Bubba297,
Since you like jokes here is one special for you.

This scene takes place in the future and it involves you.

There is a younge fellow who wishes to get a smarter brain as his is a little lacking so off he goes to the brain store... they have them in the future. He asks the attendent what do they have in a scientist brain so they take him to room full of intelligent brains. The attendent starts to show the prospect the inventory.
Here is a nice scientist brain for only $20,000 the sales fellow shows him. The younge fellow says that is nice but do you have something a little smarter. The sales fellow shows him another scientists brain with a number of degrees besides his initial dicepline for the sum of $50,000. The younge fellow says not quite I was hopeing for something a little smarter. Sales fellow says I have the just the perfect brain for you his name was BUBBA 297 he lived in Russellville Arkansas, USA who was mostly a pain in the butt on the Kawi forum at ATV Connection his brain is going for $500,000. The younge fellow said he doesn't have any degrees how can he be so smart and be worth so much. The salesman said... his brain is so valuable because he NEVER USED IT!!!!!!!!! HA HA ha ha ha ha ha ha!!!!!

 

LMFAO!!!

 

Guys, it's been real and fun. If you guys like following a person who talks the talk but dont back with proof then that's OK with me. I suspect that 100hp Banshee was probably about 60hp short. And I know that you have never actually run that bike on a track with the tree and lighting system for you would see just how SLOW it really is. I really like the idea of how your changing the sheave angles and belt lengths to get the autos to run better. Funny......... you dont have to do that with the other auto clutches to make that happen.If you start doing that with a polaris clutch you will never get it to run correctly. And dont try to tell me that this setup is different becaue I know that all belt autos work on the same principle. The guys in Japan spend lots of $ and R&D on these to have you start machining away and mess it up. Funny, as was your joke. The only difference is that mine was not a joke. Most people read that BS and know it to be just that. Only the newbies or the uneducated on autos will follow your lead because you are a talker and you are a good one at that. You need to call Aaen performance and get the bible of clutch tuning from the master of the clutches himself,Olav Aaen, unless you think you know more than him. Sir, I am done posting on your Kawi forum. I know some have been amused at my posts, but on all honesty they were meant to be true. In the real racing world real numbers and timeslips show the proof. You dont know how really dumb you showed yourself to be by actually admitting you were using a stopwatch, then wanting to defend the times. Go check the Polaris forums. I actually help the guys there and dont talk BS. Have fun screwing up your clutch. Peace, William

 

Here is some truths about the belt questions. A longer belt wont do any good. It may shift up slightly higher on the drive clutch but will be higher on the driven since its longer keeping the same gear ratio you had before. A same length wider belt will help since its wider it will force the belt further into the driven and in turn pull up higher on the drive clutch. You can get two mph extra by doing minor machining of the drive clutch. As for the welding the drive and changing the angle on the clutch you have to be very careful as the angle cant be changed much or the belt wont shift up or will shift out slowly making a slower excellerating bike with a high top speed which isnt feasable. If we were to machine the drive clutch like stated before with a wider belt you could gain approximatly 4-5mph. Lightening the clutch will help some also but the effects in extra speed are minimal; the main gain from a lighter clutch is better throttle response and better excelleration.

 

MTECATE4G... thanks for your positive input... some people that have machined the "contact points" of the front clutch, report that they still are not able to get the belt to the top of the primary... IMO, this means one of several things is happening...

1) possibly the weights are not heavy enough, or the curve of the weights is not correct, to finish forcing the sheeves together
a) the weights could be heavier, with the clutch lightened, without sacrificing acceleration
b) the factory clutch weights may have the ramp curve cut to maintain that 1/2" of unused primary pulley, as a safety factor or ???

my machinist friend, will be making me 3 sets of skelletonized weights, one with the stock curve, one with a sharper curve, & one with a more gradual curve, for me to expirement with... the weights will be "holey" & a blend of lead & tin ( the lead - tin blend is harder & has increased melting point ), will be melted into the holes, the holes will be machined of an irregular shape to insure that the lead blend will stay in place

2) the belt is "bottoming out" on the secondary, & no amount of machining on the primary, will allow the belt to go higher up on the pulley, with out a longer belt
a) it was reported by ALLTOYS, that he machined this sleeve, to allow the belt to go deeper into the secondary... my initial inspection of this bushing shows that it is already of nominal thickness, & machining it thinner, ( if needed ), probably wouldn't net much gain on the Primary...
b) the sheeves themselves may be machined differently to allow a smaller diameter bushing, netting more gain on the primary ( if needed )

while I would agree that the wider belt would allow the belt to ride higher on the pulley, as long as the secondary is not bottomed out, I find it interesting, that appearently the "new" belts from Kawasaki may be actually narrower, as most late model '03's come from the factory, containing only 1 - .06mm ( the thinnest ) shim in the secondary, instead of .12 - .18 shim thickness as earier models...

I have an extra primary & secondary clutch now to work with, so when I can find some time, I really want to conferm if the stock belt is bottoming out in the secondary or not, to determine where the changes need to be made...

at this time, I have no intention of changing the angle of the clutch sheeves...

I've said this before, but... what ever changes are made to "max" out the CVT, I want it to be easily duplicated, either for some company to cheaply manufacture, or easy enough to modify for the owners to do the work them selves... I think this goal is obtainable, if we all put our minds together on this...WAM

 

The way we check our polaris clutches is to clean them and then take a permanent marker and make a nice bold line all the way from bottom to top on both clutches. That will tell you where the belt is stopping on both clutches. Good point on checking the secondary before moving to the primary, although it would seem that they wouldnt want to do that unless that is the way they're limiting the top speed on the machines.

 

BUBBA297...Thank you for the suggestion...I think that marker Idea, it will work nicely for testing the belt travel... IMO, the corporate lawyers get involved in the pre-release of the quads & set limits as to what is deamed as "safe"... I'm sure that the top speed is limited, & since the potential for wheel lockup is greater if the belt comes off the front pulley rather than the rear, that it is no coincidence that the belt goes to the top of the secondary, but not to the top of the primary... I don't know of anyone personnally that has jumped the belt off the pulleys, so to say the least, the incidence is low, even with jumping 40' table tops, like some guys do, the belt stays on the clutches...WAM

 

I would like to slap the kawi engineers that designed all these little limiting things into the 650. I hate hearing that they reduced the belt width to keep us slow. It makes me furious.

If they just put a speed limit on the CDI using the speed sensor input, the all we would need is a holeshot to fix it.

FYI, newbeetle. I can tell from the wear patterns on my clutches that my belt has never been to the bottom of my driven. If my belt went out of the drive pulley further, it could also go into the driven more and give me a much higher ratio. There is a lot of room in the driven.

 

I'd like to hear back from SHOTGUN... I'd like to clairify that he once told me that on a machined primary, that the belt still didn't go to the top of the pulley... perhaps there is something else here... the ramp curve on the weights ??? I'm sure that in the next month, I'll be intimate more with my CVT clutches than with the wife... Sorry Honey ...LOL...WAM

 

I don't know whether it was shotgun or Alltoys that told me this, and I can't find it. When they changed the angle of the sheaves to get the belt to travel out of the primary further, it didn't work well at all. the change in pulley angle caused the belt to slip at take off.

It could be machined to get just a little sliver closer together, but I am not gonna mess. A wider belt should do a lot better than that little bit of machining.

1. A wider belt would give me all I need for cvt geometry.
2. A real CDI or unlimiter module would allow my engine to produce enough power to go faster.

Bearman's 650's did 75 or so comfortably with the CDI he made (but had to destroy), and no major mods (filter and a snorkle). That is fine with me. Fix my ignition somebody.