Author Topic: Shafties (Read 4986 times)

fireblake · « **on:** 14 January 2013, 10:39:30 pm »

I went for a ride with an old mate who has a Suzuki GS1000 with shaft drive. Its a W reg bike circa 1981 and goes like stink. He rebuilt it a few years back and it had a re-bore. Now my point is, what is the problem with shaft drive? I wonder what a Fazer 1000 would be like with a shaft. Everything else the same but a shaft instead of a chain? How much power would be lost? I mean the Divvy 900 isn't a complete waste of time.....Is it?

Mickey

chris.biker · « **Reply #1 on:** 14 January 2013, 10:59:18 pm »

I have had a couple of shaft drive bike, a CX500 some one had to and a suzuki GS850, even if you do loose power the shaft drive is so fantastic to live with they ride a little differently though when you accelerate the rear of the bike lifts.

Exupnut · « **Reply #2 on:** 14 January 2013, 11:05:59 pm »

the divvy 900 is a good solid bike that is completely reliable just like the old kawa gt550. a bloody tank of a bike. the thing that made me wonder was as u look at the engine from the side it looks like half of the engine is missing. see what i mean? big foccin hole where something should be,
yamaha xj 900 s diversion

karlo · « **Reply #3 on:** 15 January 2013, 07:05:54 am »

Me ol' fella has a 900 Divvy, cracking bike and sooooo smooth but a bit on the heavy side tho'.

Exupnut · « **Reply #4 on:** 15 January 2013, 08:30:03 am »

dont remember seein one in that colour.is that a respray karlo?

stevierst · « **Reply #5 on:** 15 January 2013, 08:43:09 am »

One of the guys at work has one the same colour and loves it. He rides a brand new BMW bike at work but loves his old Divvy for commuting.

fireblake · « **Reply #6 on:** 15 January 2013, 09:52:36 am »

I did have a Honda VT500 in '85 and couriered it up north,well London. It was a cracking bike.
I just wondered how much get up and go the FZS 1000 would lose if it were a shaftie?

fireblake · « **Reply #7 on:** 15 January 2013, 10:56:32 am »

I did have a Honda VT500 in '85 and couriered it up north,well London. It was a cracking bike.
I just wondered how much get up and go the FZS 1000 would lose if it were a shaftie?

fireblake · « **Reply #8 on:** 15 January 2013, 10:57:45 am »

Stupid phone. Delete as required if you please Admin.

Mickey

JZS 600 · « **Reply #9 on:** 15 January 2013, 11:12:13 am »

I loved my shaftie!

(D9)

sadlonelygit · « **Reply #10 on:** 15 January 2013, 12:15:17 pm »

pros: low maintainance, clean, quieter

cons: heavy, sap power, torque reaction (more on this later), when they do go wrong...........ouch, gearing is set..........forever.

shafts usually run inside the s/arm and the pivot point is quite close to the 90' bevel housing. this means that a % of the power is created as lift! which means that the bike actually lifts when applying the throttle, changing ground clearance, steering geometry etc. conversely when you close the throttle, you lose clearance, give it the wheelbase of a chopper and usually a 1 way trip to a&e if it's your first time on a shaftie.
BMW came up with the ingenious (and heavy, and expensive) paralever system which goes a long way to eliminate torque reaction, but not totally.
on mine i had to replace the paralever bearings (twice) and surprise surprise they are bmw only items and bloomin pricey!
ex Z1000ST and BMWR1100S owner
(oh, the GS1000G was just an overbored 850, not a real 1000!)

BBROWN1664 · « **Reply #11 on:** 15 January 2013, 12:24:55 pm »

I passed my test on an xs750 shaftie and have had various bikes since including a pan European which was shaft drive. I like it but as others have said the lifting instead of sinking under throttle can be a little off putting at first.

My current cbf1000 would be good with a shaft drive. Much less mess.

The Rocketeer · « **Reply #12 on:** 15 January 2013, 01:00:14 pm »

I hate chains, chain adjusting, chain oiling, the oil flinging off, scottoilers etc etc etc. If there are any disadvantages to a shaft drive then they dont bother me........

sadlonelygit · « **Reply #13 on:** 15 January 2013, 01:21:23 pm »

Quote from: FJGAR on 15 January 2013, 01:00:14 pm

I hate chains, chain adjusting, chain oiling, the oil flinging off, scottoilers etc etc etc. If there are any disadvantages to a shaft drive then they dont bother me........

wait until you have to re shim the end float on the rear bevel drive.........or a bearing goes in the middle of nowhere.
i wipe my chain over with an oily rag once a week, hasn't been adjusted for 6 months. modern chains.........fecking ace

Pat · « **Reply #14 on:** 15 January 2013, 02:38:10 pm »

the general rule of thumb for a transverse engine is that it'll lose 10% of its rear wheel power by using a shaft instead of a chain, mostly due to having 2 90deg bevel drives, rather than a linear drive with a chain.

Using an engine with a longitudinal crank eg. BMW boxer or CX500/Guzzi V-twin means there's only one bevel gear so less loss, in fact to run one of those engines with a chain would still require a bevel gear anyway as you'd need one to drive the front sprocket in the correct plane, so power wise there would be minimal difference.

eddie · « **Reply #15 on:** 15 January 2013, 05:45:04 pm »

OMF loves her staffie

UG · « **Reply #16 on:** 15 January 2013, 11:37:28 pm »

Fish banana

pilgrim · « **Reply #17 on:** 15 January 2013, 11:46:51 pm »

Courierd in the 80's on,amongst other things, a Yam XJ 750 Seca. Never really noticed any big problems with lifting/squatting, but always wondered
how much more ooommph it lost through not being chain drive. Bought it with 9k on the clock and part exed it for an FJ1100 two years later when I
stopped DR ing with just over 90k on the clock

Vaguely remember changing the diff oil.......er............once?

Used to murder head race bearings every 10k though, never found out why, and no, not through pulling wheelies!

PS. Pomchi.

fireblake · « **Reply #18 on:** 16 January 2013, 07:13:59 pm »

All interesting stuff. i must say that i never noticed any raising of the rear on my VT, but it wasn't the most powerful bike and my previous bike was a Stan Stephens tuned RD400 so i was just happy to stay on.

Mickey

JZS 600 · « **Reply #19 on:** 16 January 2013, 08:33:56 pm »

I rode a Boxer 1100 in the 90's when the 4 valve head came out. It was lovely, light steering, low C of G, flickable etc...

What I noticed on take off was the back rose up as I was moving forward. You know what, I didn't mind, it was kind of fun! The telelever front end was another story.. THAT took a while to get used to.

My D9 didn't suffer from any of that, it was the pogo effect from the suspension in bends that used to get me!

chunk166 · « **Reply #20 on:** 16 January 2013, 10:41:39 pm »

I used to have a Divvy 900 brilliant bike,only problem was its weight,I would have another if i didn't have problems with my arm

The Rocketeer · « **Reply #21 on:** 16 January 2013, 11:55:32 pm »

Quote

fecking ace

On your hands and knees boy, there's shite all over your back wheel

MEM62 · « **Reply #22 on:** 17 January 2013, 10:53:01 pm »

Modern chains are much better than they were when I first started riding back in the 70's. I rarely have to adjust the chain on my FZS1000 and I use Wurth dry chain lube, which is much cleaner than traditional chain lube and keeps the bike nice and clean. I used to tour on a '98 VFR800 and the chain on that was a pain. It would always need adjusting at some point on a trip and the pinch bolt needed to be done up with a torque wrench. What a pain! Now I have an R1200RT I don't have to think about it.

sadlonelygit · « **Reply #23 on:** 18 January 2013, 09:37:33 am »

Quote from: FJGAR on 16 January 2013, 11:55:32 pm

Quote
fecking ace

On your hands and knees boy, there's shite all over your back wheel

and in my pants as well............no chance of me cleaning either

Pat · « **Reply #24 on:** 18 January 2013, 02:06:18 pm »

Is it the law that you have to park your divvy 900 up in front of a wall or fence before you're allowed to take a piccie of it?