• There were many reasons for the change of the site software, the biggest was security. The age of the old software also meant no server updates for certain programs. There are many benefits to the new software, one of the biggest is the mobile functionality. Ill fix up some stuff in the coming days, we'll also try to get some of the old addons back or the data imported back into the site like the garage. To create a thread or to reply with a post is basically the same as it was in the prior software. The default style of the site is light colored, but i temporarily added a darker colored style, to change you can find a link at the bottom of the site.

Broken output shaft - Final Drive Belt Tension involvement?? Sept '23 BEFORE RECALL

My SWAG is that the shaft failed from fatigue, it looks like the crack initiated about 12 oclock and than progressed until it finally failed at about 7 oclock. There is a slight ridge across the top that might have been a slight machining error that created the stress riser.
The failure of the bearing may have been as a result of the crack progressing and creating higher than normal stresses on the bearings resulting in some of them failing.
You should be able to find an engineering lab that does failure analysis and they can do hardness, high resolution pics that might show an inclusion etc. to give you a much better analysis.
The failure of the bearing and the shaft should have been noticeable some time before it actually broke; by the increasing vibration of the gearbox. JMO
 
TheMariner said:
I don't think something like an Output Shaft would be cast. It's more likely machined from hot-rolled bar or from a forged billet.

Here's my 2c worth...

In my opinion the failure is because of 1 of 3 possible reasons:

1). Failure of or no material QA performed before being machined. The hot-rolled or forged billet had a processing fault in it that wasn't found before the part was machined, hardened, & ground. This is unlikely because every shaft is breaking in the same way. Rolling or forging faults are usually more random.
2). Poor material choice and/or heat treatment. The material isn't strong enough for the job at hand in the first place or the heat treatment is too savage leading to brittleness.
3). Design. Machined-in stress raisers that play havoc with fatigue resistance that'll eventually lead to fatigue failure. Rotational bending is a high-risk condition that is bad for fatigue resistance. Throw in shock loading & the occasional reverse bending & it's a nightmare for Designers.

The pics of the broken ends all look the same... 3/4 of the annular breaks are a dull, grey, flat-ish surface & the remainder is a shiny jagged surface. To me, that says fatigue failure. The dull grey areas have been cracked for a while and fretting together (hence the kinda smooth surface) but there was enough solid shaft left to still hold it together. When the cracked area gets too big, the remaining solid shaft isn't strong enough to keep it together, so it breaks suddenly. This gives a shiny, jagged break.

What allowed the shaft to fatigue is the next question. If it's a design error, then we'll all be in trouble eventually... not just some of us. Because it's a bit more random, I think it's either a physical machining error that should have been identified in post-machining QA; it's a heat treatment problem; or a combination of both.

The interesting thing is that BRP are able to narrow it down to individual Spyders for the recall (thankfully, not mine) which, to me, indicates they know the actual shaft UIN (Unique Identifying Number) involved. UIN's are not usually applied before machining & heat treatment.

I may be wrong :dontknow:
Click to expand...

you are probably right... not casting machined still have failure points due to impurities in metal and so on. Ill be watching this one closely thanks for posting information...
 
There was another RT that had the same problem. I think he was from New Jersey, and he said he had 20,000 miles on the bike, and he said he was going up a slight hill when the bike just stopped. I think it was a 2019 or 2020 RT. This is the third output shaft that I've heard of failing.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Hi Everyone,

Just saw a copy of the info. sent to another Australian owner about this, and one of the lines says "What is the potential problem? The output shaft installed on affected vehicles may be exposed to stress concentration that could cause fatigue failure."

To me, this points to a machining error that wasn't detected during inspection because it only applies to a selection of engines. If it was a design error it would apply to every Output Shaft made, and a Heat Treatment error wouldn't cause a stress concentration.

Just trying to join the dots, so I may be wrong.
 
Is anyone aware of this problem happening to bikes outside of the Engine Output Shaft recall range (2017-2019 RT & F3)?

My 2016 STS with 33,000 miles broke down last week and needed to be towed home.
I have yet to get it towed to a dealership for inspection, but having taken off several left side panels, what I can see is that the front pulley is spinning under slight acceleration in 1st gear.
Sure, it could also be the front sprocket issue, which also did not include my specific model.

FWIW, I had a short call with BRP in which it was mentioned that there've been reports of possible Engine Output Shaft issues with other bikes outside the range of the recall, and I was advised to get it inspected and repaired, and then contact BRP for possible "exception warranty coverage". Yikes!
 
Raprider said:
Is anyone aware of this problem happening to bikes outside of the Engine Output Shaft recall range (2017-2019 RT & F3)?

My 2016 STS with 33,000 miles broke down last week and needed to be towed home.
I have yet to get it towed to a dealership for inspection, but having taken off several left side panels, what I can see is that the front pulley is spinning under slight acceleration in 1st gear.
Sure, it could also be the front sprocket issue, which also did not include my specific model.

FWIW, I had a short call with BRP in which it was mentioned that there've been reports of possible Engine Output Shaft issues with other bikes outside the range of the recall, and I was advised to get it inspected and repaired, and then contact BRP for possible "exception warranty coverage". Yikes!
Click to expand...

Most likely a failed pulley. If the pulley turns and the shaft does not, you have your answer. If both the pulley and shaft turn together, then you've got an output shaft issue.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Thanks, Ron... I'll take a look to see what I can. I'm not sure how much is visible without taking too many things apart.
 
Raprider said:
Thanks, Ron... I'll take a look to see what I can. I'm not sure how much is visible without taking too many things apart.
Click to expand...

I think the output shaft issue is a 1330 problem. I don't believe the 998 had such issues. Another reason I'd guess it's a pulley and not the output shaft.
 
NAAAH OT /\/\ they borrowed the same guys from the electric design group that designed the new 2024 instrument cluster *** to do the machining and QC test because they let the machinists have lunch on Fridays and Mondays... or whatever! lolol

On topic - Agreed with TheMariner above, too much heat treatment leading to brittleness along with stress risers = a fault waiting to happen. But with random testing, it wouldn't get caught. So BRP has narrowed it down to certain days/shifts etc, ergo the certain lots and UIN that could be affected.
Didn't they use the 1330 in other vehicles too? Bet the same issue exists there too, at least for certain UIN and build dates...
 
WRCLVR said:
NAAAH OT /\/\ they borrowed the same guys from the electric design group that designed the new 2024 instrument cluster *** to do the machining and QC test because they let the machinists have lunch on Fridays and Mondays... or whatever! lolol

On topic - Agreed with TheMariner above, too much heat treatment leading to brittleness along with stress risers = a fault waiting to happen. But with random testing, it wouldn't get caught. So BRP has narrowed it down to certain days/shifts etc, ergo the certain lots and UIN that could be affected.
Didn't they use the 1330 in other vehicles too? Bet the same issue exists there too, at least for certain UIN and build dates...
Click to expand...
I got a call yesterday from my dealer. I am to bring the bike to them in the Spring. Right now it is -30 C and the bike is in storage till Spring.
 
I will wait until the dealer has done a few before taking mine in. And my Washington State one will have to be done in May or June when I return.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top