morrisond
Expert
In the ride report we all saw, they mentioned incredible smoothness.
Given that it's pretty hard to make a 4 Cylinder 4 stroke smoother than what exists, maybe it's something in the drive train.
Could this be a result of a new drive system?
Maybe a belt replacing the Chaincase?
Wasn't Yamaha working on some sort of Hydraulic Drive to replace the CVT?
Given that it's pretty hard to make a 4 Cylinder 4 stroke smoother than what exists, maybe it's something in the drive train.
Could this be a result of a new drive system?
Maybe a belt replacing the Chaincase?
Wasn't Yamaha working on some sort of Hydraulic Drive to replace the CVT?
they are using the old fluid drive system from the 70s
rupprider
Expert
The only Harley-Davidson snomobile I ever saw had some kind of a hydraulic oil filled clutch. AIR(as I remember)
big_red1a
Expert
what about the new R1 crossplane engine the crankshaft causes the motor to be way smoother and deliver more power at lower rpm
bagadonitz
TY 4 Stroke Junkie
I can't wait till they announce this new thing so all the speculation can end. With every passing day the speculation gets more ludicrous.
I love my Yamaha but I've learned over the last few winters that they really can over hype mediocre updates that amount to stretching a skid and BNG.
I love my Yamaha but I've learned over the last few winters that they really can over hype mediocre updates that amount to stretching a skid and BNG.
hossZ28
Still has a yamaha powerplant!
- Joined
- Feb 6, 2009
- Messages
- 202
- Location
- Ontario Canada
- Country
- Canada
- Snowmobile
- 2014 Arctic Cat XF 7000 LTD
A Lot of lost sleep over new decals lol!!!!!!!!!!!!!
BNG
It runs on C.N.G.
morrisond
Expert
Or it could be my idea from last year.
On an Apex you have two sets of gears, the reduction gear on the engine and then the chain case. You don't need both on an engine like the Apex where you need to reduce RPM's anyways. There is a lot of power loss with two(and added weight).
If I were Yammie, ditch the chaincase and make the reduction you need before the clutch, could also incorporate your reverse(activate the reverse with a solenoid) here.
The net benefit is that you lose the halfshaft and chaincase, which is an lot of weight. Your clutch system would then also be spinning at much lower rpm(about 4,500-5,500) which is a lot more efficient.
Plus without all that extra stuff spinning around, should be a lot smoother.
On an Apex you have two sets of gears, the reduction gear on the engine and then the chain case. You don't need both on an engine like the Apex where you need to reduce RPM's anyways. There is a lot of power loss with two(and added weight).
If I were Yammie, ditch the chaincase and make the reduction you need before the clutch, could also incorporate your reverse(activate the reverse with a solenoid) here.
The net benefit is that you lose the halfshaft and chaincase, which is an lot of weight. Your clutch system would then also be spinning at much lower rpm(about 4,500-5,500) which is a lot more efficient.
Plus without all that extra stuff spinning around, should be a lot smoother.
morrisond
Expert
The only real downside is how much the Secondary would have to hang down. Due to 4 stroke Torque spread you may be able to get away with less of a ratio spread in your CVT system meaning smaller secondary.
Basically just have the thing fully shift out at say 85-90 mph and then use RPM to get all your top end.
Doesn't the Apex basically make the same Torque over a 20-25% RPM Spread and then have a nice spread on HP.
The other downside is no user changeable gears....
Basically I'm just really bored waiting for info to come out on what the new sled really is and pulling stuff out of my a**.
Basically just have the thing fully shift out at say 85-90 mph and then use RPM to get all your top end.
Doesn't the Apex basically make the same Torque over a 20-25% RPM Spread and then have a nice spread on HP.
The other downside is no user changeable gears....
Basically I'm just really bored waiting for info to come out on what the new sled really is and pulling stuff out of my a**.
abj87
Pro
morrisond said:
I think running the clutches that slowly would cause slippage, due to the increased torque.
What about a motorcycle gearbox with an automatic clutch and shifting?
7 skulls
TY 4 Stroke Junkie
What about a motorcycle gearbox with an automatic clutch and shifting?[/quote]
Honda has several variations on gearbox/auto clutch set-ups with their atvs: electric shift, twin clutch "DSG", automotive style. IMO I wouldn't want any of them for a snowmobile. Their hydrostatic tranny , however...
Honda has several variations on gearbox/auto clutch set-ups with their atvs: electric shift, twin clutch "DSG", automotive style. IMO I wouldn't want any of them for a snowmobile. Their hydrostatic tranny , however...
LazyBastard
TY 4 Stroke God
Has anyone ever dyno'ed one of these things off the driveshaft with a track NOT installed? I would be curious about how much power is lost. I also find the concept of going with hydraulics to be very interesting-- maybe something like a torque converter split in two with hoses? How would a torque convert's efficiency compare with the existing gear reduction and clutching system?
LazyBastard
TY 4 Stroke God
To answer my own question....
I found a claim like this somewhere "out there"....
Assuming that you had a real good TC, on the low-loss end of that claim, 2% loss in efficiency seems excellent, and I would guess better than any existing sled transmission. Hmm... there may be a new experiment being planned out in the back of my brain.
Also note: A TC using hoses with a valve block would make for a very clean reverse.
This approach would also eliminate all torque related chassis stress, need for aligning the engine, allow significant weight reduction due to less motor mount, no chaincase, etc.
And of course, throw in a spring, piston, and shock absorber somewhere on the high-pressure side of things and all motor roughness would be absorbed.
I found a claim like this somewhere "out there"....
Assuming that you had a real good TC, on the low-loss end of that claim, 2% loss in efficiency seems excellent, and I would guess better than any existing sled transmission. Hmm... there may be a new experiment being planned out in the back of my brain.
Also note: A TC using hoses with a valve block would make for a very clean reverse.
This approach would also eliminate all torque related chassis stress, need for aligning the engine, allow significant weight reduction due to less motor mount, no chaincase, etc.
And of course, throw in a spring, piston, and shock absorber somewhere on the high-pressure side of things and all motor roughness would be absorbed.
TurboJamie
TY 4 Stroke God
I would personally like to see a clutch capible of taking the 11,000 rpm that motor turns and removal of the gear reduction system.
