I'm not satisfied with the fit of the stock clutch bolt bushing. There is too much play between the bolt and the bushing and the bushing and the clutch hub, this causes imbalance and stress to the clutch bolt. Is anyone aware of a better fitting bushing? Titanium would be ideal for weight reasons but I would consider a hardened steel bushing with a surface treatment / plating.
Does anyone produce a tighter tolerance Clutch bolt bushing for the P85?
- Thread starter LoudHandle
- Start date
Remember when they use to use an O-ring on the bolt ?
Or maybe the reason why it's not a true fit because it could unbalance the clutch even more than factory tolerance allows .
For some reason they like having an aggressive bore to taper which makes absolutely no sense except for creating undo stress on the clutch not to mention the horrid pop it makes coming off .
You have to try a CVTech , throttle response is like lightening . Doo ran them for years and now Poo is running the dummied down version on the fanners but they also have one good for 250 ponies . Weights fling to the center not out , that alone makes to much sense .
Or maybe the reason why it's not a true fit because it could unbalance the clutch even more than factory tolerance allows .
For some reason they like having an aggressive bore to taper which makes absolutely no sense except for creating undo stress on the clutch not to mention the horrid pop it makes coming off .
You have to try a CVTech , throttle response is like lightening . Doo ran them for years and now Poo is running the dummied down version on the fanners but they also have one good for 250 ponies . Weights fling to the center not out , that alone makes to much sense .
I have no issues or problems with the P85. I'd just like to upgrade the bushing so it fits the bolt and the bore better.
So when you torque the clutch bolt you don't end up with the clutch bolt being ~1/32" +/- off center. Really what is the point in balancing the clutch and truing the sheaves if the clutch bolt can and usually does end up that far off center every time. With that much random imbalance, why spend the money and still have a shoddy fitting stock bushing causing imbalance.
After measuring my collection of clutch hub bores, bushings, and bolts; I have 10-15 thousandths clearance between the bushing and the Clutch hub bore and a pretty consistent 20 thousandths clearance between the bolt and the bushing.
Way too sloppy of a fit for my liking. I'll likely have to take maters into my own hands and have some made that fit correctly. I was just hoping that someone else recognized the problem and had rectified it.
So when you torque the clutch bolt you don't end up with the clutch bolt being ~1/32" +/- off center. Really what is the point in balancing the clutch and truing the sheaves if the clutch bolt can and usually does end up that far off center every time. With that much random imbalance, why spend the money and still have a shoddy fitting stock bushing causing imbalance.
After measuring my collection of clutch hub bores, bushings, and bolts; I have 10-15 thousandths clearance between the bushing and the Clutch hub bore and a pretty consistent 20 thousandths clearance between the bolt and the bushing.
Way too sloppy of a fit for my liking. I'll likely have to take maters into my own hands and have some made that fit correctly. I was just hoping that someone else recognized the problem and had rectified it.
You are not the only one that realizes this. We had a couple different versions made up last winter with fairly good results. I know I have one left if you're interested.
Do you think this is something enough people would be interested in that it would make sense to produce a run of them?
I'll take the one you have left. Although I'd like about a dozen, for my fleet alone. From the views of this thread verses the responses, my guess is that the stock part is assumed to be adequate for the average Joe sledder. You would need to market the benefits to ensure the sales.
I would like to see them produced in Titanium, but that is your decision.
I would like to see them produced in Titanium, but that is your decision.
Last edited:
I
I'd take a couple, would also prefer Ti
Looks like a reasonable machinest like myself could help out here if I had a drawing or sketch--- pass it along, I interested
gtwitch in wyoming PM at gtwitch@uwyo.edu
gtwitch in wyoming PM at gtwitch@uwyo.edu
Looks like just copy the POO bushing and tighten the inner and outer tolerance. Yes/No??
gtwitch in wyoming
gtwitch in wyoming
You bet...
Happy Face Products makes them and has them available. Nice and precise fit.... CNC machined stainless.
Set includes bushing and washer
Made exactly for the reasons you cite.
Total Tolerance of Stock set: 0.032"... (Bolt to bush + bush to bore)
Total Tolerance of HFPP set: 0.004"... (Bolt to bush + bush to bore)
NOT on their website yet...call them or email them.
Email: sales@happyfacepp.com
Phone Number: (866) 623-8473
http://happyfacepp.com/
From Dave Lynn of HFPP:
Stock Clutch bolt with HFPP Bushing/Washer:
Happy Face Products makes them and has them available. Nice and precise fit.... CNC machined stainless.
Set includes bushing and washer
Made exactly for the reasons you cite.
Total Tolerance of Stock set: 0.032"... (Bolt to bush + bush to bore)
Total Tolerance of HFPP set: 0.004"... (Bolt to bush + bush to bore)
NOT on their website yet...call them or email them.
Email: sales@happyfacepp.com
Phone Number: (866) 623-8473
http://happyfacepp.com/
From Dave Lynn of HFPP:
Stock Clutch bolt with HFPP Bushing/Washer:
Last edited:
Yes, until a recent policy change at work, i could have made these in between real jobs. Shrink the ID up to 20 Thousandths, and grow the OD 10-15 thousandths would work.
Last time I spoke with Sam (Happy Face) he was considering making them but had not committed to a production run, and was talking hardened steel at that time. Maybe I could convince him to do a smaller run in TI?
Ti parts are always cool... IMO... The diff in this small of a part (small and thin wall) would not save much at all... maybe a few grams... especially that close to the rotational center... would not make a difference.... and Ti would be more expensive.
Plus, given the design of the bolt... Heat treating would not make a difference in the function of the bushing... again IMO.
The HFPP bushings I photo'd here... have really no weight to them and are a great fit in the clutch and on the bolt I have... Checked them on 3 other clutch bolts... I'll be getting 2 more of them in addition to the one I have.
But the centering of the bolt would make a diff.:becky:
Plus, given the design of the bolt... Heat treating would not make a difference in the function of the bushing... again IMO.
The HFPP bushings I photo'd here... have really no weight to them and are a great fit in the clutch and on the bolt I have... Checked them on 3 other clutch bolts... I'll be getting 2 more of them in addition to the one I have.
But the centering of the bolt would make a diff.:becky:
Last edited:
MH,
All valid points but there is not a single steel fastener or bracket left on my PRO chassis sleds. So this bushing in TI or even Hard Anodized 6061-T6 or 7075 T-6 aluminum would be optimal. After all I'm still shooting for sub 400# wet weight ready to ride sleds and every gram counts. Stock bushing is 17 Grams, The same design in TI is 10.2 Grams, In Aluminum it comes in between 5-6 Grams depending on the exact alloy. So I would be fine with Aluminum also; like they were in the '80's and '90's, IIRC
Last edited:
The one's I made were 7068 Aluminum. I used this material as its yield and hardness are really close to steel and I wanted to keep the bolted joint functioning as close to stock as possible and being a third of the weight was just a nice bonus.
Last edited:
You bet...
Happy Face Products makes them and has them available. Nice and precise fit.... CNC machined stainless.
Set includes bushing and washer
Made exactly for the reasons you cite.
Total Tolerance of Stock set: 0.032"... (Bolt to bush + bush to bore)
Total Tolerance of HFPP set: 0.004"... (Bolt to bush + bush to bore)
NOT on their website yet...call them or email them.
Email: sales@happyfacepp.com
Phone Number: (866) 623-8473
http://happyfacepp.com/
From Dave Lynn of HFPP:
Stock Clutch bolt with HFPP Bushing/Washer:
Perfect! Then I don't have to make them haha! If Dave's not willing to do a production run then I'll do it, but I bet this thread will give him enough motivation to go ahead with it.
LH... if you are going to that level... are you running a HFPP or Carbon Clutch cover, Ti cover bolts, Ti Primary and secondary springs, Ti primary clutch bolt, Ti secondary Clutch bolt, Ti Flywheel bolts, Ti jackshaft, Ti drive shaft, Ti engine bolts, etc???
.
.
Last edited:
D
Bushing and Washer
We have a Stainless Steel bushing and washer manufactured by Happy Face Performance Products that brings all the tolerances in at .002" using your stock bolt. The stock bushing for a Polaris P85 has a .559" hole. The bolt has a .542" dia. This leave .017" play. Our bushing and washer bolt holes are set at .544". When we balance a clutch we use these close tolerance bushing and we do have them available as an option for purchase for 35.00. Everything you can do to help keep the centerline established to the crank is a positive to the overall balance and longevity to the crank. If your interested check out our site at:
http://www.cascadecp.net/Cascade-Balancing.html
If you have any questions feel free to drop us an email or call.
Depending how you measure the stock bushing the numbers can vary a bit. Bottom line is we can fix the loose issues.
We have a Stainless Steel bushing and washer manufactured by Happy Face Performance Products that brings all the tolerances in at .002" using your stock bolt. The stock bushing for a Polaris P85 has a .559" hole. The bolt has a .542" dia. This leave .017" play. Our bushing and washer bolt holes are set at .544". When we balance a clutch we use these close tolerance bushing and we do have them available as an option for purchase for 35.00. Everything you can do to help keep the centerline established to the crank is a positive to the overall balance and longevity to the crank. If your interested check out our site at:
http://www.cascadecp.net/Cascade-Balancing.html
If you have any questions feel free to drop us an email or call.
Depending how you measure the stock bushing the numbers can vary a bit. Bottom line is we can fix the loose issues.
M
A TI Driveshaft flexes too much for my liking, especially with the precise alignment required for the belt drive to function, not to mention track tension and alignment issues with a TI driveshaft. While a large diameter tubular TI shaft could rectify this, I do not feel it is cost effective for development ATM. I would develop a super rigid tubular Carbon Fiber center section and glue machined billet TI or Aluminum stub ends to it for the money.
While I considered a TI Jackshaft it did not save enough over the newer stock Large Diameter Hollow three piece Jackshafts. Dan of AI, consulted with me and others about building a three piece hollow TI Jack Shaft similar to the current stock steel shaft. At that time I did not feel it was worth the risk of development as TI flexes more than steel and by the time you change wall thickness and geometry to compensate to be rigid enough for the belt drive the weight savings would not likely justify the additional expense.
I have the HFPP cover for one of my clutches and the PCC cover is an easy bolt on option when I get that far and see if I need it. My focus ATM is the chassis. Yes, I have sourced every bolt in the engine and the chassis. The cylinder bolts being my hardest find and most recent locate and should be in my PO Box soon. I do run TI springs in both clutches and shocks as well as exhaust springs in TI. I will not use the pogo stick shocks regardless of manufacter or who tuned them.LH... if you are going to that level... are you running a HFPP or Carbon Clutch cover, Ti cover bolts, Ti Primary and secondary springs, Ti primary clutch bolt, Ti secondary Clutch bolt, Ti Flywheel bolts, Ti jackshaft, Ti drive shaft, Ti engine bolts, etc etc???
.
A TI Driveshaft flexes too much for my liking, especially with the precise alignment required for the belt drive to function, not to mention track tension and alignment issues with a TI driveshaft. While a large diameter tubular TI shaft could rectify this, I do not feel it is cost effective for development ATM. I would develop a super rigid tubular Carbon Fiber center section and glue machined billet TI or Aluminum stub ends to it for the money.
While I considered a TI Jackshaft it did not save enough over the newer stock Large Diameter Hollow three piece Jackshafts. Dan of AI, consulted with me and others about building a three piece hollow TI Jack Shaft similar to the current stock steel shaft. At that time I did not feel it was worth the risk of development as TI flexes more than steel and by the time you change wall thickness and geometry to compensate to be rigid enough for the belt drive the weight savings would not likely justify the additional expense.
Last edited:
I brought this up a few years ago:
http://www.snowest.com/forum/showthread.php?t=323445
I'll have to contact HFPP or Cascade.
http://www.snowest.com/forum/showthread.php?t=323445
I'll have to contact HFPP or Cascade.
D
I do run the HFPP cover. It's easy to balance, cuts rotating mass and cools better than a solid aluminum cover. There are some really nice products for clutching coming on the market and people are beginning to see the advantages. Anything that helps to improve is always a plus regardless of who provides it.
I will work on getting the bushings on the HFPP web site. I could use a few 48 hour days. Again feel free to contact me or give me if you have any questions.
I will work on getting the bushings on the HFPP web site. I could use a few 48 hour days. Again feel free to contact me or give me if you have any questions.
Similar threads
