Path: ...!news.roellig-ltd.de!open-news-network.org!weretis.net!feeder8.news.weretis.net!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail
From: Roger Merriman <roger@sarlet.com>
Newsgroups: rec.bicycles.tech
Subject: belt drives
Date: 27 Jan 2025 12:27:22 GMT
Lines: 19
Message-ID: <lvpcdaFg4ngU1@mid.individual.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Trace: individual.net Xu+oYArt23mAqn4gH9dakgWg9X/1hpPumQ2GQiBvG1JabNVINs
Cancel-Lock: sha1:ZGMoqJHa8v+kgZh14m7FTm661ns= sha1:t4BJ39oW5b17oHQYozkWBSbKnQM= sha256:71Pe4qKQEMrScC0WzBqS/DTapvdvE/E7RrhLOP0jpA0=
User-Agent: NewsTap/5.5 (iPad)
Bytes: 1490

<https://youtu.be/OlDYHoiqpew?si=dxpa83lxcQxIBEO5>

That Ben Denlaney has a new Gravel bike on test with a belt drive, and his
“pub bike” which has belt drive, and the good and the bad with such
systems. Ie punctures are faff and I guess weight to a degree, ie hub vs
derailleur systems.

Though touching wood I’ve found Gravel tyres with tubeless fairly reliable
particularly considering that one is riding fairly challenging terrain on
paper thin tyres!

Certainly considering how much of puncture fess tubes on Gravel is or was!
Tubeless generally solves that, so would largely remove that problem.

Though I’m not sure if belts like mud and muck I have vague memories of MTB
belt drives not performing that well in such situations?

Roger Merriman