Motor mounts

Devilmanak · Mar 17, 2012

Yep.

The simple strap idea has some issues, one of which I decided was bad, one of which was pointed out above by the fact that they need to pivot or they will loosen the bolts.
1st one - A cut up M series motor plate, metal mount on one end, plate rubber bushing mount on the other. - Changed because it was pointed out that it needed to pivot, so:
2nd one - Cut the end off and scabbed on a tie rod/end. It interfered with the secondary, I placed it on the TCL without being smart, lol. Plus it was a scabbed together ugly mess as I was sick of screwing with it. Now in the metal pile.
3rd one - Easy, basic. I think it was a Poo radius rod. Cut off, rethreaded for the end. Lower end has an bushing I found that fit, then drilled out to baccept 3/8" bolt. (More on that below.) The upper is the same sized rod end, a chunk of fuel tubing that drilled out a bit that is a press fit between bolt and inner rod end. (Rubber mounted.)

Both ends can rotate, so no loose bolts. Also allows movement front to rear, which Cat put there for some reason. Only addresses lift, which from my measurements IS a problem.

Now, those lower frame bolts that people are using to mount their links, are shouldered. (For a reason.) A non shouldered bolt will alow you to tighten the bolt too much and crush the aluminum frame member. (At least how I see it.) Putting a strap under that bolt will allow you to overtighten it also, which is one thing I didn't like about my original straps. I used the rear mount bolt for two reasons. One, it is closer to 90 degrees to the tcl and the direction it lifts. Two, you can get to the rear nut of the shouldered bolt from under the sled. This is helpfull because I drilled and threaded the shouldered bolt to accept a 3/8" bolt, for tie rod mounting. (It mostly removes the allen hex hole, so you can tighten the bolt from under the sled if the allen key strips.) A smaller metric bolt stripped when I threaded it. Last thing, my rod lightly touched the belt at WFO throttle, so I bent it in the vice to tuck in better. Easy strap, wouldn't have taken a day if it was the first I made, LOL.

Devilmanak · Mar 17, 2012

Hard mounting the jackshaft isn't going to solve anything, it may make it worse, unless major frame modification is made. The problem is engine lift, at least when they are connected the center to center stays the same. .
Hard mount it, the engine will still come up, the offset and vertical alignment with change, and without major frame work (engine stopper), the engine will suck back towards the now rigid jackshaft and destroy center to center, as well as parallelism. The problem is the motor mounts/engine mounting system. Go grab an old 1M clutch and lift up on it, the mounts keep it from moving. Engine is mounted with a stopper to frame, that the jackshaft is mounted in. Our mounts are too soft, keep the engine from lifting and problem should go away. (THIS problem, there are multiple others that are also hurting us.) CLutch problems, flexy jackshaft, etc etc etc.

knifedge · Mar 17, 2012

--Important to note--

Jackshaft should be hard mounted AND disengaged from tcl

--TCL can still be utilized and mounted to chassis for engine support, but that is it. It should be entirely independant of and not touch the jackshaft. Would also be better if it were mounted on the tunnel but closer to the engine(shorter = stiffer)

--Two options to stop jackshaft/secondary misalignment caused by tcl

--Hard bolt the engine to the frame(not practical) and stop all engine/jackshaft/secondary movement/misalignment -- No engine movement = no tcl movement = no jackshaft/ secondary movement/misalignment = cool running clutches

--Hard bolt AND disengage jackshaft from tcl -- Secondary will ALWAYS stay true regardless of engine/tcl movement -- Only primary clutch moves around a bit, not BOTH clutches = 1000 mile belt life (not perfect, but tried and true)

--If you want to concentrate on the engine mounts and/or tcl support, i would agree with wyoboy and work on the mag side first and install a torque arm to control the engine "twist"

Going West · Mar 17, 2012

Well since were discussing the TCL What is its real purpose. The only thing it does is keep Center to Center distance, correct. While doing this, by its very design it sacrifices all other forms of alignment if it moves at all. I think most can agree on this.

Why go though all this trouble for consistent C to C distance when all you have to do is mount a solid horizontal torque arm (just like devilmanak fabbed up) to the font of the motor, one on each side. No more twisting or torquing and the CtC stays true, you only have a bit of up and down movement which does not really affect alignment. This has been done for a long time and it does not create extra vibration or cause fatigue failure (as long as the engine is allowed to vibrate up and down you can lock the horizontal plane). I see no reason why this could not be done on the PC, and if the motor mounts are a little soft its not that hare to add extra ones or replace the stock ones with a stiffer version. To me this seems like a much easier way to accomplish the same task but with no or very minimal drawbacks.

Devilmanak · Mar 17, 2012

The best way to comprehend this is to go out to the sled armed with an person, prybar, and alignment bar. Sit there and have your friend push, twist, pull, pry, and move the engine every which way possible. That is what I did, and why I understand what is going on with the alignment when the engine moves. Much easier than trying to explain/argue it.
Clutch alignment is alignment between the clutches, nothing else. Other things affect how they are aligned, but the end result of clutch alignement are aligned clutches. It has nothing to do with how the jackshaft goes into the chaincase. If the clutches are aligned sitting in the garage, they are aligned. If they are aligned when the engine is moved 1" back from static, they are aligned. If they are aligned while the engine and jackshaft are floating all over the place, they are still aligned.
The only way I could get the alignment to change for the worse is to lift the clutch and twist the tcl. I could not get the tcl to bow by forcing the clutches together. If I moved the jackshaft over to the mag side .060", the tcl did it's job of keeping things together by pulling the engine over .060".

CatRpillar · Mar 17, 2012

GW - that's an interesting thought in regards to keeping the motor restrained in the horizontal plane. Paired up with the TCL one would think this would would be an easy and effective design. But then Devilmanak shows that the TCL does a good job, at least under static conditions - maybe under field conditions the restraint would provide further help........

Going West · Mar 17, 2012

This is the plan for the next trip. Shop has reported good success with a similar setup and he has a 1200 turbo crammed in there.

aksnopro · Mar 18, 2012

has anyone tried normal clutches? the sheave angles on these clutches were both the same right? which is not normal they were under the impression there wasnt going to be misalignment so they put the sheave angles the same.

if you had normal clutches with different sheave angles would we still be having this issue???

are the team secondarys the same sheave angles as the AC secondary?

blewup my 084 belt today, 260 miles. my recoil was off and i was starting it by the clutch so it wasnt getting the normal rests it would get but still pulled a cord on both sides.

when cooled down i would win against a 2012 pro rmk i was with we raced 8 times today. after 4-5 pulls when my belt heated up he would bearly beat me but i was only pulling 7200 rpm when cold i was getting 7800, he said he was banking good R's these clutches getting this hot are really effecting our performance. got it all on helmet cam, we raced 8 times today over 3k in elevation changes in the races.

ill post the details with the helm cam shots later. but moral of todays story is i have to figure this out asap my performance is dropping big time once the clutches heat up. will post rest of details in a topic.

-Aksnopro

Devilmanak · Mar 18, 2012

The other way to think about this:
Cat would not have put this out without testing. They have been working on this platform for how long? Front end design appeared in 08 on the race sleds. Along with some other framework similarities. They have engineers and have been doing this for, ahem, 50 years, lol. There is no way I am going to be smart enough to re-engineer a unique system like that better than a team of trained engineers. My thoughts are to trust the process, even though we are not sure why things are the way they are.
They knew clutches were going to run warmer, so put a fan on it. Maybe they were in a hurry because of the anniversary and rushed some things, but I bet they had protoypes on the snow years ago and have been working on the link for that long. 6 years on the M chassis with only refinements, this has been a long time coming. I just can't think that they would have come up with a design like this wihtout a reason and it working. So anyway, the question is, what changed between testing and production? Being as engine movement seems to be the problem, the logical answer would be engine restraint. (Motor mounts.) I could see the mounts being designed stiff to solve the issues we are having, final prototypes being tested and some guy saying "Too much engine vibration, we need softer motor mounts, build them."
There also seems to be some confusion in communication within Cat. Their instructions for the jackshaft update are just plain WRONG. It says to align the clutches after doing the update. I did my update myself. I have proven that on my sled, if you move the jackshaft over and align the clutches, then ride the sled, the motor will get worked over with use and pull the clutches out of alignment. They were spot on at 118 miles when I got the sled and did the update. At 351 miles the belt went, even though I babied it a LOT. When I mentioned this to a dealer today, and he also verified that they had a problem sled, did the update, and continued to have problems until they re-aligned the sled for a second time after some use, and now it seems ok. I think Wyoboy also said the same thing above?
So:
Some sleds seem to be fine. We have already seen that quality control in the factory is not good this year. Maybe the ones that came from the factory with the jackshaft in the right place, nut tight, and clutches aligned are ok.

Now take a problem sled. It comes from the factory with a loose jackshaft nut, and the shaft is floating around, pulling the tcl (and engine) around. Customer has problems, can't figure it out, then the update comes out. Update is done, jackshaft if moved over a bit, clutches re-aligned (as was my sled), and the sled is used. The engine gets pulled over by the newly repositioned jackshaft and tcl, and now the clutches are out again, and more belt problems. At first glance, this sled was updated, clutches were aligned after the update, so that COULDN'T be the problem and we all start to look for other issues. And look really really hard, lol. Lots of theories.

Add in the other things: Enclosed poorly vented clutch area, sticking primaries, flexible jackshaft, questionable belts, etc., and you are going to have a mess. (Different variations of a mess, I am sure some folks would be thrilled to get 350 miles out of a belt, but that is still not right.)

So I should know tomorrow. TCL is strapped down, new belt, I did some venting for giggles, I know how hot my clutches were after a certain amount of riding. Not real scientific there, but if I have found my issues (offset incorrect, plus engine moving around compounding the issue) then the change in clutch temps should be noticable. Snow will be similar to last ride, deep and heavy.

Devilmanak · Mar 18, 2012

aksnopro said:
has anyone tried normal clutches? the sheave angles on these clutches were both the same right? which is not normal they were under the impression there wasnt going to be misalignment so they put the sheave angles the same.

if you had normal clutches with different sheave angles would we still be having this issue???

are the team secondarys the same sheave angles as the AC secondary?

blewup my 084 belt today, 260 miles. my recoil was off and i was starting it by the clutch so it wasnt getting the normal rests it would get but still pulled a cord on both sides.

when cooled down i would win against a 2012 pro rmk i was with we raced 8 times today. after 4-5 pulls when my belt heated up he would bearly beat me but i was only pulling 7200 rpm when cold i was getting 7800, he said he was banking good R's these clutches getting this hot are really effecting our performance. got it all on helmet cam, we raced 8 times today over 3k in elevation changes in the races.

ill post the details with the helm cam shots later. but moral of todays story is i have to figure this out asap my performance is dropping big time once the clutches heat up. will post rest of details in a topic.

-Aksnopro

Bummer, thought you had yours figured out. You still strapped down? I will check your thread.

aksnopro · Mar 18, 2012

no i took out my reeds and unstrapped my tcl, the arctic cat warranty rep told me to i followed there instructions, still blew the belt. ill call them monday and see what they say. i also have a cracked roller with a missing chunk, could have been why i wasnt getting good R's today too....

-Aksnopro

Devilmanak · Mar 18, 2012

Hmm. So TCL strap was working for you then?
I think new rollers are one of the 2013 updates.

Kbakbmr · Mar 18, 2012

With everything I have done with motor mounts/clutches I was racing a 12 pro rmk163 vs. My Pc 153 up hill and across the flats. He had a bmp head and different springs/ weights. Pinned up 3 climbs and across the flats we were neck n neck... Untill his belt blew and he was end over end. Kitty cat wins WOOPTY WOOP

Daltech · Mar 18, 2012

Ok.
All this thinking is interesting. I do thou think that cat engineers has done there thinking aswell, and I don't belive they where that far out.

I sometimes think outsides of the box, and here is the outside.
Cat added a fan to the primary, why did they not add a fan to the secondery instead?

Ok, enought questions.
I have not had major problems with clutches and heat with my riding conditions. But I have been measuring clutch temps, not by hand, but with an IR temp meter.
What I've found, is my inne sheave on my primery always are around 20 celcius degrees warmer then the outer sheave.
Ok, why is it like that. Clutches are perfect alligned.
I think it is from heat transfer from engine/crank that heat up the inner sheave.

So last weekend, Mr.Rasmussen was over here, and I went riding with him on a course. Fun. Snow was heavy, heaviest I ever expired this winter with this sled. After some bashing in the trees, I could really feel a lack of performance in my sled. Clutches where HOT, as not to stick my hands in there. I also got the famos belt chatter when belt got that hot. Unfortently I was not able to measure temps with my IR meter, since my day was about riding, and not tuning.

So, lack of performance when bashing around in the trees, and ended up with HOT clutches. It all started with lower performance, before clutches went real hot.

Bashing around in the trees, and out side temp was around 0 celcius degrees, result in low airflow true the engine comparment, which equals to heat bulid up in the engine comparment.
Ok, so where does heat goes?
Right, it always goes up. Where is up, yes, it is directly into the air intake. So let say air intake heats up to 50-60 degrees celcius, and it is not measured by the IAT sensor, because that one is located in the fair top for the intake system, fuel will not be reduced due to the actual intake temperatur, but will be adjusted according to the outside temp.

This again result in a heatsoaked crankcase. Heatsoaked crank case is bad for engine perfromance, and it will spread it's heat to everything that is connected to it. Clutch innersheave first.
What does the fan? It cools it down again.

One of my thoughts if you want.
And next week, I plan on proving my theory, whit an air temp sensor down in the intake before trottlebodies, and another up on the dash measuring real outside temp.
I'm expecting an difference, question is how big of a differnece it will be.

And a side not. All of you who have looked inside the air intake, has seen there is alot of "fins" in differnet size and shapes. Probaly to reduse intake noise. These fins will act as a cooling fin to the plastic box, and actually use the intake air to cool down the airintake plastic.

Going West · Mar 18, 2012

Devilmanak said:
The other way to think about this:
Cat would not have put this out without testing. They have been working on this platform for how long? Front end design appeared in 08 on the race sleds. Along with some other framework similarities. They have engineers and have been doing this for, ahem, 50 years, lol. There is no way I am going to be smart enough to re-engineer a unique system like that better than a team of trained engineers. My thoughts are to trust the process, even though we are not sure why things are the way they are.
They knew clutches were going to run warmer, so put a fan on it. Maybe they were in a hurry because of the anniversary and rushed some things, but I bet they had protoypes on the snow years ago and have been working on the link for that long. 6 years on the M chassis with only refinements, this has been a long time coming. I just can't think that they would have come up with a design like this wihtout a reason and it working. So anyway, the question is, what changed between testing and production? Being as engine movement seems to be the problem, the logical answer would be engine restraint. (Motor mounts.) I could see the mounts being designed stiff to solve the issues we are having, final prototypes being tested and some guy saying "Too much engine vibration, we need softer motor mounts, build them."
There also seems to be some confusion in communication within Cat. Their instructions for the jackshaft update are just plain WRONG. It says to align the clutches after doing the update. I did my update myself. I have proven that on my sled, if you move the jackshaft over and align the clutches, then ride the sled, the motor will get worked over with use and pull the clutches out of alignment. They were spot on at 118 miles when I got the sled and did the update. At 351 miles the belt went, even though I babied it a LOT. When I mentioned this to a dealer today, and he also verified that they had a problem sled, did the update, and continued to have problems until they re-aligned the sled for a second time after some use, and now it seems ok. I think Wyoboy also said the same thing above?
So:
Some sleds seem to be fine. We have already seen that quality control in the factory is not good this year. Maybe the ones that came from the factory with the jackshaft in the right place, nut tight, and clutches aligned are ok.

Now take a problem sled. It comes from the factory with a loose jackshaft nut, and the shaft is floating around, pulling the tcl (and engine) around. Customer has problems, can't figure it out, then the update comes out. Update is done, jackshaft if moved over a bit, clutches re-aligned (as was my sled), and the sled is used. The engine gets pulled over by the newly repositioned jackshaft and tcl, and now the clutches are out again, and more belt problems. At first glance, this sled was updated, clutches were aligned after the update, so that COULDN'T be the problem and we all start to look for other issues. And look really really hard, lol. Lots of theories.

Add in the other things: Enclosed poorly vented clutch area, sticking primaries, flexible jackshaft, questionable belts, etc., and you are going to have a mess. (Different variations of a mess, I am sure some folks would be thrilled to get 350 miles out of a belt, but that is still not right.)

So I should know tomorrow. TCL is strapped down, new belt, I did some venting for giggles, I know how hot my clutches were after a certain amount of riding. Not real scientific there, but if I have found my issues (offset incorrect, plus engine moving around compounding the issue) then the change in clutch temps should be noticable. Snow will be similar to last ride, deep and heavy.

I'm sorry but I respectfully disagree with some of your assumptions. The TCL will not move the engine around if the update was done properly. The TCL will move the JS with the engine (as was the design) but not the other way (all the force comes from the engine so it will dictate how things move as long as the system was put together without any internal stress).

The reason you had your alignment change is because when you moved he JS in the chain case bearing to get your 4.5mm you did not make sure it moved in the bearing on the TCL. This put a side load on the TCL and caused it to bow a bit, this caused misalignment that you corrected with shims. Once you ran the sled for a bit the bearing in the TCL slid on the JS back to where it should be causing your alignment to come out of spec again. The engine did not have to move for any of this to happen. There may have been some side load on it for a brief amount of time until the TCL slid back over on the JS but that would have been very minimal.

Also to assume that cat is a big company and has good reason to build things the way they do so we really should not question their ideas is a very scary assumption. Cats main goal is to make money, that's it. That is why there is only one platform this year, that is why the fired most of their mountain department and replaced them with a bunch of rooks, its to save a few bucks and make more money. Its also why they are still advertising extended belt life with the TCL, the main purpose of the TCL was marketing, sell more sleds make more money. Locking the jack shaft and the engine together is not needed for great belt life, lots of properly clutched sleds with good motor mounts have tremendous belt life. But to the average Joe consumer (I was rooked in too) the TCL is a reason to choose AC over another brand (which is marketing).

CatRpillar · Mar 18, 2012

Daltech

Some good testing info.

I am thinking that it is somewhat normal for the inner primary sheave to run hotter. Why? Cooling air hits the outer sheave first plus the fact that the inner sheave sits closer to the motor which is just simply a warmer environment. It's tough to say if the difference in heat is actually getting generated there though. If you can, check the shaft temp at the primary too just for a comparison. It should be cooler than either sheave but would be interesting as a data point.

knifedge · Mar 18, 2012

--Question--

--Why create that much heat in the first place?

--Do some pulls with the side panel cover OFF and then check clutch temps. This would indicate whether there is a venting/heat building issue or a clutch misalignment issue

Daltech · Mar 18, 2012

CatRpillar said:
Daltech

Some good testing info.

I am thinking that it is somewhat normal for the inner primary sheave to run hotter. Why? Cooling air hits the outer sheave first plus the fact that the inner sheave sits closer to the motor which is just simply a warmer environment. It's tough to say if the difference in heat is actually getting generated there though. If you can, check the shaft temp at the primary too just for a comparison. It should be cooler than either sheave but would be interesting as a data point.

That's a great idea. Have a laser on my ir temp meter, so should be possible to get in between and measure shaft temp aswell. I'll stick that to the "to do list"

Daltech · Mar 18, 2012

knifedge said:
--Question--

--Why create that much heat in the first place?

--Do some pulls with the side panel cover OFF and then check clutch temps. This would indicate whether there is a venting/heat building issue or a clutch misalignment issue

Are you question me??

Arctic cat is the only one who has their air intake above the exhaust pipe. Try stick your hand on the exhaust pipe after som pulls true the deap.
I bet you will regret sticking your fingers in there afterwards.
That heat will transfer to its enviroments. And if you are running an aftermarket pipe without any heat shields, it will even be worse.

WyoBoy1000 · Mar 18, 2012

I haven't read through all the post.
I think mounting a torque arm in the front is the best bet, farther forward means less movement, even the one white rad built was the same mount but being in the middle will allow twice the movement as it would in the front.

I also think since the clutches are tied together, when there is a jar or hit in the clutching it all goes through the belt. Unlike before the motor/ clutches could move separately and not jar the belt alone. One reason I think softer springs and clutching may be the ticket, so if there is a jar everything can move.

We have gotten the clutching free'd up a lot compared to the old school clutches with rollers etc..., but yet we are running the same spring etc....., maybe we need less spring and different setups.

Motor mounts

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known 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

Well-known member

Similar threads