50 vs 48 start angle

[cody geyer]

Hello,
I've been reading every post regarding clutching on this site and the others for this past year. I'm totally green, but trying to learn the concept. It's my understanding that the steeper start is going to accelerate faster? , but is it less forgiving than the 48. The 48 will have better backshift? Will one work better more consistently in all conditions or be more forgiving to tune? Please advise as I'm about to order one. Does the shorter track of the rush model lend itself to one vs other?

Lots of questions that I haven't been able to pin down answers directly.

2016 pro s RUSH
168 gd's
1.68 or 1.74
Clutch is out for balance, considering Indy speciality adjustables?
Aggressive trail rider/ PA


Thanks!! Cody g

 

[Lid1]

48 would be more"forgiving" to conditions. It doesn't open the secondary as fast all other things equal. For example if you have a 50 and it works like a champ on hard pack it may be a bit much in deeper wet snow. Apply to much load. By no means am I saying that is the case with the set up you mention just a seeing what on paper would be more forgiving. Imo.

 

[wallacbr]

To really get an understanding purchase a copy of Olav Aaen's Clutch Tuning Handbook. This will give you a great foundation for understanding the operation of the CVT.

Sent from my XT1080 using Tapatalk

 

[racerdave]

I'd guess you are looking at full progressives. The second number has to be taken into account for back shifting also. A lower number will back shift quicker than a higher number.

 

[cody geyer]

Lid1

Thank you, a confirmation (?)of what I've been trying to digest and wrap my head around. I've read through hundreds of pages of guys asking about the same spring rates,helix choices ,and gram weights, profiles. Etc.

i am simply looking for the all around safer? choice that will work well alot of the time.

Does the shorter track make one more desirable? i assume the 50 May be harder to find traction with.

Thanks, not trying to sound smart. I've enjoyed the wealrh of knowledge on this site and it was finally time to ask a question that I haven't specifically been able to find myself.

 

[cody geyer]

I'd guess you are looking at full progressives. The second number has to be taken into account for back shifting also. A lower number will back shift quicker than a higher number.

Yes Dave sorry I did not specify that.
50-44, 48-44
I thought I read that the closer numbers create faster back shift

You are still running a 48-44? Are you pleased ??

Cody g

 

[stroker2]

Give SSI a call and they will cut you a helix with a 50-44 and a 48-44 Test yourself, you will have see what your sled likes, either cut will work.

 

[racerdave]

I ran the 48-44 last year for 500+ miles. Poor year, so I didn't test it against anything. Starting with a 50-44 this year, and will run the 48-44 on the 46-42 angle in my Indy 600.

 

[Honest800]

The stock helix is a pretty good trail helix. If you're looking for consistency, stay with stock secondary. The FP's can get inconsistent in different conditions, especially if you load up the primary.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Brock]

Full progressive helix will give you better back shift then a compound . Just be careful the start angle isnt to much.

If your going compound helix , its best to go 22 degrees higher then the finish angle. So if you choose a 44 degree finish angle, the start should at least be a 66 degree

66-44-.46—-66-42-.46 ER TSS-04 HELIX (LW420494 )

48-44-F—-46-42-F ER TSS-04 HELIX (LW420767

Both of these might work for you

The main think is alignment and proper float

Remember, the weights and helix are the main tuning and the springs are the fine tuning in clutching

Guys will have different ways and may achieve good results .

I myself go with the heaviest weights I can with the lightest springs possible.

 

[Just-Pinch-It]

Hello,
I've been reading every post regarding clutching on this site and the others for this past year. I'm totally green, but trying to learn the concept. It's my understanding that the steeper start is going to accelerate faster? , but is it less forgiving than the 48. The 48 will have better backshift? Will one work better more consistently in all conditions or be more forgiving to tune? Please advise as I'm about to order one. Does the shorter track of the rush model lend itself to one vs other?

Lots of questions that I haven't been able to pin down answers directly.

2016 pro s RUSH
168 gd's
1.68 or 1.74
Clutch is out for balance, considering Indy speciality adjustables?
Aggressive trail rider/ PA


Thanks!! Cody g

The steeper the angle the faster the up shift and will load the motor quicker. Shallower angles back shift better. Secondary spring tension affects both of the above to an extent. IMO for all the CFI engines the full progressive angles work better. Actually it's amazing how well a straight angle will work on the CFI's. Angles which end or cross through 44* work better. Lower spring rates work better on the CFI's, with more emphasis on spring rate rather than the starting and finishing poundage.

 

[cody geyer]

Thanks guys

Going to try the 48-44 f first.
Clutch alignment was out roughly .060. Shimmed correctly and float set .080 now.

If we get snow this year in the east we'll see how well this works as there is another rush8 and 17' assult in our group,


Cody g

 

[Snoman]

Thanks guys

Going to try the 48-44 f first.
Clutch alignment was out roughly .060. Shimmed correctly and float set .080 now.

If we get snow this year in the east we'll see how well this works as there is another rush8 and 17' assult in our group,


Cody g

I ran a 50/44 as Doc and Brock recommended last year with a 140/200. Used cutler adjustable weights a 120/310 with gates and gear to1.74 and the sled was great. A lot of off the corner pull. Fast Maine trails.