Snocross 2025

[Not greg b]

3 minutes ago, ZR6000RR said:

When you run Wide open all the time on a belt I am betting was not broken in because you figure they don't know what they are talking about. Another dumb person trying to come across as smart.

Belt was broke in. It bangs off a rev limiter for a while in stage one at wto and dosent go very fast 

[ZR6000RR]

8 minutes ago, Not greg b said:

Belt was broke in. It bangs off a rev limiter for a while in stage one at wto and dosent go very fast 

Then you are over revving. Simple as that. Dumb people should never claim to be smart. I'm just average, so I don't try to look smarter than, well a bunch of you twats. 

[Simple Jim]

12 minutes ago, ZR6000RR said:

I'm a short fat alcoholic beet driver that holds stop signs all summer 

weird flex but ok uncledaddy. 

[Crnr2Crnr]

18 minutes ago, ZR6000RR said:

Then you are over revving. Simple as that. Dumb people should never claim to be smart. I'm just average, so I don't try to look smarter than, well a bunch of you twats. 

are you trying to say Cat didn't nail down the clutching if he's over-revving his stock sled?  

should they test and tune? 

[mnstang]

2 hours ago, Premium said:

Dug around and found this fwiw. You'd think the Catalyst setup would be no problem at 2 degrees unless the motor mounts are allowing too much movement? Exceeding that 5 degrees and bending the beltcase?

https://www.arcticinsider.com/more-tech-pix-and-descriptions-of-the-2012-arctic-cats/

The big news here is a new development called the Torque Control Link (TCL) that serves as a fixed C-to-C distance, coupled with a bearing design on the chaincase side that allows 5 degrees of movement. With the system, the engine and jackshaft (and thus both clutches) are connected to maintain a fixed distance and always parallel regardless of torque, improving performance and increasing belt life.

The TCL controls center to center only.  The jackshaft can still change angle slightly at that bearing and can still flex.

Moving the jackshaft forward at the tcl would move the motor forward, sure.  But moving it forward at the mag side of shaft is not going to move the motor forward.

 

Also like I said in my previous post, everyone is assuming engaging the eccentric into the riding position moves the clutches into misalignment.  Why?  If you'd design it so you'd have everything in alignment once the eccentrics are in the tensioned position because that's where it's operated, and it'd be in misalignment only when there's released tensioned when changing the belt.  People (here) are just saying when you turn them to tighten the belt it causes it to go out of out of alignment with no basis.  For all they know, and the more likely scenario, is tightening the belt moves it into being properly aligned.  That's a fatal flaw in any kind of critical thinking.  For all people know, and the more likely scenario, is it's out of alignment when you release eccentric to change the belt and moving it back to the installed position brings the alignment into the correct position.  

I don't know why people would just assume they'd design it so the clutches are misaligned when when everything is in the installed position.

[fortune46x]

17 minutes ago, mnstang said:

The TCL controls center to center only.  The jackshaft can still change angle slightly at that bearing and can still flex.

Moving the jackshaft forward at the tcl would move the motor forward, sure.  But moving it forward at the mag side of shaft is not going to move the motor forward.

 

Also like I said in my previous post, everyone is assuming engaging the eccentric into the riding position moves the clutches into misalignment.  Why?  If you'd design it so you'd have everything in alignment once the eccentrics are in the tensioned position because that's where it's operated, and it'd be in misalignment only when there's released tensioned when changing the belt.  People (here) are just saying when you turn them to tighten the belt it causes it to go out of out of alignment with no basis.  For all they know, and the more likely scenario, is tightening the belt moves it into being properly aligned.  That's a fatal flaw in any kind of critical thinking.  For all people know, and the more likely scenario, is it's out of alignment when you release eccentric to change the belt and moving it back to the installed position brings the alignment into the correct position.  

I don't know why people would just assume they'd design it so the clutches are misaligned when when everything is in the installed position.

I posted the cad and then was told to remove it , its not an assumption. when I dig my sled out I'll measure it out and give actual numbers.

Theres a reason everyone is struggling to get the secondary to fully shift out and why the belt dust is everywhere and why even my own sled with 6 miles on it was littered with final drive belt debris - the belt is riding up on the outside edge of the pulley when tensioned.

[Premium]

52 minutes ago, mnstang said:

The TCL controls center to center only.  The jackshaft can still change angle slightly at that bearing and can still flex.

Moving the jackshaft forward at the tcl would move the motor forward, sure.  But moving it forward at the mag side of shaft is not going to move the motor forward.

 

Also like I said in my previous post, everyone is assuming engaging the eccentric into the riding position moves the clutches into misalignment.  Why?  If you'd design it so you'd have everything in alignment once the eccentrics are in the tensioned position because that's where it's operated, and it'd be in misalignment only when there's released tensioned when changing the belt.  People (here) are just saying when you turn them to tighten the belt it causes it to go out of out of alignment with no basis.  For all they know, and the more likely scenario, is tightening the belt moves it into being properly aligned.  That's a fatal flaw in any kind of critical thinking.  For all people know, and the more likely scenario, is it's out of alignment when you release eccentric to change the belt and moving it back to the installed position brings the alignment into the correct position.  

I don't know why people would just assume they'd design it so the clutches are misaligned when when everything is in the installed position.

The article says C to C and parallelism is maintained, which as long as the motor mounts could "give" enough, particularly side to side, in theory could be possible.

As far as the eccentric bearing, there's multiple positions depending on the gear ratio used, so I think what Fortune is saying is that one of these 2 settings will therefore not be optimal, perhaps both if the initial alignment of the engine is off.

Here's a good clip showing the shaft movement/eccentric bearing operation (starts at about 2 min).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GNpAIYGKuFs

 

[Crnr2Crnr]

35 minutes ago, fortune46x said:

I posted the cad and then was told to remove it , its not an assumption. when I dig my sled out I'll measure it out and give actual numbers.

Theres a reason everyone is struggling to get the secondary to fully shift out and why the belt dust is everywhere and why even my own sled with 6 miles on it was littered with final drive belt debris - the belt is riding up on the outside edge of the pulley when tensioned.

 

here's the deal... 

 

[mnstang]

27 minutes ago, Premium said:

The article says C to C and parallelism is maintained, which as long as the motor mounts could "give" enough, particularly side to side, in theory could be possible.

As far as the eccentric bearing, there's multiple positions depending on the gear ratio used, so I think what Fortune is saying is that one of these 2 settings will therefore not be optimal, perhaps both if the initial alignment of the engine is off.

Here's a good clip showing the shaft movement/eccentric bearing operation (starts at about 2 min).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GNpAIYGKuFs

 

I agree that it's not going to be the same parallel in all eccentric positions.  That's what I'm saying and have said since this concept was introduced at haydays last year.  Have never disputed that and was the first person here to bring that up.  But it's a horrible assumption to say that the clutch alignment "goes out" when you turn the eccentric to the stock factory installed position.  Has anyone done these measurements to support that statement?

Are you trying to say moving the jackshaft will move the whole engine?  I don't think you understand the physics that would be required to do that.  You're then saying the jackshaft can't pivot in the TCL bearing at all, and the jackshaft doesn't flex at all, that it's a perfectly rigid bearing and shaft.  I do not buy that, especially the bearing part.  But even if that's hypothetically possible, it would instead twist the motor, moving it back a little on the pto end and forward a little on the mag end and would put an extreme stress on both jackshaft bearings.  But it's just not going to do that.  Put a pencil on a table and lift the other end, it pivots on the table, it doesn't lift parallel to the table unless you're holding it so tightly on both sides.  You'd have both jackshaft bearings failing left and right with that much twisting torque being put into them.  And they just aren't going to be that tight.

[racinfarmer]

7 hours ago, AK440 said:

Logan Christian episode. Cat/Textron is a complete shit show. This episode further reinforced why they quit entering the Iron Dog. Their shit doesn’t run reliably in cold temps. That matches what I heard years ago about two teams that struggled as Cat didn’t have proper maps to make the sleds run. Cory Davis also talked about it on the Carbide Podcast.

I haven't made it to that episode yet.  

I'm assuming they are talking about the sno-x sled, because they have the consumer sleds and XC sled fingered out, IMO.

[Crnr2Crnr]

30 minutes ago, racinfarmer said:

I haven't made it to that episode yet.  

I'm assuming they are talking about the sno-x sled, because they have the consumer sleds and XC sled fingered out, IMO.

damn you quoting his dumb washer fluid filled ass... 

but, the RXC's mapped for the Iron Diddle weren't properly mapped for the shit fuel the natives try to steal.  

[AK440]

59 minutes ago, Crnr2Crnr said:

damn you quoting his dumb washer fluid filled ass... 

but, the RXC's mapped for the Iron Diddle weren't properly mapped for the shit fuel the natives try to steal.  

Go back to bashing on Jim, the site retard. Staying at your level is your best course of action old man.

[AK440]

1 hour ago, racinfarmer said:

I haven't made it to that episode yet.  

I'm assuming they are talking about the sno-x sled, because they have the consumer sleds and XC sled fingered out, IMO.

They talked about the sno-x program and sleds. Didn’t hold back either with the criticism of how shitty Cat is now since the Textron buy out. 

[Palu49]

5 hours ago, mnstang said:

 For all they know, and the more likely scenario, is tightening the belt moves it into being properly aligned.  That's a fatal flaw in any kind of critical thinking.  For all people know, and the more likely scenario, is it's out of alignment when you release eccentric to change the belt and moving it back to the installed position brings the alignment into the correct position.  

Thats what common sense would make you believe. But we all know textron often fails to operate within sensible bounds.

[ZR6000RR]

4 minutes ago, Palu49 said:

Thats what common sense would make you believe. But we all know textron often fails to operate within sensible bounds.

Oh, the dreaded Textron hate. They OWN, are not the Engineers who have perfected the TCL to what it is today. It is not 2012 anymore you stupid FUCK.

[racinfarmer]

5 hours ago, fortune46x said:

I posted the cad and then was told to remove it , its not an assumption. when I dig my sled out I'll measure it out and give actual numbers.

Theres a reason everyone is struggling to get the secondary to fully shift out and why the belt dust is everywhere and why even my own sled with 6 miles on it was littered with final drive belt debris - the belt is riding up on the outside edge of the pulley when tensioned.

I knew I should have saved that so I could take a look at it for my understanding.  

I read it and think I have a decent idea of what you laid out.

Solidworks > NX

[ZR6000RR]

5 hours ago, fortune46x said:

I posted the cad and then was told to remove it , its not an assumption. when I dig my sled out I'll measure it out and give actual numbers.

Theres a reason everyone is struggling to get the secondary to fully shift out and why the belt dust is everywhere and why even my own sled with 6 miles on it was littered with final drive belt debris - the belt is riding up on the outside edge of the pulley when tensioned.

So you posted a video of belt at full shift? Would love to see this. Guessing another Assumption of your feeble mind.

[Palu49]

21 minutes ago, ZR6000RR said:

Oh, the dreaded Textron hate. They OWN, are not the Engineers who have perfected the TCL to what it is today. It is not 2012 anymore you stupid FUCK.

I’m at least 647% smarter than you on any subject outside of stop sign holding.

6 minutes ago, ZR6000RR said:

So you posted a video of belt at full shift? Would love to see this. Guessing another Assumption of your feeble mind.

He is infinitely smarter than you on this subject, the 647% minimum deviation in intelligence still applies to him on anything outside of stop sign holding as well.

[ZR6000RR]

1 minute ago, Palu49 said:

I’m at least 647% smarter than you on any subject outside of stop sign holding.

He is infinitely smarter than you on this subject, the 647% minimum deviation in intelligence still applies to him on anything outside of stop sign holding as well.

Well I don't hold a stop sign, but know stupid. Wont put a number on it as you're  scale proves my point. At least use 420. Then the others will get the lack of brain function you showed. A reason, if I may.

[Palu49]

Just now, ZR6000RR said:

Well I don't hold a stop sign, but know stupid. Wont put a number on it as you’re  scale proves my point. At least use 420. Then the others will get the lack of brain function you showed. A reason, if I may.

“You’re  scale” yea Jim, you’re really tearing everyone else up in intellectual ability my friend.

[ZR6000RR]

3 minutes ago, Palu49 said:

“You’re  scale” yea Jim, you’re really tearing everyone else up in intellectual ability my friend.

299 steps in front of you, you fucking retard. Giving you a few hundred, mind u. Too easy!

[Gym Ramstud]

Gym doesn't understand the controversy surrounding this belt drive.  Gym hasn't had any problems with the belt drive on his 9R.  Gym has faith in the engineers of Rosseau MN and the R&D that goes into the products. Gym is confident Polaris tests and tunes their machines properly and their test riders feedback is of the highest standards.  Gym wouldn't let his dog loose near them though.  Gym is stoked for wide open throttle wheelie ripping and roost spraying season with no concerns.  Gym wishes you luck.       

[mnstang]

46 minutes ago, Palu49 said:

Thats what common sense would make you believe. But we all know textron often fails to operate within sensible bounds.

I'd just think if people were making claims they could back them up but oh yeah I'm on the internet and freedom sledder 

 

6 hours ago, fortune46x said:

I posted the cad and then was told to remove it , its not an assumption. when I dig my sled out I'll measure it out and give actual numbers.

Theres a reason everyone is struggling to get the secondary to fully shift out and why the belt dust is everywhere and why even my own sled with 6 miles on it was littered with final drive belt debris - the belt is riding up on the outside edge of the pulley when tensioned.

I don't care about your particular sled, based on your symptoms, I'd say you got a bad one, which obviously would not be representative of a design flaw.  I understand why you want to get it figured out but to base a design issue solely around an anomaly machine that clearly has problems that most sleds don't, sample size of 1, that may fool the likes of a few boot lickers on this forum but one sled that has huge belt problems that 99% of other sleds don't have doesn't indicate a design problem, sorry.  It means you got unlucky.  If it was a design problem, everyone wiuld be wearing final drive belts like you are and it's not the case at all.  

If you have final drawings, from cat, that show the jackshaft being unparallel to engine, or rather out of spec, when in running form, I'd love to see them.

[Zambroski]

Man!  With all the problems in these Kittens, I don't regret bouncing back to doo.  Sure, I gotta let some other Doo guy at the stops blow me occasionally but, I just look away.

Also, found and ordered this bitchin' three piece set for working on it.   Finally, they recognize that many, non liberal Americans don't have doll hands.  Only $1499.00 too.  Came with a $20off coupon for some $1900 storage horseshit for the tunnel.  I'll pass on that tho.

 

 

[Crnr2Crnr]

1 hour ago, Zambroski said:

Man!  With all the problems in these Kittens, I don't regret bouncing back to doo.  Sure, I gotta let some other Doo guy at the stops blow me occasionally but, I just look away.

Also, found and ordered this bitchin' three piece set for working on it.   Finally, they recognize that many, non liberal Americans don't have doll hands.  Only $1499.00 too.  Came with a $20off coupon for some $1900 storage horseshit for the tunnel.  I'll pass on that tho.

 

 

take one of those hands and point to the SkiDoo belt drive.