I'm a mechanic by trade and have almost exclusively snap on tools at work, but mostly craftsman at home. One thing I've noticed is the craftsman tools will interchange nicely from sae to metric but no to much with the snap on. For what it's worth... I'm for going all metric on the horse too.
2016 Wish List / Predictions
- Thread starter teal_210
- Start date
I think we can all agree on the metric hardware, and Timbersled has voiced their take on it.
Lets move on - and try to keep things positive.
Lets move on - and try to keep things positive.
Here's my list:
-Metric Fasteners, as mentioned above. I don't think there is a single bike out there that this kit will fit on that has SAE hardware. That means every single one of your customers needs to carry two different tools sets with them while riding.
-Tunnel cooler option. I don't even run radiators anymore and I'm seeing at most a 20 degree temperature swing between riding hard pack trails and deep powder.
-Maybe have a suspension tuning guide on your tech tips page? I know you have some information in the instructions, but a more in depth guide to suspension setup could be cool. Also, any guide to properly setting up the fork for snow bike work would be nice as well
-Roost guard for front of kit and for the brake. I made my own with some ABS sheet. Took like 15 minutes and now there's no more snow being packed around the carb and back of motor. Seems easy enough to design, build, and include.
-Better Ski/Front assembly attachment to fork. Having the customer drill holes makes it a lot easier for you guys I know, but when someone goes to buy a used kit, the holes never seem to be in the right place. That means drilling new holes that are usually touching the old holes and are now weaker, which means either welding in new material or getting more creative. It just seems like there should be a way to make these things without needing to drill holes specific to certain forks.
-Belt Drive could be cool and save some weight.
-Metric Fasteners, as mentioned above. I don't think there is a single bike out there that this kit will fit on that has SAE hardware. That means every single one of your customers needs to carry two different tools sets with them while riding.
-Tunnel cooler option. I don't even run radiators anymore and I'm seeing at most a 20 degree temperature swing between riding hard pack trails and deep powder.
-Maybe have a suspension tuning guide on your tech tips page? I know you have some information in the instructions, but a more in depth guide to suspension setup could be cool. Also, any guide to properly setting up the fork for snow bike work would be nice as well
-Roost guard for front of kit and for the brake. I made my own with some ABS sheet. Took like 15 minutes and now there's no more snow being packed around the carb and back of motor. Seems easy enough to design, build, and include.
-Better Ski/Front assembly attachment to fork. Having the customer drill holes makes it a lot easier for you guys I know, but when someone goes to buy a used kit, the holes never seem to be in the right place. That means drilling new holes that are usually touching the old holes and are now weaker, which means either welding in new material or getting more creative. It just seems like there should be a way to make these things without needing to drill holes specific to certain forks.
-Belt Drive could be cool and save some weight.
Only have a couple rides on my almost new '13/14 kit but I agree with a lot of the suggestions.
Here's a few that I don't think need to be implemented.
Don't go out of your way to make it lighter unless it's cost effective. Exotic materials will drive up the price of an already expensive item. It's a minimalist design already can't see a lot of weight savings to be had cheaply.
Metric would be great but it took me all of 5 min to assemble a small kit from an old sled tool kit (metric) and a couple spare sockets, Allen wrenches etc. prolly doesn't weigh 2lbs and will turn every fastener on the bike and track. If not I got a small vice grips and small crescent.
I haven't had anything apart yet since it was assembled on the bike when I bought it and everything has stayed tight, but if there are bolts in shear that have threads in the shear plane and not proper grip length, this is a big problem from a quality and longevity standpoint. No excuse for that. That's like civil and mech engineering 101.
Now I got another project, to fix that issue.
Otherwise, thanks TS for making a fun @ss machine to ride. I love it!
Here's a few that I don't think need to be implemented.
Don't go out of your way to make it lighter unless it's cost effective. Exotic materials will drive up the price of an already expensive item. It's a minimalist design already can't see a lot of weight savings to be had cheaply.
Metric would be great but it took me all of 5 min to assemble a small kit from an old sled tool kit (metric) and a couple spare sockets, Allen wrenches etc. prolly doesn't weigh 2lbs and will turn every fastener on the bike and track. If not I got a small vice grips and small crescent.
I haven't had anything apart yet since it was assembled on the bike when I bought it and everything has stayed tight, but if there are bolts in shear that have threads in the shear plane and not proper grip length, this is a big problem from a quality and longevity standpoint. No excuse for that. That's like civil and mech engineering 101.
Now I got another project, to fix that issue.
Otherwise, thanks TS for making a fun @ss machine to ride. I love it!
kylerf150, if you haven't already, use the syringe method outlined by Timbersled. You can get them at most hardware stores. The two times I've done my 2014, it was literally a 5 minute opperation to remove brake reservoir lid on the bike, suck the recommend new/clean brake fluid into a syringe, attach syringe to nipple with 4" piece of tube holding it vertical to let any air bubbles rise in the syringe, open nipple on the brake caliper, slowly push fluid up through system and out into the brake reservoir, close nipple, put reservoir lid back on, wipe up and/or rinse off spillage and done. No pumping or bleeding at all is needed with this method because it doesn't introduce any air into the system. Lever is firm from the first pump. Takes longer to put the zipties on the brake hose than to fill it. Key is not introducing air in the first place and this method works flawlessly.
Sorry to digress. Back to topic.
Last edited:
A new/redesigned chaincase cover would be great.. im sitting at home with a huge hole in my cover and a new one is on backorder..... i hope i can jerryrig something together so i can ride this weekend. forecast is calling for some snow finally
I totally agree with your comment on let's keep it positive, but change demanded by the end user only comes from the end users requests and for my now close to $7000.00 Cdn for a LT kit, too bad so sad is not an acceptable answer from TS. Again I'm calling BS on the increased cost they just don't want to do it, that's a different problem altogether.
M5
N
n16ht5
Well-known member
Bro, I work in a steel mill. I can come up with almost any size metric bolt of any grade I could want within 24hrs, which I have to every so often. The ONLY strange wrench sizes I have to carry are for your SAE Timbersled!!!!
Otherwise -
Front ski should be bigger/longer
Taller lugs on the track
Longer track (146)
Better bearings
Dedicated kit that puts the motor over the track!!! I have no problem pulling the motor on my YZ450 for the winter to put into a kit that gets me on TOP of the track instead of way out in front of it
the solution tedesled...
LIGHTER .CHECK
NO TENSIONER SPROCKETS ,CHECK
LIGHTER AND STRONGER SKI AND SPINDLE, CHECK
NO CHAINCASE SLIMMER,CHECK
FREE ADJUST AXELS FOR DIFFERENT GEARING, CHECK
BETTER SUSPENSION 29.5 INCH AT REAR WHEEL , CHECK
METRIC BOLTS AND NUTS,CHECK
LIGHTER .CHECK
NO TENSIONER SPROCKETS ,CHECK
LIGHTER AND STRONGER SKI AND SPINDLE, CHECK
NO CHAINCASE SLIMMER,CHECK
FREE ADJUST AXELS FOR DIFFERENT GEARING, CHECK
BETTER SUSPENSION 29.5 INCH AT REAR WHEEL , CHECK
METRIC BOLTS AND NUTS,CHECK
WIDER SKI BETTER FLOTATION,CHECK
I like the idea of no chaincase on the outside of the side panel, but on the inside instead. If this could be done without making the kit wider overall.
YES ITS POSSIBLE , TOTAL WITH OF THE TEDESLEDD WITH 11.4 WIDE TRAC IS ONLY 13,4 INCH....
Looks interesting. Please start a new thread to discuss and we'll keep this one on topic. I'm sure your new thread will have much discussion. Looking forward to it!
I would like to see Timbersled come out with details and pictures of the sx kit before you have to pay for it next year. The 15 sx is great but I think some people held back since they didn't know what they would be getting. Great product but let people know what to expect. I vote to cut all tracks to 10.5 wide so everyone can enjoy better handling without any sacrifices.
The 10.5" wide all tracks seems like a great idea! riding with a lot of SX kits this year and myself on a ST. I see nothing negative of having a 10.5. Actually the thing has more track speed because of less rotating mass than the 12.5 making it better in every type of snow condition!
Hey but when some one pulls out a LT it is a different story. How are the SX with LT doing?
I would tend to disagree with cutting "all models" to 10.5 inch track. For those that prefer a narrower track, the SX is available and the narrow track (and shaped paddle profile) fits it's intent and personality better. A 12.5" wide track fits the ST and LT intent better. Giving up 2" of width is giving up a lot of floatation and would require a lot more spin to keep the same forward momentum and float. Many of us want more floatation and not less.
Losing even an inch off the full length of a track adds up way faster than adding or removing overall length. Look at the surface area differences between a 15" wide and 16" wide snowmobile track of the same lengths. Granted those are longer overall, but removing 2" of width off these snowbike tracks would be a fair percentage of removed footprint which would need to be countered with even longer long tracks. My personal preference would definitely be to keep the 12.5" width rather than needing to go even longer with the track to make up the loss of floatation because then one would have to deal with the issues inherent to going longer and longer.
Freeing up track speed and hp by sacraficing floatation seems counter to the intent of the ST and LT kits in my opinion. Keeping the SX, and perhaps expand that line, for those what want narrower tracks, but keep the 12.5" wide for the ST and LT since they are targeted for deep powder and in powder the tip in difference between the 10.5 and 12.5 is likely an insignificant improvement compared to what we'd lose (floatation). Just adding my opinion to the mix, but then I have not ridden an SX so don't have any first hand knowledge.
It probably largely depends on ones riding style and on the type of snow you ride. The deep powder regions may lean towards wanting to keep the 12.5" plus get even longer, for more flotation, and longer paddles vs. the wetter snow regions, spring riding, and/or those that spend more time on tracks or trails leaning towards a 10" track. So nice that we already have the SX targeting those condistions and the ST/LT for the deeper, softer conditions.
Losing even an inch off the full length of a track adds up way faster than adding or removing overall length. Look at the surface area differences between a 15" wide and 16" wide snowmobile track of the same lengths. Granted those are longer overall, but removing 2" of width off these snowbike tracks would be a fair percentage of removed footprint which would need to be countered with even longer long tracks. My personal preference would definitely be to keep the 12.5" width rather than needing to go even longer with the track to make up the loss of floatation because then one would have to deal with the issues inherent to going longer and longer.
Freeing up track speed and hp by sacraficing floatation seems counter to the intent of the ST and LT kits in my opinion. Keeping the SX, and perhaps expand that line, for those what want narrower tracks, but keep the 12.5" wide for the ST and LT since they are targeted for deep powder and in powder the tip in difference between the 10.5 and 12.5 is likely an insignificant improvement compared to what we'd lose (floatation). Just adding my opinion to the mix, but then I have not ridden an SX so don't have any first hand knowledge.
It probably largely depends on ones riding style and on the type of snow you ride. The deep powder regions may lean towards wanting to keep the 12.5" plus get even longer, for more flotation, and longer paddles vs. the wetter snow regions, spring riding, and/or those that spend more time on tracks or trails leaning towards a 10" track. So nice that we already have the SX targeting those condistions and the ST/LT for the deeper, softer conditions.
Last edited:
I don't think anyone will ever agree on the perfect width or length of track. For me, smaller and narrower is better. Yes, it's more of a challenge on the deep snow days - but that's what makes it fun.
I wonder how many people have bought a SX kit and then decided that the ST or LT was better and switched back?
I wonder how many people have bought a SX kit and then decided that the ST or LT was better and switched back?
region
i think a lot of track opinions come from the region you are riding in. here in the pacific northwest the heavy snow floats you better and you can get away with an st, when its three feet deep and heavy the lt works better for sure. lt rules in the really deep light snow like in montana if you actually want to get anywhere. imho
i think a lot of track opinions come from the region you are riding in. here in the pacific northwest the heavy snow floats you better and you can get away with an st, when its three feet deep and heavy the lt works better for sure. lt rules in the really deep light snow like in montana if you actually want to get anywhere. imho
