LTX 137 lack of transfer..Reasoning/Solution?

[actionjack]

I think I owe you one! Sure looks like they have stiffer spring on 129"

And I was thinking the stiffer spring is on the 137!

 

[cannondale27]

And I was thinking the stiffer spring is on the 137!

Right! You just found a big help for guys who have 129"s. Good eye. Now how the heck do we verify the parts Fisches are right?

 

[snowbeast]

Here.16+ 137 Cat,Sidewinder and Viper spring (2704-026,7)is not shown in this pic. Goes from lighter to heavier. Cat #'s 1704-576,7 are the 14+129" stock springs. Looks like the silver lightest one is not available anymore. Chart is current.
View attachment 134101
Spring Chart
View attachment 134123
Old chart

Steve,what is my stock spring for thickness is it .375 wire,as I would like the .405 be better for mine,now that my springs are sacked out.

 

[cannondale27]

Steve,what is my stock spring for thickness is it .375 wire,as I would like the .405 be better for mine,now that my springs are sacked out.

You have the 2704-026,7 they are not in the charts. If you want stiffer go with the 129 springs. 1704-576,7 Your stock spring measures .400

 

[ClutchMaster]

The springs?
Part numbers are different tho

Hey hold the phone
Told you the cats guys were running a .375 spring.

 

[hibshman25]

Here’s a peak at what I’ve been working at. Basically its a bolt on linkage kit that relocates the adjuster blocks to reduce preload. No drilling, welding, bending...just bolt it in! Have a 140 and 165 rider coming over saturday to do some sit in measurements with the prototype.

You can’t expect a sled to transfer if its too stiff to yield propper sag.

 

[**sj**]

Yes they have different part numbers... Kevin's at Port said his book says they are both 18.5 springs whatever that means... First I assumed it was pounds but that doesn't have with cats spec of 16.5 lbs on the 2704-026.... So now I think it's inches of the long leg....

 

[**sj**]

I swear Travis... When we talked of that...I didn't think you could accomplish it... Promising...Let's see where that testing goes...

 

[cannondale27]

I swear Travis... When we talked of that...I didn't think you could accomplish it... Promising...Let's see where that testing goes...

That is! Exciting. Progress.

 

[hibshman25]

I swear Travis... When we talked of that...I didn't think you could accomplish it... Promising...Let's see where that testing goes...

You were doubting me....you should know better Ha.

 

[hibshman25]

And I was thinking the stiffer spring is on the 137!

Softer spring on the the ltx would makes perfect sense to my thinking all along. With the mount farther back in the tunnel on the ltx it needs a softer spring than a 129 due to weight distribution difference. So while it is softer on the LTX, it is still not soft enough for many under 200.

 

[actionjack]

So you guys, Travis and Cannondale, are suggesting that the spring for the 137 is already a softer rate than the 129 but an even softer rate would be better? For both 129 and 137?

 

[XP123]

So you guys, Travis and Cannondale, are suggesting that the spring for the 137 is already a softer rate than the 129 but an even softer rate would be better? For both 129 and 137?

I'm not sure about the 129 but yes they are saying an even softer spring on the 137 would be better for riders under 200 lbs. I haven't been under 200 lbs in twenty years so I'm thinking that's why I like my sled the way it is. I also know that when we go touring I will be adding a few more lbs on the back of my sled in bags and gear.

 

[hibshman25]

So you guys, Travis and Cannondale, are suggesting that the spring for the 137 is already a softer rate than the 129 but an even softer rate would be better? For both 129 and 137?

I am just going off what you found that the ltx has a softer spring. Didn't do any investigating on my end. It makes sense that it would be softer. It's not apples to apples comparison between the 129 and 137 due to rear mounting points being different. If 137 would have just been same tunnel mounts as 129 and just added longer rails then the 137 would have likely needed stiffer springs.

Hygear suggests 3" of sit in/sag from rear mounting bolt to grade with rider on machine. Would you agree Steve? If you can't get sit in with the stock springs on softest setting then, you need softer springs or less preload like my solution.

I feel once lighter riders gets the correct sit in the sled will transfer much better and the transfer blocks will actually be an effective adjustment.

 

[XP123]

Wouldn't the sled be more prone to bottoming out with the spring blocks so low? Too bad there wasn't a way to the design the spring end with a bend in it so that it would be soft initially and then stiff at full travel instead of moving the adjuster blocks. The only way for it to work is you would need round adjuster blocks that wouldn't be adjustable for this to work.