I use a gt3 belt on my normal htd pulleys. I was unable to get 12mm wide htd belts to work going up hills so i switched to 15mm gt3 and now I can run them loose with no tensioner pulleys. I’m 200lbs and can go up steep hills at full throttle.
2 Likes
So a 15mm HTD belt would have worked just as well? How is that an argument for GT3?
wow pissy much? Just sharing my experience. I didn’t feel the need to waste money on a 15mm htd belt when I knew something better was on the market. But feel free to continue using something “just good enough” and not trying to improve the quality of your ride. The rest of us will continue to innovate and you can just copy us later.
2 Likes
@Brdchris Thanks for info. Might consider such option in future also, if u say it works even better and stock htd pulleys can be used.
Its about the scientific method - all these posts are meaningless if there is no proper test. Your experience would have been valuable but only if your went from a HTD12mm to a HTD15mm. So go get a HTD 15mm belt do the tests and tell us how it went - then we finally know.
Edit: oh and yes I am salty because this whole discussion is not how something like this should be done. We need real life test results and proper comparisons. And if we find out GT3 is twice as good as HTD I’d be happy to use GT3.
3 Likes
But right now he didnt. He just said that a 15mm wide belt is better than a 12mm one.
1 Like
Where certain members of this thread have said that the current belt standards are acceptable I would beg to differ. Those building single drive rigs or those wanting to try to fit dual configurations with narrower belts on smaller hangers like 9” calibers could find these more effective belt options extremely beneficial to their applications! I’m very interested to see where this topic goes!
I am riding a single 15mm wide HTD belt on a 15 to 42 gearing and have no belt skipping even downhill. Just for reference. All I want is the proper numbers and proper tests - that’s all.
Well, just for reference I’ve been running 16 36 on 83’s with 15mm belts for almost a year and it’s complete trash. Even with tensioners it’s not a perfect science.
There’s criticism and then there is constructive criticism. Rather than complain that they aren’t presenting the information the way you like or testing the ways you see fit, offer to them how you would like this to be carried out… ya know rather than shitting on it 
So on that note! Do some testing on this and if it’s promising I may give it a try!
4 Likes
I agree that his experience is anecdotal, but…
It is. Gates has done the testing. They define the numbers. Believe it or not, many members of this forum are willing to trust the test results of a 5.4 billion dollar corporation whose two biggest product markets are belt power transmission and hoses. It’s in their best interest to give valid numbers, they wouldn’t be worth what they’re worth if they couldn’t properly advise businesses that use their products.
2 Likes
Which is why I said that he should get a HTD 15mm belt and compare.
That is fair. I agree testing is important. As per your request above… What are proper numbers and proper tests in your opinion? So that we can accommodate your needs?
1 Like
I don’t agree with that. They try to make as much money as possible and find ways to keep doing that. This whole belt science looks totally weird to me as finding relevant information on the internet seems super hard. For example I was not able to find any info on the evolution from HTD to GT3 and the iso standard that is referenced when it comes to the design costs like 200€ to download.
If we want GT3 to become our new standard because it is objectively better then we need to do the tests ourselves and confirm whatever Gates told us. At least that’s how I see it.
3 Likes
I was talking about how this thread started where HTD3 was compared to GT3. That’s obviously invalid as we use HTD5. Proper numbers are thus: you keep everything the same (belt length tooth count etc.) And only switch from HTD to GT3 profile.
It was a comparison of HTD 3M and GT3 3M. GT3, again, is the name equivalent to the name HTD.
And comparisons of different types of belt at the same pitch size is valid. It’s a comparison between tooth profile, pitch does not matter as it does not affect one tooth profile more than the other.
But if HTD5m would have a torque rating of 1000000Nm and GT3 of 1000001 then this discussion would not be necessary. I have no idea if the ratio between HTD and GT3 will stay constant between pitch sizes - only that it is much better between HTD3 and 3mmGT3.
I probably could do the math myself but I am lazy and I kind of feel that the one who claims GT3 is better is supposed to deliver the correct arguments.
To emphasize: I am fundamentally not against a switch to GT3 - but it needs to be done right.
Edit: I kind of feel like the next @b264 who usually pushes for this type of thing.
1 Like
It’s nearly a direct ratio. I hope you know this is a total “on the spot fallacy”. But lucky for you I know a thing or two about belts. I’ll be back with exact numbers.
1 Like
Isn’t OTS about being required to cite information immediately when asked? I am not asking you to tell me the numbers right now. Also thanks for looking them up I am looking forward to it.
Edit: I also wanted to say that this is the internet and I have no idea about your experience with belts. So please don’t take my criticism personally.
In the mean time, feel free to read up on the differences between tooth profiles. This document was created by SDP-SI, a company unaffiliated with Gates. http://www.sdp-si.com/d265/pdf/d265t003.pdf
1 Like
Where did you buy them?