Total Motorcycle Community Forums

I really appreciate all the input from all of you. I'm not sure I'm closer to a decision, but then I have time. The two bikes I have had recommended and that I am reading up on are the 2008 Honda Shadow 750 Aero (shaft drive) and the 2008/09 Harley 883 Sportster or Sportster Low. Not enough price difference to sway me. Guess I'll just have to keep asking questions. LOL

Thanks again!

bigbeakmacaw wrote:I really appreciate all the input from all of you. I'm not sure I'm closer to a decision, but then I have time. The two bikes I have had recommended and that I am reading up on are the 2008 Honda Shadow 750 Aero (shaft drive) and the 2008/09 Harley 883 Sportster or Sportster Low. Not enough price difference to sway me. Guess I'll just have to keep asking questions. LOL

Thanks again!

The Sportster is belt drive, not chain.

Hmm--sounds like the belt drive would be great. However, the Harley website says it's a "Chain, 34/57 ratio" I'll have to check it out, but it sounds like it's not that critical.

Which one feels better?

msh-1156 wrote:Belt Drive - best of both worlds.
And I am quite mad.

Best of both worlds with the crippling downside of not handling any kind of non-pavement situation. A misplaced chunk of gravel and you're walking to the dealer to get another belt.

Skier wrote:

msh-1156 wrote:Belt Drive - best of both worlds.
And I am quite mad.

Best of both worlds with the crippling downside of not handling any kind of non-pavement situation. A misplaced chunk of gravel and you're walking to the dealer to get another belt.

Everything has a downside. It all depends on whether one focuses on what can go right or what can go wrong. I tend to think in terms of what can go right, and in the case of belt drives the upside column has many more check marks than the downside. I'm curious - why is it Harley Davidson puts belt drives on their bikes? Do you think they're really worried about that chunk of gravel? Personally, I'm not.

msh-1156 wrote:

Skier wrote:

msh-1156 wrote:Belt Drive - best of both worlds.
And I am quite mad.

Best of both worlds with the crippling downside of not handling any kind of non-pavement situation. A misplaced chunk of gravel and you're walking to the dealer to get another belt.

Everything has a downside. It all depends on whether one focuses on what can go right or what can go wrong. I tend to think in terms of what can go right, and in the case of belt drives the upside column has many more check marks than the downside. I'm curious - why is it Harley Davidson puts belt drives on their bikes? Do you think they're really worried about that chunk of gravel? Personally, I'm not.

Don't get me wrong: for a street bike, a belt final drive is a wonderful thing. For a dual purpose bike or one needing every bit of power and weight reduction, chain is the only way to go.

Harley doesn't market nor intend their bikes to be taken off tarmac. They sell cruisers not dual purpose bikes. For their intended road surface, a belt is very difficult to beat for a final drive system.

Obviously the belt isn't going to self-destruct the moment it is taken off the beaten path, but I sure wouldn't trust a single belt to carry me over thousands and thousands of dirt and gravel roads. Chain drive, no worries, shaft, not a problem.

Well that just goes to show you how narrow my focus is. Our original poster didn't mention a thing about dual purpose or dirt bikes, and so I didn't give a single thought to anything other than street machines.

In fact all three are good, depending on the use of the machine, and now we're back to where we started!!

As a commuter - I really hate messing with the damned chain. Plus I have lovely little marks on my driveway with white chain oil all over the place.

Oh, and I know I'm supposed to apply the chain lube sparingly, but I can't seem to help gloping the crap all over the place.

My next bike will be belt of shaft. I lean toward shaft, but I feel it will be unlikely that I'll be ready to upgrade from a 250 to a Honda ST1300.

RhadamYgg

I'm a little late to this discussion, but I for one will not ever buy another bike with a chain. I am already on my second chain. First one wore out at 6,000 miles and that was with following the Owner's manual recommendations of oiling every 200 miles and cleaning every 500 miles. The second chain is almost 1/2 worn out with another 2000 miles following the same procedures. After I'm done with my current bike, I'm done with chains. I hate them. Just my personal oppinion.