Thread: Belts vs. Chains
View Single Post
  #2   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 16-01-2008, 00:32
Elgin Clock's Avatar
Elgin Clock Elgin Clock is offline
updates this status less than FB!
AKA: the one who "will break into your thoughts..."
FRC #0237 (Black Magic)
Team Role: Mentor
  
Join Date: May 2001
Rookie Year: 2001
Location: H20-Town, Connecticut
Posts: 7,773
Elgin Clock has a reputation beyond reputeElgin Clock has a reputation beyond reputeElgin Clock has a reputation beyond reputeElgin Clock has a reputation beyond reputeElgin Clock has a reputation beyond reputeElgin Clock has a reputation beyond reputeElgin Clock has a reputation beyond reputeElgin Clock has a reputation beyond reputeElgin Clock has a reputation beyond reputeElgin Clock has a reputation beyond reputeElgin Clock has a reputation beyond repute
Send a message via AIM to Elgin Clock
Re: Belts vs. Chains
Chains (if & when) they break, are easier to fix than belts in most cases.

Here's my logic behind that from using chains for a number of years now.
If you break a chain, just add some more pieces to it very simply.

In a belt system, you (more than likely) need to access the entire run of it, and replace the full belt.

I don't know why other than that, but I just know they are easier to replace than a full belt when dealing in confined spaces of the footprint we personally (as a team) use to run our chain.

Don't get me wrong, a break in the system is still a pain in the butt to fix no matter if it's made out of chain or anything else for that matter, but it's easier to get to one part of it than to get to the entire running path most times (in our designs anyways).
Your results may vary.

/my 2 cents.
__________________
The influence of many leads to the individuality of one. - E.C.C. (That's me!!)