f7ben Posted December 25, 2019 Author Share Posted December 25, 2019 30 minutes ago, jtssrx said: 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 And that is 100% wrong....sorry Also Merry Christmas JT...appreciate you!! 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jtssrx Posted December 25, 2019 Share Posted December 25, 2019 3 minutes ago, f7ben said: And that is 100% wrong....sorry Also Merry Christmas JT...appreciate you!! Merry Christmas to you and your family as well. I hope you are having a fantastic holiday. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jtssrx Posted December 25, 2019 Share Posted December 25, 2019 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 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jtssrx Posted December 25, 2019 Share Posted December 25, 2019 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
f7ben Posted December 25, 2019 Author Share Posted December 25, 2019 oh JT Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
f7ben Posted December 25, 2019 Author Share Posted December 25, 2019 You were already owned once on those charts JT. Why is it you dont learn when we teach you? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rod Posted December 25, 2019 Share Posted December 25, 2019 Fuck behn is dumb 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
f7ben Posted December 25, 2019 Author Share Posted December 25, 2019 1 minute ago, Tickle Shits said: Fuck behn is dumb You are so butthurt just triggered as fuck and Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rod Posted December 25, 2019 Share Posted December 25, 2019 4 minutes ago, f7ben said: You are so butthurt just triggered as fuck and Says the guy who has started 35 threads on the same subject trying to prove he isn’t wrong 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
f7ben Posted December 25, 2019 Author Share Posted December 25, 2019 1 minute ago, Tickle Shits said: Says the guy who has started 35 threads on the same subject trying to prove he isn’t wrong I proved I wasnt wrong with every single one too Tom and Gaygrabsducks fucking OWNED you hard too and I literally have infinity more experience with turbo sleds than you Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rod Posted December 25, 2019 Share Posted December 25, 2019 1 minute ago, f7ben said: I proved I wasnt wrong with every single one too Tom and Gaygrabsducks fucking OWNED you hard too and I literally have infinity more experience with turbo sleds than you You not only proved that you were wrong you proved gravy you’re gullible too which one of the two of us competitively raced a turbo sled in ISR classes and won a lot... was it you or.... 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
awful knawful Posted December 25, 2019 Share Posted December 25, 2019 10 minutes ago, Tickle Shits said: Says the guy who has started 35 threads on the same subject trying to prove he isn’t wrong Yep 100% for sure brain damaged. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
awful knawful Posted December 25, 2019 Share Posted December 25, 2019 7 minutes ago, Tickle Shits said: You not only proved that you were wrong you proved gravy you’re gullible too which one of the two of us competitively raced a turbo sled in ISR classes and won a lot... was it you or.... If racing means: fucking with a sled to make it slower, then go embarrass yourself. Then no. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rod Posted December 25, 2019 Share Posted December 25, 2019 Just now, awful knawful said: If racing means: fucking with a sled to make it slower, then go embarrass yourself. Then no. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
f7ben Posted December 26, 2019 Author Share Posted December 26, 2019 22 hours ago, AKIQPilot said: I cant believe this is being argued. If the performance mods increase rpm it doesnt necessarily mean you have to change the clutch tune up to take advantage of the extra power. Ben is 100% correct here. 21 hours ago, BOHICA said: I haven’t been wrong on the internet.... Ben is typically wrong but Ben is spot on clutching turbo machines. When I was turboing two strokes before it was cool the factory clutching worked as well as any aftermarket clutch tuning kits Holy fuck did momos gay lover Buttcocks get Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jtssrx Posted December 26, 2019 Share Posted December 26, 2019 20 hours ago, f7ben said: You were already owned once on those charts JT. Why is it you dont learn when we teach you? 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? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
f7ben Posted December 26, 2019 Author Share Posted December 26, 2019 1 hour ago, jtssrx said: 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? The entire curve you see is the force applied changing across the profile of the weight at a fixed rpm. That entire curve is at 7500 rpm. As the weight shift from heel to center and finally tip of the profile the force changes Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jtssrx Posted December 26, 2019 Share Posted December 26, 2019 1 hour ago, f7ben said: The entire curve you see is the force applied changing across the profile of the weight at a fixed rpm. That entire curve is at 7500 rpm. As the weight shift from heel to center and finally tip of the profile the force changes 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 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
f7ben Posted December 26, 2019 Author Share Posted December 26, 2019 (edited) 3 minutes ago, jtssrx said: 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 Yes....different weight profiles will give different force curves. Now think of it this way.... If you ran that same test at 8k rpm the force applied by the weight across the entire profile would look the same but at a much higher value.....and higher yet at 8500 etc etc Edited December 26, 2019 by f7ben Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jtssrx Posted December 26, 2019 Share Posted December 26, 2019 Just now, f7ben said: Yes....different weight profiles will give different force curves. Now think of it this way.... If you ran that same test at 8k rpm the force applied by the weight across the entire profile would look the same but at a much higher value.....and higher yet at 8500 etc etc Yes, it will be a higher value but most likely not enough to squeeze the belt. the increase of RPM isn't just becuase of the increase of power. In most cases, it's becuase the belt is slipping in the primary. This is reflected in Clutch heat. So we agree on the first point not sure you agree on the second thing I posted here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
f7ben Posted December 26, 2019 Author Share Posted December 26, 2019 (edited) 10 minutes ago, jtssrx said: Yes, it will be a higher value but most likely not enough to squeeze the belt. the increase of RPM isn't just becuase of the increase of power. In most cases, it's becuase the belt is slipping in the primary. This is reflected in Clutch heat. So we agree on the first point not sure you agree on the second thing I posted here. Absolutely not....and countless turbo sleds running very wide power ranges prove my point There are tons of turbos running over 100hp difference and more on the same clutching with fantastic results. If there was a tons of belt slip belts wouldnt last long. That's simply not the case Edited December 26, 2019 by f7ben Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jtssrx Posted December 26, 2019 Share Posted December 26, 2019 7 minutes ago, f7ben said: Absolutely not....and countless turbo sleds running very wide power ranges prove my point There are tons of turbos running over 100hp difference and more on the same clutching with fantastic results. If there was a tons of belt slip belts wouldnt last long. That's simply not the case Being faster and having perfect clutching are two different things. For example, we had three tuned sleds in our group last year. the guy that spent the time tuning his clutches beat-up on the guys that ran stock clutching in there sidewinders and guess what he ran a lower level tune just to prove the point. He put 15 sleds in 1000 feet using the TD 250 tune on our buddy running the TD 270 tune with stock clutching I personally did this in 2012 with my 1100. I raced a few guys running stock clutching with there four-stage TD tunes. I was able to beat both of on their stage three with ECO Power and MAX 91 and the beating got worse and worse as I turned up my tune. I spent weeks working on my clutching. On Eco I would slightly under rev on power trail I was spot on and on Max 91 i would over-rev by a little bit with a slight increase in clutch temp but not enough to worry. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
f7ben Posted December 26, 2019 Author Share Posted December 26, 2019 2 minutes ago, jtssrx said: Being faster and having perfect clutching are two different things. For example, we had three tuned sleds in our group last year. the guy that spent the time tuning his clutches beat-up on the guys that ran stock clutching in there sidewinders and guess what he ran a lower level tune just to prove the point. He put 15 sleds in 1000 feet using the TD 250 tune on our buddy running the TD 270 tune with stock clutching I personally did this in 2012 with my 1100. I raced a few guys running stock clutching with there four-stage TD tunes. I was able to beat both of on their stage three with ECO Power and MAX 91 and the beating got worse and worse as I turned up my tune. I spent weeks working on my clutching. On Eco I would slightly under rev on power trail I was spot on and on Max 91 i would over-rev by a little bit with a slight increase in clutch temp but not enough to worry. And like I always said. Of course a tuned clutch setup would provide results. It's simply retarded to say that a good stock clutch setup wont also provide good results with added power at a higher rpm Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jtssrx Posted December 26, 2019 Share Posted December 26, 2019 12 minutes ago, f7ben said: And like I always said. Of course a tuned clutch setup would provide results. It's simply retarded to say that a good stock clutch setup wont also provide good results with added power at a higher rpm I never said that. I just don't think it's optimal Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gold Member BOHICA Posted December 26, 2019 Gold Member Share Posted December 26, 2019 23 minutes ago, jtssrx said: Being faster and having perfect clutching are two different things. For example, we had three tuned sleds in our group last year. the guy that spent the time tuning his clutches beat-up on the guys that ran stock clutching in there sidewinders and guess what he ran a lower level tune just to prove the point. He put 15 sleds in 1000 feet using the TD 250 tune on our buddy running the TD 270 tune with stock clutching I personally did this in 2012 with my 1100. I raced a few guys running stock clutching with there four-stage TD tunes. I was able to beat both of on their stage three with ECO Power and MAX 91 and the beating got worse and worse as I turned up my tune. I spent weeks working on my clutching. On Eco I would slightly under rev on power trail I was spot on and on Max 91 i would over-rev by a little bit with a slight increase in clutch temp but not enough to worry. So you used the same clutching as turned up your tune? Or did you change your clutching for each of the three levels of tune you used when racing the other tuned sleds? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.