Motorcyclist Mag Review of Cruisers

[LaGrasta]

I just received and read the Motorcyclist three way cruiser comparison; Triumph, Harley and MG. They liked the MG well enough, but it struck me they never mentioned it has shaft drive, a far superior driveline than the other belts. To me, this is significant piece of what the MG offers over others, a large part of it's appeal.

[Kev m]

I just received and read the Motorcyclist three way cruiser comparison; Triumph, Harley and MG. They liked the MG well enough, but it struck me they never mentioned it has shaft drive, a far superior driveline than the other belts. To me, this is significant piece of what the MG offers over others, a large part of it's appeal.

Maybe because that's subjective and open to debate.

Personally I prefer shafts AND belts to chains, but I'm not sure I have a particular preference between the first two.

[LaGrasta]

It's not subjective when comparing maintenance, engineering cost, etc. It's significant and different, worth mentioning in a story, even if belts are preferred by the author. Two bikes priced the same, but one with shaft is a deal.

[DaSwami]

It's not subjective when comparing maintenance, engineering cost, etc. It's significant and different, worth mentioning in a story, even if belts are preferred by the author. Two bikes priced the same, but one with shaft is a deal.

+1, belts are for powering motor accessories, not for propelling a machine.  On ATVs, those with the belt driven CVT transmissions I've seen two break suddenly, leaving the owner's stranded far from help. 

Yeah, yeah, ANYTHING can break, chain, shaft, etc, but give me real steel in the driveline anyday.

I can't help but think the motorcycle press is biased against MG, no matter the reason, it stinks.

[Triple Jim]

Did you like the listed weight of the Guzzi? 

Actually I thought the review was amazingly positive toward the Guzzi.

[oldbike54]

I can't help but think the motorcycle press is biased against MG, no matter the reason, it stinks.

 It's odd , this is a common belief , but most every article I have read about MG in the bike mags have been positive . Their job is to point out details . Memory says it was Gordon Jennings writing about his one truly scary wreck testing bikes where he referred to crashing an ill handling brand Z motorbike , and making the comment that some of the problem came from just having ridden a good handling Guzzi on the same course and expecting brand Z to handle as well .

 Dusty

[Cool Runnings]

Belts are pretty much maintenance free, don't think I'd want one on the 95hp Guzzi though?

[lucian]

A Harley with a shaft? Imagine what that would cost. You'd be getting the shaft twice. Isn't  it more about engine layout (transverse vs  in line) that determines the best option? The new roller chains and dampened sprockets are incredibly quite to my surprise. And the ability to easily change final drive ratios is a huge advantage for some bikes. Kev's right, there is no best, just what's best for you.

[Rough Edge racing]

 Shafts are nice ...Belts problems can often be traced to improper adjustment.Some big inch Harleys put 120 HP into the belt drive.. I just changed my 97 Buell from belt to chain drive...Why? A chain just looks so mechanical...

[LaGrasta]

Did you like the listed weight of the Guzzi? 

Actually I thought the review was amazingly positive toward the Guzzi.

I agree, it was positive, absolutely. I was just surprised they didn't mention the drive line, such a distinctive difference (advantage) .

[LaGrasta]

You can renew your complete final drive system for under $200 in about an hour with a chain drive. (more or less, my experience)

OK you will most likely have to do it every 20K to 30K miles??..wow.

New chains are almost no maintence and with earplugs the noise is not an issue for me.

I prefer chain drive but a shaft does not deter me in my selection as I own both.

IMHO
:-)

Chains are messy, flinging grease all over, plus constant adjustments. Shafts just…are.

[Kentktk]

Maybe because that's subjective and open to debate.

Personally I prefer shafts AND belts to chains, but I'm not sure I have a particular preference between the first two.

  For under 100hp or so I agree

[Kev m]

It's not subjective when comparing maintenance, engineering cost, etc. It's significant and different, worth mentioning in a story, even if belts are preferred by the author. Two bikes priced the same, but one with shaft is a deal.

OK, why don't you lay out the comparative costs of maintenance and engineering for me?

I've got a couple of hundred thousand miles ridden with belts. Only thing I've ever had to do was tighten them now and again, and even then that's mostly just a after a rear tire replacement which is easier on a Harley than a smallblock.

I've also got over a hundred thousand miles on shafts. But that came at a not insignificant cost of fluids, crush washers, etc, and probably should have included at least one or two seals over the years. And though I've always been told splines aren't a maintenance item on Guzzis they sure were on airheads.

Shafts are in many ways better protected, but then rob more power, require more maintenance. There are trade offs.

I haven't read the article, but I'm not sure how much the author would want to get into such an analysis.

[Kiwi_Roy]

They probably didn't notice.
I think I will change my Guzzis over to chain and ignore them for 100k miles

[Guzzistajohn]

Yes I do like my guzzi shaft drive, but the triumph has 74k on the chain drive and I've changed the chain and countershaft sprocket 1 time. Not really a big deal

[kirby1923]

Chains are messy, flinging grease all over, plus constant adjustments. Shafts just…are.

Man where ya been?

In 25K miles I have had to adjust the chain on VFR 1 time. On my duc twice in 20K. The modern lubes do not fling off and are not too messy.

Shafts are heavier (allot especially un-sprung) take more power, require oil changes...uh

never mind.

:-)

[Guzzistajohn]

Man where ya been?

In 25K miles I have had to adjust the chain on VFR 1 time. On my duc twice in 20K. The modern lubes do not fling off and are not too messy.

Shafts are heavier (allot especially un-sprung) take more power, require oil changes...uh

never mind.

 :thumb:ZACKLY!

:-)

[LaGrasta]

It so interesting the varied experiences with each of these. I snapped the belt on my Sportster doing wheelies, but still. I was surprised at the amount of material dust as well. Chains stretch and need adjustment, at least mine always do. Both my dirt bikes and street. I've tried numerous chain lubes and they all fling, all of them, no matter what I pay. And what a pain to spray it on. Even if it didn't fling off, you spray it all over everything when first applying.

I've owned so many bikes, and only one with a shaft, my 2010 V7cc. I like it far more.

As for cost comparison, shaft cost far, far more to engineer and put on a machine. When combined with power robbing, manufactures don't want to sacrifice the biggest HP number they can quote by using them.

In relationship to the article, I thought an expensive shaft system, that I find to be superior especially on a cruiser is worth mentioning as it might sway some votes in it's direction.