Drive Shaft Service Bulletin

paulharris · Dec 1, 2012

rmscustom said:
o While steel drive shafts from other RMK models may fit, Polaris does not recommend this because there is a risk of the shaft seizing on to the inner bearing race and lower drive sprocket.

Anybody have any insight why this might happen?

My guess is that if everyone is installing the 2012 steel shaft in their sleds that will make polaris look bad, so hence they put something stupid like this in the bulletin. try to get people to believe that this 3 piece aluminum shaft is the greatest invention ever. the 2005,2011,2012 shaft has a big oil seal collar on it to back up the bearing, there is no way the bearing is going to seize to it. and the belt pulley has a steel insert with splines molded in where it slides on the shaft, just like a chaincase gear. steel on steel.....its been done this way for 30+ years in snowmobiles. a chaincase does have oil in it, but if anyone is worried....put a dab of anti-seize and smear it on the surface....problem solved.

Jeff K · Dec 1, 2012

Sure there is a seal collar, but there is no seal. Corrosion between those two metal surfaces could indeed cause it to seize together. There was mention that the 2013 shafts had a special "anti-seize" coating on the end to keep it from seizing.

pura vida · Dec 1, 2012

paulharris said:
My guess is that if everyone is installing the 2012 steel shaft in their sleds that will make polaris look bad, so hence they put something stupid like this in the bulletin. try to get people to believe that this 3 piece aluminum shaft is the greatest invention ever. the 2005,2011,2012 shaft has a big oil seal collar on it to back up the bearing, there is no way the bearing is going to seize to it. and the belt pulley has a steel insert with splines molded in where it slides on the shaft, just like a chaincase gear. steel on steel.....its been done this way for 30+ years in snowmobiles. if anyone is worried....put a dab of anti-seize and smear it on the surface....problem solved.

actually i think you are wrong. i believe there is some sort of material or coating difference between the two years and there is a concern of seizure. but i don't know/remember the exact details so someone else can confirm or correct. even if there is a seizure concern the probably solution would to be to use copious amounts of anti-seize.

pv

edit: see, there you go. someone else was able to post a better answer even faster than i was.

Gager · Dec 1, 2012

paulharris said:
well, this is a good start i guess. my first question will be: will the replacement be the exact same shaft or did they change something? it says right in the bulletin that "shafts were placed on backorder status to ensure drive shaft availability for snowmobiles currently down for repair". So they are replacing the broken shaft with the same POS part?

I firmly believe that this is a bad design and that as soon as everyone gets snow, many more will fail. The 3/8" overlap into the tube is just ridiculous.

funny how the first line says "this bonded driveshaft passed rigorous field and lab testing" Lol, we will probably never know the real story, but it sounds like the test sleds had the steel shaft in them.

Polaris is saying they are committed to the design, so yes, replacements will be the same design, but I would guess closely inspected before shipping.

The real obnoxious critics of the design keep claiming the 2013 demo sleds didn't run the bonded driveshaft, but others with more credibility and close association with Polaris say that the demos did run the bonded driveshaft. Only the cut away display sleds had the steel shaft. Look, Polaris was completely burned by rushing the 05 900 to market and they learned their lesson as the Pro chassis has been well tested from day one.

The amount of overlap is ONLY relevant to the amount of bonding surface area. Don’t buy into the socket and bolt analogies as they only apply after the bond has failed. Obviously, the wall thickness of the aluminum and the overlap were not designed to hold up without structural adhesive.

camocat1000 · Dec 1, 2012

Take note Arctic Cat: the first thing u have to do is admit you have a problem.And tell the customer that your working on it.when u do find a fix offer it to the customer instead of just selling belts.This is why there is a new Pro in my stable this year.:bounce:

Sxrlar · Dec 1, 2012

whoisthatguy said:
70 so far out of the 5% to 10% that have hit the snow. Most of those active sleds still having less that 100 miles on them. Remember, just because it hasn't failed yet, doesn't mean it won't.

Remember, just because it hasn't failed, doesn't mean it will.

nuggetau · Dec 1, 2012

Thanks for posting the service bulletin. That tells me everything I wanted to know...........they are way further behind the curve than I thought.

A difficult or impossible tow out matters to me a great deal as I will be the one doing the work to recover the sled or paying the heli bill if it can't be towed out. Then there is the 1-2 weeks of down time to get a new shaft that may or may not leave you stranded again.

I for one will be trying to prevent the failure and save myself the tow out and down time, irrespective of future warranty problems or not. It sounds like any real solution is a loooooooong way off from Polaris.

At this point I could care less about the future warranty on a $400 part, I want a sled that I can ride without down time!!!

rmscustom · Dec 1, 2012

Why are the steel shafts on backorder if your not suppose to use them?

nuggetau · Dec 1, 2012

rmscustom said:
Why are the steel shafts on backorder if your not suppose to use them?

The people who wanted a prophylactic solution gobbled up the early limited supply. Polaris saw that happening, that is why they put the '13 shaft on backorder to prevent people buying a second shaft as backups.

paulharris · Dec 1, 2012

Jeff K said:
Sure there is a seal collar, but there is no seal. Corrosion between those two metal surfaces could indeed cause it to seize together. There was mention that the 2013 shafts had a special "anti-seize" coating on the end to keep it from seizing.

The bottom line is that the 2005, 2011, 2012 steel driveshafts fit in the pro and they won't break like the 2013 will (as long as you get one that is true). The "seizing" theory in this polaris bulletin is not going to prevent the shaft from working. You buy a $2 tube of anti seize, put it on the bearing and pulley, install the shaft, and forget about it. Then you can actually enjoy riding the sled without constant paranoia.

Unklsnomobile · Dec 1, 2012

camocat1000 said:
Take note Arctic Cat: the first thing u have to do is admit you have a problem.And tell the customer that your working on it.when u do find a fix offer it to the customer instead of just selling belts.This is why there is a new Pro in my stable this year.:bounce:

Are you for real? Polaris had all kinds of updates in 2005 for the 900, but never admitted they had any problems. That's the reason why I haven't owned one since. I bet they don't recall all the drive shafts this year (like skidoo did in 08), but they should. It makes me laugh when people have to talk down other brands to make themselves feel better. They all take turns having issues, and some deal with them better than others, but Polaris track record is not great.

knifedge · Dec 1, 2012

--I wonder if Polaris will change the design of the driveshaft on the 14 Pro even though there is nothing wrong with the driveshaft they already have on the 13 Pro?

frog · Dec 1, 2012

For me this good news:face-icon-small-hap What this means is there will be a real fix very soon. Being an optimist makes life way more enjoyable than the other option...............Just sayin...............cause it's true:rose:

Jeff K · Dec 1, 2012

paulharris said:
The bottom line is that the 2005, 2011, 2012 steel driveshafts fit in the pro and they won't break like the 2013 will (as long as you get one that is true). The "seizing" theory in this polaris bulletin is not going to prevent the shaft from working. You buy a $2 tube of anti seize, put it on the bearing and pulley, install the shaft, and forget about it. Then you can actually enjoy riding the sled without constant paranoia.

Absolutely. My 2012 shaft and Avid drivers will be here this week

mountainhorse · Dec 1, 2012

o While steel drive shafts from other RMK models may fit, Polaris does not recommend this because there is a risk of the shaft seizing on to the inner bearing race and lower drive sprocket.

The reason for this is that the steel shafts do not have any kind of a corrosion inhibitor on them. They normally run, on the sprocket end, in a bath of oil from the chaincase past the seal.

The aluminum shafts... which do not run the splined end in oil, are coated with a corrosion inhibitor.

Click here for a post on this topic.
http://www.snowestonline.com/forum/showthread.php?p=3209265#post3209265

.

likkerpig · Dec 1, 2012

The way I read that bulletin is that Polaris is still investigating and trying to figure out WTF is going on.

My dilemma now is do I try and back out of my 13 Pro and choose a different brand? Rent for my 1 week trip and see what comes out for the 2014 models? Or do I trust that the Pro will hold up and not ruin our only trip out west for this year? I was OK with a suspect motor, but drive shaft...that's a completely different animal on top of the motor issues.

teeroy · Dec 1, 2012

I seriously doubt they sold 20,000 pro rmk's....must be why that number has been removed from the OP's posts.....

bigdave · Dec 1, 2012

6000-8000 maybe so im thinkin 10% now till west coast starts riding there concrete snow...then it will jump way up....my perdiction is 30-50% failure as time goes on:jaw:

bigdave · Dec 1, 2012

Not to mention i dont think 600 pros are failing,correct me if im wrong, i dont think its fair to count all pros 600 and 800...just 800 are breaking from what i heard:face-icon-small-con

AKSNOWRIDER · Dec 1, 2012

the bullitin is for both 6's and 8's..my guess is same shaft in both meaning both have had failures....

Drive Shaft Service Bulletin

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Active member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Active member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Member

Member

Well-known member

Similar threads