[Doug S]

Keep in mind some of the clutch issues are probably created by the owners or shops not using proper diligence during service and installation of clutch and parts to include proper torque and retorque . I’m not a huge p22 fan. But l think some of this is end user . I personally would not use the aftermarket “lock” that require gallons of locktite. Just my opinion

I'm keeping my 2025 XCR 850 one of the reasons is I'm not sold on the P22. Let one more year shake out some of the issues.

Bought the wife a 650 Dynamix.

 

[Sre1000]

Keep in mind some of the clutch issues are probably created by the owners or shops not using proper diligence during service and installation of clutch and parts to include proper torque and retorque . I’m not a huge p22 fan. But l think some of this is end user . I personally would not use the aftermarket “lock” that require gallons of locktite. Just my opinion

At the end of the day it was proven by the aftermarket years ago that the clutch bolt should never hold the spider in place. It really isn't a owner/shop issue. How is it a P85 takes what , 300 ft lbs of torque to keep the spider in place yet Polaris thinks a simple clutch bolt at what 110 ft lbs is sufficient? Its a design failure flat out. Don't run a P22 without a sleeve that holds the spider in place plain and simple.

 

[Lid2]

At the end of the day it was proven by the aftermarket years ago that the clutch bolt should never hold the spider in place. It really isn't a owner/shop issue. How is it a P85 takes what , 300 ft lbs of torque to keep the spider in place yet Polaris thinks a simple clutch bolt at what 110 ft lbs is sufficient? Its a design failure flat out. Don't run a P22 without a sleeve that holds the spider in place plain and simple.

I don’t disagree like I said I’m not a big fan of it. But I also see how people install them after changes. And because it is a bad design they can’t get away with stuff we could in a 85 install wise. So imo it starts off as bad design and is then amplified some that just wing it. With that being said Im not against some of the locking sleeves I just do t like the one that calls for tons of locktite

 

[patrioticinnovations]

So to be clear IF i didn’t use the aftermarket mounts I could just take a measurement of what it would take to get the lead in to 20thous. Then slot the LEFT rear mount that amount or a touch more. And then shim the LEFT front mount to chassis connection the same amount needed for 20thous.. and then just loosen the RIGHT side mounts to allow the movement . Then lock it all down and varify the 20thous. Is still achieved ? Does this sum it up ?

Not quite. I do not touch the right side mounts LID. If Polaris relies on rearward twist under load then they've already twisted the right side mounts forward so I feel there's enough twist available in those mounts to allow the left side mounts to be slotted/shimmed as if they were twisting rearward under load.

 

[just-pinch-it]

What do use for shims?

 

[patrioticinnovations]

What do use for shims?

A slotted washer for the left front. A slotted motormount bracket for the left rear.

 

[Doug S]

I don’t disagree like I said I’m not a big fan of it. But I also see how people install them after changes. And because it is a bad design they can’t get away with stuff we could in a 85 install wise. So imo it starts off as bad design and is then amplified some that just wing it. With that being said Im not against some of the locking sleeves I just do t like the one that calls for tons of locktite

It would be interesting to see the failure analysis on the bolt. Did it fail because of tension holding the clutch on or rotation from the high torque requirment when they failed. A larger dia bolt would help but the design does have the room for that.

 

[northstarrick]

they break from flexing. or loosen up. this is what i see. the Spyder retainer is a must do for the p-22. i did a clutch kit, TRS valve, and a carbon sled retainer, i torqued the clutch to 110 ft. pounds ran the sled and retorqued it. 2025 boost dynamic. guy put just shy of 3000 miles on it. clutch just as tight as the day a put the clutch on. not one issue, this was the guys third boost. 2 other clutch kits on the other ones. loose clutch bolts, one broken bolt which destroyed the sled. the the clutch kits sucked. needless to say i have another life long customer. guy kept the sled because it is what it should have been. and his 5 other riding buddy's all have my clutch kit's, boost and 9R'S. that's how you know you did it right.

 

[Sre1000]

they break from flexing. or loosen up. this is what i see. the Spyder retainer is a must do for the p-22. i did a clutch kit, TRS valve, and a carbon sled retainer, i torqued the clutch to 110 ft. pounds ran the sled and retorqued it. 2025 boost dynamic. guy put just shy of 3000 miles on it. clutch just as tight as the day a put the clutch on. not one issue, this was the guys third boost. 2 other clutch kits on the other ones. loose clutch bolts, one broken bolt which destroyed the sled. the the clutch kits sucked. needless to say i have another life long customer. guy kept the sled because it is what it should have been. and his 5 other riding buddy's all have my clutch kit's, boost and 9R'S. that's how you know you did it right.

Found the same on my brothers 9R. 2000 miles and never took additional torque. The retaining sleeves definitely work.

BTW, about 6500 miles in your a arm bushings. Virtually no wear on them. 👍

 

[Doug S]

they break from flexing. or loosen up.

You need a metallurgical microscope to look at the grain structure where the bolt break occurred. If the grain structure is still straight it's a tension failure if it's twisted its a rotational failure. Both cases will cause a loss of torque. If it's by the threads it's a stress raiser between the transition area from the thread back to the the true diameter.

 

[Lid2]

It would be interesting to see the failure analysis on the bolt. Did it fail because of tension holding the clutch on or rotation from the high torque requirment when they failed. A larger dia bolt would help but the design does have the room for that.

Would def be curious to the root cause of bolt failure. A friend of mine who installs a lot of these says what he does is torques the clutch on to spec X with a totally different bolt. Then takes that bolt out and puts in the proper bolt torques that to a lesser specified amount of x. Runs sled and retorques. Using this method he has not had any come apart that he has Installed. Owe it to luck or good technique and method that holds the (what I believe to be a flawed design ) better? Not sure just reporting the results. He does a large number of clutches not just a few so I like to use this becaue his sample pool is larger than average. Bust again I’m not in any way against some of the locking devices

 

[BattleStorm]

So .020” is the magic number? Doesn’t matter if it’s an 850 at elevation making 115hp or a super dyno Boost at 300 plus? Apparently engine torque doesn’t affect clutch alignment anymore… Oh and the rubber mounts never break in either, hmm.
I know someone that used a torque wrench to figure out his magic number.

Would def be curious to the root cause of bolt failure. A friend of mine who installs a lot of these says what he does is torques the clutch on to spec X with a totally different bolt. Then takes that bolt out and puts in the proper bolt torques that to a lesser specified amount of x. Runs sled and retorques. Using this method he has not had any come apart that he has Installed. Owe it to luck or good technique and method that holds the (what I believe to be a flawed design ) better? Not sure just reporting the results. He does a large number of clutches not just a few so I like to use this becaue his sample pool is larger than average. Bust again I’m not in any way against some of the locking devices

I believe that this is what the latest Polaris recommendation is, the two bolt method 😂

 

[Lid2]

So .020” is the magic number? Doesn’t matter if it’s an 850 at elevation making 115hp or a super dyno Boost at 300 plus? Apparently engine torque doesn’t affect clutch alignment anymore… Oh and the rubber mounts never break in either, hmm.
I know someone that used a torque wrench to figure out his magic number.




I believe that this is what the latest Polaris recommendation is, the two bolt method 😂

In regards to the 2 bolt method . Yes it very well could be . I don’t know for sure but seems possible for sure. The torque by sleds power is exactly what I was inquiring about. I see the 20thous. Used as a target number for lead in. But I was thinking it would need a touch more when pulling in it harder. So it didn’t go to far back. I just don’t know how to figure it out. Except maybe putting one on a track loader with some kinda indicator rigged and full send it. To see how much the engine moves. Which still would not account for mount wear. But be less arbitrary . What do you think about it. Am I overthinking it ? And just go with the 20 or should I give it a lil more for days with power turned up ? This is why I haven’t done it yet I can’t seem to commmit to a spec in my head

 

[justinator]

Keep in mind some of the clutch issues are probably created by the owners or shops not using proper diligence during service and installation of clutch and parts to include proper torque and retorque . I’m not a huge p22 fan. But l think some of this is end user . I personally would not use the aftermarket “lock” that require gallons of locktite. Just my opinion

I agree with you on the heavy Loctite use. Carbon sled recommended sleeve retainer and quite a bit of it because apparently the titanium doesn’t bond as well with the Loctite. I took my clutch apart to do some other work to it and it was quite a job to remove and clean all that stuff up. I really don’t feel green sleeve retainer is needed. I put a bunch of blue Loctite gel on mine when I reassembled and torque it down. The clutch mounting bolt is putting pressure on the retainer so I would prefer to just check it once in a while and make sure everything‘s good and tight rather than go through that whole ordeal of cleaning that crap off and having to use heat. I also have a sleeve retainer from indy specialties, and they only recommend a little bit of red Loctite. The problem with that one is they made the outside diameter slightly larger to have a better fit in the factory cover bushing which it does. I’m using a fire and ice cover, which already has a tighter bushing so the indy specialties connector is too tight to use with the fire and ice cover. If the P22 connector keeps the mounting bolt from loosening then I dont see the connector coming loose. I let mine cure for a few days and then took it back apart to see if the blue loctite gel seemed to do anything and it seemed to be doing its job to me.

 

[Doug S]

I agree with you on the heavy Loctite use. Carbon sled recommended sleeve retainer and quite a bit of it because apparently the titanium doesn’t bond as well with the Loctite. I took my clutch apart to do some other work to it and it was quite a job to remove and clean all that stuff up. I really don’t feel green sleeve retainer is needed. I put a bunch of blue Loctite gel on mine when I reassembled and torque it down. The clutch mounting bolt is putting pressure on the retainer so I would prefer to just check it once in a while and make sure everything‘s good and tight rather than go through that whole ordeal of cleaning that crap off and having to use heat. I also have a sleeve retainer from indy specialties, and they only recommend a little bit of red Loctite. The problem with that one is they made the outside diameter slightly larger to have a better fit in the factory cover bushing which it does. I’m using a fire and ice cover, which already has a tighter bushing so the indy specialties connector is too tight to use with the fire and ice cover. If the P22 connector keeps the mounting bolt from loosening then I dont see the connector coming loose. I let mine cure for a few days and then took it back apart to see if the blue loctite gel seemed to do anything and it seemed to be doing its job to me.

Titanium has a specific type of loctite that should be used but is very expensive. The typical red loctite can be used but it has a much longer cure time when used with the Titanium and does not bond as good.

 

[just-pinch-it]

Titanium has a specific type of loctite that should be used but is very expensive. The typical red loctite can be used but it has a much longer cure time when used with the Titanium and does not bond as good.

I'm not aware of a specific LOCTITE for titanium, just need to use the primer prior to using the loctite

 

[justinator]

I understand using regular Loctite on titanium may not give the best bond, but in my little test this spring, the blue Loctite gel seem to do its job since once I loosened it I needed to use the ratchet to be able to un thread the connector the rest of the way due to the resistance in the threads from the Loctite. When threads are cleaned, I can easily screw the connector in all the way by hand. I really don’t think once it’s torqued down and then the mounting bolt is torque down that the connector will loosen up. It could only really loosen if the main bolt loosens up and the main bolt seems to stay Perfectly tight once the connector has been installed. I will just check the torque periodically and make sure it hasn’t moved. If it does, then a titanium specific bonding agent will probably be the right choice.

 

[ExcursionPSD]

The Loctite 243 will work, it will have a longer cure time on Titanium and other sensitive metals.
Or use the hard to find, exactly correct product:

Loctite 2432

 

[Doug S]

I'm not aware of a specific LOCTITE for titanium, just need to use the primer prior to using the loctite

View attachment 2170534

Similar to a problem we had at awhile back at work on a gear box for a snowblower as in used on airports.

Hardware failure on a coupler in a gear box originally thought to be a rotational failure because of the high torque required on the hardware. Bolted the assemble together set all the backlash on the gears remove the bolts in the coupler and replace with new bolts for final assemble. Still had failures but now in tensile. Change to titanium hardware didn't have complete failures but was loosing torque value after testing and hardware showed no signs of failure or change in grain structure. Got ahold of Henkel (owner of loctite) and they reviewed all our information and recommended a different loctite product and can't remember then name of it. Had to stay refrigerated I remember that. This solved the problem but the difference here is the coupler ran in an oil bath.

The best solution to my example was to up the hardware dia or increase the number of fasteners. Both would have required a new casting pattern and redesign for additional clearance in the gearbox.

I'm more of a high milage rider been averaging 4000 plus per year so just didn't want to deal with the couple issues going with the P22 and waiting another year. There's good information coming from guys on here so I'm just taking note as I'm sure my next sled will have a P22.

 

[BRR_Dogger]

Ran Carbonsled's connector on my 9R from day 1 and never had an issue in 5000 aggressive miles. Tightened to recommended torque at installation retorqued after first ride and got just a squeak tighter. Checked torque again at 500mi, 1000mi, and 2000mi and never had bolt move. Because of this post just went out now and checked torque, and not a whisker of movement.

I'm not 100% sold on the P22 and will be trying a P85\Tied combo this season, but I believe any of the threaded connector kits are the proper fix for the P22 blowup issue. Hopefully Polaris is reading this