Bike test: urban bikes with belt drives

The chain drive has reigned supreme for most of the bicycle’s history and doesn’t look like relinquishing its crown any time soon. A chain is very efficient, reliable and works with any gearing setup.

Yet to function at its best it needs more care than many owners give it, as countless rusting drivetrains bear witness. Bikes are more convenient as everyday transport for ordinary people if the chain is hidden away in a chain case. Or, perhaps, replaced with a belt.

Belt drives have issues of their own. They don’t work with derailleurs. You can’t split and rejoin a belt like you can a chain, so you need a special frame: one that splits so you can fit the belt; or one with a raised drive-side chainstay so that the belt runs underneath it instead of looping around it.

They’re also slightly less efficient. They’re nevertheless seen on e-bikes, high-end tourers, niche mountain bikes and – the reason for this review – utility bikes.

British company ARCC is best known for its Intelligent Drive System e-bike conversion kit, which uses a front hub motor. ARCC will adapt your own bike for you or sell you a new bike with the IDS system fitted.

It stocks a range of electrified Bromptons and Moultons, plus its own e-bikes: the Abington, the Rosemont and an upcoming e-cargo bike. The Abington and Rosemont are also available without electric assistance.

Trek is a big US brand but its European-style District models are assembled in Germany. The cheapest – Districts 1 and 2 – have chains and chain cases; the two dearest, 3 and 4, have belts.

As the name says, the District 4 comes Equipped: with mudguards, rear rack, dynamo lighting, kickstand and lock. A version with a mid-step frame is available. While there are also electric assist District+ models, they’re fundamentally different bikes.

Frame & fork

The ARCC Abington is made, not merely assembled, in Cambridge. Its Reynolds 631 frame has twin top tubes that continue as seatstays.

I imagine that’s primarily for aesthetics, although the narrow-gauge tubes look like the same ones used for the step-through Rosemont – albeit with a different bend and orientation – so there may be manufacturing savings. The tubes are close enough together that you’re unlikely to clip your knees.

The frame splits on the drive side at the pleasingly industrial-looking dropouts. These are adjustable so the wheel can be moved back to tension the belt, which is more important than it is with a chain as a belt can’t be run slack.

But you won’t need to adjust that tension whenever you remove and refit the rear wheel, like you would with a fixie with track ends, as the Abington’s dropouts are downward facing.

The rear wheel drops out (or in) with no fore-aft movement required. The fork is ARCC’s own, a steel one with an old-school crown and new-school straight blades with minimal tapering.

While a more tapered fork with curved ends would look and perhaps ride a little nicer, a beefier version makes sense given the disc brake – as well as the front hub motor of the electric Abington, which uses the same fork.

The Abington’s tall head tube provides room to mount the battery for the IDS system there. It also gives a comfortably upright riding position. The seat tube is unusually wide; a 27.2mm post is shimmed out to 33mm to fit.

Presumably the larger diameter seat tube is to increase the frame’s torsional stiffness. A belt drive needs a stiff frame so that the belt tracks properly; it can’t handle sideways deviations like a chain.

The Trek District 4 has a lighter weight aluminium frame and fork, made from chunky, hydroformed tubes that hide the cables and hoses inside. Tinkerers prefer external cables but anyone buying a belt-drive bike to eschew chain care won’t be fiddling with cables and hoses.

And it does look neat and tidy. The frame splits at the drive-side seatstay to admit the belt. It’s not as substantial as the ARCC design but seems sturdy.

Like the Abington, the District 4 has adjustable, downward-facing dropouts, and the same comments apply. It has an even taller front end, giving a very upright riding position. The bottom bracket is quite high for a town bike, making it more of a stretch to get a toe down at junctions.

Bottom bracket drop is the same as the Abington’s, but with wheels about 2cm larger in radius you sit that much higher. A lower bottom bracket would be helpful.

Although the frame is painted utilitarian black, there are reflective details and logos, making it stand out at night. Frame fittings are included for everything you might need, including multiple bottles.

The brake hose guide behind the fork crown can be removed for UK use. It’s there to give a gentler curve to the brake hose if your front lever is on the left, like in Europe or the US.

Components

Both bikes employ Gates Carbon Drive belts and Shimano Alfine 8-speed hubs. As well as being cleaner than chains, belts are quieter and lower maintenance; you can wash dirt off with water. They typically last longer as well, anything from two to four times as long as a chain.

On the other hand, they cost twice as much and far fewer shops stock them. Moreover, you have to buy the right length, which is printed on the belt, as you can’t shorten it. Then there’s the efficiency issue, which I’ll get into later.

An 8-speed Alfine hub has a 307% range. Whether that’s all fine (pun intended) depends largely on the ‘chainring’ and sprocket sizes provided, which will typically be larger with a belt drive as belts don’t do tight-radius bends as well as chains.

Where you ride also matters. Living in a hilly town, I found both bikes over-geared, especially the made-in-Cambridge Abington.

Since you can’t shorten a belt, lowering the gearing would mean getting a new belt to fit your new (and somewhat choice-limited) chainring/sprocket combination. Alternatively, you can buy the Abington with an 11-speed Alfine hub (+£250) or a 14-speed Rohloff (+£1,250).

Bottom gear issues aside, an 8-speed hub is a good choice for a utility bike. Shifting is reliable and you can go from top to bottom while waiting at the lights. The hydraulic discs that both bikes have are likewise excellent, offering fit-and-forget braking in all weather conditions.

Tyres need to be tough when a bike is going to be ridden by a maintenance-averse cyclist. The District’s Bontrager H2 Comp tyres are OK in that regard; the Abington’s Schwalbe Marathon Pluses are ideal. They roll better than their heavy, wooden feel would suggest, and they’re all but impervious to punctures.

The Abington doesn’t come with any equipment unless you specify it. I added ARCC’s extraordinarily sturdy rear rack (£155) and a set of SKS mudguards (£40). You can also have a kickstand (£40) and a Brooks B17 leather saddle (£135).

By contrast, the District 4 comes with everything. I particularly liked the dynohub lighting and the MIK-compatible rear rack, which accommodates a wide range of bags, crates, dog baskets, child seats and more.

The AXA frame lock is a useful addition for when you’re just nipping into a shop for a moment but the test bike’s had a slight twist to it. I had to press on the locking bar to make it engage.

Ride

Belt-drive bikes aren’t as efficient as chain-drive bikes. The bigger losses come not from the belt but the internal gear hub – and all its whirring pinions – that belts are paired with.

Yet belts do lose some efficiency as they wrap around the chainring and sprocket because they’re not as flexible as chains, plus they’re under more tension. These efficiency losses are evident at the more modest power outputs that most people ride at most of the time.

Whether this matters to you is a moot point. Some cyclists won’t notice, others won’t care because of a belt’s advantages. People have ridden around the world on belt drives.

Yet I’ve found riding belt-drive touring and mountain bikes somewhat frustrating, and I’m not surprised that the €100,000 prize from Gates for winning a UCI Mountain Bike Downhill event on a Gates belt-drive bike remains unclaimed. (And don’t forget that downhill events have been won with hardly any pedalling at all!)

On the other hand, for a bike that will be ridden for trips of a handful of miles around town, put me firmly in the ‘don’t care’ camp. In fact, I’d really like to try a singlespeed or fixed-wheel belt-drive bike as an urban runaround.

In terms of the two test bikes, the Abington and District 4 have the same kind of ‘comfortable roadster’ ride. They’re both 15kg belt-drive hybrids with upright riding positions, comparable components and similar steering geometry. They were great for short town rides, less so for country lane rambles.

A clean, low-maintenance town bike is ideal for ‘bike users’. No mess, no fuss: jump on and go in whatever you’re wearing; park it in the rain; take it to the garage bike shop if it ever needs attention…

Belt-drive hybrids like these two are essentially modern incarnations of the traditional roadster. The ARCC Abington has a more stylish steel frame, a junction-friendly bottom bracket height and much tougher tyres. It also represents a good long-term investment for cyclists who see electric assistance in their future, as it could easily be converted with ARCC’s IDS kit.

The Trek District 4 Equipped is better value, however, because it comes with the utility cycling essentials that cost extra with the Abington. Rack, guards, lights, lock and kickstand provide the easy-to-live-with practicality that a belt drive promises. I also preferred the ride feel given by the Trek’s higher stack height and larger-diameter wheels.

Other options

Cube Hyde Pro £999

No equipment and the 8-speed hub is a Nexus rather than an Alfine, but it’s a keenly priced belt-drive bike with urban MTB aesthetics and fat (55-622) Schwalbe Big Apple tyres.

Cannondale Bad Boy 1 £2,000

Another belt-drive urban MTB, the Bad Boy 1 has an Alfine 8-speed hub, a distinctive Lefty fork and integrated, rechargeable ‘be seen’ lights. Tyres are 40-584.

First published in Cycle magazine, April/May 2025 issue. All information correct at time of publishing.