Hacker News Reader

Comment by jwalton | Hacker News Reader

I'm interested in a belt drive, too, but mainly because I hate getting a greasy chain stamp on my leg. :P Belt drives don't need lube, so they stay pretty clean.

I'm surprised there are retrofit kits. With a belt drive, usually one of the chain stays has a gap in it so you can get the belt on and off (you accomplish the same with a chain by taking a link out to install/remove the chain, but this is not an option with a belt).

View on HN

Bit niche but there is one company making split belt: https://www.veercycle.com/

But it's 3-5x the price of chain equivalent setup.

Why not just use a normal belt and some way of tensioning it like every other belt drive in the world uses? Seems like the fancy belt (and more importantly, the fancy pulleys that go with it) drives up cost substantially.

Look up-thread. You have to thread the belt through the frame. You either need a special frame with a gap in it, or a belt that can be split.

I read that part. That doesn't explain why they chose that oddball cogged belt instead of a commonly available belt profile (cogged or otherwise) for which pulleys are available off the shelf (or cheaply built to order) and belts are dirt cheap.

It's probably cheaper to put some plastic around your chain.

For a clean chain you can switch from a conventional lube to wax based lube. It’s a relatively involved process (You need to degrease your chain before application) but it keeps the chain relatively dry and clean. (Plus it’s slightly better performing than other lubes).

Scientific measurements or it didn’t happen. I think wax underperforms lube, prove me wrong.

https://www.ceramicspeed.com/media/3505/velonews-friction-fa...

See page 63 for efficiency and 64 for longevity.

The graph on page 64 is confusingly labeled, but the numbers indicate "watts expended before wet dirty run" - "watts expended after".

Reply on news.ycombinator.com