Chain would make a CVT pretty complicated compared to what a belt can offer.not a golf cart guy,but why cant they make a clutch and rear hub that uses two belts,or just use a damn chain???
Chain would make a CVT pretty complicated compared to what a belt can offer.
Light weight everything on a UTV is key, but especially unsprung weight, and double especially rotating unsprung weight.Toyo needs to make a UTV specific tire for Team Speed.... and others.
Sent from my SM-G920R4 using Tapatalk
Good input Zambo. Is it your opinion that the CVT is here to stay in the SxS's? Would you say for both the recreational SxS (which are build to many levels of performance too), and for the Baja race car too? I mean, CVT did just win the Dakar (SxS class), and every CanAm out there was CVT too.Why would a CVT have a 15-20% power loss compared to a sequential? If you're talking about v-belt friction being higher than friction between gear teeth that are directly in contact with each other, sure. But the most fuel efficient cars in the world run CVTs and they wouldn't do it if it took more power to drive the wheels.
With a CVT the car has unlimited gears basically and its always in the power band compared to any other kind of transmission where you have to go from one gear to the next. The requirement to have multiple gear ratios in a single box and shift between them while trying to put max power to the ground negates any efficiency from direct gear to gear contact. Watch any UTV in-car and you see as soon as the driver hits the gas the motor goes immediately to max RPM and stays there until he lifts.
Again, if the car is set up properly, you shouldn't be blowing belts even in a Baja 1000, and if you do its like getting a flat. The belt is like a fuse that protects the gearbox. Its pretty rare to hear of any UTV actually blowing up a transmission, although I'm sure it does occasionally happen.
But the most fuel efficient cars in the world run CVTs and they wouldn't do it if it took more power to drive the wheels.
Lol, I'm not suggesting putting a CVT from a street car into a buggy. I'm just talking about the general principle.Totally different animal. Those have metal belts and run in oil. The clutch "shifting" is also controlled by a computer, not just some centrifugal weights. From My recent Nissan rental car test, they do not like neutral drops or being rallied in manual mode. Running whoops with one would surely not end well.
I don't know. The thing is that although belts are a lot stronger than they used to be, they are still a limiting factor for how much power you can generate. Every bit of power to propel the car gets to the wheels by pulling on that belt. Just because they build a set of pulleys and a belt that is more than capable of using 172hp to push a 1700lb car down the trail on 30" tires doesn't mean you can just throw bigger tires that are twice as heavy on a car with 220hp that weighs over 2500lbs and still get the same results. Its still the same belt. I dunno, I only got my first SxS a couple years ago when the x3 came out, but after messing with this thing all that time I find myself tempted to beef up this and that so it'll be "bombproof," but in the end I always come back to the philosophy of keeping the car light weight.Good input Zambo. Is it your opinion that the CVT is here to stay in the SxS's? Would you say for both the recreational SxS (which are build to many levels of performance too), and for the Baja race car too? I mean, CVT did just win the Dakar (SxS class), and every CanAm out there was CVT too.
Totally different animal. Those have metal belts and run in oil. The clutch "shifting" is also controlled by a computer, not just some centrifugal weights. From My recent Nissan rental car test, they do not like neutral drops or being rallied in manual mode. Running whoops with one would surely not end well.