I was wondering what the speed is at the point of timing retardation(5000rpm)? Using the values of 3.098, 0.64, and 4.375 for the High range, CVT, and final drive ratios respectfully, and assuming the cvt is at it's smallest reduction ratio (0.64) the overall engine-to-wheel ratio is 8.674. At 5000rpms at the engine, you get a calculated 576.4 wheel rpm's. Converted to MPH's using a 25" diameter tire results a speed of about 42.9MPH.
If the CVT is at a higher reduction ratio, then it is even slower. I don't know how the 3.12-0.64 CVT ratio tracks to the speed of the engine; i.e. is it based on the drive or driven sheave speed? Anyway this seems a bit slow. The acceleration seems to fall flat around 50 to 55 mph on my unit. Also for those people running a top speed of 65MPH, the engine rpm's should be about 7580rpms. These values do not seem right to me. Can anyone shed some light on this? I also don't fully understand the reason they are so concerned with limiting ATV engines/speeds when they make mega-power/speed bikes? Is there a greater liability with ATV's? What is your impression or why this "limiting" was done?

 

The r.p.m that I stated was just an approximate figure, I don't want to give away to much information to my competitors. We have a lot of time into development of this box and there is more to do, I am sure everyone can understand my concern on this. As far as why the manufactures are so concerned about releasing high horsepower quads to the general public all you have to do is think back to the late 1980s, Honda and Suzuki lost millons of dollars in lawsuits that should have never been filed much less heard in court. Inexperienced riders were seriously hurt, sometimes fatally all because in there mind 4 wheels are safer than 2. Also jurors decided that 3 and 4 wheelers are unstable at any speed, virtually guaranteeing these slimmy lawyers and there clients BIG dollar settlements. Honda is still reluctant to release a big bore sport quad and you really can't blame them. There are more reasons but this is food for thought.
Bearman

 

1Bearman Well put!!!

 

The same can be said for liability insurance. Years ago, you didn't need liability insurance to ride fireroads in B.C. A guy on a dirtbike was scootin down one of these roads, lost it and crashed real bad. He wound up suing the B.C. government and won (dumba$$). Now, you have to have liability to drive these roads. They don't really enforce it, but it is there to cover their a$$. If someone crashes on a fireroad now who doesn't have insurance, and they try to sue, the government just says "You don't have any insurance. You weren't supposed to be on that road anyway". You really can't blame them for this tactic.