it's got nothing to prove to me, but I'm absolutely sure the belt will never slip or shred

 

tpolaris trannys are not the best. my friends 2000 explorer 350 had alota tranny problems

 

I don't agree with this statement. When was the last time you drove a manual transmission in high gear slipping the clutch instead of downshifting to a lower gear. Seems to me that you just need to learn to drive a belt, same as you learn to drive any transmission. At least if the CVT shreds, it is easy to replace the belt. If the hydraulics go out in the Honda, you might as well buy a new quad because it will be so expensive. My point is is not to bash, only to point out that there are clear tradeoffs that must be well understood in any transmission. I am most comfortable with belts because I drive sleds in the winter and I get thousands of miles on a sled belt. And the horsepower rating of sleds are two to three times higher than the most powerful quads. So the CVT technology is very durable.
BryceGTX

 

I understand what you're saying and I'm not bashing, just calling it as I see it and answering a question a potential buyer had with an opinion. I'm not misrepresenting "my" brand or "your" brand. I'm not saying a belt CVT doesn't work [on an atv], but it doesn't perform like a hydraulic tranny. It can't and won't no matter how good you are at tuning belt CVTs.....and, I'm confident that the hydraulics will outlast a couple few belts and clutch rebuilds with just a regular change of oil. The belt drive is merely a best effort tranny from a snowmobile manufacturer. If I was bashing I'd run a thread about the million dollar fine they just paid for late reporting of injuries due to sticking throttles, but he asked about transmissions.

A easy to find quote regarding the current Polaris CVT "The Polaris Sportsman’s transmission is one of the least-responsive in this class; a late engagement point means the power hits hard when the clutch does grab the belt". Not what I want on a long steep technical hillclimb. It's no secret that the belt drive is one of Polaris' weak points. Ride no, belt yes.

If I'm riding 0-30 mph (like most of the time) and 50% of the time I'm under 15mph I ?must? to shift from high to low or smoke a belt? Do you have to stop to shift from high to low?

 

I have 15,000 miles on one of my sleds with no clutch work and 2 belts. Not sure what else can be expected.
No way in... I believe this. This is BS in its worse form. I find the belt grabs at a very low engagement speed and just the opposite, it engages very smooth with no tendency to grab at all. Sorry propnut, I'm calling you on this one!!! This is BS!!!
BryceGTX

 

Call me on it all you want, that quote was from the Polaris twin not a trailblazer, but please.....deltaboy was not asking how a belt transmission performed on your sled. Here's the whole paragraph. "The Polaris Sportsman’s transmission is one of the least-responsive in this class; a late engagement point means the power hits hard when the clutch does grab the belt. And when crawling over rough terrain with loaded racks, this can make the driving more difficult than it needs to be. Aside from that, the Sportsman is an excellent rough rider, and it can carry a load, too." There are many other valid complaints, but this got the point across. Can you find any valid complaints about the performance of the Hondamatic?

I am not talking about a snowmobile, but a quad. Completely different application (except to get the vehicle moving). I won't argue that the belt drive is the best (even with it's shorcomings) for a sled (and you'd be a fool not to carry a spare belt on a sled), but it isn't for an ATV. I can change a sled belt in 1 minute, how long does it take on the side of the trail on an ATV. I find it hard to believe you have 15000 miles on an original clutch set when 99% of the people I know and ride with service clutches yearly or it shows signs of performance issues. You must have a 250cc Elan or you don't even notice that it shifts like crap now.

That's fine that you accept the shortcomings of the belt drive, but you are claiming that a belt drive is as efficient, reliable, and fitting for use on an ATV as a hydraulic one? If so, you've never driven one so you just don't know any better. As I said before, it is my opinion so take it or leave it. Do you really think that so many are apprehensive about belts because they're scared of the performance, technology, and reliability? I'm not fighting about this....

 

Hey propnut. Please refer me to the originator of the text so I can see the context of the discussion. I too have read the complaint that the Polaris CVT is not responsive, but to come on hard is BS unless the clutch has been toyed with. So, no I don't believe you. As far as sleds, please read that I have posted this information as support that CVTs are durable. The BS you are saying about CVTs inadvertently shredding is quite misguided as I have also heard of sled belts going up in 200 miles. If a CVT is not taken care of or operated improperly it will self destruct just like any other wearing device such as a clutch. On the other hand I have read of many sled belts lasting many miles and I have read of Polaris ATV belts lasting many miles.
LOL, seems you know very little about hydraulics or CVTs or you wouldn't have put you foot in your mouth about this one. CVTs are deinitely more efficient than any hydraulics. As a matter of fact, they are pretty close the same efficiency as a geared transmission Please feel free to school me on the characteristics of each transmission, I'm always eager to learn. [img]i/expressions/face-icon-small-smile.gif[/img]
I clean and check my clutches every year on my sleds. But I've yet to replace a component on in the clutches. Sounds to me like you and your buddies just like to play with their clutches. Many people change their clutch tuning regularly to change the shift. I prefer to stay with factory settings. Thats my choice. I know that changing the clutch tuning will gain in one aspect, say acceleration, but you lose big time in driveability.
Actually I have two 1998 Ski-doo, GT SE 700 triple-triples. I do all the work on all of my toys and know that these sleds are in top notch shape. I guess you got both feet in your mouth now eh?
BryceGTX

 

Feet in mouth? That's not nice, but you're funny. You sound like MJ's defense lawyer on this belt issue. Me making up stories about belts inadvertently shredding? Read each of these posts from the Polaris guys in this thread carefully.

Just copy the quote and go to a search engine. Better yet, type in Polaris belt slipping and see how many hits you get.

You believe what you want, but smart guys like Aaen (and heelclicker, and goodwin, and slp, and erlandson, and....) made a living out of the inefficiencies of the belt drive. Maybe only sleds loose 50% of the engine power by the time its measured at the track (and you counter "its all the gearbox's fault", right?)?

So by increasing acceleration, you loose efficiency in the back shift, and if you improve back shift efficiency you loose acceleration? That's the efficiency that you're bragging about? Belts are almost as efficient as manuals? I'm open minded enough to realize Hondamatic transmission efficiency is less than a gear driven transmission, but a bit more efficient than belt drive systems. Never mind the better performance and real engine braking. Manual may be more efficient than the Hondamatic, but doesn't perform as smooth. That's the way my opinion has been formed after reviewing the facts and experiencing the two transmission types, maybe you know something special?

Don't be afraid or ridicule the technology if you don't understand it. Educate yourself and demand more from your favorite manufacturer.

Read this and Aaen's clutch book for starters. http://world.honda.com/motorcycle-te...gy/hondamatic/

 

It seems to be a common misconception that belt drives are inefficent. Don't believe me, check from people that have actually measured it!! LOL, you might be suprised..
Yep there are a few belts that self destruct. My complaint about your posts is the comment about hard hitting clutches and not able to slowly crawl because of that. The Polaris clutching is so smooth and relaxed that this never happens! This is on all models; Trailblazers, Sportsmans... The key thing about a belt on a sled or a quad, is don't let it slip.. A UTE should be in low gear if crawling. Not too much different than a quad with a munual transmission. Heck, read the owners manual.. It tells you that..
LOL although I am not familiar with all their products and am clearly no expert about their products, but I suspect most of their products focus on performance, not efficency. Typically what I have seen when these guys change their clutch tuing, is that they want more performance, this almost invariably increases the wear and decreases the efficiency.
Hmm, I read this thread and don't see where I said this!!!
I have been working with hydraulics for years. So this is not new technology to me. I don't ridicule it, I don't think any of my posts have ridiculed it. And for anyone interested, it appears that the diagram for the "Distributor valve" on the Honda website is incorrectly labeled on the motor side of the drawing. It shows the spools are ported to the low pressure return path to the pump; but it is labeled "intake stroke"; it should be labeled "Discharge stroke". Basically the two labels should be swapped. Hmm, seems even Honda doesn't know how its own transmission works!!!
I don't read at any of these web sites where it makes a comparison of the efficiencies of transmissions. I saw at the Honda website where they compare the efficiency of the ATV trans to off-road equipment like bulldozers, but no CVTs or manual transmissions.
BryceGTX

 

Give me a break. I've had enough, you believe what you want. You are completely missing the point of the whole thing. It's obvious you've never driven one of the hydraulic transmissions or you wouldn't have posted. Be careful if you ever do because the engine braking will launch you over the bars if you don't expect it (why would you to this point?).

You can't admit that the belt drive is inferior (in comparison). That's fine. I can admit my brakes are inferior to discs (when operated with individual levers), what's your problem? Whether you like it or not, the belt drive is less efficient and there are many after-marketers that capitalize on it. If the machine isn't accelerating at it's full potential (because of compromises the manufacturer has determined is the best all around performance) than that screams inefficiency. You can't admit that belt issues are common with Polaris, and you're wrong there too.

I have to give you credit for reading and picking out the Honda web master or tech writer's mistake, but I'm sure Honda Engineering knows how the tranny works. I missed that error as I've seen this cartoon in its correct form.

http://www.atving.com/editor/press/h...tValveRotb.jpg

Remember before you jump on the opportunity to nitpick, these are cartoons and not designers accurate schematics. They are purely for informational purposes, not for troubleshooting or copying their tranny.

I admit the belt drive works (just) OK, you can not admit the hydro is much better in all the areas I suggested, which is the question I was answering. I've never seen a belt drive study that concluded the efficiency was any better than 85%. Compare that to multiple references of 98% in 1 to 1 with the Hondamatic, lesser only when you bleed off oil (less efficiency) for lower speeds - as designed, yet amplifying torque through the reactionary forces on a higher angle swash plate. With all the belt force created buy the sheave angles, primary flyweight force, secondary spring and belt contact patch friction trying to keep the belt from slipping, it is not that hard to understand that the belt drive just sucks power up all the time. And how do you like the disconnected feeling as you rev before you actually move? As the quote I posted about being jumpy is from another magazine, I cannot post a direct link, but the Polaris that was tested against the others was "grabby". This can be fixed, but get out your weights and springs, time to tune the clutches. Real fun!! Read Aaens book and then talk belt drive efficiency.

You will never find a study that compares these two transmission types, it's obvious to most there is no comparison. You're just stubborn, and I am signing off. Thanks for the debate.