New Hurricane weights?

[KnappAttack]

I always got rid of the reverse angle helix on tuned sleds. I didnt feel it was needed. I always felt the reverse angle was to combat turbo lag, which I never found to be a problem.
Straight 35, 39-35, 41-37 are the angles I used.
Your results may vary.

Funny you mention that Rich, I have gone to a 35-39 Reverse angle helix on my 23 as the old progressive 41-37 setup I ran on my 17 didn’t work as well on the 23 with the same TAPP primary I ran. I know the centers are longer on the 23 as well and also needed more offset than my 17 did. I’d have never run a reverse angle on the old 17. I find the 23 needs a completely different clutch setup. Going to change it up even more for next season so I can go back and run the 8JP too. We have my buds sled working real well with the 8JP now.

 

[STAIN]

Funny you mention that Rich, I have gone to a 35-39 Reverse angle helix on my 23 as the old progressive 41-37 setup I ran on my 17 didn’t work as well on the 23 with the same TAPP primary I ran. I know the centers are longer on the 23 as well and also needed more offset than my 17 did. I’d have never run a reverse angle on the old 17. I find the 23 needs a completely different clutch setup. Going to change it up even more for next season so I can go back and run the 8JP too. We have my buds sled working real well with the 8JP now.

How is the dust?

I find the 23 needs a completely different clutch setup

What do attribute that too?
Was the return to the 35-39 out of necessity? What led you back in that direction? Very curious because I have a 24 and 25 that I ride with that will need some attention

 

[sideshowBob]

Funny you mention that Rich, I have gone to a 35-39 Reverse angle helix on my 23 as the old progressive 41-37 setup I ran on my 17 didn’t work as well on the 23 with the same TAPP primary I ran. I know the centers are longer on the 23 as well and also needed more offset than my 17 did. I’d have never run a reverse angle on the old 17. I find the 23 needs a completely different clutch setup. Going to change it up even more for next season so I can go back and run the 8JP too. We have my buds sled working real well with the 8JP now.

That really surprises me...those reverse angles on any sled I have dealt with[since the 70s] have never made sense to me...is your new sled not tuned? I run 43/37 41/39 ect Daltons on my SW....I have 4 helixs I alternate with depending on conditions and whether I am trail riding or racing my buddies-

 

[NYTurbo]

Im surprised the CTC has increased yet utilize the same belt and im not aware of any bulk head changes that would effect the distance . Interesting

 

[rb2001srx700]

I was able to test this morning. With weights at 71.1g 2 magnets in first hole 1 magnet in hole next to it. Now was running 8700 out of hole. Tractored down to 8250. This was with xs825 belt. Switched to 8JP belt ( brother-inlaws suggested) and now hit 9250 on top end. Just need to move or add a little tip weight and I should be right on. It will be a while before I can work on it again so when I get it dialed in I will let everyone know.

 

[74Nitro]

Im surprised the CTC has increased yet utilize the same belt and im not aware of any bulk head changes that would effect the distance . Interesting

Anyone I've measured I haven't seen any change.

 

[74Nitro]

That really surprises me...those reverse angles on any sled I have dealt with[since the 70s] have never made sense to me...is your new sled not tuned? I run 43/37 41/39 ect Daltons on my SW....I have 4 helixs I alternate with depending on conditions and whether I am trail riding or racing my buddies-

I really gave the reverse a chance to work, and tried to dial in the primary weights with it. I snapped a couple belts in half, while full throttle accelerating well before reaching 70mph.
I changed to the 41/37 and like it much better. I find the sled cruises at lower rpm's and the backshift is still great imo. I just had the 41/39 show up along with the 44/40 to try out.

 

[KnappAttack]

Im surprised the CTC has increased yet utilize the same belt and im not aware of any bulk head changes that would effect the distance . Interesting

I don't know of any publicized changes either, but I cant argue with what I see in front of my eyes and witness first hand. I know on the 23 I have there is no way no how I could ever remove any material from the secondary for alignment or it would hit the frame at full shift using the TAPP. I even have to run the snap ring on the shaft or the movable will hit the frame. I'm running the same TAPP I ran on the 17 I need to have 1.5mm more offset on it and the 825 and 8JP belts also sit down into the secondary by quite a bit to run enough deflection, in my old 17 the belts ran above the secondary. If I run the longer 8DN I get upwards of almost 25% OD with the TAPP! It's crazy the difference between the 17 I had vs the 23 I now have just because of the difference in centers between them.

That really surprises me...those reverse angles on any sled I have dealt with[since the 70s] have never made sense to me...is your new sled not tuned? I run 43/37 41/39 ect Daltons on my SW....I have 4 helixs I alternate with depending on conditions and whether I am trail riding or racing my buddies-

It's tuned. I fell upon then need for the 35-39 reverse helix when I went back to lighter secondary springs when I couldn't use a severely sprained or possibly broken wrist early in the season. I intentionally went to the lighter secondary spring so I could put a belt on easier with the bad wrist. I dropped a bunch of spring pressure to be able to put the belt on which necessitated going down to the 35 start angle. Ended up it worked to my advantage with the TAPP trying to shift so hard down low.