• We have updated the site to the latest version. You will be required to log in to make sure your account is active. There are quite a few new functions so it will take a little time to get use to it. Please post if you see or have any issues.

SLP Magnum weights?

racerdave

racerdave

Moderator
Staff member
Moderator
Messages
1,087
Age
68
Location
Will County, Illinois
Country
USA
Years Snowmobiling
since 1976
Snowmobile
AXYS Switcher 800,Indy600sp,XCSP600ves
Anyone using them? Good/bad? And yes I just seen them on the site many here love to hate.
 
Fastsledder has. Said he liked them.
 
Not that I hate slp weights at all. Their weights are purpose built for high elevation and mountains.
Things get way different near sea level and trail riding.

Maybe the new weights are good for low elevation flat land trail riding??
 
I have a set that im just trying now. So far they seem Pretty good . Lot of mass towards the heel for belt grip. The shift profile is very very similar to a 10 series and to the SSI weight. I think they will be a good all around weight . I will be testing them against a more aggressive profile weight that I usually prefer. ill let you know the results.
 
Brock said:
Not that I hate slp weights at all. Their weights are purpose built for high elevation and mountains.
Things get way different near sea level and trail riding.

Maybe the new weights are good for low elevation flat land trail riding??
Click to expand...

They aren't a high elevation weight. Spoke with SLP about this before buying them.

I have tested these weights against a lot of stuff that has been posted on here. Run the stock helix and 140/220 secondary with 160/340 primary or something close. Mine shifts out at 8150-8200 builds to 8400. Nothing bad to say about them. Faster than alot of stuff posted on here. I have a 17SBA aggressively studded.
 
The mtx are a flatter profile to keep revs up in higher elevation. What weights are you talking about?

Different ways to clutch for sure. It’s not about picking someone’s set up on here and saying yours is faster? Anyone can say that?


I like a more aggressive profile then slp and lighter springs then you’re using. We can all clutch different but get fast sleds
 
Magnum. New this year? Maybe last? They are different than the older MTX weights.
 
Brock said:
The mtx are a flatter profile to keep revs up in higher elevation. What weights are you talking about?

Different ways to clutch for sure. It’s not about picking someone’s set up on here and saying yours is faster? Anyone can say that?


I like a more aggressive profile then slp and lighter springs then you’re using. We can all clutch different but get fast sleds
Click to expand...

Didn't just pick somones set up and say "mines faster".

Just shared what i tried and said it like it is. Nothing personal. I like aggressive weight and light springs too. Very surprised by how well these worked out.
 
800imp said:
They aren't a high elevation weight. Spoke with SLP about this before buying them.

I have tested these weights against a lot of stuff that has been posted on here. Run the stock helix and 140/220 secondary with 160/340 primary or something close. Mine shifts out at 8150-8200 builds to 8400. Nothing bad to say about them. Faster than alot of stuff posted on here. I have a 17SBA aggressively studded.
Click to expand...
How much weight are you running in th and what is your engagement at?
 
Engages at 3800. Depends on the day/conditions. Around 69. I also picked up some longer set screws so I can load the heel. They come with 1.2g short set screws only and a lock set which are .7g i believe.
 
IMG_E4134.JPG
Just a picture comparing the shift curve profile for reference. polaris 10 series in front, the slp magnums in the middle, and SSI weights in the rear.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
IMG_E4142.JPG
this shows the slp magnum in front and a cutler profile(they now call it the turbomag) in the rear.
 
What was the TM's called before? Those magnum weights sure have a lot of coating worn off. How many miles on them?
 
From AAEN's clutch book, to compare with faubs pic above

aaenprofile.jpg
 
Understand the above for a traditional non adjustable wt, but it seems that the profile becomes somewhat less important with adjustable weights. For example, if the weights profile is aggressive then the amount of weight that will need to be added is less than a weight with a less aggressive profile. And, that doesn’t include the width of the weight or the shape of the backside of the weight.
 
Last edited:
Just-Pinch-It said:
Understand the above for a traditional non adjustable wt, but it seems that the profile becomes somewhat less important with adjustable weights. For example, if the weights profile is aggressive then the amount of weight that will need to be added is less than a weight with a less aggressive profile.
Click to expand...
I have found even when loading up a more standard profile weight I still cannot get it to accelerate as good as the more aggressive profile. The more aggressive profiles are not as forgiving to conditions changing and getting them setup is not as forgiving so there are some tradeoffs. For all-out top speed only running I would not run the more aggressive profile.
 
jfaub63 said:
I have found even when loading up a more standard profile weight I still cannot get it to accelerate as good as the more aggressive profile. The more aggressive profiles are not as forgiving to conditions changing and getting them setup is not as forgiving so there are some tradeoffs. For all-out top speed only running I would not run the more aggressive profile.
Click to expand...

I couldn’t agree more. That’s why I tell guys the turbo mags(aggressive profile)are for tuners not for the guys that wanna gas n go. Weight has to be changed going from 500’ to 3000’, or from hard pack to sticky snow, or from -10 to +10. Etc..
 
Saw the new series Bikeman adjustables last night. They are pretty much 10 series profile. But then again most of the good ones are.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.


Back
Top Bottom