Toothed belt drive vs. chain

[BGarside]

Am looking for another commuting bike for all year round riding and have already decided to spec. disc brakes to reduce maintenance and rim wear.

Also considering a hub gear, and I see some hub-geared bikes are also available with toothed belt drive.

This appeals to me again due to reduced maintenance, potentially alleviating the need to keep cleaning and drying a chain during the lousy winter weather.

However, I have reservations over efficiency and durability. Has anyone tried or owned a belt drive bike and if so have any comments regarding the feel of the belt vs. a chain, any extra drag and the life of the belt?

[gazza285]

My mate had a Pipedream Skookum single speed with a belt drive. It now has a chain and sprockets due to the number of broken belts he was having, it was used off road though.

[v12Legs]

I've heard good things about belt drives, as long as the belt is a good quality one. I understand that the Gates one is regarded as the best.

This bike looks good: http://www.cube.eu/uk/bikes/tour/hyde/cube-hyde-ra...

[Get Karter]

A puncture on your commute with a belt drive bike would be a hassle.
Bike shops have special gauges to set the belt tension correctly. This, obviously, needs to be done every time the rear wheel is moved.

[BadgerBenji]

Depending on the frame removing the rear wheel will not mean restring the belt tension. Swinger or slider drop outs would be fine as would a bike with an eccentric bottom bracket.

Belts a nice idea but have heard of people getting less than 300 miles from one, but that was with off road usage.

[Mr Gear]

2 problems with belts: You need an odd split frame (yes really... because the belt has to pass through the rear triangle) so they tend to be expensive, and also, there is a lack of standardization and therefore getting parts if needed.

They are actually nice to ride though.

[jr6yam]

Mr Gear said:

They are actually nice to ride though.

I agree

[BGarside]

Thanks for the feedback. Just wondered if the belt would feel less efficient than a chain, or wear out faster.

I guess removingthe rear wheel need not be more complicated with a belt than with a chain, although obviously the hub gear would complicate things.

The Cube looks good. I'd seen the Hyde Race last year and was keen on it but that was fitted with a chain. They are good value bikes for the specs.

[Roger Irrelevant]

I always wonder just how much maintenence you really save by having belt/hub gears. I've got 30-speed Ultegra on my winter/commuter bike which you'd be forgiven for thinking was a right pain to keep running sweetly, but in actual fact all I do is spray some GT85 on it most days, maybe tweak the barrel adjuster every few months and change the chain every six-to-eight months or so, and it's absolutely fine. Considering that there are still lots of other things on a bike that can wear out or require maintenance, and that a belt can be a right faff if something does go wrong, it just doesn't seem worth it to me. But that is just me.

[BGarside]

Roger Irrelevant said:

I always wonder just how much maintenence you really save by having belt/hub gears.....

Probably more if you are as anal as I am about keeping the chain clean, dry and oiled. I suspect I'm not typical of the majority of cyclists though