Bikes that really should have shaft drive
Discussion
Silver993tt said:
I also vote for shaft drive on nearly all bikes. An alternative would be enclosed chains and don't understand why they're not available, even as an option.
The answer for enclosed chains is the same for shaft drives.No one gives a s
t bar about a dozen people on the internet who don't increase demand for new bikes in the first place.Dr Jekyll said:
Reduced maintenance is the upside. You can be out riding while the chain drive owner is faffing around adjusting the chain.
Given the power of modern bikes reduced efficiency compared with a perfectly adjusted chain is irrelevant. Weight is similarly irrelevant.
Most of us have no interest in adjusting our final drive ratio, that's why cars seem to manage perfectly well with shaft drive.
Hmm, "faffing". I changed the oil more times than I adjusted the chain.Given the power of modern bikes reduced efficiency compared with a perfectly adjusted chain is irrelevant. Weight is similarly irrelevant.
Most of us have no interest in adjusting our final drive ratio, that's why cars seem to manage perfectly well with shaft drive.
Interesting that you should post the Z1000ST. I still have one of these and have owned several. One was a road legal drag racer with welded crank, 1140cc etc. Strange choice you might think but in standard trim the shafty was only about half a second slower than the (supposedly much lighter and sportier) chain over the standing quarter - the difference diminishes as you add power. Some of that half second could be attributed to the extra weight of the shafty but even then part of the extra weight was due to the heavier frame.
So even in the dark days of primitive Zeds there wasn't really a huge performance difference, increased efficiency should have minimised what there was by now anyway... As for shaft reaction and evil handling, the shafty actually handled better than the chain version, that was down to an improved frame tho' - both could wheely and do rolling burnouts but only one would snap its final drive after a weekend's playing... and it wasn't the shafty.
Now... belt drives
So even in the dark days of primitive Zeds there wasn't really a huge performance difference, increased efficiency should have minimised what there was by now anyway... As for shaft reaction and evil handling, the shafty actually handled better than the chain version, that was down to an improved frame tho' - both could wheely and do rolling burnouts but only one would snap its final drive after a weekend's playing... and it wasn't the shafty.
Now... belt drives
Hooli said:
tight5 said:
Hooli said:
R1s, as they are all ridden by fat blokes too old to bend down & manage to lube the chain.
one gets ones butler to do such things .How terribly lower class !
nightflight said:
To answer the original question, Ducati Multistrada.
Yes, agree. test road the bike. 2 things I didn't like were no shaft drive, agricultural engine. It's a very expensive bike that should at the very least have features such as shaft drive as it's marketed as a long distance touring bike. If they wanted to keep the same power to the rear wheel then simply up the power output by 10-15hp.Silver993tt said:
Yes, agree. test road the bike. 2 things I didn't like were no shaft drive, agricultural engine. It's a very expensive bike that should at the very least have features such as shaft drive as it's marketed as a long distance touring bike. If they wanted to keep the same power to the rear wheel then simply up the power output by 10-15hp.
You mean the new 'Strada? The engine might be rough (well, typical V-twin) but it's got a better spread of power (and more of it) than the old one. I know they're now doing a deal with free panniers to tempt the long-haul brigade, two of my mates bought them just before that was introduced (one managed to get a set retrospectively 
) but it's still not really a tourer in the Goldwing sense; it's a Sunday morning bike that happens to be comfy enough to get you to the good roads in a fit state to enjoy them - the added weight of shaft drive would probably count against it if only used for those Sunday mornings.Said mates and I are off to the Alps again soon: I'll be the one on the full-fat tourer but they'll still get there fresher than I will
I ride my Fazer600 everyday to work and back, all year round, and most weekends for fun when I'm not out on the sports bike, only recently had to change the (original) C&S at 28k miles. Adjust it maybe once/twice a year, and even then its a slight tweak. I think the shaft lovers are just too lazy to keep a chain clean personally, although I think an enclosed chain would make more sense.
Silver993tt said:
Yes, agree. test road the bike. 2 things I didn't like were no shaft drive, agricultural engine. It's a very expensive bike that should at the very least have features such as shaft drive as it's marketed as a long distance touring bike. If they wanted to keep the same power to the rear wheel then simply up the power output by 10-15hp.
Are you imagining that you can take the top off the engine to expose a power control knob that you just turn up a few notches, instant power gains with no impact on emissions, driveability, economy etc?Mr2Mike said:
Silver993tt said:
Yes, agree. test road the bike. 2 things I didn't like were no shaft drive, agricultural engine. It's a very expensive bike that should at the very least have features such as shaft drive as it's marketed as a long distance touring bike. If they wanted to keep the same power to the rear wheel then simply up the power output by 10-15hp.
Are you imagining that you can take the top off the engine to expose a power control knob that you just turn up a few notches, instant power gains with no impact on emissions, driveability, economy etc?Gassing Station | Biker Banter | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff