Palu49 Posted February 8 Share Posted February 8 7 hours ago, Not greg b said: I am not sure to be honest. Not enough. I do know if cat put some different calibrations in the clutching and the suspension this sled would be a home run out of the box. And it doesn’t need to be a race set up. It needs to run like a 600 should. Using the same secondary set up on every trail sled is wrong. It wouldn’t take an engineering over haul to fix it. Takes about $250 in overnight parts from Theefivver Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jonlafon1 Posted February 8 Share Posted February 8 17 hours ago, krom said: Deja vous all over again.. Though it came up already in this thread, but its come up hundreds of times so it may not have been this thread.. Textron in their infinite wisdom marks weighs with the last 3 digits of the pn, and the mass of the weight not including the bushing. Everyplace else they label and mention it, the mass of the bushing is included. So 66g weights are marked 65, 64g weights marked 63 etc. 17 hours ago, favoritos said: The ADAPT weight numbers for reference are 1 gram over the number stamped on them. It's a goofy way of doing the numbers, but that's what they use. Haven't weighed the bushings, but I've weighed quite a few with bushings and the actual weight is just under the rated number. I.E. 66 gram reference number actually weighs 65.70 grams. Here are a couple sets of 116-65, (66g) weights with bushings. I wrote the decimal point over 65 on each. Thanks guys.. I got it now.. I should have picked up on it when I weighed the stock "59" it was damn close to 60 on the gram scale. I was wondering if you were messing with me when you said they were 66 in the pic.. Got it now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jonlafon1 Posted February 8 Share Posted February 8 17 hours ago, Palu49 said: 48S has the 155/220 in it which was stock setup for a 19. I haven’t swapped the 155/220 into the stock catalyst helix and tried it. I thought the 155/220 with the stock helix was pretty decent.. My initial feeling was that spring might be to soft for the stock helix.. But it cut down the dust when I tried it.. What do you think about running slightly more initial rate on the primary spring? I really like the lower engagement but wondering what a 85 or even a 100 would be like? I saw you mentioned the primary spring(and a 85) and I was thinking you might be onto something with those heavier weights and a 85 or better initial rate on that primary spring. Only issue may be pushing the engagement a bit to high. Thinking 3500 or maybe 3800 would be about as high as I would like to see engagement. (trail setup).. I think the finish is probably okay around the 255 stocker. Agree with your thoughts on the helix also (lower finish angle). I keep thinking a 47 or 48 finish instead of the 49.. Doesn't seem like much but that 49 is JUST slightly to much IMO. You mentioned a 44 finish also.. Bet this helix will backshift like a mofo.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Palu49 Posted February 8 Share Posted February 8 @jonlafon1 the stock helix takes too much to get rolling and then shifts out to the progressive too fast imo. I’m not 100% sure how high the 85 will engage but I don’t think it’s gonna be anything crazy, they engage super soft with the 65, but will get those heavier weights rolling a little better. I agree finish is good and I’m definitely getting good shift out on the primary as you can see. The 48s might work very well with a little less weight and higher engagement from the primary, I think the 48/44 with the 85 initial and the 66s might work well to squeak those last couple rpms out of it that it needs too. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jonlafon1 Posted February 8 Share Posted February 8 https://www.startinglineproducts.com/arctic-cat-drive-spring-black.html Found this one.. Same part number as the cat number.. Probably sourced from same manufacture as cat? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
krom Posted February 8 Share Posted February 8 (edited) 1 hour ago, jonlafon1 said: https://www.startinglineproducts.com/arctic-cat-drive-spring-black.html Found this one.. Same part number as the cat number.. Probably sourced from same manufacture as cat? Just looked through some stuff and found this: Edited February 8 by krom 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Palu49 Posted February 8 Share Posted February 8 8 minutes ago, krom said: Just looked through some stuff and found this: 015 105-225 009 85-225 found an 85-225 today I’m gonna try if the weights come in. Fucker might squeeze the belt in half 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jonlafon1 Posted February 8 Share Posted February 8 Wondering if anyone has tried the ultimax XS belts on the adapts? I really like these belts as they seem to be slightly stickier then others. 17 minutes ago, Palu49 said: Fucker might squeeze the belt in half Thats the spirit! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
krom Posted February 8 Share Posted February 8 most of those have a msrp of $12.45 right now Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jonlafon1 Posted February 8 Share Posted February 8 14 minutes ago, krom said: most of those have a msrp of $12.45 right now Yea I looked one up and it said 10 bucks.. I was like .. what? The 85/275 was the one I looked up 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Posted February 8 Share Posted February 8 29 minutes ago, jonlafon1 said: Wondering if anyone has tried the ultimax XS belts on the adapts? I really like these belts as they seem to be slightly stickier then others. Thats the spirit! Yes I run them on my tuned 998 with an ADAPT. I've had a fantastic experience with them...performance/longevity/price/minimal belt dust. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jonlafon1 Posted February 8 Share Posted February 8 2 minutes ago, Premium said: Yes I run them on my tuned 998 with an ADAPT. I've had a fantastic experience with them...performance/longevity/price/minimal belt dust. Same on the winder yamaha clutches.. First time around on adapts for me.. Was wondering how they faired on adapts. Thanks. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Palu49 Posted February 8 Share Posted February 8 (edited) 85-225 primary spring- engaged slightly higher but grabbed the belt way too hard, lost about 300 rpms. 64 gram 48s 155/220- rpms went up to about 8000 picked up zero speed seat of pants wasn’t any faster getting there. 64 gram 56/49 stock spring- shifted out wicked fast and lost about 100 rpms and 2-3mph still pulled through the wall though. 62 gram 48s 155/220- 8150 rpms picked up 4mph gps The snow was shit sticky stuff and the temp was high so speed was down but I ran the setup from the other day as a baseline and then based the rest off that. That said the 62 gram combo should be 100mph on good cold snow and there’s some tuning left to be done. Far from thunders 107 on snow that the race teams couldn’t accomplish on ice but not bad overall. Edited February 8 by Palu49 8 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
racinfarmer Posted February 9 Share Posted February 9 Ever wonder what the former Cat engineers still in the TRF area are doing these days? It isn't no Catalyst or race sled project, it is the Sasquach. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Posted February 9 Share Posted February 9 I've seen a few posts now of people saying the Catalyst clutch offset is contributing to the loss of speed. I would imagine with a built on shaft design of the secondary the alignment would be absolutely critical. Anyone with more info here? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jonlafon1 Posted February 9 Share Posted February 9 (edited) 1 hour ago, Premium said: I've seen a few posts now of people saying the Catalyst clutch offset is contributing to the loss of speed. I would imagine with a built on shaft design of the secondary the alignment would be absolutely critical. Anyone with more info here? Mine is fine. I see no signs of alignment issue on the clutches. I dont have many miles and was still working on loading the weights and messing with springs. Back several pages back it was brought up, as far as what they should be for offset.. 1.507" I believe. Mine is dead on that number.. The hard part is getting a bar into the clutches/area to measure it.. Its so damn tight.. If the alignment is so out of wack I would think we would here of belts blowing. I ran mine VERY hard for 250 miles thinking I would have snapped a belt.. Took about 50 miles on my sidewinder in 2017 > BANG,, Then we started to change alignment on them. Edited February 9 by jonlafon1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jonlafon1 Posted February 9 Share Posted February 9 (edited) 13 hours ago, Palu49 said: 85-225 primary spring- engaged slightly higher but grabbed the belt way too hard, lost about 300 rpms. 64 gram 48s 155/220- rpms went up to about 8000 picked up zero speed seat of pants wasn’t any faster getting there. 64 gram 56/49 stock spring- shifted out wicked fast and lost about 100 rpms and 2-3mph still pulled through the wall though. 62 gram 48s 155/220- 8150 rpms picked up 4mph gps The snow was shit sticky stuff and the temp was high so speed was down but I ran the setup from the other day as a baseline and then based the rest off that. That said the 62 gram combo should be 100mph on good cold snow and there’s some tuning left to be done. Far from thunders 107 on snow that the race teams couldn’t accomplish on ice but not bad overall. Great info here! Nice work.. I have a 50/46 helix coming to try..Will report if I get another chance to run this year Edited February 9 by jonlafon1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crnr2Crnr Posted February 9 Author Share Posted February 9 (edited) 13 hours ago, Palu49 said: interesting booster seat... Edited February 9 by Crnr2Crnr 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Palu49 Posted February 9 Share Posted February 9 4 minutes ago, Crnr2Crnr said: interesting booster seat... I was trying to soften up the seat. 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fortune46x Posted February 9 Share Posted February 9 9 hours ago, racinfarmer said: Ever wonder what the former Cat engineers still in the TRF area are doing these days? It isn't no Catalyst or race sled project, it is the Sasquach. VERN!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Palu49 Posted February 9 Share Posted February 9 I believe I’ve really struck a nerve with Terry from thunder on the catalyst page. He’s claiming 107 on snow (😂) but seems very threatened by the fact that someone else is getting 100 on snow with no gimmicks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fortune46x Posted February 9 Share Posted February 9 Just now, Palu49 said: I believe I’ve really struck a nerve with Terry from thunder on the catalyst page. He’s claiming 107 on snow (😂) but seems very threatened by the fact that someone else is getting 100 on snow with no gimmicks. 107 with a horsepower adder right ? they did a "pipe mod" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Palu49 Posted February 9 Share Posted February 9 4 minutes ago, fortune46x said: 107 with a horsepower adder right ? they did a "pipe mod" He’s claiming stock on snow, I said ehhh I’d like to see proof on that because I haven’t heard of a race team stocker over 105 on ice. Then he went off on a rant about Ben’s Soo sled going 113 with his clutching which doesn’t seem to correlate but ok. Fuck a good running decent clutched 800 ctec with a boss doesn’t run more than 103-104 on snow Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fortune46x Posted February 9 Share Posted February 9 31 minutes ago, Palu49 said: He’s claiming stock on snow, I said ehhh I’d like to see proof on that because I haven’t heard of a race team stocker over 105 on ice. Then he went off on a rant about Ben’s Soo sled going 113 with his clutching which doesn’t seem to correlate but ok. Fuck a good running decent clutched 800 ctec with a boss doesn’t run more than 103-104 on snow I hadn't heard what Bens sled did on ice - but there was a reason HC racing chose a procross over a catalyst and it doesnt take a genius to figure it out. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jonlafon1 Posted February 9 Share Posted February 9 If I was guessing Terry did some slight machining on the adapt and balanced them out. Is maybe getting more OD then stock. Probably a shallow helix with hitters loaded. I have not spoke to him about the Catalyst. He has done work on all my clutches since 2017. With the late arrival of the 2024 Cats I did not send him my adapt primary YET. He is usually a straight shooter and guessing he can back up his claims. He did do a few days with Cat last winter on the 600 and clutching.. Obviously nothing Cat saw or did with him translated over to the production clutching. I can say I swear by the heavy hitter weights. They are aggressive and slightly finicky when making adjustments, but once you get a feel for them they do pull hard. I like loading the tips on 2 smokes with them and staying lighter in the middle hole. MAYBE we should call Ricky up and see what the hot set up is on these things? 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.