Time of course will tell, and one has to admire anyone going to that length but I have to wonder if the chain is a bit small. A five speeder is a lot porkier than any motorbikes I know of.
The chain on two and three speeders is 3/4" BS. Not as fancy as the type used here but bigger.
So the obvious thing now is to say, get some use in and see what things are like in a few thousand miles. We await reports...
Buell Tensioner, I had to look it up, so I thought I would share...
Draggin, keep in mind that the Buell did not have much weight to deal with. When they downshifted the lower belt went under tension. With the weight of the M3W, I believe you would end up with too much slack and the belt would jump on downshifts.
Time of course will tell, and one has to admire anyone going to that length but I have to wonder if the chain is a bit small. A five speeder is a lot porkier than any motorbikes I know of.
The chain on two and three speeders is 3/4" BS. Not as fancy as the type used here but bigger.
So the obvious thing now is to say, get some use in and see what things are like in a few thousand miles. We await reports...
From a reliability standpoint, the chain will be as good as the belt, but will require a bit more maintenance, lube/cleaning etc. But for brute strength, the chain will be more than strong enough.
You've been around the block a few times and know that chain works well, but the new stuff does seem to be a LOT better than what I used run on my bikes decades ago
Guys with blown Harleys putting out over 150hp, sometimes go to chain over the belt because of the added strength of the chain.
I have used on my old Harley touring bike, 530 pitch O-Ring chain. The O-Ring chain comes prelubed with grease and you only need to do a light dusting of WD-40 over it with a rag to keep it clean on the outside. I've put over 10k miles on the old bike with the 530 O-Ring chain and only adjusted the chain at the first 1k miles and its still on the money.
"Usually" the only down side to chain is the noise, but from what I've read here, the chain will be much quieter than the current belt configuration.
Why would you want to modify to a chain which has less life span and requires far more maintenance than the belt? A motorcycle chain rarely lasts over 10000 miles is extremely dirty as it flings off any lubricant and unless is fully enclosed running in a bath or lubricated by a Scott oiler. Sorry but I don't get it 🤔
Why would you want to modify to a chain which has less life span and requires far more maintenance than the belt? A motorcycle chain rarely lasts over 10000 miles is extremely dirty as it flings off any lubricant and unless is fully enclosed running in a bath or lubricated by a Scott oiler. Sorry but I don't get it 🤔
My point a few posts ago. In my mind, and through five decades of motorcycle experience, there's zero rationale unless you're building a 300 HP drag racing M3W.
One benefit is not putting so much load on the bevel box output shaft bearing. A cahin can be run slacker and still engage. The belt seem to be set very tight. Losser it may skip
One benefit is not putting so much load on the bevel box output shaft bearing. A cahin can be run slacker and still engage. The belt seem to be set very tight. Losser it may skip
Ken Running a drive belt or chain too tight will cause premature wear on final drive bearings shafts. Lots on here are running belts slacker than set at the factory. Time will tell
