TRS Clutching [ PART FOUR ]

[kanedog]

I saw TRS Tony naked. Well hung comes to mind.

 

[TRS]

I saw TRS Tony naked. Well hung comes to mind.

Fake News

 

[xpspenziv]

It's been a while since I was here. I'm really glad to see it is still going. Tony is a great guy. Very helpful getting my boosted174-3" set up. I forgot most of what I learned. Time to put the racecar away a get ready for the fluff.
Tony. I'll be seeing you in a few months. Coming down with a buddy.

 

[grizzslayer]

Hello Tony...sorry to bug you. I tried PMing you a couple times; Not sure if they are getting through with the new system.

Thanks

Jeff

 

[TRS]

Jeff,
I sent you a PM. I’ll check it to see if it sent.
Thanks

 

[mt.sledder]

Tony, have you done any clutch work on the turboed 850 axys sleds?

 

[TRS]

Had a few out last year. Boondocker kits.

 

[kanedog]

Tony, Tony mo moanee, fee fi mo moanee, TONY!
Haha think of Kanedog when this lil’ ditty gets stuck in yer head all day today! Haha. Happy clutch for all!

 

[TRS]

You da man

 

[kanedog]

I am determined to get you laughing and trolling! Now get on the super low gearing train. Better gains than any clutching can achieve although combined together, you will throw any engine mods in the trash. It’s orgasmic.

 

[mt.sledder]

So what's the clutching recommendation for a turbo 850?

 

[TRS]

mt. sledder,
I pm you.
Thanks

 

[kanedog]

mt. sledder,
I pm you.
Thanks

Burandt is testing a 25/69 ratio. Snomo intel for ya. Gears are coming from Pfeiffer Engineering. Pfeiffer has a method where they can Hobb the teeth and broach the splines without removing the pulley from the fixture. That’s cool. They got all geared up to supply Specialty Motorsports for their belt drives. Then specialty went dark and left them high and dry with all the equipment manufacturing setup for pulleys I believe. So if anyone wants a pulley supplier, now you know where to go.

 

[mt.sledder]

Has anyone noticed if the e start sleds are a bit slower reving than the non e start sleds due to the weight of the ring gear and it’s position so far from the Center of the crank? I’ve seen a difference and I’m not sure if it was the ring gear or something else contributing to it.

 

[Sheetmetalfab]

Has anyone noticed if the e start sleds are a bit slower reving than the non e start sleds due to the weight of the ring gear and it’s position so far from the Center of the crank? I’ve seen a difference and I’m not sure if it was the ring gear or something else contributing to it.

primary and secondary clutch wear part health, clutching calibration, engine wear health (leak down test) and throttle position sensor accurately set all make the difference in how a sled runs / feels.

(assuming the track /gearing is identical.)

heavy vs light primary clutch would take a seismograph to measure the difference. Often clutching calibration or clutch wear part health changes happen at the same time as installation of “lightweight” parts so it is hard to pinpoint the instrument of change.

bring purchase justification into play and all bets are off.

 

[mt.sledder]

primary and secondary clutch wear part health, clutching calibration, engine wear health (leak down test) and throttle position sensor accurately set all make the difference in how a sled runs / feels.

(assuming the track /gearing is identical.)

heavy vs light primary clutch would take a seismograph to measure the difference. Often clutching calibration or clutch wear part health changes happen at the same time as installation of “lightweight” parts so it is hard to pinpoint the instrument of change.

bring purchase justification into play and all bets are off.

I've noticed a difference between 2 new sleds both set up the same. The electric start sled just seems a bit slower reving (throttle response) than the non electric start sled. Not sure if that can be attributed to the weight of the ring gear a long way off the center of the crank or not. The ring gear would be a lot more weight than the lightweight covers, starter cups, titianium bolts etc that people seem to claim make the engine more responsive. The sleds I'm seeing the difference in have none of these lightweight parts.

 

[bryceraisanen]

Wanted to do a little review of the TRS clutching way.

A little background, 16 axys 800 155, rode sled stock for 300 miles and blew stock belt at about 200. Added silber turbo and sent cluthches to IS for reshimming spider and Dans wonderful clutch work. After turbo was added running 7# at 10,000 i was blowing belts every 150 or so. this was with the polaris belt and the gates 45c, the polaris lasted just a tick better. this was with tons of cool down time with panels off till clutches were just warm. It was rediculous the amount of cool down time i was doing. belts were still blowing.

I knew something was wrong so i bought a AXIS clutch alignment tool to check offset. factory setting was spot on according to that bar. i then tried some different clutching to try and figure it out. Nothing seemed to help. I had been looking at the TRS thread and decided to read the entire thing. Good lord, its long ! Decided to contact tony after reading his method using bar stock to check offset, I did this method and found my offset was way inboard when the alignment bar said it was right on. So i shimmed it out and gave it .025 float. I then bought TRS helix and weights also bought venom springs.

My previous setup i couldnt achieve full rpm, could only get 7900-8100 in 2-3 feet of fresh powder and rpm would fade on steep climbs.

TRS setup last time out in cooke pulled 8400-8600 depending on snow conditions. There is alot of power in that 8400-8600 range !!!!

Im a very happy camper and wanted to say thanks for the help. Very pleasant guy to talk to.

No blown belts in 7 days of riding, clutch faces look incredible. Used gates 45c

current set up running 7# of boost at 10,000

TRS weights- 70 gram
TRS helix-42-32f
venom 125-175 secondary spring
venom 140-330 primary spring
8400-8600 all day long !

I really believe the offset is super critical to achieving belt life.

Thanks,Tim

I have same setup. What difference is there between the 42-32 and the 46-32?

I have both cuts on my helix. Been running the 46-32. Wondering if I should try the other side...

Sent from my SM-N976U using Tapatalk

 

[briand]

If your using the 46-32 helix on some sleds you cant use much lower then a 140-200 rate in your secondary spring rate without some sleds sipping the belt as with the 42-32 you can go down to a 125-175 and on some sleds a 100-150 start rate on the secondary spring. The 42-32 gives a little better backshift too then the 46-32 at least that's what i notice.

 

[bryceraisanen]

Here's my belt after about 600 turbo miles with TRS setup. No cords coming out or anything, looks like plenty of life left. I just shimmed the primary tighter by another .022" as side clearance has grown over the last year.

For now I'm stuck with too much lead in, as there isn't enough adjustment on the Axys.

I'm wondering if there is any way to get rid of this shiny-ness on the belt. I haven't noticed any problems, rpm is always good. But reading about glazed belts makes me wonder if I'm leaving something on the table.. I took these pics after a good scrubbing in hot soapy water with red scotchbrite.

Witness marks a bit higher on outside of belt.

Sent from my SM-N976U using Tapatalk

 

[briand]

Here's my belt after about 600 turbo miles with TRS setup. No cords coming out or anything, looks like plenty of life left. I just shimmed the primary tighter by another .022" as side clearance has grown over the last year.

For now I'm stuck with too much lead in, as there isn't enough adjustment on the Axys.

I'm wondering if there is any way to get rid of this shiny-ness on the belt. I haven't noticed any problems, rpm is always good. But reading about glazed belts makes me wonder if I'm leaving something on the table.. I took these pics after a good scrubbing in hot soapy water with red scotchbrite.

Witness marks a bit higher on outside of belt.

Sent from my SM-N976U using Tapatalk

Sorry for editing this but just out of curiosity whos method did you use to do the clutch alignment with?
The glazing is more predominate in the top picture then the bottom one but there is what looks like more belt wear on that side then the bottom picture.
So just to be clear the top belt picture is the side that rest against the fixed primary sheave and the bottom pic is the side that's against the movable side of the primary sheave.
If it is then the secondary is still out of alignment somewhat. It needs to be shimmed out a little more from the jackshaft bearing according to the witness marks on the belt.. I would try adding very thin spacers .010-.020 thousand of an inch at a time to see if those witness marks get closer to the same. you want them to be the same on both side. Also if you ran this belt like this for 600 miles it might be hard to get a accurate witness mark reading due to belt wear in this position for 600 miles. i would start off with a new belt now to get a more accurate picture of where you new spacing witness marks will be. the old belt will throw this off somewhat now. There's nothing wrong with it keeping it as a spare if you want. According to what your marks are showing you could be gaining some more in performance with a closer alignment.