• We are no longer supporting TapaTalk as a mobile app for our sites. The TapaTalk App has many issues with speed on our server as well as security holes that leave us vulnerable to attacks and spammers.

Measured Stock '23 SRX Specs - Weight and Clutch Offset

U
jonlafon1 said:
I think its important to remember that not every offset number will be same exact for every sled.. I have posted(previous) my thoughts and experiences with my 2022 compared to the early sleds 2017+.. I used the hurricane bar on both, check temps, and put in the time to get it happy(running cool). I do know I made the mistake of thinking my 2022 would be happy at the same offset numbers I used on my 2017. WRONG..
Click to expand...
I believe you are correct that there certainly can be differences in offset but the method Mike Knapp is using to determine correct offset is also the best way. One variable that we need to keep in mind that cool clutches equal no slip and normally have proper alignment, proper offset and a clutching combination that achieves proper RPM.. But it is also possible that broken belts, excessive heat can be caused by many other factors and still have proper offset, proper center to center and proper alignment…. In the hands of a experienced tuner such as yourself you know that proper shift, lack of heat, lack of belt dust and proper RPM is your goal with clutch offset very important part of the entire system… Clutches out of balance, spinning at high RPM is a common problem that will cause heat and a very high percentage of them get this way as soon as parts are changed.. Pins, rollers, ramps, springs, spiders, helixes , covers and adjustors can throw a clutch out of balance and many are , no too mention the wrong weights, wrong springs, wrong helixes, wrong settings… My used 17 Sidewinder with 300 miles on it had multiple issues after I bought it… No midrange, hot clutches, lazy shift, wrong top RPM, terrible suspension, four inch carbide and the offset was 61 mmm … After a complete clutch rework its now set at 58 mm and I know this offset for this machine with these clutches is correct
 

Simplespeed said:
U

I believe you are correct that there certainly can be differences in offset but the method Mike Knapp is using to determine correct offset is also the best way.
Click to expand...
Agree with what you're saying and I know Knapp could get his offset dead balls with his eyes closed. I think what Jon was trying to convey is every sled is different so the number Mike comes up with should not be used without checking your own offset first.
 
If the CtC , sheave thickness on both primary and secondary are the same and the belt thickness is the same your offset should be very close sled to sled.
 
It took me a while with working on clients machines and all, but I had time today to check the offset on my 2023 with the TAPP and stock secondary.

Previously on my 2017, perfect alignment setting at full shift with straight edge method on the belt, perfect alignment was 58.8 MM measuring Yamahas way.

So, I tried to hit that on my 2023, to get close I had to take out the one stock 2 MM shim and the 1.5 MM snap ring to get there. I ran the sled on the stand and found the first problem in doing this. The Secondary hit the alum frame! I noticed it when I went to set full shift on the clutches so I could measure the alignment. It wouldn't go to full shift! So I added back in the 1.5 MM snap ring and did it again. This time I could get to full shift without hitting the frame and this was very very close to being perfect offset for the TAPP and stock secondary. I ended up with a 60.4 MM setup on the TAPP, stock secondary and new XS825 belt which is what I set my 17 up on.

So, conclusion is the 2023 is indeed different than my 2017 was using the same TAPP primary clutch and new XS825 belt I ran on my 17 with the stock secondary. Bottom line, the 2023 needed 1.6 MM more than my 2017 did with the same belt. So I found it is indeed different than the 2017 was too. Why, I'm not sure, I can only guess the C to C has changed maybe, unless there's been a change in the secondary which is indeed possible. I dont have my 17 here anymore to verify and measure things.

I know that putting the Hi-Torque rollers on the 2023 secondary needed some material taken off on the width to get the rollers to fit in and roll properly, so there is that, I just chalked that up to the dies wearing on the mold for casting the secondary, but who knows, I wasn't impressed when the Hi-Torque rollers would not fit nicely and square on the secondary. They fit just fine on the 17 like they should have. China clutch I'm sure....






Here you can see what taking out 2MM shim and 1.5MM snap ring does on my 2023....
Doing the same on my 2017 and taking out the same shims, this did not happen with same setup....


F1CC0E2E-AC54-4C3C-8945-E92A1686E004.jpeg


588D9D61-F801-4A71-AAD9-7E85D172609F.jpeg
 
Last edited:
KnappAttack said:
It took me a while with working on clients machines and all, but I had time today to check the offset on my 2023 with the TAPP and stock secondary.

Previously on my 2017, perfect alignment setting at full shift with straight edge method on the belt, perfect alignment was 58.8 MM measuring Yamahas way.

So, I tried to hit that on my 2023, to get close I had to take out the one stock 2 MM shim and the 1.5 MM snap ring to get there. I ran the sled on the stand and found the first problem in doing this. The Secondary hit the alum frame! I noticed it when I went to set full shift on the clutches so I could measure the alignment. It wouldn't go to full shift! So I added back in the 1.5 MM snap ring and did it again. This time I could get to full shift without hitting the frame and this was very very close to being perfect offset for the TAPP and stock secondary. I ended up with a 60.4 MM setup on the TAPP, stock secondary and new XS825 belt which is what I set my 17 up on.

So, conclusion is the 2023 is indeed different than my 2017 was using the same TAPP primary clutch and new XS825 belt I ran on my 17 with the stock secondary. Bottom line, the 2023 needed 1.6 MM more than my 2017 did with the same belt. So I found it is indeed different than the 2017 was too. Why, I'm not sure, I can only guess the C to C has changed maybe, unless there's been a change in the secondary which is indeed possible. I dont have my 17 here anymore to verify and measure things.

I know that putting the Hi-Torque rollers on the 2023 secondary needed some material taken off on the width to get the rollers to fit in and roll properly, so there is that, I just chalked that up to the dies wearing on the mold for casting the secondary, but who knows, I wasn't impressed when the Hi-Torque rollers would not fit nicely and square on the secondary. They fit just fine on the 17 like they should have. China clutch I'm sure....






Here you can see what taking out 2MM shim and 1.5MM snap ring does on my 2023....
Doing the same on my 2017 and taking out the same shims, this did not happen with same setup....


View attachment 175187

View attachment 175188
Click to expand...
Great post Mike. It just goes to show if you spend the time and really check #*$&@. If not always the same in every year and machine. You guys have no idea how lucky we are to have someone like this posting what he is posting.
 
jonlafon1 said:
Great post Mike. It just goes to show if you spend the time and really check #*$&@. If not always the same in every year and machine. You guys have no idea how lucky we are to have someone like this posting what he is posting.
Click to expand...

Well Jon, same goes for you and your postings, had you not mentioned anything, I'd have set it up like I had my 17 setup and wondered why it was running hot, blowing belts or having the secondary hitting the chassis. So I'm/We're just as lucky to have you doing the same with the testing that you do.
 
KnappAttack said:
Well Jon, same goes for you and your postings, had you not mentioned anything, I'd have set it up like I had my 17 setup and wondered why it was running hot, blowing belts or having the secondary hitting the chassis. So I'm/We're just as lucky to have you doing the same with the testing that you do.
Click to expand...
Thanks Mike.
 
Has the bearing housing on the jackshaft changed or is the picture just deceiving ?
 
NYTurbo said:
Has the bearing housing on the jackshaft changed or is the picture just deceiving ?
Click to expand...

I don't have a 17 to compare. But I have been thinking it could very well be the secondary that has changed. If I had an old one here I could verify, but I found I also have to run more shims inside the secondary for belt deflection as well. I set them up like the old Cat reverse cam secondary for deflection adjustment with the internal shims, and bolt them down solid so they don't float, so the internal shimming works well for that without the floating and bolting them down solid. I have about .060" more shim in there now that I think about it. Kinda makes me think the secondary has changed with it hitting the frame like that and the added shimming for internal style belt deflection adjustment, unless the C to C has changed, but for certain, thats quite a difference from where I was on the 17. 1.6MM or about .060" is quite a bit of difference, so something has seemingly made quite the difference.
 
I replaced my fixed sheave on my secondary last month. It took a month to get but showed up.
Measured offset with original secondary and again with new fixed sheave.
Had to cut the exact amount off to get same offset. So new fixed sheave was the same as my 17 as far as offset.
 
KnappAttack said:
It took me a while with working on clients machines and all, but I had time today to check the offset on my 2023 with the TAPP and stock secondary.

Previously on my 2017, perfect alignment setting at full shift with straight edge method on the belt, perfect alignment was 58.8 MM measuring Yamahas way.

So, I tried to hit that on my 2023, to get close I had to take out the one stock 2 MM shim and the 1.5 MM snap ring to get there. I ran the sled on the stand and found the first problem in doing this. The Secondary hit the alum frame! I noticed it when I went to set full shift on the clutches so I could measure the alignment. It wouldn't go to full shift! So I added back in the 1.5 MM snap ring and did it again. This time I could get to full shift without hitting the frame and this was very very close to being perfect offset for the TAPP and stock secondary. I ended up with a 60.4 MM setup on the TAPP, stock secondary and new XS825 belt which is what I set my 17 up on.

So, conclusion is the 2023 is indeed different than my 2017 was using the same TAPP primary clutch and new XS825 belt I ran on my 17 with the stock secondary. Bottom line, the 2023 needed 1.6 MM more than my 2017 did with the same belt. So I found it is indeed different than the 2017 was too. Why, I'm not sure, I can only guess the C to C has changed maybe, unless there's been a change in the secondary which is indeed possible. I dont have my 17 here anymore to verify and measure things.

I know that putting the Hi-Torque rollers on the 2023 secondary needed some material taken off on the width to get the rollers to fit in and roll properly, so there is that, I just chalked that up to the dies wearing on the mold for casting the secondary, but who knows, I wasn't impressed when the Hi-Torque rollers would not fit nicely and square on the secondary. They fit just fine on the 17 like they should have. China clutch I'm sure....






Here you can see what taking out 2MM shim and 1.5MM snap ring does on my 2023....
Doing the same on my 2017 and taking out the same shims, this did not happen with same setup....


View attachment 175187

View attachment 175188
Click to expand...

I had to grind that area down after modification of the secondary to shift out more.
Even with the stub shaft in the proper position.
Its close now as far as clearance at full shift.
Colored that area with black marker to make sure no contact under load.
 
Great posts guys! This is a clearance I have not checked. I will definitely have to check mine today as I have machined the secondary shaft and on top of that I fully float my secondary with internal shimming for belt deflection so it walks back and forth somewhat. I know my approach is not conventional wisdom but it has worked for me for over 5000 mikes on my SW and 10s of thousands of miles on all my other sleds.:)
 
This is a great post. I measured my '23 LTX LE, which is the same as Mike's. I also have a TAPP and measured the Yamaha way and have 61mm for offset with just the snap ring.
 
sideshowBob said:
Did you sell your 2017 SW ?
Click to expand...

Bob, my 2017 is gone yes, would have been nice to swap the secondary and check it out on my 23 if I had it here to check the results with that secondary.

I have ALOT of shim in the secondary to get any belt deflection and the belt is still tight for deflection, I'm wondering if they perhaps moved the centers out a wee bit further perhaps either intentionally or unintentional, I put it all back together today and noticed the belt sitting flush in the secondary, where I remember it sitting higher on my 17. I wished I could really verify why the need to change offset so much more, but at this point, it is what it is, and this 23 I have just needs a bit more offset than the 2017 measuring offset the Yamaha way.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.


Back
Top