Opinions - Clunk vs Snick

[Gonzo]

I haven't owned nearly as many bikes as some of you, but I have this nagging little question.

Is it only in my mind, or do shaft-drive bike transmissions tend to clunk more than chain-drive transmissions?

My older chain type always seemed to snick into gear. My CB700 and my ST1300 just seem to take a little more deliberate care to make that smooth shift.

There also seems to be some difference between up-shift and down-shift.

I'm not complaining, just want opinions.

gonzo

[Mellow]

I've only owned shaft drives so I can't give an opinion on one vs the other.. you always see 'driveline lash' described in bike reviews and wonder if that's talking specifically about the shaft affect.

[Bones]

The BMW's I've ridden (all shaft drive) all had "clunky" trannies. In contrast, my ST "snicks" into gear, with teh occasional exception of 1st gear, and then only when shifting from neutral. My most recent ride on a chain drive bike was on a Triumph Sprint ST which "snicked" quite nicely into gear.

Isn't "shaft effect" the tendency for the suspension to decompress on downshifts, thereby reducing available traction when downshifting in a turn? I didn't think it had anything to do with clunking into gear.

[ParkerBill]

I came from an '04 Honda Shadow Spirit 750 cruiser with chain drive to the '06 ST1300. I think the ST shifts easier, smoother and more "snickity" than the 750 did. :D

[UNTMatt]

There is a difference between tranny smoothness and driveline lash. As long as a chain is properly adjusted, there should be no lash from the chain.

That being said, the low maintenance of the shaft drive, despite the lash, is a blessing over cleaning and waxing the chain every 300 miles (sooner if ridden in rain/snow/etc), adjustments to the chain, and replacing chain/sprockets every 15k - 25k miles.

My old Daytona tranny seemed to be about as smooth as the ST's but without the driveline lash. That bike was fun...I miss it sometimes. :(

[bmcdonau]

Harleys clunk into gear, but I've never had a problem with false neutrals or missing shifts. Its a very solid feel when you hit the next gear. All my Honda's have had much smoother trannys, but the 70's and 80's SOHC and DOHC bikes had occasional problems hitting neutral when shifting from 1st to 2nd and finding a false neutral between 4th and 5th. It seems like Honda has finally gotten it right with the ST--its smooth and no missed shifts.

I don't know that there is any real difference between a clunk and a snick since I've never had a transmission fail on any bike I own. I've had more problems with different clutch designs than the actual transmission themselves. The first generation SOHC Honda 750s had terriable clutches.

Drive train lash is much worse on a shaft drive bike since there is very little "slop" to take up the torque. Belts and chains are much more forgiving in that respect.

I really don't know which is best. I like shaft drive because it requires little maintenance on a daily basis, but you have more tasks to perform when maintenance comes due. Belts require occasional adjusting, but don't sling oil like a chain and last a long time. I think chain drive is best for pure performance, but they require regular maintenance and you have to change both the sprockets when you replace the chains. Its all just one big compromise.

[ConqSoft]

All my Hondas have had the clunk, and the ST is the first and only driveshaft bike I've owned.

[ParkerBill]

That being said, the low maintenance of the shaft drive, despite the lash, is a blessing over cleaning and waxing the chain every 300 miles (sooner if ridden in rain/snow/etc), adjustments to the chain, and replacing chain/sprockets every 15k - 25k miles.

+1 on that!!! That was one of the reasons I traded the SS750 for the ST1300. I got to hating the chain maintenance!!

[Talonboy]

I think it is all transmission design, nothing to do with chain or shaft output. I think the brands all shift differently, some better, some worse.

[Blrfl]

I've noticed that hondas tend to be a little more "snicky" if you preload and use partial clutch versus doing a disengage/shift/engage.

Come to think of it, my Kaw (also a shaftie) is the same way.

--Mark

[clmixon]

I've noticed that hondas tend to be a little more "snicky" if you preload and use partial clutch versus doing a disengage/shift/engage.

Come to think of it, my Kaw (also a shaftie) is the same way.

--Mark


With Mark on this. Also, for me, snick is associated with fresh oil, clunk is one of the clues that I am about due to change the oil.

Chris :06biker:

[Prairie Dog]

My previous ride was a '99 VFR. That tranny was smooth and quiet, shifting up or down.

In comparison, I find the gear box of my '06 ST1300 to be a bit clunky, meaning that it requires more effort and is noisier, especially on downshifts.

Drive train lash is another matter that I believe is unrelated to the gear box.

Has anyone switched to synthetic or blended oil, and noticed an improvement in gear box smoothness?

[GOPHER]

My first Suzuki (an RF600 with a chain) had the worst case of "clunk" I have ever seen. The shift from first to second was horrible. My 2006 V-Strom 1000 also had a bad case of the clunk. My Suzuki SV650 is smooth as butter though.

My ST by comparison is pretty slick. I guess it's just a matter of perception.

[AZST]

I've noticed that hondas tend to be a little more "snicky" if you preload and use partial clutch versus doing a disengage/shift/engage.

Since I originally read this, I started using the "preload" method.....shifts like buttahhhh...:yes:

--Bryan
04ST1300A
:04biker: