Belt drive weight comparison
- Thread starter alt
- Start date
There’s some weights here, stock and modified c3. I think most aftermarket set ups add weight overall with the tensioner but use aluminum gears for lower rotating weight.
https://www.snowest.com/forum/showthread.php?t=433467
https://www.snowest.com/forum/showthread.php?t=433467
Thanks ICR! I saw Dan's post about 1 AM but needed to get to bed. 
I was planning on posting an answer today / tonight afterwork.
Dan the meat and potatoes you are looking for is in post 20 of the link ICR provided (a sled build for my daughter).
If you need / want more just let me know. I'll post the pics of the stock PRO Ride QD verses my modified C3 setup here as well, soon. Just got love the easy button!
I was planning on posting an answer today / tonight afterwork.Dan the meat and potatoes you are looking for is in post 20 of the link ICR provided (a sled build for my daughter).
If you need / want more just let me know. I'll post the pics of the stock PRO Ride QD verses my modified C3 setup here as well, soon. Just got love the easy button!
Polaris PRO Ride QD verses C3 verses My upgraded C3 belt drive
Stock PRO Ride QD weight; 1155 Grams
C3's Steel Idler faster bolt with steel spacers and standard bearings as delivered; 143 Grams
My Titanium Fastener with Drilled Titanium washers used as spacers and Ceramic Hybrid bearings; 98 Grams
The C3 steel tensioner bolt w/ jam nut is 45 Grams, My Titanium version with jam nut is 29 Grams. So my TI fastener / spacer / Ceramic Hybrid idler bearing upgrade saves 61 Grams.
C3 Belt drive, Mitsuboshi Giga Torque GX Belt, lightened with Ceramic Hybrid bearings in the tensioner, Titanium tensioner bolt and Drilled Titanium bearing spacers; 1295 Grams for 2.63:1 ratio
While the total assembly does weight 140 Grams more in this ratio. The actual rotating weight is far less (761 Grams for the pictured ratio). So in round numbers 2/3 the rotating weight of the stock belt drive.
Stock PRO Ride QD weight; 1155 Grams
C3's Steel Idler faster bolt with steel spacers and standard bearings as delivered; 143 Grams
My Titanium Fastener with Drilled Titanium washers used as spacers and Ceramic Hybrid bearings; 98 Grams
The C3 steel tensioner bolt w/ jam nut is 45 Grams, My Titanium version with jam nut is 29 Grams. So my TI fastener / spacer / Ceramic Hybrid idler bearing upgrade saves 61 Grams.
C3 Belt drive, Mitsuboshi Giga Torque GX Belt, lightened with Ceramic Hybrid bearings in the tensioner, Titanium tensioner bolt and Drilled Titanium bearing spacers; 1295 Grams for 2.63:1 ratio
While the total assembly does weight 140 Grams more in this ratio. The actual rotating weight is far less (761 Grams for the pictured ratio). So in round numbers 2/3 the rotating weight of the stock belt drive.
Last edited:
Where in the hell have I been...... That's a great thread, I ran through it pretty fast so tonight I'll go over it again. I can't believe I didn't see that one. I have to admit I'm pretty guilty about getting on here and just looking through real quick to see if anything pertains to me referring to questions or whatever
edit
Last edited:
LH I'm having a hard time figuring out why you let people frustrate you to the point of abandoning that thread? Not just because you had some killer parts 
posted but it was just plain good information. So anyway soon as I talk to tki or have something interesting to say I'll chime in again.
posted but it was just plain good information. So anyway soon as I talk to tki or have something interesting to say I'll chime in again.FWIW, the TKI parts are heavier than the C3 pieces.
Although Tom will argue this point; his sprockets are machined to the wrong tooth profile (The sprockets do not match the belt). Which works for most, but it is not correct.
The cheaper / budget blower drive guys have been doing it forever. As they can machine one sprocket tooth profile that sort of fits every belt made to date. There are just a lot of non-contact belt to sprocket, but hey it sells parts, I guess.
As far as me refusing to continue the build thread:
I noticed a few errors (bad photo links) and typos in a my build thread and was (and still am) pissed that they (SW) only give you a 30 day window to edit a post before it's locked and archived. Since I can't fix the errors Without a Moderator's help, (and I've been old enough to wipe my own azz for 46 plus years, I have no need for supervision) I see no point in my sharing. As I refuse to post inaccurate information.
The majority of the original meat and potato Members have long since left SW and all that remains are largely Douche Nozzles with nothing worthy of reading anyway. I see no point in sharing my knowledge to help them avoid crap products nor have them benefit from my intellectual property.
Although Tom will argue this point; his sprockets are machined to the wrong tooth profile (The sprockets do not match the belt). Which works for most, but it is not correct.
The cheaper / budget blower drive guys have been doing it forever. As they can machine one sprocket tooth profile that sort of fits every belt made to date. There are just a lot of non-contact belt to sprocket, but hey it sells parts, I guess.
As far as me refusing to continue the build thread:
I noticed a few errors (bad photo links) and typos in a my build thread and was (and still am) pissed that they (SW) only give you a 30 day window to edit a post before it's locked and archived. Since I can't fix the errors Without a Moderator's help, (and I've been old enough to wipe my own azz for 46 plus years, I have no need for supervision) I see no point in my sharing. As I refuse to post inaccurate information.
The majority of the original meat and potato Members have long since left SW and all that remains are largely Douche Nozzles with nothing worthy of reading anyway. I see no point in sharing my knowledge to help them avoid crap products nor have them benefit from my intellectual property.
Understood.... So when you go to the C3 website, it says nothing about belt drives. Do the search, and says no results. When you say tki is heavier are we talking alot or a little? The last c3 I had I swapped out as much as I could with titanium and aluminum but was a pita. Tom's looks easier to simply swap hardware but maybe c3 has changed things assuming they still make them. Also. i may have missed it but do you have the weight of the c3 just as it comes, no mods?
Last edited:
C3 sold off the Syncrodrive line (their trade name for their belt drive) to Specialty MotorSports https://specialtymotorsports.ca/collections/syncrodrive-kits
NOTE:I have not bought anything from the new owner; as Kevin and I made my kits from his available inventory and are not a standard kit. I use a larger lower sprocket (58T, standard is 53T IIRC), a smaller top sprocket (he made a custom run of 21T to 19T for me, standard is 22T to 30T IIRC), and a longer belt than the standard kit (kit is 720mm mine are 800mm, due to my 9" center to center distance). The standard kit will be slightly lighter than mine; total weight and rotating weight.
From memory they are within a pound but the majority of the weight of the TKI is on the rotating portion (sprockets and idler), although his idler mount is very weighty as well.
I do not have a photo of the unmodified weight; but from the weight of the C3 steel fasteners and the TI fasteners. You can get very close. "The C3 steel tensioner bolt w/ jam nut is 45 Grams, My Titanium version with jam nut is 29 Grams. So my TI fastener / spacer / Ceramic Hybrid idler bearing upgrade saves 61 Grams."
Add the 61 Grams back in to the 1295 Gram Modified weight; 1356 Grams, but thats with my larger bottom sprocket and longer belt. I'd guess a standard kit (no fastener changes) would come in under 1300 Grams in the more normal ratios and lengths.
This is the things I like, increasing efficiency! LH a belt drive as opposed to a chain drive I hear the belt drive does not like high speed for a sustained time? Is this really true as it builds heat? I would figure a steel to steel contact would be like a freight train where steel wheels to track has a lower coefficient of friction (25%) Would a roller chain like an after market cam chain be less friction as opposed to the std. HY-VO set-up? I am sure a perfect chain pitch without a dog leg with the tensioner would be more efficient? Does this come to play with a belt drive as well? Thanks Mike
My opinion as to why Chain and chaincases are dead
That all depends on your definition of "high speed"? From the Gates Engineering Design Manual
"POLY CHAIN® GT® CARBON® Belt Drive Systems #17595 4/09"
The maximum design speed is 6500 Feet Per Minute;
The formula for that from the manual is;
V(belt Velocity in Ft/ Min)=PD (Pitch Diameter in Inches of largest sprocket)x Speed (of largest sprocket in RPM) / 3.82
Note: I rounded down to the nearest 100 RPM
Which; with my C3 58T lower sprockets and custom CNC'd 9 Tooth 2.86 Pitch drivers equals a track speed of 105 MPH.
And the newer industry standard 7 Tooth driver in 3" Pitch or the 6 Tooth in 3.5" Pitch is a track speed of 85.5 MPH.
As Mountain riders; neither of those will likely ever be reached regardless of power adders. Most sleds and snow bikes are geared for 80 MPH and below as an extreme (impossible to achieve) top speed. (I typically gear for mid-70 MPH theoretical track speed for general use, unless a particular closed course needs something else).
That said if I was still running the Alcan 200 (a highway race from the Haines Alaska border to Desdash lake and back) I'd still use a belt drive even though it would exceed those numbers. Sustained 120 MPH plus speeds are required to win it.
IF the sprockets actually match the belt properly then it is a non-issue (refer to my previous post on which manufacture to support in that regard). The other manufacture with the improper sprocket tooth profile will build heat at the contact points and lead to increased wear and premature belt failure.
With the proper belt and sprocket tooth profile (it is modeled from the involute gear tooth form) so there is no sliding friction, it simply meshes like proper high end (ground and lapped) gears do. Thus little to no heat generation. The little heat you do generate is from the fan effect of displacing the air that is in the way at the point of mesh (commonly referred to as belt whine). Most heat seen in a belt drive is ambient, due to the exhaust or turbo proximity, assuming proper design (as stated previously).
Pre belt drive;
My "race" sleds ran triple roller chain with billet aluminum sprockets (as it was far lighter and less parasitic drag).
My "stock" sleds ran HYVO as that was the next best option (much closer to a proper gear mesh and less sliding friction).
The Link Belt silent chain is archaic in comparison (too much sliding friction / metal shavings, with the straight wedge tooth form)
A properly designed belt drive has none of the parasitic drag of the oil nor the sliding friction of mismatched parts.
As to the dog leg;
Unlike one manufactures sales pitch; the straighter you can run the belt the longer it will last. Excessive top sprocket wrap is just a piss poor design that they attempted to spin as a marketing plus (it is not). However the dog leg in the carbon belt is less of a detriment than it is in the chain, though. When ever you bend a chain their is wear taking place reducing pin diameter and increasing the hole size in the links. With carbon moderate flex is not an issue, but bending to the point of fracture is, so the bend radius is most important as well as proper handling (a larger radius is better than a smaller one). As everything has a service life, the more exaggerated the bends the quicker you will use up the service life.
I believe I have answered your questions and hope you and others find that helpful.
That all depends on your definition of "high speed"? From the Gates Engineering Design Manual
"POLY CHAIN® GT® CARBON® Belt Drive Systems #17595 4/09"
The maximum design speed is 6500 Feet Per Minute;
The formula for that from the manual is;
V(belt Velocity in Ft/ Min)=PD (Pitch Diameter in Inches of largest sprocket)x Speed (of largest sprocket in RPM) / 3.82
Note: I rounded down to the nearest 100 RPM
Which; with my C3 58T lower sprockets and custom CNC'd 9 Tooth 2.86 Pitch drivers equals a track speed of 105 MPH.
And the newer industry standard 7 Tooth driver in 3" Pitch or the 6 Tooth in 3.5" Pitch is a track speed of 85.5 MPH.
As Mountain riders; neither of those will likely ever be reached regardless of power adders. Most sleds and snow bikes are geared for 80 MPH and below as an extreme (impossible to achieve) top speed. (I typically gear for mid-70 MPH theoretical track speed for general use, unless a particular closed course needs something else).
That said if I was still running the Alcan 200 (a highway race from the Haines Alaska border to Desdash lake and back) I'd still use a belt drive even though it would exceed those numbers. Sustained 120 MPH plus speeds are required to win it.
IF the sprockets actually match the belt properly then it is a non-issue (refer to my previous post on which manufacture to support in that regard). The other manufacture with the improper sprocket tooth profile will build heat at the contact points and lead to increased wear and premature belt failure.
With the proper belt and sprocket tooth profile (it is modeled from the involute gear tooth form) so there is no sliding friction, it simply meshes like proper high end (ground and lapped) gears do. Thus little to no heat generation. The little heat you do generate is from the fan effect of displacing the air that is in the way at the point of mesh (commonly referred to as belt whine). Most heat seen in a belt drive is ambient, due to the exhaust or turbo proximity, assuming proper design (as stated previously).
Pre belt drive;
My "race" sleds ran triple roller chain with billet aluminum sprockets (as it was far lighter and less parasitic drag).
My "stock" sleds ran HYVO as that was the next best option (much closer to a proper gear mesh and less sliding friction).
The Link Belt silent chain is archaic in comparison (too much sliding friction / metal shavings, with the straight wedge tooth form)
A properly designed belt drive has none of the parasitic drag of the oil nor the sliding friction of mismatched parts.
As to the dog leg;
Unlike one manufactures sales pitch; the straighter you can run the belt the longer it will last. Excessive top sprocket wrap is just a piss poor design that they attempted to spin as a marketing plus (it is not). However the dog leg in the carbon belt is less of a detriment than it is in the chain, though. When ever you bend a chain their is wear taking place reducing pin diameter and increasing the hole size in the links. With carbon moderate flex is not an issue, but bending to the point of fracture is, so the bend radius is most important as well as proper handling (a larger radius is better than a smaller one). As everything has a service life, the more exaggerated the bends the quicker you will use up the service life.
I believe I have answered your questions and hope you and others find that helpful.
Last edited:
