Hardcore Sledder banner

81 - 100 of 134 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,091 Posts
Get the cost savings; take the 230k and divide by 2, because full retail is usually double dealer cost.... 150k, and I would guess Polaris cost is 1/2 of dealer, so divide by 2 again and it’s 75k. But, 75k is 75k none the less. It all adds up.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,797 Posts
I will always agree with this. This is what it is. Money saving. It saves polaris 46 bucks give or take per sled (using retail prices as the difference). That only takes 5000 units with that savings of $230,000 dollars. The program is already finished for the larger slot in the same helix cast.

My point in previous posts was that the change is so small. We wont notice it. Adding 3 delrin washers is a much bigger impact... And we honestly cant even feel that. So for this change to think is performance oriented.... It just isnt. The numbers in savings is just too substantial to ignore. Polaris did alot of r&d for their new body, handlebar warmers and display. They had to cut costs somewhere. This was the easiest solution to save money.

If you can stand up and say to the company. "I know how we can save hundreds of thousands of dollars, eventually into millions in savings. We already have the parts needed for it and it takes one change on a machining program that already exists." Yeah lets do that. Simple as that.
Nail......meet head. Drop mic.....
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
4,814 Posts
The more I study this large roller influence, the more I see the probable effect it can have. For example, as the belt pulls the helix along the roller, the spring is being compressed. The larger roller will tend to enter the 44 degree angle sooner than a smaller roller because the spider will be slightly farther from the spring mounting surface. This changes the spring to a lighter tension. Small effect? But may be why they increased the spring to a higher tension.
You have a good point. Measurement of the new ramp would give us the answer. BUT, if in machining the new helix for the 0.2" larger DIAMETER roller, they set the CNC machine to move the bottom (half circle) of the track (stationary starting point), 0.1" (RADIUS of roller) closer to the mounting base of the helix, all these changes of force and relationships would be ZERO change. The track of course has to be 0.2" wider (measured perpendicular to the ramp surface). The PERC pocket should be 0.1" deeper into the reverse side of the new track and the pocket needs to be a larger "notch" to accommodate this roller. The whole concept is to start out with the sheaves and the pins the roller rotates on, in the exact same position at they would be on a TSS-04 with small roller and the same spec small roller helix.

The roller on the pin, is not a lever, it has very little friction on the pin, resisting it's slow rotation. When not shifting up/down, the net force the roller feels, is a vector perpendicular to the surface of the ramp that the roller is touching at any point in time. There are only two points of contact & no lever effect, so the net force vector/direction has to go from the roller contact on the ramp surface to the centerline of the pin it rotates on. When the net force vector does not go thru these two points, the roller is going to move on the ramp, until the net force vector once again goes thru these two points.

The net force is the result of a number of different mechanical relationships going on around it:

  1. *Rotation of the movable sheave around the axis of the clutch, resistance to the movable sheave rotating relative to the fixed sheave from rotating friction at the bushings AND from the belt squeezed between them (like between a brake caliper and a rotor squeezing the brake pad)
  2. *Friction resistance from the belt to sliding up/down the faces of the sheaves, as the ratio changes
  3. *Pressure from the spring, always trying to close the clutch up (downshift) by moving the movable sheave towards the fixed sheave.
  4. *Tension/pull from the belt trying to rotate the movable sheave counter clockwise (when engine is running forward). Pull on the fixed sheave only goes thru the helix & roller system on the Tied Clutch not the TSS-04.
  5. *There are other forces involved as well, which I am not smart enough to explain
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
4,814 Posts
Nice. Checking out some of our trails first but its about time.
I'll be with a crew tomorrow morning, working on the same sort of thing: brushing, inspection, beaver dams, blocked culverts, abandoned cars, etc.
 

·
Registered
19 600 Switchback Assault
Joined
·
162 Posts
The roller on the pin, is not a lever, it has very little friction on the pin, resisting it's slow rotation.
Yeah you are right about that.
Thinking about it I thought the bigger roller would send the force at a different angle but after rethinking it, it will remain the same.
 

·
Brand loyal, not brand blind
Joined
·
14,762 Posts
You have a good point. Measurement of the new ramp would give us the answer. BUT, if in machining the new helix for the 0.2" larger DIAMETER roller, they set the CNC machine to move the bottom (half circle) of the track (stationary starting point), 0.1" (RADIUS of roller) closer to the mounting base of the helix, all these changes of force and relationships would be ZERO change. The track of course has to be 0.2" wider (measured perpendicular to the ramp surface). The PERC pocket should be 0.1" deeper into the reverse side of the new track and the pocket needs to be a larger "notch" to accommodate this roller. The whole concept is to start out with the sheaves and the pins the roller rotates on, in the exact same position at they would be on a TSS-04 with small roller and the same spec small roller helix.

The roller on the pin, is not a lever, it has very little friction on the pin, resisting it's slow rotation. When not shifting up/down, the net force the roller feels, is a vector perpendicular to the surface of the ramp that the roller is touching at any point in time. There are only two points of contact & no lever effect, so the net force vector/direction has to go from the roller contact on the ramp surface to the centerline of the pin it rotates on. When the net force vector does not go thru these two points, the roller is going to move on the ramp, until the net force vector once again goes thru these two points.

The net force is the result of a number of different mechanical relationships going on around it:

  1. *Rotation of the movable sheave around the axis of the clutch, resistance to the movable sheave rotating relative to the fixed sheave from rotating friction at the bushings AND from the belt squeezed between them (like between a brake caliper and a rotor squeezing the brake pad)
  2. *Friction resistance from the belt to sliding up/down the faces of the sheaves, as the ratio changes
  3. *Pressure from the spring, always trying to close the clutch up (downshift) by moving the movable sheave towards the fixed sheave.
  4. *Tension/pull from the belt trying to rotate the movable sheave counter clockwise (when engine is running forward). Pull on the fixed sheave only goes thru the helix & roller system on the Tied Clutch not the TSS-04.
  5. *There are other forces involved as well, which I am not smart enough to explain
This calls for a third Bloody Mary! Or is it my 4th?
2108305
 
  • Like
Reactions: Bontz

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
6,283 Posts
I'll be with a crew tomorrow morning, working on the same sort of thing: brushing, inspection, beaver dams, blocked culverts, abandoned cars, etc.
Hopefully there's more than just you if you're trying to clear that out!!
Just checking out some trails around home that I've always worked with the land owners. We have our first meeting Tuesday and we'll come up with a schedule for the club. What's nice this year is the weather has worked out real nice for the farmers and they're able to get the crops off. Nothing like last year
 

·
Brand loyal, not brand blind
Joined
·
14,762 Posts
Just checking out some trails around home that I've always worked with the land owners. We have our first meeting Tuesday and we'll come up with a schedule for the club. What's nice this year is the weather has worked out real nice for the farmers and they're able to get the crops off. Nothing like last year
Now if only the China Syndrome and mask nazis cooperate.
 

·
Vendor
Joined
·
10,165 Posts
Discussion Starter #94
o.k. here's the deal. it's apparently a cost thing only. from venom they can not cut a second ramp in this new set-up safely. so one trax only. if you change the large rollers to the small ones you have to use the older helix. it will work. with near 100 matrix and new assault and apparently the mountain sleds clutch kits all ready sent out this is what we are doing. if this is no performance gain? which we believe it's not. and the new roller is way weaker then the small ones so what's the durability going to be? we may just still use the old helix but add small rollers to our kit's. we will know for sure once we get snow. head to head on the porta tree will tell all. if there is any performance gain.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
16,508 Posts
The Nov issue of Snow Tech magazine states on page 21 that the new Matryx secondary roller size is the same as that now being used in the Cat Boss secondary. Furthermore, on page 49, Fett Bros advertises improved fiber secondary rollers for Cat, Skidoo and Yamaha.
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
21,005 Posts
Larger roller - less rolling resistance = smoother shift. Played with these sorts of things in the past. Would bet on timers new roller sleds are faster than old.
Jamie - are you back on a Polaris to start this season? If you are, did you go with the 146" Assault (Matryx) or something else?
 

·
Brand loyal, not brand blind
Joined
·
14,762 Posts
  • Like
Reactions: Bontz
81 - 100 of 134 Posts
Top