Benefit of running Suzuki Primary Clutch Springs with Team Primary Clutch on C-TEC2 engines?

[Frostbite]

I was playing with the clutching last night on my my 2020 Hardcore. I noticed the primary spring had a nice low engagement but the finish rate was lower than I was used to with the Suzuki. So I wondered if the primary springs from the Suzuki would work with the Team Primary. I went to Speedwerx and saw that they an adapter ring to allow the use of Suzuki primary springs in the Team Primary. There were a couple Speedwerx H5 springs that I absolutely love on my 2015 Proclimb with the old style clutches. The blue/white 120/310 and the white 125/340. These primary springs allow you to a nice low engagement speed so you aren't digging a hole every time you take off and also allow you to throw a lot of weight at the primary because of their high finish rate. Has anyone experimented with using Suzuki primary springs?

I am sure I will get chastised by the "Just Ride It" crowd for even asking the question! If that's your response, find a post dealing with the application of wraps because you're definitely not a tuner!

NOTE: These springs should not be used in the Arctic Cat TEAM Primary unless our spring cup adapter pn SPXTPSA is used as well. See our other listings for TEAM-specific primary springs.

Original Rate at 2.5" & 1.25"	Rate with Speedwerx Adapter at 2.7" & 1.4"
120-310	115-305
125-340	120-335
140-335	130-325
170-260	160-255
155-300	150-305
165-310	155-315
170-330	165-310
175-305	170-300
180-300	175-295
190-330	180-320
114-267	110-265
122-285	115-275
148-290	143-285

TEAM Primary Clutch Spring Cup Adapter // 2016+ Arctic Cat Models with TEAM Drive Clutch

This spring cup adapter is designed to allow you to run your older style primary springs in the new TEAM drive clutch on 2016 and newer Arctic Cat snowmobiles.

speedwerx.com

 

[kiliki]

I have a few times and the 120-310 worked well but I only used it one day as the stock spring was broke and I wanted to ride. the ctec put out more low end power than the zuki and it showed in the mid with the h5 spring.

 

[kiliki]

also the 18-19 spring is different than the 20

 

[Frostbite]

I ordered the adapter and will play with springs a bit. Speedwerx lists their springs by 2016 and later and prior to 2016.
A low engagement and high total force has always been my ticket to clutching success. Make that motor work to pull that weight!

 

[CB.8]

I have used the old type springs. I have had much better luck with the springs designed for the team clutch.

 

[kiliki]

also the compression rate is not the same across the board in all aspects. fyi

 

[Dam Dave]

you can use any spring that fits

 

[Frostbite]

CB.8, that's good to know.

The stock primary spring in my 2020 Hardcore was a 120/265. I had a nice long talk with Steve at MDS and told him I have used his weights with great success on my 2009 M8 and my 2015 Proclimb but, I have some concerns based on the experiences of others with their 2020 sleds. He reiterated that his weights have a return policy. He said, if you can't get them to work, send them back, simple as that.

So, I will give them a try. I thought I might need a primary spring that was a bit stronger to pull them. That's why I was looking for primary springs with a higher total force rate which made me wonder if my drawer full of Suzuki primary springs might be useful.

Looking at the Cat primary springs for the C-TEC2, I see a couple springs that are interesting. I see 120/285 spring 0646-474. I have to wonder why Cat didn't put this spring in the sleds from the factory in place of the 120/265. It has the same soft engagement rate as the stock spring but a higher finish rate that would allow them to throw a little more weight at the primary. I don't have the rate of compression on my chart but, perhaps it's much higher than the stock spring?

Also, I see there are some ultra low engagement Cat clutch springs listed. The 105/285 looks like it might be awesome in the deep stuff if the sled has the bottom end torque to pull it but, with the way that belt sits a mile above the secondary, I think it just might. Has anyone tried this primary spring?

 

[SoDakCat]

I always loved the old cat gold primary spring 75/275. Ran that in my m7 and 2010 m8 with great results.
I was looking at getting the adapter as well and give that spring a try.
CPC does make some soft initial rate springs as well but not as high of a finish rate as Frostbite is looking for.

 

[Frostbite]

SoDakCat, I don't suppose you have a stock number for the Cat gold spring? I remember that primary spring. You could just ease into motion with it to keep from digging a giant hole in the deep stuff but, it had a high enough finish rate that it worked well. I may even have one in collection. I will have to look.

I miss the Black Hills. I lived there years ago. I had 30 acres just east of Rockerville that I miss dearly. However, trying to make a living in Aviation was tough, especially after all the tourists go home after Labor day.

 

[SoDakCat]

SoDakCat, I don't suppose you have a stock number for the Cat gold spring? I remember that primary spring. You could just ease into motion with it to keep from digging a giant hole in the deep stuff but, it had a high enough finish rate that it worked well. I may even have one in collection. I will have to look.

I miss the Black Hills. I lived there years ago. I had 30 acres just east of Rockerville that I miss dearly. However, trying to make a living in Aviation was tough, especially after all the tourists go home after Labor day.

0646-433

SPRING,CLUTCH-GOLD STRIPE-75/275 LB

SPRING,CLUTCH-GOLD STRIPE-75/275 LB Part # 0646-433 Arctic Cat OEM Part

www.countrycat.com

 

[sno*jet]

So, I will give them a try. I thought I might need a primary spring that was a bit stronger to pull them. That's why I was looking for primary springs with a higher total force rate which made me wonder if my drawer full of Suzuki primary springs might be useful.

I dont follow the logic here - using a heavier spring so you can run heavier weights.
Also tuning a clutch before the motor is even broke in. just ride it LOL

 

[Frostbite]

Thank you SoDakCat, I appreciate it!

sno*jet, I knew it was coming. The sled has 349 miles on it, it must be broken in by now, right?

I was taught decades ago by a very wise tuner that you have to make a motor work to get maximum power out of it. To make it work, you have to keep throwing clutch weight at it until it won't pull it anymore. The higher the total force rate of the primary spring, the more clutch weight you can throw at the motor. Maybe installing wraps are more your style?

 

[BlueDevil]

I believe your counter acting the weight with the heavier spring? I could be wrong but by adding a heavier finish rate spring and then adding weight is really not making the engine work harder? Depending on the rate increase vs weight added of course

 

[CB.8]

CB.8, that's good to know.

The stock primary spring in my 2020 Hardcore was a 120/265. I had a nice long talk with Steve at MDS and told him I have used his weights with great success on my 2009 M8 and my 2015 Proclimb but, I have some concerns based on the experiences of others with their 2020 sleds. He reiterated that his weights have a return policy. He said, if you can't get them to work, send them back, simple as that.

So, I will give them a try. I thought I might need a primary spring that was a bit stronger to pull them. That's why I was looking for primary springs with a higher total force rate which made me wonder if my drawer full of Suzuki primary springs might be useful.

Looking at the Cat primary springs for the C-TEC2, I see a couple springs that are interesting. I see 120/285 spring 0646-474. I have to wonder why Cat didn't put this spring in the sleds from the factory in place of the 120/265. It has the same soft engagement rate as the stock spring but a higher finish rate that would allow them to throw a little more weight at the primary. I don't have the rate of compression on my chart but, perhaps it's much higher than the stock spring?

Also, I see there are some ultra low engagement Cat clutch springs listed. The 105/285 looks like it might be awesome in the deep stuff if the sled has the bottom end torque to pull it but, with the way that belt sits a mile above the secondary, I think it just might. Has anyone tried this primary spring?

Frostbite

I am running Mds weights with a 45 degree helix and stock springs on my 20 hc. Never a problem pulling rs.

 

[Frostbite]

Thanks CB.8, that's good to know. Are you using the stock primary and secondary springs?

I am not 100% sure but, if I am not mistaken a 45 degree helix is the stock helix, correct?

 

[Cinno]

Thank you SoDakCat, I appreciate it!

sno*jet, I knew it was coming. The sled has 349 miles on it, it must be broken in by now, right?

I was taught decades ago by a very wise tuner that you have to make a motor work to get maximum power out of it. To make it work, you have to keep throwing clutch weight at it until it won't pull it anymore. The higher the total force rate of the primary spring, the more clutch weight you can throw at the motor. Maybe installing wraps are more your style?

I somewhat agree with Frostbite here in that I too have had better luck with staying on the heavier side when selecting weights. It helps build and maintain heat in the pipe and you will get a slightly quicker backshift by staying on the low speed side of the shift curve. Remember centrifugal force is a function of speed squared, so changing weight primarily targets the shift speed where as changing the spring is a more broad position based tuning variable over the whole speed and throttle range. It's more used as a fine tuning adjustment. You will notice on most manufacturers sled tuning charts the primary spring is only changed once over 10K feet, where as the weights are changed every 2-3K feet. Most of my earlier tuning experience was on Skidoo sleds with those Clicker adjustments that allowed you to effectively tune on the hill and dial your shift revs to a very precise level. I think with the advent of servo and ECM controlled exhaust valves the torque curves have increased enough for me that i can't feel the torque difference over a 1K altitude anymore so I ignore the rpms these days after i get it close.

Cinno

 

[madmax]

If any of you visit the dark side, Polaris forums, you’ll know TRS and his clutching. In a nut shell, uses lighter weights and lighter springs. It works very very well. There are many ways to clutch, just depends on what you want as an end result.

 

[sno*jet]

sno*jet, I knew it was coming. The sled has 349 miles on it, it must be broken in by now, right?

I was taught decades ago by a very wise tuner that you have to make a motor work to get maximum power out of it. To make it work, you have to keep throwing clutch weight at it until it won't pull it anymore. The higher the total force rate of the primary spring, the more clutch weight you can throw at the motor. Maybe installing wraps are more your style?

glad to hear youre riding it! was under impression all you do is molest the poor thing . Just sounds like somebody taught you how to make their heavier weights work better imo. 48 degree helix stock i believe, you may want to try the 45 after you bog that primary down with more hardened steel

 

[Vern]

I would have to agree with blue devil that adding a heavy spring to run heavy weights is counter productive, at least in my mind. I would think that heavy spring heavy weights is going to net the same result as lighter spring and lighter weights. I like to run as heavy of weights as I can with the lightest spring possible while still maintaining rpm. I’ve had good luck doing that and in my mind seems the most efficient. I’ve also had good luck with softer springs in the secondary than what cat like to use. I couldn’t get the Mds to work on my ‘20 though, so I may try a bit stiffer spring just to see what happens. That is after I see if the addition of the jaws pipe changes anything first. Well, if it will ever snow that is.