Hey all, hope you Christmas was merry and you got all your go-fast parts that you have been yearning for.

Just a quick question, I installed the black spring, removed the shim and love it, but when I turn on the key and hear the familiar whine of the KEBC it sounds like it is struggling. When I turn the key off, no problem, it sounds the same. I didn't do anything to the drive pulley yet (have the red spring ready though) and I know that the KEBC works on the drive pulley.

Any thoughts?

 

No problems here, with or without any of my springs.

 

That kebc thingy has an extremely primitive brain, and goes through some kind of learning cycle to remember where the right spot to push out to is. Hopefully it will figure it out and stop bugging you sometime soon.

If mine ever busts, I'm just going to unplug it and remove it, since the driven pulley is responsible for engine braking at most speeds (like a polaris) and I'd rather save my funds for aftermarket stuff.

The spring doesn't change the KEBC. Adjusting the belt causes it to re-learn. Mine wacked out somewhat whe I changed the belt.Now it is back to normal but it took a while.

 

Good news, for sure, just like you, I would hate to shell out any bucks, but I need mine, it has saved my scrawny a$$ more than once for sure.

 

I love the K-EBC feature. I do think that Yamaha has a better design. I also need the K-EBC and my wife needs it more. But, everyone is different and has different needs.

 

The yamaha design is wonderful in some ways. It saves the belt big time. It is all mechanical and Never Ever freewheels down a hill. It provides a feeling of confidence due to it's smoothness. It isn't high tech, it is very old tech. They just put the same sprag clutch on the crank that some many older machines with auto shifts had and did not allow the belt to get loose at idle.

However, it makes changing cvt characteristics quite a bit more difficult, since changing the belt and or springs is harder. It isn't undoable, just takes 2 to 3 times a long.

The centrifugal clutch heats up the oil, burns it, and puts a lot more abrasive particles in the oil. That oil is filtered sure, but the particles can still splash onto moving parts before being filtered. The oil pump has to eat them before they get filtered. the strainer doesn't catch stuff that small.

It is also heavier than the kawi cvt. Every other machine trades off features for weight (except polaris isn't concerened as much with weight).

I noticed my friend's 660 gets his oil black in just a short number of miles. he changes the oil and filter more often than i do. My oil looks new. That black dirty oil is not a good thing for longevity.

 

Not sure about the oil thing as I have my dealer change the oil and filter about every 2 or 3 weeks. Its in the warranty so I might as well take advantage of it. As far as heat generated by the belt and effecting the oil,..?? well?? LOL I have no comment on that as I dont think the belt contributes enought heat to matter.

Sure the springs and belt are easier to change in the Kawi. But, I never touched the Kodiak in almost 3 years, I had to remove a spacer after 80 miles on the P650.

When I say a better design Im talking about less maintenance and less belt wear PERIOD! Nothing more nothing less. Oil burning, heat build up?? That means nothing to me as far as the belt design goes.

The one advantage I can see the Kawi belt having over the Yamaha is the ability to adjust it. Once the Yamaha belt starts wearing there is no way to make it better. The Kawi you take the spacers out to bring it back to top performance. BUT!! I bought a new belt a few weeks ago for my Kodiak and my original belt was still well withing specs but it was glazed. I guess what Im saying is you have to remove the spacers and tighten up the Kawi belt just to keep up with the Yamaha belt.

I knew this when I bought the P650. Does it bother me?? No, if it did I wouldnt have bought it in the first place. For the power, speed, stability and versitility the P650 has I can deal with the belt and the maintenance required for it. To me, its the best ATV made, but, I think Yamaha has the better belt design.

 

Let me elaborate on the heat thing. Although everyone knows that the yamaha design makes for a longer belt life, what not everyone realizes is that there is a tradeoff. That being the centrifugal clutch that causes the oil degradation due to heat and it adds abrasive particles to the oil. It is commonly called a sprag clutch. Part of it is a one way bearing that prevents the primary pulley from turning faster than the engine, and allows the engine to freely turn paster than the primary pulley. Add to that a helix type device in the seconday pulley and the belt backshifts upon decelleration and the cvt pushes the engine (hence, engine brakes that never jerk, or freewheel). The reason the one way bearing must freewheel the other way is to allow stopping the yamaha without killing the engine. But, since the bearing will not transfer power from the engine to the primary pulley a centrifugal clutch is used to transfer the power. Wonderful idea. I don't have to tell you how good it works, I'm sure you know quite well how well the system runs. But that clutch, depending on riding style, speed, etc., can heat up the engine oil.

Some old timer ATV owners of Hondas (same kind of centrifugal clutch device as the yamaha ultramatic) that plow a lot have claimed that the centrifugal clutch sharing the engine oil was quite detrimental to their machine, others say not. I don't know if I believe that it is a huge deal, especially when properly cared for. I do know that my friend's 660, with his slow mud boggin riding, dirties his oil incredibly fast.

-I'm just chewing on the plusses and minuses of each design. I haven't sent any oil to be analized yet or anything like that.

It is true that the any engine itself would be better off without that additional oil contaminating and oil heat breakdown factor, but that doens't make it a bad overall design.

I just like to look at things from a design perspective, I'm not really making a final judgement on either design. I'm just pointing out that the yamaha system is not without drawbacks.

I have however, expressed my oppinion (and in a sense passed judgement) that Kawasaki was negligent in their design of the 650 belt system, solely due to the unusually high percentage of new 650 owners with low belt life and cvt problems. Other ATV manufacturers have gotten much better belt life out of the same kind of cvt system to the 650 (meaning the belt has to slip for a clutching mechanism).