Heavy TRA Clutch Arms

[SnowSnob]

I've noticed a few companies coming out with heavy clutch arms for the TRA, Tom's Snowmobile has 40 and 45grm arms and Fett Brothers has the "Fat Body" arms.
I've heard once you find the right combination these heavier arms are impressive....some have said 10-12mph track speed.

Everything I've heard about these has been for the XP, has anyone tried these in the Rev and what arms are working the best?

 

[frog]

BJ has a set in his 860 XP and we may try them in my 07 860 to see how they work. He is using the Fett bros arms, the weight seems to be distributed better for the 800-860 engines with the Fett arms.

I will post my finds if we try them.

 

[SnowSnob]

Hopeing I won't have to try a bunch of different ramps to get them to work right.
Anyone know if the 415's are working on the older Rev's?

 

[SnowSnob]

Anyone try these out yet?

 

[winter brew]

An engine will only pull "so much" load for a given amount of power....whether the load comes from arms, pin weight, springs, helix angle....the engine only makes so much power so don't expect huge gains unless your current setup is way off base.
Everything I have tried over the years (all the gimmicky clutching products) pretty much just gives a different "feel" to the setup, but overall performance is almost always similar. JMHO-

 

[XXL]

I had to pull the stock pin weight out of the stock arms in my 163 09X 800 to get it to pull 8200 at 7-8000 Ft. on clicker 4.

 

[byeatts]

I've noticed a few companies coming out with heavy clutch arms for the TRA, Tom's Snowmobile has 40 and 45grm arms and Fett Brothers has the "Fat Body" arms.
I've heard once you find the right combination these heavier arms are impressive....some have said 10-12mph track speed.

Everything I've heard about these has been for the XP, has anyone tried these in the Rev and what arms are working the best?

Total weight of a properly setup heavy arm is typically 2 to 3 grams more.The weight down lower generates more force off the bottom and is better suited for BB,s torque.They generate a better holeshot and great for boondockng,Its less revy and will gain more traction.Toms straight arms shift all the way out ,something I could never get the stock arms to do.

 

[SnowSnob]

Here's the link I discoverd these on, interesting read.
http://www.dootalk.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=297187

 

[byeatts]

Here's the link I discoverd these on, interesting read.
http://www.dootalk.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=297187

Like always i continue to test setups and since that post you mentioned have found the 433,s to pull even better with the heavy arms.Im pulling consistant 53 to 58 track speed seconds after hitting the flipper in deep stuff with a 2.5 extreme 156 moving about 10 mph sled speed.860 BB. Have also found improvements with Winter Brew,s suggestion on the 288 belt.

 

[Dynamo^Joe]

You have x-spring and y-helix angles installed in the secondary that build a certain resistance to the flyweight.

The top side of the helix observes the input forces from the engine.
The bottom side of the helix observes the summation of the load it will see.

It takes Z-forces (clutch lever weight input) to exert through (x-spring and y-helix angle [clutch]) against the values of the summation of the (track load) observes to achieve the engine's rated rpms.

Summation "∑" of load being the combined sled weight, HP applied, snow load, elevations....etc.

In the final analysis, weight determines rpms.
Need more rpms then have to reduce flyweight
...or increase spring force
...or increase ramp angle

Add a heavier lever then you'll have to reduce flyweight or increase spring force
or increase ramp angle to maintain rated rpms.

Add a heavier lever, you'll have to "stall the shift" somehow to maintain rated rpms.