Belt vs Chaincase
- Thread starter Dootimes2
- Start date
My bottom bolt has sheared off on the lower sprocket/gear more times than the belts failing. On many posts people have claimed to remedy this problem by replacing the stock bolt with a super high grade bolt OR you can throw a dewalt cordless drill, an easy-out, extra bolt, pliers, and a hammer in your backpack. It sucks when this happens, NO BRAKES!
Sounds like poorly matching shaft to gear.if it keeps happening obviously there is something else going on, not just a weak fastener.
Had a cmx belt drive on an 06 summit. No tensioner with the gearing I ran, no breaking belts in, no letting off the throttle when landing a jump and no failure in 4000 miles. All of my pros I just rode and no failures.
I only did the tki tensioner because I got a great deal on it and had the belly pan and drive off to replace this.
D
I was up in the air when I started this thread, but I decided I wanted the 3" more than the QD so chain case it is. Kind of glad it is a chain now as I have never broke on or had one fail in several thousand miles. Its all good and I still like to read the posts in this thread for other opinions and knowledge keep'em coming. WE got 2 163 3"ers. One all black ( Wife's ) and one black with orange tunnel, rails and spindles ( Saaweeet ).
U
I agree.
Nothing seems scarier to me than breaking a belt on a climb and suddenly losing my belt and brakes. Or clipping along up/down a trail hitting the brakes and then having nothing. I can't for the life of me understand why they don't move it down or why more people don't see this as a problem.
I'm currently shopping for my next new sled and the QD/Chaincase-2.6"/3" and engine reliability are the only issues I am seeing with the Axys. Hopefully the engine issue has been addressed with the new piston design. But I am still not liking the QD because of the brake location so that may dictate which track I choose if I go Poo again.
FWIW, 10's of thousands of miles have been on sleds made by Doo, Poo, Cat and Yamaha respectively without chaincase issues. Durability in that respect speaks for itself if they are properly maintained IMO.
What exactly is the weight difference between the two? Didn't the 13 save like 15 lbs or something?
IIRC it's a 13 lb weight difference between th 2.6 QD and 3" chaincase
Thought it was 2lbs of rotating weight, but don't know total static - someone here will.
The 13 pro also introduced carbon overstructure, glued a-arms, aluminum driveshaft, and lightweight seat - all contributed to the weight loss, FWIW.
For 2017 I feel that Polaris will have the QD for the 3"
They cannot -and will not give us everything in the first year new sled.
I went to the TKI with Zero miles on my 2104 QD by Polaris
1,400 trouble free miles and running 2.25 ratio- and all Mountain riding
Tom does provide a better grade lower bolt tighter wrap around the top pully - I dunno if this is the fix /
All I can tell you is when I get the my new 2016 with my QD 2,6 it 's getting a TKI
Why go back in time -???
S/C
They cannot -and will not give us everything in the first year new sled.
I went to the TKI with Zero miles on my 2104 QD by Polaris
1,400 trouble free miles and running 2.25 ratio- and all Mountain riding
Tom does provide a better grade lower bolt tighter wrap around the top pully - I dunno if this is the fix /
All I can tell you is when I get the my new 2016 with my QD 2,6 it 's getting a TKI
Why go back in time -???
S/C
D
All I know is that my 16's with the 3" and electric start will be almost the same weight as my 12's. Except in a better chassis and I am just fine with that.
my guess is they will drop the ball until skidoo puts belt drive on theirs with the brake on the driveshaft and a tensioner like it should be. stronger belt too.
then they will copy that and call it quick drive 2 and say "20% stronger, lower c.o.g, 8 tooth drivers...
and your 16 axys with 1200 miles will be worth 4 grand..
polaris told my dealer that they did not put the belt drive on the 3" because of the lower gearing. There was not enough room to put a bigger pulley on the bottom. they did not want to put a smaller pulley on the top because it would put to much stress on the belt. I myself am going with the 2.6. just haven't decided on a length.
Similar threads
