I was going to try to pull the diagram off the PDF but I'd have to print and scan it I guess..

Anyway,if you've seen it no need to post it.

"FActory says width would be 1.396" +/- .031" . Minimum service limit is 1.320"."

So if the projected width is wider,and the spec is for the projected width,wouldn't that mean it is closer to,or is possibly in spec? Both for your belt and the new one.
You said the new belt was out of spec by x right? Well if it isn't measured the way Polaris measures and lists the spec(for projected width,if applicable),then how do you know it is out of spec.
What discrepancy? the 1.396+/- .031, is the range a new belt I imagine. Probably the specs they give whoever makes the belts. Anything outside that isn't an acceptable NEW belt. And minimum service limit(when you should replace it) is 1.320
So if the belt isn't measured the way Polaris measures then there is no way to no if it is in spec or not.
Where is the discrepancy?
Make sense,or clear as mud?

 

Thanks for the intelligent input. I'm going to have to think about your rationale and take another mental run at it.

 

The projected width is where the confusion for me is. The service limit is 1.320 (actual) vs the 1.396 +/- .031 (projected. How do you compare actual vs projected?

The factory spec was 1.396 (projected) minus the tolerance of .031 should be 1.365 .

Actual measured was 1.360

Confusion still reigns.

 

Does it say the service limit is measured different than the new spec?
My manual list measurements and then shows how to get the projected measurement. Doesn't say x is projected or not projected.
I think all measurements are projected if the belt is trimmed on the edge...if not then use actual width,because if it isn't trimmed then the actual with would be the same as if it was trimmed and you used the projected width. Seems that some are trimmed and some arent.
Bottom line both measurements,service and new spec should be done the same way IMO.
With the 1.396 -.031,if the belt is trimmed then you can not compare the 1.360 "actual" measurement,as it will be too narrow.
Think of it this way, you have 2 belts that are identical,except you trim off a small amount of each upper edge. One will measure smaller that the other using the "actual" method,but as far as the clutches are concerned they are identical. The clutches grip the V portion,not the edge. So in essense all the projected width does is allow you to measure the belt as it the edge was not trimmed.
The only reason I can think of that Polaris would use the projected method is that they use both trimmed and non-trimmed belts and wanted a standard way that would work for both. That or they use trimmed and non-trimmed interchagelably?
I see why they use belts with the edge trimmed,not sure why they wouldn't use all trimmed belts but the best I remember the XP belt on my machine is not trimmed,but again I wasn't looking for that when I looked at it.

 

Dilemmas like this could be solved by dealing only with actual measurements.

For instance, give us what the actual measurement should be along with the +/- tolerance and then give us the minimum service limit measurement. The difference then is available for wear.

Giving the projected measurement is pie in the sky. No way of a guy measuring that.

My head really hurts on this one.

 

Well they would have to use actual numbers for the type belt. ie list a measurement for a trimmed and for a non trimmed belt. But you would think they could do that. The projected can be measured..just not as easily. You basically need 3 straight edges,lol. One for each side of the V part and one to lay accross the flat outer side. Mark where each of the V edges intersect the flat edge and measure that distance. Basically you make the belt triangle shaped as if the trimmed edges were still there. Make sense?

 

Yup, unfortunatly it does. I think I'll just deal with the min servce limit and keep measuring for that.

thNks for the input.

 

No problem. In any case I bet a new belt will provide a long life for you. In your neck of the woods,where life may depend on it,I would carry a spare and tools to change it and not sweat the wear too much. Even a new belt can be defective and fail...man that would suck wouldn't it?

 

<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>Originally posted by: HIGHOCTANE

Well they would have to use actual numbers for the type belt. ie list a measurement for a trimmed and for a non trimmed belt. But you would think they could do that. The projected can be measured..just not as easily. You basically need 3 straight edges,lol. One for each side of the V part and one to lay accross the flat outer side. Mark where each of the V edges intersect the flat edge and measure that distance. Basically you make the belt triangle shaped as if the trimmed edges were still there. Make sense?</end quote></div>


The manufacterer, I'm sure has a specially made jig, Or uses a comparator with a transparancy, they use to measure with. there is no accurate way to measure the belts with just a pair of digital calipers,without first "seating" the belt in a jig or fixture!
I now understand the confusion!

 

Yeah, next time I'm going to let the Boogie Man stay under the bed, but you're right on about the jig.