P to the 22 roller bearing delete…..

[Fat_Tones]

1 to 2 degrees is in the margin of error. Meaning not a nickels worth of difference. Ride it the way it is or get rid of it altogether. Why put money in a turd.

….and when it’s all done, you still have a P22

 

[RBalazs]

1 to 2 degrees is in the margin of error. Meaning not a nickels worth of difference. Ride it the way it is or get rid of it altogether. Why put money in a turd.

Sometimes turds have to be polished too I could’ve totally missed what he told me because yes, 1 to 2° is nothing!

 

[RBalazs]

….and when it’s all done, you still have a P22

I mean, if all the P 22s were actually still staying attached to the crank, wouldn’t be a problem clutch. Kurts is actually pretty fond of the P 22, he said he likes it better than the P 85 once they stay on and are torqued to the proper specs, and the roller bearing is deleted.

 

[RBalazs]

1 to 2 degrees is in the margin of error. Meaning not a nickels worth of difference. Ride it the way it is or get rid of it altogether. Why put money in a turd.

Swinny, swanny, slimmy, slappy… Samsonite!! That’s it, I was way off!

I stand corrected, Kurt said no big pulls but he was 40 to 50° cooler than the other sled tree riding. That is not a margin of error.

 

[Fat_Tones]

I mean, if all the P 22s were actually still staying attached to the crank, wouldn’t be a problem clutch. Kurts is actually pretty fond of the P 22, he said he likes it better than the P 85 once they stay on and are torqued to the proper specs, and the roller bearing is deleted.

I’m a bolt collector.

 

[JeffBrines]

Wow. Do you know how a cvt system works you know infinite gears so yes a few mm does make a difference. The lower you can get in the primary and the higher you are in the secondary is gonna get you into the lowest “gear” possible. Go look at a bicycle it will all make sense

I clearly do know how it works. I literally just ran some simple (linear) math for you to show you this.

Don’t shoot the messenger You did see that they are adding an adjustment screw in the secondary to adjust deflection, and therefore they can get the belt up higher in the secondary, with the gained 1/8” more play in the primary. No!?

And he didn’t disagree at all that the P22 isn’t a great clutch. It’s lighter than the P 85 and it just has a “couple” issues.

Not aiming this at you at all. I DID have a typo. I wrote "primary" when I meant "secondary" with respect to getting the belt to ride higher.

When you add the set screw, you are opening the sheaves of the secondary as you turn it IN, right? So in this case the belt drops into the secondary and this gives you deflection. Without the set screw the sheaves are totally closed for "lowest possible starting gear".

Does this make sense? This is what I'm not following.

And yeah, 1-2 degrees is completely non material.

 

[RBalazs]

I clearly do know how it works. I literally just ran some simple (linear) math for you to show you this.

Not aiming this at you at all. I DID have a typo. I wrote "primary" when I meant "secondary" with respect to getting the belt to ride higher.

When you add the set screw, you are opening the sheaves of the secondary as you turn it IN, right? So in this case the belt drops into the secondary and this gives you deflection. Without the set screw the sheaves are totally closed for "lowest possible starting gear".

Does this make sense? This is what I'm not following.

And yeah, 1-2 degrees is completely non material.

I know we’re human, we all make mistakes.

As far as the set screw, yes I realize when you screw it in it opens the sheaves and the belt can drop down but that’s why I showed pictures that he sent me how it sits after the delete. It’s not as high as it is when you perfectly adjust a P85 belt, but it’s higher than it is when the roller bearing is installed. It’s going to sit down lower in the secondary because the shaft, even with the bearing delete is larger than the shaft on the P 85 and simply to have enough deflection. You still could adjust it so that it’s tighter than tight and just on the verge of creeping forward if you want, just like you get with the roller bearing intact.

I also misspoke regarding the temperature difference and it’s actually a 40 to 50° temperature difference as you can see in my post above and that’s quite a difference and certainly not a “non material” difference.

Don’t take this wrong, because it’s the truth. At some point everyone and actually mainly you, since you are the one saying this is snake oil is going to have to just shut up. I can ask Kurt and I’m sure he wouldn’t have a problem if I messaged you his cell number so you could ask him the questions directly.

 

[mountaincat 800]

This is my 850 with a well used belt and the deflection bolt backed all the way off the movable sheave.
Point being the deflection bolt sometimes does not have to open the secondary for proper belt deflection.

 

[JeffBrines]

I know we’re human, we all make mistakes.

As far as the set screw, yes I realize when you screw it in it opens the sheaves and the belt can drop down but that’s why I showed pictures that he sent me how it sits after the delete. It’s not as high as it is when you perfectly adjust a P85 belt, but it’s higher than it is when the roller bearing is installed. It’s going to sit down lower in the secondary because the shaft, even with the bearing delete is larger than the shaft on the P 85 and simply to have enough deflection. You still could adjust it so that it’s tighter than tight and just on the verge of creeping forward if you want, just like you get with the roller bearing intact.

I also misspoke regarding the temperature difference and it’s actually a 40 to 50° temperature difference as you can see in my post above and that’s quite a difference and certainly not a “non material” difference.

Don’t take this wrong, because it’s the truth. At some point everyone and actually mainly you, since you are the one saying this is snake oil is going to have to just shut up. I can ask Kurt and I’m sure he wouldn’t have a problem if I messaged you his cell number so you could ask him the questions directly.

Roger on all points. However, we disagree on one huge thing. Its not my job to "shut up" when claims are being made that are not overly objective in nature. The idea of discourse is to arrive at some kind of truth, or at least a better version of the truth than we start with. I know, Snowest is incredibly tribal, where people hate saying things like "oh, I see, I had it wrong". Products, brands and people become more akin to religion than what they really are (which is so strange). The idea of going to market with a product and the entire market bowing to the greatness of the creator just because they created something and made a claim is absolutely insane. Being critical, skeptical and curious are wildly important when it comes to determining what actually works/doesn't work, and how we can make things better. Don't misread, this doesn't make Kurt a bad guy if his product doesn't work. I've built a lot of things that didn't work! Its nothing personal, its just simple discourse.

I'm happy to talk to Kurt, but I'd rather he come here and address my questions directly. I don't bite. These are very reasonable questions rooted in the way these clutches work. I generally put the onus of a product on the creator to show me quantitatively something is better. Its up to me to verify those findings, both empirically and qualitatively when I have a product, but he first has to convince me the problem/solution holds water.

While I hear his claims, he has done a poor job articulating how these claims are rooted in first principles. This is why I keep saying "snake oil". Its easy to make claims, and its easy to sell us snowmobilers on qualitative outcomes, things like "throttle response" and "lower belt temperature" (cognitive bias and the placebo effect is a hell of a thing, btw). Unless you really show us how something is accomplishing those things, and you have the math to make me go "ah ha, that makes sense", I'm going to approach things from a skeptics point of view. To be clear, math + a good hypothesis doesn't make it so (its the first step). This is where the empirical testing mixed with on sled experience comes in. You need all these things to come together for a "good product".

Kurt, if you are reading this, I keep coming back to a handful of things.

1) I'd want to see belt deflection from a real world rider (IE, not from Kurt's own email) with this installed who is hammering on their sled. A hot belt with hot clutches generally needs a touch more belt deflection than what you can get away with when things are on the cooler side of things with respect to belt squeal. This brings me to point 2...
2) The bearing *does work*. Durability sucks, but it absolutely works. It allows the system to work with less heat and less deflection. Without it, you have to run more deflection. The proof here is kurt forces you to run a set screw for his kit to work. I still am not seeing how adding a set screw makes the belt ride higher in the secondary. Can you explain this mechanically?
3) Deflection = worse performance, period.
4) I'm not convinced any of this is actually material outside of simply deleting the bearing because it isn't durable (which is fair!). I'm not saying I can't be convinced, but until he wants to show me how the 1/8" across a 3" shift surface while also adding a set screw and deflection is something your normal rider feels, especially against all the other clutching variables. Kurt, I've done the simple calculation - (1/8)/3=0.041 - can you also add sheave angle to give us real change? Being its linear maybe my math works but my brain says you need to include sheave angle if you are going to make gear down claims with any sort of precision.
5) A handful of pulls absolutely does not equal something remotely quantitative from a testing perspective. I'd like to see a more real world test. Two riders, same sled, same clutching, one with the delete one without, both on new belts. Go ride for 5 minutes then get hit with the temp gun. Claiming 40-50 degree lower temps is *huge* for something this small. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence, no?


If you want to gear down, there are real ways to do this, as Kurt himself knows.

I suppose I could buy one just to run a real objective test on my own channel, the product is cheap. Totally willing to be proven wrong. Then again, I do feel he needs to answer these questions.

 

[spoon]

The setscrew in secondary keeps belt from being too tight on primary when there is no bearing. You don't need the setscrew when there is a bearing as the belt is tight all the time. Deflection is only there to keep friction from pulling sled along at idle or stalling engine. Belt height in secondary is relative to belt length and width and spacing of sheaves. Setscrew is there to maintain a set spacing to allow belt to be free from friction of spinning primary at rest. With bearing and larger diameter on primary, the secondary sheaves can actually be farther apart (than with setscrew) and shifted out already with belt lower in secondary. With a multi-angle helix you are actually closer to the next angle before even moving and this can negatively affect performance as well. This applies to all CVT systems not just the P22. Been doing this with Arctic Cat Team clutches since 2018. (going from roller to non-roller and recalibrating)

 

[mountaincat 800]

The setscrew in secondary keeps belt from being too tight on primary when there is no bearing. You don't need the setscrew when there is a bearing as the belt is tight all the time. Deflection is only there to keep friction from pulling sled along at idle or stalling engine. Belt height in secondary is relative to belt length and width and spacing of sheaves. Setscrew is there to maintain a set spacing to allow belt to be free from friction of spinning primary at rest. With bearing and larger diameter on primary, the secondary sheaves can actually be farther apart (than with setscrew) and shifted out already with belt lower in secondary. With a multi-angle helix you are actually closer to the next angle before even moving and this can negatively affect performance as well. This applies to all CVT systems not just the P22. Been doing this with Arctic Cat Team clutches since 2018. (going from roller to non-roller and recalibrating)

I wondered about the Cat clutch and if owners are experiencing these same bearing failures.
To me Polaris should have two different belts lengths for the P85 vs. the P22. Easy!

 

[spoon]

I have been lucky with my Team clutches unlike many others. I have one 2018 clutch on a Ctec with 2700 miles and no issues. My other 2 roller teams have about 1000 miles each and look near new. Bearing is not serviceable on older ones. New Adapt clutch has replacement bearing available. Have heard of bearing issues with those if overtorqued on the main clutch bolt.

 

[JeffBrines]

The setscrew in secondary keeps belt from being too tight on primary when there is no bearing. You don't need the setscrew when there is a bearing as the belt is tight all the time. Deflection is only there to keep friction from pulling sled along at idle or stalling engine. Belt height in secondary is relative to belt length and width and spacing of sheaves. Setscrew is there to maintain a set spacing to allow belt to be free from friction of spinning primary at rest. With bearing and larger diameter on primary, the secondary sheaves can actually be farther apart (than with setscrew) and shifted out already with belt lower in secondary. With a multi-angle helix you are actually closer to the next angle before even moving and this can negatively affect performance as well. This applies to all CVT systems not just the P22. Been doing this with Arctic Cat Team clutches since 2018. (going from roller to non-roller and recalibrating)

Great explanation.

For fun, I just went outside and did a very quick test. My buddy has a P-85 on this 9R and I have a P-22 on my boost. I took the side panel off and blipped the throttle from idle to engagement, getting the sled to move forward a bit with a rider on the sled to observe.

1) At idle, Spoon is right, and this is where I was confused - It does appear the P-22 causes the secondary to open just a hair due to how tight deflection is.
2) (P22) When engagement occurs, both sheaves respond, with the primary engaging and the secondary beginning to move and shifting a teeny amount right off bottom (even though its already open a hair)
3) With the P-85, right as the primary engages and the sled starts to move the belt looks to end up in a similar place to the P22 with respect to the secondary. I'd have to take video and really look close but I don't think there is much of a difference once you are actually moving, even barely.


In both cases, this becomes non-material almost immediately when the sled's track starts to move (with respect to the 1/8" or so we're talking on both sides of the equation). Again, I'll grab some video when I have time, but I think we're ignoring how momentum of the clutch plays into this, too. This is where its not like a dirt bike with static gearing. Its continuous (obviously) with RPM and torque-sensing being huge drivers to all of this.

I still say if you want to change your gearing, change you gearing. If you want to delete your clutch bearing, delete your clutch bearing, but don't think doing the latter is going to change the former in a way you feel.

 

[RBalazs]

Roger on all points. However, we disagree on one huge thing. Its not my job to "shut up" when claims are being made that are not overly objective in nature. The idea of discourse is to arrive at some kind of truth, or at least a better version of the truth than we start with. I know, Snowest is incredibly tribal, where people hate saying things like "oh, I see, I had it wrong". Products, brands and people become more akin to religion than what they really are (which is so strange). The idea of going to market with a product and the entire market bowing to the greatness of the creator just because they created something and made a claim is absolutely insane. Being critical, skeptical and curious are wildly important when it comes to determining what actually works/doesn't work, and how we can make things better. Don't misread, this doesn't make Kurt a bad guy if his product doesn't work. I've built a lot of things that didn't work! Its nothing personal, its just simple discourse.

I'm happy to talk to Kurt, but I'd rather he come here and address my questions directly. I don't bite. These are very reasonable questions rooted in the way these clutches work. I generally put the onus of a product on the creator to show me quantitatively something is better. Its up to me to verify those findings, both empirically and qualitatively when I have a product, but he first has to convince me the problem/solution holds water.

While I hear his claims, he has done a poor job articulating how these claims are rooted in first principles. This is why I keep saying "snake oil". Its easy to make claims, and its easy to sell us snowmobilers on qualitative outcomes, things like "throttle response" and "lower belt temperature" (cognitive bias and the placebo effect is a hell of a thing, btw). Unless you really show us how something is accomplishing those things, and you have the math to make me go "ah ha, that makes sense", I'm going to approach things from a skeptics point of view. To be clear, math + a good hypothesis doesn't make it so (its the first step). This is where the empirical testing mixed with on sled experience comes in. You need all these things to come together for a "good product".

Kurt, if you are reading this, I keep coming back to a handful of things.

1) I'd want to see belt deflection from a real world rider (IE, not from Kurt's own email) with this installed who is hammering on their sled. A hot belt with hot clutches generally needs a touch more belt deflection than what you can get away with when things are on the cooler side of things with respect to belt squeal. This brings me to point 2...
2) The bearing *does work*. Durability sucks, but it absolutely works. It allows the system to work with less heat and less deflection. Without it, you have to run more deflection. The proof here is kurt forces you to run a set screw for his kit to work. I still am not seeing how adding a set screw makes the belt ride higher in the secondary. Can you explain this mechanically?
3) Deflection = worse performance, period.
4) I'm not convinced any of this is actually material outside of simply deleting the bearing because it isn't durable (which is fair!). I'm not saying I can't be convinced, but until he wants to show me how the 1/8" across a 3" shift surface while also adding a set screw and deflection is something your normal rider feels, especially against all the other clutching variables. Kurt, I've done the simple calculation - (1/8)/3=0.041 - can you also add sheave angle to give us real change? Being its linear maybe my math works but my brain says you need to include sheave angle if you are going to make gear down claims with any sort of precision.
5) A handful of pulls absolutely does not equal something remotely quantitative from a testing perspective. I'd like to see a more real world test. Two riders, same sled, same clutching, one with the delete one without, both on new belts. Go ride for 5 minutes then get hit with the temp gun. Claiming 40-50 degree lower temps is *huge* for something this small. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence, no?


If you want to gear down, there are real ways to do this, as Kurt himself knows.

I suppose I could buy one just to run a real objective test on my own channel, the product is cheap. Totally willing to be proven wrong. Then again, I do feel he needs to answer these questions.

Hey man, you can take it from here. I never planned on dying on this bearing delete cross I think I’ll just grab a notepad, make some popcorn and try and learn from your post. Seriously, ya got some real good questions, that I don’t have the answers too

I do really think you should call Kurts Polaris, ask for Curtis, have a conversation with him and report back. How’s that sound?

 

[RBalazs]

Great explanation.

For fun, I just went outside and did a very quick test. My buddy has a P-85 on this 9R and I have a P-22 on my boost. I took the side panel off and blipped the throttle from idle to engagement, getting the sled to move forward a bit with a rider on the sled to observe.

1) At idle, Spoon is right, and this is where I was confused - It does appear the P-22 causes the secondary to open just a hair due to how tight deflection is.
2) (P22) When engagement occurs, both sheaves respond, with the primary engaging and the secondary beginning to move and shifting a teeny amount right off bottom (even though its already open a hair)
3) With the P-85, right as the primary engages and the sled starts to move the belt looks to end up in a similar place to the P22 with respect to the secondary. I'd have to take video and really look close but I don't think there is much of a difference once you are actually moving, even barely.


In both cases, this becomes non-material almost immediately when the sled's track starts to move (with respect to the 1/8" or so we're talking on both sides of the equation). Again, I'll grab some video when I have time, but I think we're ignoring how momentum of the clutch plays into this, too. This is where its not like a dirt bike with static gearing. Its continuous (obviously) with RPM and torque-sensing being huge drivers to all of this.

I still say if you want to change your gearing, change you gearing. If you want to delete your clutch bearing, delete your clutch bearing, but don't think doing the latter is going to change the former in a way you feel.

Nice! You nailed it, although gearing concepts are relative on a CVT and dirt bike, it’s not exact.

Yup, not saying I am buying all this , shoot I don’t even have a boost until my 25 shows up. But if someone wants to run snake oil instead of VES extreme, I’d love to watch also. I’m sure you would also Nice pics on your Insta

 

[shattuck]

Interesting but I am going to slap a P85 on from TRS before I do this modification on a P22.

Very smart now you can read all the P22 threads and chuckle to yourself just like me. We’re out some money but our clutching problems are over!!!

 

[kanedog]

Everybody was clutching fighting

 

[Fat_Tones]

Those cats were fast as lightning.

 

[spoon]

In fact it is a little bit frightening

 

[goridedoo]

Good lord, every Jeff Brines post is a college thesis paper… TL;DR. You can do all the math and over thinking you want but you aren’t gonna know chit till you ride it.



I can’t really imagine gearing a boost down… and I’ve been a proponent of lower gearing on 800s/850s for a long time. Don’t knock it till you try it I guess