Originally Posted by
mconlonx
This.
Belt drives seem to appeal to those who want to overthink the whole bicycling thing.
Adds $250 to the retail price of a bike compared to the same bike with a chain. That alone dictates that belt drive bikes will sell less well. And you have less options for adjusting the gearing to suit your needs.
What I really love are the belt drive bikes (belts are cleaner!) which come with, er, belt-guards. As clean as they are, they didn't manage to figure out how to make it so they wouldn't suck in a pant-leg or shoestring...
Regarding non-elegant solutions -- I think Trek went through three different designs for the rear dropouts in as many years on the District before they just dropped it altogether.
If I was strictly a non-winter cyclist I'd have little interest in them. I'm not overthinking this at all. Chains rust when exposed to salty slush and work poorly when they get sand and grit worked between the rollers, pins and plates. Sand and salt is what they put on the roads around here.
My rear rim will get this rust colored coating all over it and my bike will literally drip rust colored water from the chain after a sloppy ride when temps are within 10 degrees of freezing. It can take less than a few days for this to happen after cleaning and lubing the chain.
It is very weather dependent though. If it stays really cold and dry it's not as much of an issue. Yes, I could minimize the problem by spending more time on chain maintenance but that's exactly what I don't want to have to do.
From a maintenance standpoint since I've switched to an IGH, brakes and the chain have become the biggest maintenance issues on my winter bike. I've experimented with different types of brakes, why shouldn't I consider an alternative to a chain?