Install the app
How to install the app on iOS

Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.

Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.

  • Don't miss out on all the fun! Register on our forums to post and have added features! Membership levels include a FREE membership tier.

Pro Belt Tensioner : Leaving out the cost... will it help?

I'd love to see some slowmo video of the belt system. Would really love to know what's happening for sure.

You and me both! IMO, I think it may be just as likely there are issues with the peripheral and associated parts as it being any type of specific belt issue (strength, heat, ballooning, etc.). Or a combination of a number of factors coming together just right (or wrong maybe) to cause issues with specific sleds. It definitely doesn't seem to be any specific or consistent thing between those of us having issues as individual experiences are so varied.

PV
 
I ran across these at the snow show, and thought "what the he!!", I'll grab one. So, here's the skinny: these are not a tensioner. In fact they don't even touch the belt when in stalled (.010"-030" clearance). Supposed to keep the belt from ballooning, as mention in other posts. We'll see how things go this season.
 
"IF" the QD is indeed made by Gates (I have my doubts). It is made to Polaris' specifications which are not even in the ball park to the quality of Gates' standard off the shelf Carbon belt, which is half the price of the Polaris belt by the way. The QD is a ancient tooth profile circa the '50's and '60's and vastly inferior to the newer Gates G2 tooth form.

Can you please share a little of your knowledge on these 1950 and 1960 tooth profiles you speak of. If you're referring to the 11mm pitch then maybe you didn't realize that many of todays Top Fuel drag racers are using the same exact 11mm pitched belt we received on our '13 Pro's. Granted, a typical belt on a Fuel Car is 3" wide and they see different shock loads but the 11mm pitch is the same as the Polaris engineers decided to use on our belts.


Maybe you were referring to something else when you mentioned "tooth profile". :dunno:
 
LH... Which tooth profile do you believe that Polaris is using and what profile is it that the aftermarket companies are running?


.
 
Can you please share a little of your knowledge on these 1950 and 1960 tooth profiles you speak of. If you're referring to the 11mm pitch then maybe you didn't realize that many of todays Top Fuel drag racers are using the same exact 11mm pitched belt we received on our '13 Pro's. Granted, a typical belt on a Fuel Car is 3" wide and they see different shock loads but the 11mm pitch is the same as the Polaris engineers decided to use on our belts.


Maybe you were referring to something else when you mentioned "tooth profile". :dunno:

Certainly! The pitch has nothing to do with the actual tooth profile, as most all of the tooth profiles are available in numerous Pitches (spacing). The first cogged belts were commonly referred to as an HTD profile, which was basically a semi circle attached to the belt. Essentially that is what Polaris decided to use as the tooth profile on the QD. With the HTD, semi circular tooth, there is little to no resistance to the belt climbing up the sprocket tooth other than the belt tension and tensile strength. Since the HTD there have been numerous upgrades to the tooth profiles.

Since I started working on a prototype CVT for sleds twenty years ago, when the belt technology still could not handle the shock loads a sled delivered, the tooth profile has gone from what Gates calls the GT to the GT2. Both of which are shaped like an involute gear tooth with subtle differences for load handling properties and noise reduction. By changing the tooth shape the tooth has more straight on bite / contact with the sprocket tooth and is more resistant to climbing regardless of the load placed on it. The other benefit of the newer tooth profile is less heat generation as the tooth does not grind its way into the pocket in the sprocket, like the HTD profile does because of the teeth in front of it trying to climb out of the sprocket. The GT and GT2 profiles essentially do not touch the sprocket until making full contact. Also Gates has gone from a Kevlar cord, that still had some stretch, to a Carbon fibre cord that has zero stretch and unbelievable strength.

It is my belief if Polaris had indeed used Gates' GT2 Carbon belts (even if they opted to have Gates make them in their 11mm pitch (which is reserved for special large clientele to license from them by the production run) there would be near zero issues with the QD. Polaris could still charge whatever they deemed appropriate for the belts and they would have reaped a near 100 percent satisfaction with the Quick Drive as delivered.

If you look closely at what most top fuel cars use to drive their blowers, it may be an 11mm pitch but the majority are not using the HTD profile. Most are using the Gates Carbon belt in the GT2 tooth profile. Which is a far cry from the antiquated HTD belts of yesteryear and what Polaris opted to give us with the QD.

Hopefully that sheds more light on my previous comments and opinions.
 
I believe that the 2014 Belts are the Gates GT3 models... I'm checking into this right now.

I hope to have more info to post on this soon (and hopefully what was run in the MY 2013 Pros)

The Tensile cords are also wound differently in the upgraded GT3 compared to the GT2. I also believe that they have pulled away from carbon and gone to fiberglass, changed the facing on the belt-tooth face, and made the teeth themselves a bit more elastic.


GATES:
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, Verdana][SIZE=-1]PowerGrip® GT3 is made of a highly advanced combination of materials.
This new, technically advanced belt covers the widest range of industrial applications. The PowerGrip® GT3 synchronous belt transmits up to 30% more power than previous generation belts (PowerGrip® GT2). This entire belt range is suited both for new drive designs as for replacements on existing drives without any adaptation of the system.
[/SIZE][/FONT]
 
Last edited:
GT /HTD belts pics

attachment.php


...

Gates Belt Profiles.jpg
 
Certainly! The pitch has nothing to do with the actual tooth profile, as most all of the tooth profiles are available in numerous Pitches (spacing). The first cogged belts were commonly referred to as an HTD profile, which was basically a semi circle attached to the belt. Essentially that is what Polaris decided to use as the tooth profile on the QD. With the HTD, semi circular tooth, there is little to no resistance to the belt climbing up the sprocket tooth other than the belt tension and tensile strength. Since the HTD there have been numerous upgrades to the tooth profiles.

Since I started working on a prototype CVT for sleds twenty years ago, when the belt technology still could not handle the shock loads a sled delivered, the tooth profile has gone from what Gates calls the GT to the GT2. Both of which are shaped like an involute gear tooth with subtle differences for load handling properties and noise reduction. By changing the tooth shape the tooth has more straight on bite / contact with the sprocket tooth and is more resistant to climbing regardless of the load placed on it. The other benefit of the newer tooth profile is less heat generation as the tooth does not grind its way into the pocket in the sprocket, like the HTD profile does because of the teeth in front of it trying to climb out of the sprocket. The GT and GT2 profiles essentially do not touch the sprocket until making full contact. Also Gates has gone from a Kevlar cord, that still had some stretch, to a Carbon fibre cord that has zero stretch and unbelievable strength.

It is my belief if Polaris had indeed used Gates' GT2 Carbon belts (even if they opted to have Gates make them in their 11mm pitch (which is reserved for special large clientele to license from them by the production run) there would be near zero issues with the QD. Polaris could still charge whatever they deemed appropriate for the belts and they would have reaped a near 100 percent satisfaction with the Quick Drive as delivered.

If you look closely at what most top fuel cars use to drive their blowers, it may be an 11mm pitch but the majority are not using the HTD profile. Most are using the Gates Carbon belt in the GT2 tooth profile. Which is a far cry from the antiquated HTD belts of yesteryear and what Polaris opted to give us with the QD.

Hopefully that sheds more light on my previous comments and opinions.

All very good info LH. I've been absent from the forum since spring so I have missed a bunch. When this was discussed last spring I was under the impression that Polaris did opt for the GT2 tooth profile. I guess it was just speculation and never confirmed. Thanks for the clarification.

Hopefully the 2014 belt is a GT2 or GT3 design. Maybe this will provide for a more reliable drive system. :thumb:
 
If they (Polaris) are using the Power Grip series that is yet another engineering error in my opinion. They should be using the Poly-Chain line and the Carbon belts. The Power Grip line from my limited knowledge ( I did not re-verify in the last few months) still uses Kevlar cords and does stretch. Compounding the problem of tooth shear with their chosen tooth profile.
 
Who knows till/if I/we can confirm what they are using...

The new GT3's are not using kevlar, I know that... but IS Polaris using this... ????



.
 
But, as you've also said... the GT2 is a profile AND characteristic of the belt... as there are GT2 carbon and OTHER GT2 belts... I would bet this is true of the GT3 as well. <br><br><br>We'll see.<br><br><br><br>.<br>
 
I would think that Polaris knows that if they go to a carbon belt that the belt is stronger than the jack shaft and drive shaft , something has to flex and it won't be that belt .
 
I would think that Polaris knows that if they go to a carbon belt that the belt is stronger than the jack shaft and drive shaft , something has to flex and it won't be that belt .

I call BS! Nearly every aftermarket belt drive uses the Gates Carbon belt and the stock shafts (CMX being the exception) and nearly zero problems.
 
Back to the tensioner... I believe this belt has a fair amount of "slack" or lack of tension. It just doesn't appear to because the belt is so damn stiff. I have installed the FnI part, and I'm looking forward to torture testing it!
 
That's the other guys , there's just to much flexing going on with the Pro even though they claim it's stronger . So they shaved a massive amount of weight off of the Pro compared to the IQ but they really didn't do anything to strengthen it . The collar is the only thing that's keeping them together . They can't be that dumb not to use a carbon belt it , they have to have a reason ? Maybe it just comes down to cutting cost ?
 
The only reason I see to use a tensioner is to allow for sprocket changes for different ratios..like the TKI kit.

yup i agree. belt tightens the hotter it gets. teeth expand.

reason the 13 belts blew it was a POS. Same reason they made the 115 v belt for the 900. didnt have to add a tensioner and a bunch of other crap just a better belt.
 
Premium Features



Back
Top