If what jcthorne says in reply 14 is correct, which I commented on in reply 17, nothing will prevent the failure - this side of a wider pulley hub or hardened washer installed on the shaft behind the pulley.
TTSR, it's fairly quick and easy to answer that question yourself - just remove the bolt and see if the pulley slides off.
The best substitute for brains & knowledge is....................silence.
WOW that's utterly alarming! If that is the case then the bolt does nothing at all apart from stopping the pulley falling off - earlier. On the V-twins the pulley is proud of the shaft, meaning the clamping force (term used in BRP s/bulletin) of a tighter bolt locks the pulley & shaft together, preventing relative movement and thus wear - end of problem.
.
The bolt holds the pulley from lateral movement. It is not intended to stop rotational movement.
That's what the splines are for. Just like any other use of a splined shaft and pulley.
The bolt does lock the pulley and shaft together on the V twin to serve the same purpose-to stop lateral movement of the pulley, not rotational movement.
The bolt holds the pulley from lateral movement. It is not intended to stop rotational movement.
That's what the splines are for. Just like any other use of a splined shaft and pulley.
The bolt does lock the pulley and shaft together on the V twin to serve the same purpose-to stop lateral movement of the pulley, not rotational movement.
Correct, according to jcthorne's observations. If he is correct, your second comment is true. Your following comments are true in part, as evidenced by the BRP service bulletin on the subject about 8 years ago, where they stated that the clamping force of the retaining bolt was inadequate due to insufficient torque being applied to the retaining bolt on assembly - to lock them together without relying on the splines, which failed then and are failing again.
The splines on these machines are not designed to transmit drive. We're seeing that repeated repeatedly.
Last edited by Freddy; 07-25-2018 at 07:12 AM.
The best substitute for brains & knowledge is....................silence.
Just a quick update. Mancuso was able to get my damaged pulley off and install the new one I gave them. I will ask a few more details when I go pick up the bike today.
Correct, according to jcthorne's observations. If he is correct, your second comment is true. Your following comments are true in part, as evidenced by the BRP service bulletin on the subject about 8 years ago, where they stated that the clamping force of the retaining bolt was inadequate due to insufficient torque being applied to the retaining bolt on assembly - to lock them together without relying on the splines, which failed then and are failing again.
The splines on these machines are not designed to transmit drive. We're seeing that repeated repeatedly.
If the splines are not to transmit drive, what is, the bolt that simply holds the pulley on the shaft? My 6 HP lawnmower requires at least a key to couple the blade and spin it, the bolt merely keeps the blade on the shaft.
Fretting corrosion and wear destroys the pulley splines. For this application, two methods have been used to resolve the fretting issue. One is to use the Loctite and essentially glue the pulley onto the shaft to prevent movement. The other method is to lubricate the splines to prevent wear. As I posted earlier, our 2014 RTS has lubricated splines from new, and no wear is present. Not no dust, no wear as I took it apart and inspected the pulley and shaft.
That bolt at 95 ftlb torque is simply saving you ankle from wear.
Tapered splines are very expensive to machine in comparison to straight ones. Also not completely sure it would have solved the problem.
I can not recall ever seeing tapered splines. Typically in a tapered shaft design, they may or may not use a key also. My OSSA trials bike uses a non keyed tapered shaft and drive on the crankshaft end to drive the clutch. Often with a tapered shaft and key, the key is to hold a timing, such as on a flywheel with a CDI.
Tapered splines, and the stress of the taper, may induce stress cracking in the spline root of the female splined part on account of the extreme outward pressure.
If you've ever removed the front pulley, it's not a tight fit with the output shaft, at least on the older 998's. You can easily remove it by hand. There is quite a bit of tolerance in the fit. Enough you can move the sprocket forward and backwards on the shaft.
I think the this is causing the fretting wear. Everytime you would shift from reverse to first, or vice versa the splines would rub against each other. The Loctite will fill in this Gap and keep the splines from rubbing against each other.
Tapered splines, and the stress of the taper, may induce stress cracking in the spline root of the female splined part on account of the extreme outward pressure.
If you've ever removed the front pulley, it's not a tight fit with the output shaft, at least on the older 998's. You can easily remove it by hand. There is quite a bit of tolerance in the fit. Enough you can move the sprocket forward and backwards on the shaft.
I think the this is causing the fretting wear. Everytime you would shift from reverse to first, or vice versa the splines would rub against each other. The Loctite will fill in this Gap and keep the splines from rubbing against each other.
Not even the shift from forward to reverse, simply any force that increases the load on the splines. This includes simply riding and never even finding reverse.
Fretting corrosion is not like typical rust, it is a corrosion that results from a high pressure interface with microscopic relative motion. Essentially, it can be assumed the movement is nil but the pressure is high. The result is typically a very hard oxide is produced and this in a sense becomes almost a micro fine compound that increases wear.
Most often I see this in riveted aluminum joints, or aluminum joints joined with exotic fasteners on high stressed airframe structures. Depending on the severity, that dictates the required repair actions.
The two possible means to stop fretting is either lock the two parts and prevent any motion, or lubricate the parts to stop the wear. The third choice is do not ride.
This is a good article in regards to spline drives and fretting.
The splines work fine, the problem is wear from fretting.
..........which is the issue here - we agreed totally. The splines can work fine is certain circumstances as we agree, but not on these machines as they come from the factory.
Your Danfosss info is great and Ive seen a more in-depth one in the other looonger thread on pulley failures.
Interestingly it states: Another method of stopping frettingcorrosion is to use a clamped coupling.With a clamped coupling it is possible tovary the fit from sliding to solid.
This is what BRP did to rectify the 998 failures but it seems impossible on the 1330 for reasons stated above.
The best substitute for brains & knowledge is....................silence.
..........which is the issue here - we agreed totally. The splines can work fine is certain circumstances as we agree, but not on these machines as they come from the factory.
Your Danfosss info is great and Ive seen a more in-depth one in the other looonger thread on pulley failures.
Interestingly it states: Another method of stopping frettingcorrosion is to use a clamped coupling.With a clamped coupling it is possible tovary the fit from sliding to solid.
This is what BRP did to rectify the 998 failures but it seems impossible on the 1330 for reasons stated above.
So, you are saying BRP redesigned the pulley, allowing a pinch bolt design that clamps the splines?
FWIW, consider, if the bolt alone was able to couple the shaft to the pulley and prevent movement, why would BRP even consider adding the expense to cut the splines in the pulley and shaft?
..........which is the issue here - we agreed totally. The splines can work fine is certain circumstances as we agree, but not on these machines as they come from the factory.
Ironic, there is zero wear on the splines in our 2014, they were lubricated by BRP when assembled new.
If someone took the time to research the failures, I suspect most failures would be on pulleys / shafts without lube.
So, you are saying BRP redesigned the pulley, allowing a pinch bolt design that clamps the splines?
FWIW, consider, if the bolt alone was able to couple the shaft to the pulley and prevent movement, why would BRP even consider adding the expense to cut the splines in the pulley and shaft?
No, to the above in bold. The increased torque on the bolt locked the pulley to the shaft (because the pulley stood just proud of the splined shaft) clamping it rigidly to the shaft, hence no more failures.
From what jcthorne and a couple of others have observed, that is not possible on the 1330 because the shaft sits proud of the pulley.
I don't recall any other owners reporting seeing grease when they have simply looked at the pulley - just lots of owners reporting that they see red dust. So that raises the question, how did yours come to have grease?
But all this is academic - Houston, we have a problem! or is that - BRP, you have a problem!!!
The best substitute for brains & knowledge is....................silence.
No, to the above in bold. The increased torque on the bolt locked the pulley to the shaft (because the pulley stood just proud of the splined shaft) clamping it rigidly to the shaft, hence no more failures.
From what jcthorne and a couple of others have observed, that is not possible on the 1330 because the shaft sits proud of the pulley.
I don't recall any other owners reporting seeing grease when they have simply looked at the pulley - just lots of owners reporting that they see red dust. So that raises the question, how did yours come to have grease?
But all this is academic - Houston, we have a problem! or is that - BRP, you have a problem!!!
Freddy, have you yourself actually removed the pulley from a 1330 Spyder?
As for the splines being lubricated on our RTS when built new, the grease used has been posted either in the other topic or on the FB topic.
i will find the photos of the pulley inspection on our 14 RTS, possibly things have been changed, however the photos should indicate that the pulley sets pround of the shafts end, by likely 1mm.
If what the others state is true, that the shaft sets proud of the pulley, then there would be no reason for BRP to now have discontinued the multi piece retaining bolt and separate washer and have gone to a one piece bolt / washer design, with the large OD washer integrated into the bolt.
All standard trans have sliding gears with splines ,they are in oil and almost never fail .If the sprocket was to be lubed with a moly type grease at a set time it should last .
Freddy, have you yourself actually removed the pulley from a 1330 Spyder?
As for the splines being lubricated on our RTS when built new, the grease used has been posted either in the other topic or on the FB topic.
i will find the photos of the pulley inspection on our 14 RTS, possibly things have been changed, however the photos should indicate that the pulley sets pround of the shafts end, by likely 1mm.
If what the others state is true, that the shaft sets proud of the pulley, then there would be no reason for BRP to now have discontinued the multi piece retaining bolt and separate washer and have gone to a one piece bolt / washer design, with the large OD washer integrated into the bolt.
They have not discontinued the separate washer and bolt. Both forms are still available to order and are prescribed for different years. While I do not know all of them, I can tell you the 2015 F3 uses the separate washer and bolt, the 2016 and newer specifies the one piece. The parts look up for the 2015 has not been updated to show a superseded part.
Inquiring through BRP tech help at the dealer, dealer was told to replace like for like as shown in the parts lookup and not to update an older bike to the newer part but gave no reason.
On another note, I found out how they got my pulley off. Using a harmonic balancer puller with bolts through the holes in the pulley. The were able to get nuts on the bolts behind the pulley one at a time using a bent closed end wrench to hold the bolt. Wish I had thought of that. But they were great about it.
The 08's still use the bolt and washer. I have witness marks on mine because I have noticed that the washer tends to move even after being torqued to the higher spec. I had the front pulley in mine fail in 2016 in a fashion similar to what is now being seen with the F3's. I don't know if it was from fretting, or from the bolt coming loose and allowing the pulley to move laterally.
I've always wondered why the new issue seems to be more prevalent in the F3's then the RT's. I know the pulleys are different, but what makes one design last longer with no issues, and the other be more prevalent to failure?
They have not discontinued the separate washer and bolt. Both forms are still available to order and are prescribed for different years. While I do not know all of them, I can tell you the 2015 F3 uses the separate washer and bolt, the 2016 and newer specifies the one piece. The parts look up for the 2015 has not been updated to show a superseded part.
Inquiring through BRP tech help at the dealer, dealer was told to replace like for like as shown in the parts lookup and not to update an older bike to the newer part but gave no reason.
On another note, I found out how they got my pulley off. Using a harmonic balancer puller with bolts through the holes in the pulley. The were able to get nuts on the bolts behind the pulley one at a time using a bent closed end wrench to hold the bolt. Wish I had thought of that. But they were great about it.
Ironic, I was led to understand, when the dealer looked up the original separate bolt washer vs the one piece setup, the previous had been superseded. I was under the impression, you tried using a crow foot puller.
No, to the above in bold. The increased torque on the bolt locked the pulley to the shaft (because the pulley stood just proud of the splined shaft) clamping it rigidly to the shaft, hence no more failures.
From what jcthorne and a couple of others have observed, that is not possible on the 1330 because the shaft sits proud of the pulley.
I don't recall any other owners reporting seeing grease when they have simply looked at the pulley - just lots of owners reporting that they see red dust. So that raises the question, how did yours come to have grease?
But all this is academic - Houston, we have a problem! or is that - BRP, you have a problem!!!
A photo of the bolt removed, pulley still in position on shaft, grease is evident and the pulley sets proud of the shaft.
Some of the photos during the pulley / spline inspection on our 14 RTS. Yes the splines were lubricated from BRP. Splines showed no wear, either on the pulley or the gearbox output shaft. I opted to assemble wet with lubricated splines and applied corrosion prevention compound to the grip of the bolt. The bolt threads were left dry except for oem applied locking compound. When I accomplished this task, it was still uncertain if the bolts were backing off and allowing the pulley to have less applied tension securing it. I drilled the bolt and lockwired it to safety it. Previously, you notice the red paint, I had painted witness marks to visually see if the bolt or washer had turned.
I opted to reassemble with the splines lubricated. BRP around the same time decide to use the Loctite method to reduce the clearance to 0/0. In theory, both can work. MY method does not require the specific steps and cure time to ensure the Loctite is done correctly. However, I do plan on having this inspection and relube of the splines accomplished in about 14k miles when I do the transmission filter. If there is no wear of the lube is not breaking down, I may extend the next inspection to 28k miles and accomplish it during each transmission filter change.
Freddy, have you yourself actually removed the pulley from a 1330 Spyder?
As for the splines being lubricated on our RTS when built new, the grease used has been posted either in the other topic or on the FB topic.
i will find the photos of the pulley inspection on our 14 RTS, possibly things have been changed, however the photos should indicate that the pulley sets pround of the shafts end, by likely 1mm.
If what the others state is true, that the shaft sets proud of the pulley, then there would be no reason for BRP to now have discontinued the multi piece retaining bolt and separate washer and have gone to a one piece bolt / washer design, with the large OD washer integrated into the bolt.
No - just going on what folks like you have posted in this thread. My hands-on experience is with the V-twins.
The second Bold point contrasts with observations made by others herein, so That needs some investigation/confirmation. The pulley proud of shaft by about 1mm is the case on the V-twin. Thanks for your pic above.
The best substitute for brains & knowledge is....................silence.
Reply With Quote
Originally Posted by Freddy
that's utterly alarming! If that is the case then the bolt does nothing at all apart from stopping the pulley falling off - earlier. On the V-twins the pulley is proud of the shaft, meaning the clamping force (term used in BRP s/bulletin) of a tighter bolt locks the pulley & shaft together, preventing relative movement and thus wear - end of problem.
