Bike porn

They are less efficient than chain drives, mainly due to hysteresis loss as the belt flexes.

Chain drives are pretty damn good....

Chains may get a bad press because they wear, they need frequent lubing and hence they're 'oily' and attract dirt, but they are super efficient at the transmission of power. In 1897, Professor R.C. Carpenter of Cornell University conducted experiments which showed that even a well-worn chain was up to 98 per efficient.
In 1930, the National Physical Laboratory at Teddington measured the efficiency of a bush roller chain as between 98.1 and 98.9 percent.
According to a 1998 paper by Matt Kidd and others, delivered at the Engineering of Sport conference at Heriot Watt University, a bicycle chain is 98 percent efficient.

The carbon belt system looks to be the same (on paper).his

and they are prone to foreign object damage. At this point, I usually show the extensive shrouding on a Buell final drive to illustrate the lengths one has to go to to stop stones from getting trapped between the belt and the sprocket, but people who want to see that picture again can UTFS.

Hence the the frame like structure of the Gates Beltring and sprocket. Should allow the belt to operate in pretty muddy/stoney conditions.

Basically, you spend a lot of money and get a system that has pretty much the same efficiency as a chain. Yet is far less flexible terms of gearing and frame compatibility.

The feel of the drive is different though, I'd say smoother feeling. That in itself was enough for me to want a belt-drven SS in m collection (collection? its only 3 fecking bikes).