Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site vaxwaller.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!mhuxt!houxm!vax135!cornell!uw-beaver!tektronix!zehntel!varian!vaxwaller!bob
From: bob@vaxwaller.UUCP (Bob Palin)
Newsgroups: net.cycle
Subject: Re: Chain vs. Driveshaft
Message-ID: <235@vaxwaller.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 26-Mar-85 12:11:07 EST
Article-I.D.: vaxwalle.235
Posted: Tue Mar 26 12:11:07 1985
Date-Received: Fri, 29-Mar-85 02:50:58 EST
References: <673@rayssd.UUCP> <1144@watdcsu.UUCP>
Distribution: net
Organization: Varian, Walnut Creek, CA
Lines: 28

...
> 
> On the other hand chains are dirty, ugly, high maintenance items.
> They need regular lubrication and adjustment, and need replacement
> after as little as 10,000 miles. (O-ring chains last longer)
...
> 
> If performance isn't your only concern, a shaft drive may make sense.
> A slightly higher initial cost buys an essentially maintenance free
> final drive which can be almost as good as a chain.
...
> 
> Rick Sellens

This sums up chain/shaft fairly well though I suspect that someone who
bought a chain drive for the performance aspect could easily go through
a chain in less than 10000 miles, O-ring or not.  I have had four chain
drives and currently have two shaft drive bikes and will always try for
shaft drive in future though not at all expenses.

The bikes I currently have, a 1984 VF700 Sabre and a 1980 CX500 DeLuxe,
are both water cooled,  this is one area in which I can find no advantage,
they both get just as hot as air cooled bikes, they're heavier and there
is no noticable performance gain compared to similar air cooled bikes.

Why water cooled ?

Bob Palin,  zehntel!varian!bob