Fix Kits!
- Thread starter Coleniuk
- Start date
O
Oregonsledder
Well-known member
After watching how both of you so called "experts" have handled yourselves in this thread, I would not buy from either of you! I have been replacing pistons in two strokes for years with good results. It’s not nearly as complicated as you guys want to make it.
Bad
Mountainhorse you are definitely the officer and I am definitely one of the squirrels!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=Oq3GHO-5laA
Mountainhorse you are definitely the officer and I am definitely one of the squirrels!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=Oq3GHO-5laA
Life is good!
I don't care who you are... that is freakin hilarious... I needed that tonight !!
BTW.. After looking at this page again... The "Retort" youtube was a general "funny" and not directed at you.... good info in your post.
I don't care who you are... that is freakin hilarious... I needed that tonight !!
BTW.. After looking at this page again... The "Retort" youtube was a general "funny" and not directed at you.... good info in your post.
I tend to agree with Kelsey on the offset, if the cylinder was actually offset .070 from the crank centerline, that would create tremendous side load on the piston, one would think it would be very short lived. Questions to Dan: why would polaris offset it or what would it accomplish to make the motor live longer etc. to me it seems like it would shorten the life if it was actually offset? In your video you pointed out castings in relation to bolts etc. could it be the casting is little different but the bore is still centered on the crank?
S
snowmobiler
Well-known member
off·set
/n., adj. ˈɔfˌsɛt, ˈɒf-; v. ˌɔfˈsɛt, ˌɒf-/ Show Spelled [n., adj. awf-set, of-; v. awf-set, of-] Show IPA noun, adjective, verb, off·set, off·set·ting.
noun
1. something that counterbalances, counteracts, or compensates for something else; compensating equivalent.
2. the start, beginning, or outset.
3. a short lateral shoot by which certain plants are propagated.
4. an offshoot or branch of a family or race.
5. any offshoot; branch.
/n., adj. ˈɔfˌsɛt, ˈɒf-; v. ˌɔfˈsɛt, ˌɒf-/ Show Spelled [n., adj. awf-set, of-; v. awf-set, of-] Show IPA noun, adjective, verb, off·set, off·set·ting.
noun
1. something that counterbalances, counteracts, or compensates for something else; compensating equivalent.
2. the start, beginning, or outset.
3. a short lateral shoot by which certain plants are propagated.
4. an offshoot or branch of a family or race.
5. any offshoot; branch.
Last edited:
Dan - Your work speaks for itself and if I were shopping for a 'fix kit' I would definitely send my engine your way, no questions asked.
That being said, I have had several kinematics, strength of mat'l, engine theory/design/simulation courses, and I have never heard of an engine with an offset cylinder from the crank center-line (not that I consider myself an expert by any means in anything or that it isn't possible). An offset crank center-line of any sliding mechanism would cause some very strange phenomenons, especially in an IC engine where the input force is the combustion event.. The crank angle would not be equal to 0 at TDC (piston at rest) meaning there would be significant force on the rod bearings when the crank angle is at it 0 since the piston would be traveling down during the expansion stroke (it might even be over constrained?), if the cylinder were offset on the intake side (refer to Heywood). There would also be significant side loading on the cylinder wall/piston if this were the case, which would fatigue any piston, cast or forged.
Also, 's' (distance from center of crank to center of wrist pin) would be very difficult to predict since it is dependent on the crank angle aligned with the cylinder, meaning finding the piston speed at varying crank angles would be difficult since Sp=ds/dt. Again, not trying to be a smarta** or discredit any of your work because I have a lot of respect for what you do, but offsetting the cylinder center-line from the crank center-line seems like a pretty silly thing to do from a design/reliability standpoint.. Is it possible the measurement varies equally on the exhaust side of the engine to make room for the increase in skirt width?
I do agree with many of the points you made and also agree/disagree with some of the things RKT is saying. Not trying to stir the pot in any way..
Last edited:
R
RKT
Well-known member
2 videos.... Please view both .. It was done in a hurry but I think they are clear...
http://youtu.be/JL_4HQ-oaq8
http://youtu.be/98kJFXiV0AU
http://youtu.be/JL_4HQ-oaq8
http://youtu.be/98kJFXiV0AU
Dan - Your work speaks for itself and if I were shopping for a 'fix kit' I would definitely send my engine your way, no questions asked.
That being said, I have had several kinematics, strength of mat'l, engine theory/design/simulation courses, and I have never heard of an engine with an offset cylinder from the crank center-line (not that I consider myself an expert by any means in anything or that it isn't possible). An offset crank center-line of any sliding mechanism would cause some very strange phenomenons, especially in an IC engine where the input force is the combustion event.. The crank angle would not be equal to 0 at TDC (piston at rest) meaning there would be significant force on the rod bearings when the crank angle is at it 0 since the piston would be traveling down during the expansion stroke (it might even be over constrained?), if the cylinder were offset on the intake side (refer to Heywood). There would also be significant side loading on the cylinder wall/piston if this were the case, which would fatigue any piston, cast or forged.
Also, 's' (distance from center of crank to center of wrist pin) would be very difficult to predict since it is dependent on the crank angle aligned with the cylinder, meaning finding the piston speed at varying crank angles would be difficult since Sp=ds/dt. Again, not trying to be a smarta** or discredit any of your work because I have a lot of respect for what you do, but offsetting the cylinder center-line from the crank center-line seems like a pretty silly thing to do from a design/reliability standpoint.. Is it possible the measurement varies equally on the exhaust side of the engine to make room for the increase in skirt width?
I do agree with many of the points you made and also agree/disagree with some of the things RKT is saying. Not trying to stir the pot in any way..
Kelsey and you are both correct in what you are saying, your not stirring. I suspect if Polaris chose the to off set in relation to crank center line they made the adjustment.
And I have not had time bust every measurement into nano exact but the 13 case crankshaft location is about .015 higher the then other 2011/12 cases I checked. And when this 13 is assembled with the exact same pistons,rods,cylinder & head it needs a different sized cylinder shim to get the the squish where I want it.
I have sum more 13's coming in to look at
so far all I can say is either Polaris, myself or Kelsey is nuts.
Dan
Lmao !!! Kelsey I am not laughing at you...... I am laughing at both of us.
NBC, abc & fox have nothing to worry about. Obviously you and I have work to do and still we are flailing away making low grade video !!! OH MY GOD I AM STILL LAUGHING !! As you are trying to bust my chops and I bust yours.
I will say this.... I am not arguing that the seal cover both s not in line with the crankshaft it has t be or they needed a new off set cover.
I am heading out of town and won't be back till next week.
And I will say this your video added a human side to this for me and the rage I have for sum of your tactics has softened.
I CAN NOT BELIEVE HOW FUNNY THIS HAS GOTTEN !!!!
In the end when the snow melts and we both have time in increase the quality of our video skills it might end up to be really good for all who own a Polaris.
In parting till a later date I will say...... If Polaris and or Kelsey make me look like I am nuts I will be proud to say I learned a new video skill !!!
OH MY GOD MY BELLY HURTS !!!!:
Dan
INCONCLUSION; IF YOU WANT A VERY RELIABLE POLARIS 800 CFI YOU HAVE SEVERAL EXCELLENT FIXES TO CONTEMPLATE. FOR AROUND $800.00 YOU CAN GET NEW PISTONS AND A SHIM KIT THATS WORKS FLAWLESSLY OR FOR $2500.00 YOU CAN GET A FLAWLESS STROKED MOTOR. BOTH ARE GREAT IT'S UP TO YOU THE CONSUMER TO LAY DOWN YOUR CASH. A STROKER SOUNDS VERY COOL BUT DO I SPEND THE FLUFF?
Next time do you want to borrow an edge finder??
. I find everyones fighting of how long a sleds motor should last very interesting. One complains his sled lasted only lasted 1000 miles while the next complains his went down at 3000. So who sets the bar of how long an engine should last? Is there really an average? Seems like most winters im happy if an engine last 1000. With a snowmobile owner that does poor maintenance one could say he could only get 1000 miles out of a "fix kit". Seems mileage out of any sled, fixed or not, is more of a shot in the dark.
I could quote a lot of the replies but if you have read the thread you've read it.
Forged pistons need more clearence. T of F
Forged pistons in engines with higher side loads will over time collapse skirts. T-F
Rod length should be stroke x2
What is the Pro 800 rod length?
cyl skirt to case clearance is not a problem ?
And Yes more than one way to skin a cat (I'm not asian btw) LOL
Forged pistons need more clearence. T of F
Forged pistons in engines with higher side loads will over time collapse skirts. T-F
Rod length should be stroke x2
What is the Pro 800 rod length?
cyl skirt to case clearance is not a problem ?
And Yes more than one way to skin a cat (I'm not asian btw) LOL
The first thing I usually look at is part#'s. 12 to 13 they changed the case half's, 2204342 to 2204902, cylinder monoblock 3022352 to 3022449, and cylinder base gasket 5813515 to 5813826. Second I wonder why???? Is there an off set that was corrected with a deck change or what????? I am not going to take mine apart till needed so??? Mountain Horse Google Hollywood Knights great movie. That was just a taste and if I have a bad day pop it in a home. I have watched it a 100 times and it is still not dull yet!
The 70 x 2 = 140mm .... That would be awesome, Piston life would be staggering. 140mm is not practical in this design IMO.
My God the spacer would be massive and the case volume jump would hurt more then it would help imo
OEM stock is 132mm
I am not talking about pistons anymore ever on this motor.
Polaris off set something and I think Kelsey and I am both nuts and neither of us know exactly what they did. I sure don't. they thicken the cylinder sleeves on the 10, then the 2011, and then again on the 12..... and never called any part off set and now the 13 has thinker sleeves again and its call off set. I'm starting to see thicker sleeve in my sleep.
I do know this I will be using the Long rod, with the cast piston on this motor until its gone.
Kelsey will be using his forged pistons.
And Kelsey probably loves the new 13 cylinder simply because it massive in the extended sleeve area and is more suited for a big bore then ever before.
And the Long rod is going all the 13's I do that.
I am not trying to increase performance in this motor as Kelsey is
I am in it for long gevity and piston life.
I have been working with this motor since 2008 and as per the norm you try to do it better every year.
till next week.
Dan
Last edited:
It is not a stroked motor. Longer rod.
I think Dan has stepped up and shown some class in this post. I think both options are an improvement over stock and will increase reliability. Thanks to both parties and the moderator for keeping it open
