• 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.

TEAM TIED TEST

No new updates, we did however throw it back on the 901 and used it on the hill. Worked well, did however have a little miss shift due to the track conditions. Big snow pile then hard ice under neith. That's not the tides fault, any sec. With the tension that was on it would have reacted the same way. I'm just trying to keep it real here guys. It's a great clutch we rode 23 miles on the hill afterwards. Hard pack ice base with 3 inches of fluff on top. Various speeds and clutch responded perfectly, extremely smooth. Great addition to the Axys..
 
better get um while you can boys ! they are hard too come by and helixes are 10 days out .........
 
Dr.Notadoo said:
No new updates, we did however throw it back on the 901 and used it on the hill. Worked well, did however have a little miss shift due to the track conditions. Big snow pile then hard ice under neith. That's not the tides fault, any sec. With the tension that was on it would have reacted the same way. I'm just trying to keep it real here guys. It's a great clutch we rode 23 miles on the hill afterwards. Hard pack ice base with 3 inches of fluff on top. Various speeds and clutch responded perfectly, extremely smooth. Great addition to the Axys..
Click to expand...

So are you saying the clutch could have used more spring than a 140/200 in these conditions?

Is this helix/spring recommendation based specifically for the groomed trail, standard track 1.35 lug with studs,.....kind of riding.

Just wondering as some guys will run bigger lug tracks with not studs and are riding in 6-8" of snow covered fields.

Would the spring recommendation be different in that scenario, and if so, what would be the next logical choice?

My thoughts are that you may need a stiffer end poundage to help pick up the backshift. Something like a 140/220 as you don't want the secondary opening up too soon either.....which a larger lug track and deeper snow will have a tendency to do.

Just throwing this out for further discussion... 8)
 
Yep everybody's situation is a little different , tracks , pipes , studs, rider weight , etc ......
 
The 140/220 is better for back shift then the 140/200,yes.

What doc is doing is like me, using the softest springs possible with the heaviest weights. It's the best drag race system.

I do the same.

It won't work for everyone.

Stiff end poundage springs with light weights has way to much friction and heat.

Don't be afraid to throw weight at the 800 ho.
 
Brock said:
The 140/220 is better for back shift then the 140/200,yes.

What doc is doing is like me, using the softest springs possible with the heaviest weights. It's the best drag race system.

I do the same.

It won't work for everyone.

Stiff end poundage springs with light weights has way to much friction and heat.

Don't be afraid to throw weight at the 800 ho.
Click to expand...

Understandable......for drag racing. But adding weight can be counter productive if you can't hit 8100-8200 RPM.....you can only throw as much weight and as little spring as the sled will take for your given conditions, driver weight, track lug, etc.

Just wondering what you would do differently if you were in 8" of snow and not hard pack, racing type environments?
 
Kinda sorta similarly, I am running the basic set-up (120-310 primary; 140/200 secondary; 50/44 helix; 70 gram adjustable Daltons--as light as they go), stock belt (I see belt dust--and Sharpie lines completely scuffed off to top of primary) on my new (but broken in) Pro X with stock gearing/1.75" track with Bikeman pipe/PC V (Dynotech tune) and hitting 8400 RPMs on plowed roads (98.5 MPH best GPS--with a bit of track spin likely)--or hitting just 7950-8050 RPMs on groomed trails.

The stock motor/stock clutching was really snappy--but seemed a bit breathless after 80 MPH and would pitch you over the bars when I let off. It would hit 8250-8350 on groomed trails. My target with these mods should be about 84-8500 RPMs?

Next course of action?: Lighter springs? Lighter weights? Team Tied/64/60 helix? Gates belt (It's a 2016--Do I need shimming for sure?); Add the Terralps head/pistons I am holding and hope the claimed extra power gets my RPMs up?

Love the site and help here--BTW. Just trying to assimilate all the info!
 
Koolme said:
Try a 64/60 full progressive. You'll like it... A lot with the 140/200 spring.

Is anyone running the Indy Specialties clutch master weights? They are working very well in my Axys RMK. Fully adjustable from 60-75g ish.
Click to expand...
Those weights look bad ass, they have 5 holes for magnets, 2 for the tip which is where we need it. Only downfall they are $240
 
sixpack said:
So are you saying the clutch could have used more spring than a 140/200 in these conditions?

Is this helix/spring recommendation based specifically for the groomed trail, standard track 1.35 lug with studs,.....kind of riding.

Just wondering as some guys will run bigger lug tracks with not studs and are riding in 6-8" of snow covered fields.

Would the spring recommendation be different in that scenario, and if so, what would be the next logical choice?

My thoughts are that you may need a stiffer end poundage to help pick up the backshift. Something like a 140/220 as you don't want the secondary opening up too soon either.....which a larger lug track and deeper snow will have a tendency to do.

Just throwing this out for further discussion... 8)
Click to expand...
SIXPACK, A SLIGHTLY STIFFER SEC. SPRING WOULD HAVE HELPED FOR SURE,SAY A 155-222 ,WOULD HAVE BEEN MY FIRST CHOICE.THE MORE YOU LOAD THE TRACK,WHEATHER ITS LUG OR LONG STUDS FOR BITE THE SECONDARY WILL RESPOND AND ITS GOING TO ALMOST ALWAYS NEED A TOUCH MORE DRIVEN TENSION TO KEEP FROM SHIFTING UP TO FAST AND OVER LOADING THE MOTOR.
 
My mechanic was curious why the stock secondary helix is suggested as a 50/44 and the Tied helix is a 64/60. Trying to learn clutching here--so any help is.....helpful!

This is a Pro X SW 800 with stock gears and 1.75 track/Bikeman pipe/Dynotech loaded PC V, btw.

And finally: Would about the same set up work on my Pro S SW 1.74 gears/1.5" track?

Thanks for any help here.
 
Ok I think I understand ur question , the tied clutch opens much like a primary, there fore there is no belt scuff. This means the angles need to be much steeper to work properly. A 50-44 full in a tied is 68-63 full. The tied is a smoother working more efficient clutch. Much better performance over the tss-04. Your set up will very from mine a bit, slightly shallower angles and probably spring tension. Totally do able , just like any other set up slight tweeking may be needed for ur application .
 
Dr.Notadoo said:
Ok I think I understand ur question , the tied clutch opens much like a primary, there fore there is no belt scuff. This means the angles need to be much steeper to work properly. A 50-44 full in a tied is 68-63 full. The tied is a smoother working more efficient clutch. Much better performance over the tss-04. Your set up will very from mine a bit, slightly shallower angles and probably spring tension. Totally do able , just like any other set up slight tweeking may be needed for ur application .
Click to expand...

Thanks for your reply: SO "shallower" IS 64/60 vs 68/63? I am only pulling just over 8050 RPM on trail groomed snow (but saw 8400 on hard plowed road and 98.5 GPS-- likely with track spin letting it rev higher) with that X which has the Bikeman pipe/PC V and EMPTY Dalton 70-gram adjustables/120/300 primary and 140/200 secondary--so maybe the Tied and the 64/60 with the 120/310 primary will "let it eat' its way to 8400 RPM.

Also--What I believe you guys refer to as backshift does seem less snappy than the stock motor/clutching--that is when I get back on it--its a little sluggish.

The wild card is I have a Terraalps head sitting here which may add a few ponies.

Thanks again for any guidance.
 
What your saying is on a less resistant surface such as plowed road your running rpm and good gps speed. So that tells me the 1.75 track with snow packed trail is adding more resistance which will require either a stiffer secondary or shallower angle . In either case your slowing the upshift a bit which will result in a better back shift and maintaining better rpm
 
I'm running the 68-63 but running 120-240 and 120-310 with 11-68 turns 8300 -8350 with pipe mod and PC with DT set up Gates belt ,,,118 mph on the speedo 24-40 gears 109gps 2015 s black mark off the top of the primary, full floating secondary
 
Last edited:
Tried the 200 IMO it didn't back shift any better than the ts04 then tried the 220 and it got better but not quite there now have the 240 and can run more weight in the primary if I want ,the 11 series weight are not quite as tip heavy as the 10 series but shift way harder bottom to mid ,, love it now corner to corner
 
Dr.Notadoo said:
What your saying is on a less resistant surface such as plowed road your running rpm and good gps speed. So that tells me the 1.75 track with snow packed trail is adding more resistance which will require either a stiffer secondary or shallower angle . In either case your slowing the upshift a bit which will result in a better back shift and maintaining better rpm
Click to expand...

Ok--If I wanted to try a Tied--how would you spring and helix it? I have a 140/200 secondary spring on the stock secondary on it now.
 
JimCamp said:
I'm running the 68-63 but running 120-240 and 120-310 with 11-68 turns 8300 -8350 with pipe mod and PC with DT set up Gates belt ,,,118 mph on the speedo 23-40 gears 109gps 2015 s black mark off the top of the primary, full floating secondary
Click to expand...
9mph off on the speedo? I thought they were closer than that. It sounds like a mid 80's Indy speedo. Did you recalibrate for the gear change? Silly avy:p
 
You must log in or register to reply here.


Back
Top Bottom