Bikes that really should have shaft drive

[Mr2Mike]

Silver993tt said:

r, no. What I expect is that either the 10-15hp makes no difference to road riding or, if for marketing purposes they need to show same HP at the rear wheel they could increase the capacity by 50-100cc as an easy way to maintain the output.

And ultimately what does that gain you? A heavier bike that uses more fuel and a final drive system that will be ruinously expensive if it goes wrong. Or you could have a simple chain with an oiler that requires minimal attention.

[Silver993tt]

Mr2Mike said:

And ultimately what does that gain you? A heavier bike that uses more fuel and a final drive system that will be ruinously expensive if it goes wrong. Or you could have a simple chain with an oiler that requires minimal attention.

Plenty of shaft drive designs (in fact most on modern bikes) that have no reliability problems whatsoever. As I mentioned earlier, nothing wrong with a chain but is should be enclosed, then it would last the life of the bike in the same way as a cam chain.

With regards extra weight, so what as it's a road bike. A few kilos more when the size & weight of a rider will vary by much more than this anyway. The road isn't a Moto GP track where a few kilos actually makes a difference.

Edited by Silver993tt on Wednesday 27th August 10:42

[Prof Prolapse]

Silver993tt said:

Plenty of shaft drive designs (in fact most on modern bikes) that have no reliability problems whatsoever.

Not true for BMW though is it? I've heard loads of owners whinging about shafts.

K-series especially fail don't they?

[Silver993tt]

Prof Prolapse said:

Silver993tt said:

Plenty of shaft drive designs (in fact most on modern bikes) that have no reliability problems whatsoever.

Not true for BMW though is it? I've heard loads of owners whinging about shafts.

K-series especially fail don't they?

Yes, everyone's 'heard' but very few have experienced. I ride with 10-15 German colleagues 3-4 times a year on tours across Europe. They have ridden GS1100/GS1150/GS1200/RT1100/K1200S/K1300S/K1200R over the last 15 years and not one of them has experienced a shaft issue with their bikes. Zero.

[Prof Prolapse]

Not going to argue, just what I heard. Anecdotally a friend hasa BMW shaftdrive, has done shed loads of miles, and it goes well.

Sadly reliability is at least 3 parts perception nowadays. I'm never sure who to believe.

[Silver993tt]

Prof Prolapse said:

Sadly reliability is at least 3 parts perception nowadays. I'm never sure who to believe.

It's usually rumours spread by those who don't like change. The same happened with ABS, traction control etc, etc. I've had loads of bikes with chain drive but having a bike now with shaft drive I would never go back unless the chain was enclosed.

[black-k1]

Mr2Mike said:

black-k1 said:

Removes requirement for lubing and adjusting and saps less power than a badly adjusted/lubed chain.

I doubt that very much. A chain would have to be in a hell of a state before it saps more power then than two sets of bevel gears and a universal/CV joint.

Power transfer efficiency for a new, correctly adjusted chain is about 98%. Power transfer efficiency for a shaft plus drive gears is around 92 to 95%. Power loss due to a worn/dirty/badly adjusted chain is around another 4 to 5%.

I admit that the difference is negligible between the two, and that the shaft losing less power is perhaps a little strong, but it's less than the variation you would get between two engines of the same design/specification.

[SAS Tom]

Silver993tt said:

Prof Prolapse said:

Silver993tt said:

Plenty of shaft drive designs (in fact most on modern bikes) that have no reliability problems whatsoever.

Not true for BMW though is it? I've heard loads of owners whinging about shafts.

K-series especially fail don't they?

Yes, everyone's 'heard' but very few have experienced. I ride with 10-15 German colleagues 3-4 times a year on tours across Europe. They have ridden GS1100/GS1150/GS1200/RT1100/K1200S/K1300S/K1200R over the last 15 years and not one of them has experienced a shaft issue with their bikes. Zero.

Not really shaft issues, more clutch, gearbox and final drive issues that are really expensive compared to chain driven bikes. 3 of the 4 BMW's I've had have either had them in my ownership or just previous. Chain's are much cheaper in my experience.

[Dr Jekyll]

willis1337 said:

ZZR1400

That's a GTR1400 isn't it?

[Silver993tt]

Dr Jekyll said:

That's a GTR1400 isn't it?

no it isn't. GTR1400 is a tourer in same class as Trophy 1200, RT1200 and ZZR1400 is a sports tourer in the same class as K1300S, VFR1200F.

[willis1337]

Silver993tt said:

no it isn't. GTR1400 is a tourer in same class as Trophy 1200, RT1200 and ZZR1400 is a sports tourer in the same class as K1300S, VFR1200F.

Also the GTR has 50bhp less than a ZZR (c. 25%).

[Silver993tt]

willis1337 said:

Also the GTR has 50bhp less than a ZZR (c. 25%).

Yes but also has more torque lower down and uses variable valve timing unlike the ZZR1400.

[RizzoTheRat]

2 minutes to tweak the chain every few thousand miles and £150 quid or so for new chain and sprockets every 30k miles, vs a huge amount of faff and costs when the shaft drive eventually fails? I'll stick with chains thanks. Shaft drives just seem to me a bit of a solution to a problem that doesn't exist.

[Wedg1e]

RizzoTheRat said:

2 minutes to tweak the chain every few thousand miles and £150 quid or so for new chain and sprockets every 30k miles, vs a huge amount of faff and costs when the shaft drive eventually fails? I'll stick with chains thanks. Shaft drives just seem to me a bit of a solution to a problem that doesn't exist.

The shaft drive on a bike is analogous to the propshaft and differential of a rear-wheel drive car: you see those broken down all the time, do you?
My ST1300 is as near as dammit 10 years old and has managed 37000 miles on its original shaft drive with no issues, not even an oil leak. By the time it breaks, the bike won't be worth fixing.
My last ST13 had over 50K on it: the same reliability (it's still out there somewhere).
The ST1100 I had before that had 107K on it last I heard, how many chain drive bikes can go that far on one chain...?

[Husaberk]

Wedg1e said:

The shaft drive on a bike is analogous to the propshaft and differential of a rear-wheel drive car: you see those broken down all the time, do you?
My ST1300 is as near as dammit 10 years old and has managed 37000 miles on its original shaft drive with no issues, not even an oil leak. By the time it breaks, the bike won't be worth fixing.
My last ST13 had over 50K on it: the same reliability (it's still out there somewhere).
The ST1100 I had before that had 107K on it last I heard, how many chain drive bikes can go that far on one chain...?

Yeah, most shaft drives probably last the life of a bike. Thing is, my new bike makes more power, is half the weight and is £5k cheaper than an ST which pays for quite a few sets of c&s. Plenty of other bikes on market similar. Bus engines can last a million miles but I wouldn't buy one of them either..............

[spareparts]

Seriously, who really cares if it has shaft or chain? This has never been a factor in one of my decisions to buy one bike or another. The cost/convenience and theoretical power loss/gain (for pubs/forum arguments) of either is really inconsequential. There's heck of a lot more to a bike's design/features/performance/handling than just the final drivetrain.

[creampuff]

Silver993tt said:

willis1337 said:

Also the GTR has 50bhp less than a ZZR (c. 25%).

Yes but also has more torque lower down and uses variable valve timing unlike the ZZR1400.

It's also a full 5 inches wider than a Pan European. I measured it!!

[RizzoTheRat]

Wedg1e said:

RizzoTheRat said:

2 minutes to tweak the chain every few thousand miles and £150 quid or so for new chain and sprockets every 30k miles, vs a huge amount of faff and costs when the shaft drive eventually fails? I'll stick with chains thanks. Shaft drives just seem to me a bit of a solution to a problem that doesn't exist.

The shaft drive on a bike is analogous to the propshaft and differential of a rear-wheel drive car: you see those broken down all the time, do you?
My ST1300 is as near as dammit 10 years old and has managed 37000 miles on its original shaft drive with no issues, not even an oil leak. By the time it breaks, the bike won't be worth fixing.
My last ST13 had over 50K on it: the same reliability (it's still out there somewhere).
The ST1100 I had before that had 107K on it last I heard, how many chain drive bikes can go that far on one chain...?

I accept some are pretty reliable, but my point is a C&S is a consumable that's easy to change, a shaft requires slightly less maintenance but is much more of an issue to fix if/when it does go wrong.

[Wedg1e]

RizzoTheRat said:

I accept some are pretty reliable, but my point is a C&S is a consumable that's easy to change, a shaft requires slightly less maintenance but is much more of an issue to fix if/when it does go wrong.

I concede that one - even I'm not masochistic enough to strip and rebuild a bevel box at the side of the road, not that a snapped chain would be exactly a 5 minute fix either... either way you're bumming a lift or walking

[Wedg1e]

Husaberk said:

my new bike makes more power, is half the weight and is £5k cheaper than an ST which pays for quite a few sets of c&s.

Horses for courses, of course... I don't do sports bike yoga positions and I don't do warp speed so I'll take the boring inconvenience of never having to wipe chain oil off my undertray instead