New Carbon Fibre Hood for the Pro to be released soon.

LoudHandle said:

Carbon is only electrically conductive, no thermal transfer occurs. The carbon tunnel will cool the engine just fine with a smaller, quality, cooler installed. All while using less anti-freeze to accomplish that. IMO FWIW

Click to expand...

I agree carbon does not conduct thermally. That's my point. It will be less efficient at cooling than an aluminum tunnel if the coolers are equal. Since the stock coolers are nearly inadequate I don't believe a slightly more efficient cooler will work with a carbon tunnel. If I were installing a carbon tunnel I would also install a larger cooler, which would offset any weight savings. Your choice would obviously be different.

The issue with a carbon fiber tunnel is carbon fiber flexes and deflects more than alum, BUT it comes back to original shape. Thus a carbon fiber tunnel needs to be made in a honey comb lay up for strength . This makes it either 1/4 to 5/16 thick, and that changes everything on mounting points. Honey comb lay up will make the chassis stronger by 10 times and lighter by half, than if you lay it up with just layers of carbon fiber. If you where to make just a carbon fiber with layers (.063 same as tunnel) you are looking at 5-7 layers of carbon fiber (our pre preg is .010 thick per layer, our 12K is .025 AFTER autoclave) a honey comb lay up has just 2 layers of carbon fiber each side, with a .125 or .250 layer of honey comb center. I plan on making one next summer, big project to make sure everything fits anchoring wise.

Cooling on the pro is not very good, I agree one needs a front cooler like pre 2010 or like the IQ, which is what I am doing, this would eliminate the heat exchangers running the tunnel frame rail. The exchangers being smooth is not a efficient way to cool either, more for structure I believe to the tunnel.

In the process of doing honey comb slide rails, once I am don't I will post a picture on our site of me (199 lbs) standing on them in the middle on 2- 5 gallon buckets, to show how strong they are in honey comb.

The biggest savings with carbon fiber is there is no snow build up while riding!!! I don't understand dry weight, you don't ride it dry!!! As you guys know you can add up to 20-50 lbs of ice and slush, that is where the real savings are!!

TJ

Scott said:

TJ, I've filled my shopping cart on your website several times...would be SO AWESOME to hit the "purchase" button.

Click to expand...

That's hilarious!! I'm sure ive done the same thing 10 times

If you look at the Pro side tunnel it is basically flat except for the lower foot rest bend. A carbon fiber plate the same thickness as alum being made that flat will bend more, I work with it everyday and use the highest quality (same as F1 and IndyCars) Pre Preg and cure it in a autoclave at 50 psi. Throw a couple bends in the part it is stiffer than alum by 5 times...Could honey comb be added in needed sections for stiffness, yes it will help a lot and it would work better than alum for sure. Ever seen a Top fuel dragster in slow motion?? see all the deflection in the body?? All carbon fiber .063 thick. yes carbon fiber is stiffer than alum and steel when a honey comb layer is added. If I take 2 pcs same thickness say .050 being FLAT (like the tunnel sides) the carbon fiber will bend as easy but comes right back, alum will stay bent, thus making it stronger. Once I add bends it is super strong. Add honey comb/core then it is stronger than steel...

This should probably have its own post I don't want to hijack someones post, sorry...If someone wants to start a different post I will comment from there.

TJ

Thanks for the thread LH.
Rumors here for the 2016 have been circulating around here recently.
One is a lighter hood with LED's. The other is no oil adjustment. Motor, chassis, suspension upgrades? You seem to have some contacts with Polaris. I would be interested in what you have heard. I apologize in advance if I am off topic here. :second:

I'll wait for CF to come stock. There are weight advantages to aluminum tunnel with marginal coolers. Snow sticks to it and like many have pointed out, loosing that heat sink means more cooling needed someplace to compensate.
All this is becoming more needed with taller tracks needing smaller drivers to have cooler clearance as well as light weight.

Maybe it is time to come up with something a little more effective at dissipating heat than just an hollow extrusion. Even finned extrusion with more surface area has a distance to surface factor for the fluid flowing through. As well as more mass retains heat longer.
Something as simple (but more expensive) as two 1/2" tubes or three 3/8" tubes spaced and hung to create air space all around, running full tunnel length both sides for structure, from plenum to plenum, would be a huge improvement (whew lol).

My experience with marginal cooling includes front of the tunnel only and full length. Full length has the advantage on my temp gauges in the trees. Mostly 'cause there is more contact to aluminum not coolant quantity.
A CF tunnel with only a front cooler would create clearance as well as cooling issues at less than full throttle.

geo said:

Something as simple (but more expensive) as two 1/2" tubes or three 3/8" tubes spaced and hung to create air space all around, running full tunnel length both sides for structure, from plenum to plenum, would be a huge improvement (whew lol).

Click to expand...

Something like this?: http://www.snowest.com/forum/showthread.php?t=213373

Ya, though I'd probably add some weight with small cross braces for structure and harmonics.

Wonder if Norway every took the offer and how well it worked. This year would be a good test lol.

geo said:

I'll wait for CF to come stock. There are weight advantages to aluminum tunnel with marginal coolers. Snow sticks to it and like many have pointed out, loosing that heat sink means more cooling needed someplace to compensate.

All this is becoming more needed with taller tracks needing smaller drivers to have cooler clearance as well as light weight.



Maybe it is time to come up with something a little more effective at dissipating heat than just an hollow extrusion. Even finned extrusion with more surface area has a distance to surface factor for the fluid flowing through. As well as more mass retains heat longer.

Something as simple (but more expensive) as two 1/2" tubes or three 3/8" tubes spaced and hung to create air space all around, running full tunnel length both sides for structure, from plenum to plenum, would be a huge improvement (whew lol).



My experience with marginal cooling includes front of the tunnel only and full length. Full length has the advantage on my temp gauges in the trees. Mostly 'cause there is more contact to aluminum not coolant quantity.

A CF tunnel with only a front cooler would create clearance as well as cooling issues at less than full throttle.

Click to expand...

I can attest to the cooler contact with aluminum being a huge benefit for cooling.

My plastic tunnel skin makes my sled run 10% hotter than my brothers stock powdercoated tunnel.

Its not a deal breaker though.

I just adopted an actively seeking soft snow riding style.

Since this is the intended goal of riding anyways.
No cooling problems yesterday.

Here's a pic they sent me