broken drive shaft
- Thread starter NM
- Start date
I really have to give it up to all you armchair engineers out there saying the material is too thin, the overlap is insufficient, etc. Come on guys, do you really think that Polaris DIDN’T do any engineering on this part? Have you looked at any of the engineering data for any of the materials involved? Do you really think that they DIDN’T test this part to failure repeatedly?
We had a dealer jump in on this (hypertoys) who said that “Polaris is addressing the issue right now and taking care of customers” and “Failure is caused by inadequate bonding agent being applied at time of assembly.” Obviously, these failures are happening with low miles whether stock or turbo’d. All failures have been at the bonded connection between drive stub and drive extrusion. It appears from the photos posted that the stub spins inside the extrusion and then the aluminum fails (ie, the failure does not start with the aluminum extrusion). Of all the posts of 2013 preview rides we had last spring, I don’t recall one with a driveline failure. Anyone that has any experience with these types of structural adhesives know that they are some pretty amazing bonding agents. So my point is: With what we know right now, the facts point to this being a manufacturing defect and NOT an engineering defect.
This doesn’t mean Polaris isn’t due some criticism, maybe the “low ball subcontractor” comments are right on target, who knows, but those of you saying the glued driveline can’t possibly work don’t have any hard evidence to back up your claim. If fact, all of the drivelines that have not failed (the vast majority) prove your claims are wrong.
Still, I do understand how these failures would shake your confidence in the driveline. I’m thinking 1) inspect glue holes on driveline and make sure there is evidence of glue, 2) follow recommended break-in of Quick Drive Belt and 3) if driveline has not failed after belt break-in and some good WOT pulls then you can assume that you have a correctly assembled driveline. Yeah, yeah, yeah, I know, if it does fail it really sucks, but I am confident that Polaris will take care of us.
We had a dealer jump in on this (hypertoys) who said that “Polaris is addressing the issue right now and taking care of customers” and “Failure is caused by inadequate bonding agent being applied at time of assembly.” Obviously, these failures are happening with low miles whether stock or turbo’d. All failures have been at the bonded connection between drive stub and drive extrusion. It appears from the photos posted that the stub spins inside the extrusion and then the aluminum fails (ie, the failure does not start with the aluminum extrusion). Of all the posts of 2013 preview rides we had last spring, I don’t recall one with a driveline failure. Anyone that has any experience with these types of structural adhesives know that they are some pretty amazing bonding agents. So my point is: With what we know right now, the facts point to this being a manufacturing defect and NOT an engineering defect.
This doesn’t mean Polaris isn’t due some criticism, maybe the “low ball subcontractor” comments are right on target, who knows, but those of you saying the glued driveline can’t possibly work don’t have any hard evidence to back up your claim. If fact, all of the drivelines that have not failed (the vast majority) prove your claims are wrong.
Still, I do understand how these failures would shake your confidence in the driveline. I’m thinking 1) inspect glue holes on driveline and make sure there is evidence of glue, 2) follow recommended break-in of Quick Drive Belt and 3) if driveline has not failed after belt break-in and some good WOT pulls then you can assume that you have a correctly assembled driveline. Yeah, yeah, yeah, I know, if it does fail it really sucks, but I am confident that Polaris will take care of us.
The forces on the drive shaft are more extreme than any other drive component, Not only does it take the constant on/off throttle torque and vibrations but also takes every hit and impact from the paddle as it leaves the driver. Of all the worrisome parts on a sled this is one area you shouldn't need to even think about, Its simply a Terrible mistake and I just spoke to one rider who cancelled his sled order, These Will FAIL. there is no doubt they will be catastrophic, minimal insertion and glued WILL FAIL. Poo needs to step up Now and address this, I dont ride this sled however had I purchased one I would be Postal . The removed all reliability and everyone whos on the snow will be constantly wondering what day it will grenade, Not to mention everyone will be tip toeing around to ensure he makes it home,.These things are breaking on the trail with minimal loads.JMO
R
RKT
Well-known member
The failures have already occurred and are REAL!.. I am sure there iwll be a recall that will fix this.. The prototype shafts , last year, were different...
OK, we have finalized our design on addressing this issue.. What we have should prevent this failure from happening until Polaris does whatever they see fit..
What I would like to know is how many people are interested in the fix we offer? We will plan on production end of this week and early next.. BUT, we do not want to over-produce..
So, I am looking for a head count so we can get this going...
I think it may be better to start another thread (maybe a POLL type) to better get this head count..
OK, we have finalized our design on addressing this issue.. What we have should prevent this failure from happening until Polaris does whatever they see fit..
What I would like to know is how many people are interested in the fix we offer? We will plan on production end of this week and early next.. BUT, we do not want to over-produce..
So, I am looking for a head count so we can get this going...
I think it may be better to start another thread (maybe a POLL type) to better get this head count..
S
suitcase
Well-known member
Im sure they stayed on the groomed trails too.
these are the ones that Im waiting to hear form, if they have had issues. and like MH says no issues so far. So where does that leave the rest of you.
with out a dought there has been a couple of problems with this. but like stated you will have that with a new design. but did these brake because of something other than poor enginering? Or have these few sleds banged a big rock in the bar ditch with only 2 feet of snow?
I have my concerns about this from the time I snowchecked. but did it anyway. Due to the the testing done by riders that I know put this sled to the test.
Did they change vendors for the drive shaft? Do we really know or are we just spit balling?
I see the same pattern this winter, as I did when the D 8 came out, and a few people lost there motors right out off the trailer. The sky is falling!!
I don't think everyone should blow a shoe just yet. Yes I feel bad for the ones that had problems with there new sled, it sucks. There is no dought in my mind that Polaris and there dealer will take care of these people. Just the way they have cared for the rest of us when we have had problems with a sled.
Some good points have been made here on this thread, ones that I will check on myself, and ask my dealer to check before I pick up my sled.
Just my 2 pennys!!!
Hmm You willing to take a solo ride 25 miles out?
G
Going West
Well-known member
Just because some engineer designed something does not mean it is built correctly. We ordered a piece of equipment that cost $250,000. When it showed up the hitch on the center pivot looked ridiculously weak and under build, any guy with half a brain could see that it would not last, they assured us that it was plenty strong and engineer to handle the load. We didn't get 5 days out of the unite until the hitch pulled apart and caused major damage.
Most times if it looks extremely weak and under built, its because it is.
I have no doubt that the glue will hold the shafts together, that stuff is amazing, but the over lap area seems very inadequate to me. Maybe that's not the case and we all will be eating our words but I would think the extra 2 oz of weight the it would have cost would have been well worth the trade off to make the inserts 1.5 to 2 inches long. a piece like this should be over build to some degree.
S
suitcase
Well-known member
No matter what sled I ride I would never go any where alone.
Im just saying there are just a few that this has hapened to. not everyone that has hit the snow had problems.
why did these few have problems? we can sit hear for a month of sundays talking about that.
Im a rider not a enginer. this will be taken care of, by polaris I would count on it.
Im just saying there are just a few that this has hapened to. not everyone that has hit the snow had problems.
why did these few have problems? we can sit hear for a month of sundays talking about that.
Im a rider not a enginer. this will be taken care of, by polaris I would count on it.
i totally agree suitcase. seems a bit silly to think this is a good idea. thankfully i dont have a 13 on order, but my father does. so i'm trying to keep him from jumpin off a cliff... He's an old school farmer, and likes things built like a tractor. He just picked up his sled and already wants out of it... a little puzzling, but I can understand his anger.
So i've been told by him that if i want to buy his 13 for cheap i can have it, should i do it? or just wait till next years run?? and by cheap i mean 10g's and it's mine... 2013 spring order Pro 800 155" with a lame *** driveshaft!
I
IEATSRT
Well-known member
Ignorance is bliss!!! Had 215 miles on my sled before all these issues came to light. Now at 230 miles still going strong. Still... what has there been... 2 belts that stripped some cogs? Albeit both were likely not broken in properly as per manual specs. Not one blown belt that wouldn't have gotten someone home. Driveshafts... how many are we at?? 6? Maybe 8? Classic example of media negativity being blown way out of proportion. I've been following the threads here and on Snow and Mud. Wonder how many haven't had failures? I will admit that there shouldn't be any, however the constant negativity from those who don't even ride the sled is just elementary. Lets leave the playgroud talk to the kids, your dad is tougher than my dad. We get it, you ride a far superior doo or cat, your D*#k is bigger than mine bla bla bla.
OK , I've got another wild arse theory . The suspension might also have something to do with it ? You all know how tight the track has to be right ? Especially on the Asssault (luckily it's not on the pro) How well does the suspension go threw it's full travel ? does it loosen or tighten ?
the only people that should be ashamed is Polaris. i'm sure they will have this figured out soon, i hope!
No kidding....or the insert should extend much deeper into the driveshaft.
Obviously it's easy to say with hindsight, but that LOOKS like it would fail! I do destructive testing for a living and can get a good feeling when setting up a test whether a test article is going to fail or not. From what I see, it is simply a poor design with emphasis on weight and simpicity rather than durability.
Just because something is designed by someone with a degree in engineering doesn't mean they have common sense....or perhaps the design parameters and stress load info they were given were not correct or improperly applied....or someone moved a decimal point
Perhaps the prototype parts that were tested were held to a closer tolerance than the production parts?? If that insert can move AT ALL, it WILL fail....glue or no glue. Sometimes a VERY small difference can make the difference between a part failing quickly or lasting indefinately. So many possibilities...and just another similarity between the Pro and the XP.
I
IEATSRT
Well-known member
Agreed looks like it could have been extended more for greater surface contact, however, even if it was if there was inadequate bonding it would fail no matter how long it was. Like mentioned, if it can move at all it will fail. From what I can see the issue isn't the surface area contact, it's either failure of glue to bond properly, or inadequate amount of glue. Sure looks to me like a manufacturing defect, not an engineering blunder. At any rate it is an issure that I am certain will be taken care of and addressed. I feel for those who have had issues, but with all new designs there are bound to be hicups. We see this in all industries, it's a fact of life, recalls are inevitable, we live with them move on and have fun. We are still in this for fun right?? For pete sakes if your sitting behind your computer screaming bloody murder at polaris at least go ride yous sled first and see if she holds.
Point being is that for $13000, this problematic joint and delicate belt drive should have been thoroughly tested prior to the first sled being sent to the customer. I will bet that the left side joint on the driveshaft that has exactly zero torque being transferred through it, is exactly of the same design as the right side joint that has the full horsepower torque and braking torque being transferred through it. As a Structural Engineer, and from looking at the photos, in my opinion this would be considered gross negligence on the part of the designer of that joint. And for that matter, given the potential dangerous situations that can arise from either a sudden belt or driveshaft failure, the Quick Drive System appears to be not yet ready to put into a production sled. Fortunately, it sounds like the 2012 driveshafts will work in lieu of, thank God. But there is no easy fix for the delicate belts, other than to retrofit a chaincase. I mean, you can't even store the spare belt on either the sled or in a backpack, as per manufacturer's recommendations. The missing of that critical detail by a major manufacturer who should know better, is pretty pathetic, in my opinion.
Furthermore, extending the steel insert further into the female aluminum center tube, would have not increase the shear strength of the aluminum shell, through which all the torque is transferred. Extending the steel insert would have given more glue area and more contact area, but the aluminum would still have failed. There are an infinite number of stress reversals that take place on the drive shaft. Glue does not hold up to stress reversals. Neither does initially overstressed aluminum. All in my opinion.
Last edited:
This has been a great discussion and I feel for those that bought into this set up that is becoming really obvious that they forgot a few pieces , there are others that have been running belts for years and just look at this with utter disbelief . These mistakes have already been made and corrected .
Is the brand loyalty so bad that they can't learn from other mistakes ?
Season hasn't even started and it went from the belt to the drive shaft and it aught to make it's way back to the jackshaft in short order .
Is the brand loyalty so bad that they can't learn from other mistakes ?
Season hasn't even started and it went from the belt to the drive shaft and it aught to make it's way back to the jackshaft in short order .
P
paulharris
Well-known member
the clutch side driveshaft insert is aluminum. not sure how brilliant this is either because if the bearing ever wiggles or spins on the shaft it will wear down the aluminum quickly and the driveshaft is junk.
your comments about the stress reversals make total sense. I know this glue is amazing, but i hightly doubt its designed to bend back and forth millions of times as the driveshaft spins creating "stress reversals". Hard to believe that a polaris engineer could be such an amateur to design something like this and put it into production
Last edited:
Similar threads
