jtssrx

MAX BOOT LMAO!!!!!!!!!!!! HA AH AH AH AHA HA HA AH Tell me why there Mueller didn't find one shred of evidence that proves what you're saying?

Okay after I read the chart I agree with you that it's at 7500 all the way through. But do you agree that at full shift "30mm" of stroke it's applying less force then they do 10mm of shift? The charts show the weights aren't applying more force as they go through there shift curve. there is a peak 10mm's of shift and it steady falls down as the weight shifts out. It will do this at any RPM range. The reason you have adjustments is to apply more force at different points in the shift curve

The MC's of the world loved this until it didn't come true

If I was owned tell me again how what I'm seeing is wrong? It appears to me that the force being applied is going down as RPM increases. Am I reading it wrong?

Jap motors are better simply based on the Nicasil process.

I tried that new Infrared grill I bought last night. I did 8 US Prime New Yorks and 8 Filets with detroit Zip Sauce from Andiamo. I also made whipped mashed and Wedge salads with fresh bacon.

I’d take the Suzuki anyday over the cat built motor

I’ve owned both sleds in the last 8 months. 2019 SRX and a 2019 XRS 850. If you want to go fast and do nothing else an SRX or Thundercat are the ticket. If you want to do anything else run the bumps play off trail ride the ditches ride all day on the trail fast without getting tired ride an two stroke. the sidewinder and thundercat are one Dimensional

Ben according to these charts as RPM increases the force applied to the weight decreases. The full shift at the left of the chart is 7500 RPM’s. The start is 0 and the are measuring the shift in mm’s as the weight goes-to full shift. It’s clear as rpm increases all these weights apply less force

Merry Christmas to you and your family as well. I hope you are having a fantastic holiday.

No my claim was the increased RPM you keep talking about doesn’t apply enough force to grab the belt. That the increased RPM you’re seeing when you add power is most likely a result of belt slip as you’ve exceeded the weight ability to hold squeeze the belt. The advent of an adjustable weight wouldnt have been necessary if any weight applied enough force to squeeze the belt at any RPM range as you seem to be suggesting

My ass doesn’t hurt. Yours clearly does as you keep posting about the same thing over and over again. Opinions are like assholes everyone’s got one. His opinion is it’s nor worth it to add more power without dialing in the clutches to get every once of power you added to the track. What’s wrong with that opinion?

The premise of the article is to show a novice can add these parts and go faster. It doesn’t changing the clutching doesn’t help. Im not sure why it even matters other than Ben always has to be right. I think it’s because he has a small cock!!??

Sorry I had to run out. You said same fuel now you say pump fuel. I can buy 93 octane pump fuel. Are you going to move the goal post again and say UP pump fuel next? of course pump gas is a limiting factor. I like how this conversation has morphed into how much boost can you run on pump fuel from why they say run stock clutching and what makes more power 7800 or 8100. You twisted this from where it started.

I say the 7700 is quicker and the 8500 can more MPH. the 7800 will make more power on the same boost as there is more timing there. The 8500 can pull more MPH. 8500 is good for almost 12mph over the 7700 on a gearing calculator.

Loaded question. Does the sled detonate at 7700 on the Pump at the same Boost level as the 8500? If not then I say 7700 on the same boost level as 8500. When you say faster do you mean quicker or more MPH? 8500 is capable of more MPH as you MPH on the RPM. This is a proven fact.

You can run the same boost at 7800 on good fuel. I'm not arguing against 8100 for a trail sled running questionable fuel.

It makes more power at 7800 as the timing is higher there. The only reason these guys where pushing tunes was they could offer stock clutching when they removed the rev limiter.

Why what?

if you know what you're doing It's not faster at 8100. if you have good fuel it makes more power at 7800.

Good God dude you made two claims that were false. First, you said the timing doesn't change then you said the rev limiter is right after 7800. See I owned one of these things. I had a TD tune on it. It would detonate when you ran the clutching at 7800 without good fuel. Why, because of the increased load you had to run in the clutch to get it to 7800 where the timing was advanced. Again running that motor at 8100 is a bandaid for poor fuel.

Oh Really?? The other reason why people with piggybacks are hitting the rev limit is because if stock clutching is used, the increased power will put you above 8000 rpms which is too close to the stock rev limit

The problem is the the piggy backs cannot adjust timing or rev limit. It basically adds boost and fuel. The stock programmed boost/timing curve drops off substantially after 7900 Hmm Oh really

What I posted is 100% correct. I'm talking about cause and affect. You're arguing about clutching we are talking about two different things. Merry Christmas