Has anyone looked into swapping out the chaincase for the quickdrive setup? Can it be done? I'm wanting to convert to the quickdrive plate, aluminum driveshaft, etc. The brake system looks to be the same minus the brake disc. Should be able to drop a few lbs of rotating weight and I would still run the tki belt drive. Any info is greatly appreciated.
Chaincase to Belt Drive.
- Thread starter 2themax2
- Start date
Why not just put on a TKI chain to belt drive conversion
On a quick drive equiped sled the brake disc in on the in side of the belt pully. On a chaincase equiped sled its on the out board side of the chain case. I don't know if there is a difference in the jack or track shafts from one to another. Or even the caliper IMO. Its probably cheaper and easyer to use a belt drive kit like Tki
Re-read the first post dude.
He just wants the backer plate and shafts.
Personally after riding belt drive to chaincase back to back.........
I'm keeping the chaincase on my 163x3.
I noticed absolutely zero gain with the belt drive.
WHAT? everybody else notices the difference from a chain to the Quickdrive and to go to a TKI kit is another leap to better as it is so smooth compared to the Quickdrive and turns so much easier than the banjo tight Quickdrive belt. For you not to notice, I think your riding style must be way different than mine.
You sell them...........
Smoother, yes.
Better??
Doesn't go any farther or faster.
Unsure if its worth any money.
I think a lot of people try to justify money they spend.
No matter the fuzzy math involved.
I owned an 11 pro and a 13 at the same time.
Side by side testing.
Last edited:
The jackshaft is different also.
I didn't know that, seems like alot of work. I wonder if I could swap out the driveshafts leaving everything else the same?
They don't fit the chaincase.
Sure i am biased but here are the gains over chain:
lighter, lower rotating mass
wont break case if the belt breaks
no oil to leak out or change
easy to visually check tension
over a Quickdrive:
turns easier
gearing choices (lower gearing increases performance and saves clutch belts)
way more belt contact on upper gear (makes the belt way more reliable than OEM design)
smoother
belt is 1/2 cost of OEM
belt is way easier to change than OEM
How does it "turn easier"? ...than a quickdrive?
That is impossible when adding a tensioner. You add inherent friction into the system with a tensioner
Aftermarket belt drives with an ADJUSTABLE tensioner have less tension on the belt than Polaris' quick drive.
Sent from my SM-G920R4 using Tapatalk
Is that fact or marketing advertisement? By engaging more of the belt, changing its direction, and adding a bearing, you also add more friction. So if you do in fact have less tension on the belt, does that negate the effects of adding friction to the system? Has this ever actually been tested?
Go up to sleds with both systems and feel the belts. If u go to a snow show, there will be lots of sleds with both systems. That polaris belt is tight.
Sent from my SM-G920R4 using Tapatalk
I don't disagree, but you are also adding friction into the system in other ways like I mentioned. So is the difference in tension less than the added friction? Not saying it is or isn't just that the question exists...
Good question, I cannot answer that.
I do believe that a system with an adjustable tensioner can handle more power and the belt will last longer.
I also believe that the chain system works fine. I will take a sled with either system and not change it to the other.
I don't see $800-$1,100 benefit of a belt drive.
Sent from my SM-G920R4 using Tapatalk
I do believe that a system with an adjustable tensioner can handle more power and the belt will last longer.
I also believe that the chain system works fine. I will take a sled with either system and not change it to the other.
I don't see $800-$1,100 benefit of a belt drive.
Sent from my SM-G920R4 using Tapatalk
Similar threads
