**** "DO'S & DO NOTS" for NEW SPYDER OWNERS... ****

[Illinois Boy]

So I just bought a 2014 spyder rs sm5 and was reading through the do's and don't for new spyder riders lots of great info but can't seem to find anything specific to the sm5 manual transmission it focuses on the semiautomatic. What speed and gear are outher riders using. Is this a high rev machine? I'm coming off a Harley vrod and the shifting points seem way diffrent. Any feed back would be grate:dontknow:

While this information does seem to apply only to the SE5; the shifting points and rpm's do apply for the manual shift 900 series engine and tranny.

Coming off a Harley V-twin, you'll need to get used to running your rpm's higher than you are accustomed with your Harley. Running your model Spyder between 2500-3500 rpm's will not provide you with the power and control you need -- and besides, it is hard on the entire system. I ride an Ultra-Limited and a 998 SE5 RTS. I have become quite accustomed to running each in a different manner as they require. It just takes a few miles for you to figure it out, and you'll see.

One other difference to note for you though is that you are able to run your manual clutch at lower rpm's without being as concerned with clutch slippage as you would have with the SE5 at lower rpm's -- however, as just stated, you do not want to run your 900 engine at low rpm's.

Ride safe and enjoy yourself!

 

[malecrisis]

While this information does seem to apply only to the SE5; the shifting points and rpm's do apply for the manual shift 900 series engine and tranny.

Coming off a Harley V-twin, you'll need to get used to running your rpm's higher than you are accustomed with your Harley. Running your model Spyder between 2500-3500 rpm's will not provide you with the power and control you need -- and besides, it is hard on the entire system. I ride an Ultra-Limited and a 998 SE5 RTS. I have become quite accustomed to running each in a different manner as they require. It just takes a few miles for you to figure it out, and you'll see.

One other difference to note for you though is that you are able to run your manual clutch at lower rpm's without being as concerned with clutch slippage as you would have with the SE5 at lower rpm's -- however, as just stated, you do not want to run your 900 engine at low rpm's.

Ride safe and enjoy yourself!

Thanks for the feed back will give it a try gonna be hard convincing myself to ride the RPMS into the 4500 5000 range

 

[NoJive]

I'd like to suggest that you add that the vacuum lines could be a problem on the manual transmission Spyders as well. My 2012 RTS was running like crap, and found both lines cracked. Put new lines in, and it runs like a top. It seems like this could be a common problem, due to the front line going right across the cylinder head!

 

[Illinois Boy]

I'd like to suggest that you add that the vacuum lines could be a problem on the manual transmission Spyders as well. My 2012 RTS was running like crap, and found both lines cracked. Put new lines in, and it runs like a top. It seems like this could be a common problem, due to the front line going right across the cylinder head!

It is mentioned within the text, but is specific to SE5 & 6. I will change it to include manual shift as well.

SE5/SE6 shifting problems / Cracked Vacuum Hoses:
Cracked (dry-rotted) vacuum hoses are related to shifting problems on the SE5's. Heat seems to be the culprit.
Have these checked regularly as part of your maintenance program and replace them if needed.
No reports on the 2014 1330's yet; but this may remain an issue despite the improved cooling system.

 

[NoJive]

Nice, and thanks for the list. This was one of the first things I read when I got my used '08 GS. I sold it last year, and included a copy of the list with the bike to help the new owners.

It is mentioned within the text, but is specific to SE5 & 6. I will change it to include manual shift as well.

SE5/SE6 shifting problems / Cracked Vacuum Hoses:
Cracked (dry-rotted) vacuum hoses are related to shifting problems on the SE5's. Heat seems to be the culprit.
Have these checked regularly as part of your maintenance program and replace them if needed.
No reports on the 2014 1330's yet; but this may remain an issue despite the improved cooling system.

 

[ShortCake]

NEWBIE AND THANKFUL

What an awesome thread! I have yet to even look at any other posts/threads and have read this all the way through from the beginning.

I am totally new to Spyders although being active on 2-wheels for about 12 years now. I'm a youngin' only in my mid 40's but due to a nagging knee issue, felt it was time to get more serious about safety and the chances of going down. I am in the process of getting a brand new leftover 2015 RT S SE6 (still in the warehouse and boxed) $5630 under suggested retail. Putting a lot down so the monthly payments are less damaging. I also invested in getting the additional 3 yr extended warranty (especially with all of the electronics and computer gadgets used in these machines).

My only question is, after reading most of the info in this thread, I remember reading something about what gears you should be in for certain mph. I did read about the lower RPM's when to shift for the RT 1330 models, but, was anything said about which gear is best for which speeds? Previously stated was that 4th gear is good for cruising anywhere from 45mph up to 60 or even 65mph. Is that still the same or different since new info has been added about the 1330's?

 

[Illinois Boy]

...was anything said about which gear is best for which speeds? Previously stated was that 4th gear is good for cruising anywhere from 45mph up to 60 or even 65mph. Is that still the same or different since new info has been added about the 1330's?

It is explained in detail within the text that is specific to the 1330 engine if you re-read just that section (very first post).

In short however, for the 1330's, the important thing to remember is when to shift out of first to second. It should be at or above 2500 rpm's. Many shift out of first at 3000 rpm's or slightly higher.

The second thing to remember is that you do not need to use all the gears (6 of them) all the time. In other words, if you are just cruising around town you might never use 5th or 6th gear.

Since you have ridden motorcycles, you know when an engine sounds like it needs to be shifted up or down. The same applies here. The 1330 machines are not as sensitive to its shifting points as the 900 series engines were.

The shifting issue mostly came about because of the 998 engines' low torque at low rpm's. The torque-range of the 900 series engines is at 5,000+ rpm's -- required shifting at higher rpm's (5,000+) and basically staying within that range.

Too many owners were shifting their 998 engines too early and running them at too low of rpm's. Some were also shifting to 5th gear and cruising around town all day in 5th gear. That is torture on the 900 series machines. Apparently, American's love low rpm machines and many have a hard time getting used to a higher rpm engine. Thus, BRP came up with the 1330 engine to satisfy those who are not comfortable with a high rpm engine. (Personally, I love the 900 series engine.)

Hope this helps.

Enjoy your ride, and ride safe, often, and aware.

Illinois Boy

 

[Dan65]

Tires

I had read this post before picking up a 2010 RT with 4,800 miles on it. Great info and I followed a lot of it. The RT had just went thru a $700 plus annual inspection. It looked like new including the tires which showed very little wear. The bike had not been ridden in the last year plus, or if so very minimal. You can look at my post "wild ride" and see what happened to me 20 minute's after leaving sellers home on interstate I-25. Its at the dealer now and is considered a catastrophic failure. looks like 5-6 thousand repair. No one is going to be able to really say what happened for sure but common sense says 6 year old tires sitting for quite some time equals a good chance for a blow out (i.e. Possible Dry Rot). Not trying to create fear but I don't want anyone going thru what I did for it truly was a near death experience. Just my thought !!

 

[Illinois Boy]

6 year old tires sitting for quite some time equals a good chance for a blow out

There is generally a rule about tires... do not use tires after 6 years -- period. It is also important one looks at new tires for their manufacture date. While it is rare, a dealer could sell you news tires that are six-years old. The advice... do not buy them.

Glad to hear you are okay.

 

[Wct22]

I just ordered the belt guard myself. I live on about a 1/2 mile of gravel/dirt road, and I guess I have been lucky and had no issues in the couple weeks I have owned my :spyder2:. I'm hoping the belt guard works well, as I don't know anything else to do besides slow down.

BTW, this is an awesome thread.

Jive

Where did u get guard, I'm new to Spyder and live on gravel road
thanks

 

[NoJive]

http://spyderpops.com/the-missing-belt-guard-fits-all-spyder-models-2008-2014-except-2014-15-rt/

Sent from my SM-G928P using Tapatalk

 

[rosebelle]

Engine wear

This thread has been going for a few years. Much was claimed in the earlier years.

Now that some time has passed, from those that have contributed in the past, or others, is there any reason to add to, take back or modify the views expressed?


Not criticizing the thread, I think it's very good and absolutely what Forums should be about, but I have a slight problem with the statement often made summerized as "rev it high, it is good for the engine (and stops belt vibration)". The engine is not an animal, it is made of parts rubbing and pushing together, the faster it runs the greater these factors and wear increases. Every second an engine runs it is wearing out. Other than destructive vibrations, or a weak oil pump is there a reason to run any engine fast without increasing wear albeit a small wear increase.

So, is there any evidence that the 998 engine wears out quicker running it slow (but at reasonable, often felt natural, shift points)?. Alternatively what evidence of longevity (miles) is there with those that run these at the higher stated revs.?

 

[PrairieSpyder]

This thread has been going for a few years. Much was claimed in the earlier years.

Now that some time has passed, from those that have contributed in the past, or others, is there any reason to add to, take back or modify the views expressed?


Not criticizing the thread, I think it's very good and absolutely what Forums should be about, but I have a slight problem with the statement often made summerized as "rev it high, it is good for the engine (and stops belt vibration)". The engine is not an animal, it is made of parts rubbing and pushing together, the faster it runs the greater these factors and wear increases. Every second an engine runs it is wearing out. Other than destructive vibrations, or a weak oil pump is there a reason to run any engine fast without increasing wear albeit a small wear increase.

So, is there any evidence that the 998 engine wears out quicker running it slow (but at reasonable, often felt natural, shift points)?. Alternatively what evidence of longevity (miles) is there with those that run these at the higher stated revs.?

The OP is updated as things change. The current version is as of June 27, 2016. So a new member doesn't have to read through all the pages of advice to get the best info.

However, I just did a quick scan of that post and didn't notice anything specific to the F3 model, like shifting RPMs, etc. So maybe it needs to be revisited after all.

 

[Illinois Boy]

The OP is updated as things change. The current version is as of June 27, 2016. So a new member doesn't have to read through all the pages of advice to get the best info.

However, I just did a quick scan of that post and didn't notice anything specific to the F3 model, like shifting RPMs, etc. So maybe it needs to be revisited after all.

No reference directly to the F3; but rather the 1330 engine itself. It is mentioned and covered.

 

[Illinois Boy]

This thread has been going for a few years. Much was claimed in the earlier years.

Now that some time has passed, from those that have contributed in the past, or others, is there any reason to add to, take back or modify the views expressed?


Not criticizing the thread, I think it's very good and absolutely what Forums should be about, but I have a slight problem with the statement often made summerized as "rev it high, it is good for the engine (and stops belt vibration)". The engine is not an animal, it is made of parts rubbing and pushing together, the faster it runs the greater these factors and wear increases. Every second an engine runs it is wearing out. Other than destructive vibrations, or a weak oil pump is there a reason to run any engine fast without increasing wear albeit a small wear increase.

So, is there any evidence that the 998 engine wears out quicker running it slow (but at reasonable, often felt natural, shift points)?. Alternatively what evidence of longevity (miles) is there with those that run these at the higher stated revs.?

No offense but this has been parsed, covered, uncovered, cooked, stewed, and broiled. This info on the two different engines has been verified through several years practical experience and data by many experienced riders. If you have a 998 engine, then you may want to follow the advice; but that's entirely up to you. You are not the first who wants to argue with it.

If you have a 1330, then it is far less complicated and that info is in there as well.

Ride safe...

 

[IdahoMtnSpyder]

So, is there any evidence that the 998 engine wears out quicker running it slow (but at reasonable, often felt natural, shift points)?. Alternatively what evidence of longevity (miles) is there with those that run these at the higher stated revs.?

Maybe you're not aware of it yet, but when you take your Spyder in for servicing the technician connects it up the BUDs computer. One of the readouts is a histogram of engine speed in increments of 2000 rpm for the 998. If you have the 998 engine, and have a high percentage of operating time in the 2000 to 4000 rpm range, the technician may well chew your butt. BRP wants owners to spend something like 80% and more time at rpms above 4000. That's the way the engine is built. Keep in mind the pedigree of the Rotax includes ultra light aircraft. You don't want slow turning engines on them!

 

[PrairieSpyder]

No reference directly to the F3; but rather the 1330 engine itself. It is mentioned and covered.

That's true. But the F3T and F3L (don't know about the base F3 or F3S) have a bigger rear sprocket and the shifting points are different than for the 1330 in an RT.

 

[Peter Aawen]

Further to what IdahoMtnspyder wrote, there isn't any evidence that keeping your revs up will cause premature wear (& growing numbers of Spyders doing this are reliably reaching high mileage for bikes too) but there IS evidence that ignoring that advice can cause premature wear requiring expensive repairs!! :yikes:

So, if you ride a V-twin Spyder, ignore the rev recommendations at your peril & potential cost!!

 

[rosebelle]

Failures by revving engine too low

I'm not ignoring this to my peril. What is the type of failure related to too much time at low revs? I am reading anecdotal evidence not proper science. I do realise this topic has been discussed from the moon and back, but I cannot find say e.g. this 998 has spent 80% of its time at 2000rpm, 5% at 3000, 5% at 4000 .....and it's crankshaft is bent, the piston have melted.....etc.; as opposed to this engine has spent 80% at 5000 rpms.....etc and the engine is glowing with health.(or whatever happens). Data?

As far as the relationship to aircraft motors, is this engine used in any aircraft, and if so at what revs does it cruise on? I suspect not and even less so at peak HP at what...8000rpm?.

My experience in aviation is that engines are run at very low outputs to what the engine could be hotted up to do. Continental and Lycomming motors in Cessnas run at 2700 rpm. Now I do realise that Rotax do cruise higher RPMs than that; but the point is less rpms means less stress means reliability.

I am not arguing that the 998 was designed to rev high to get max power but about it's longevity if run this high, and what doesn't fail that claims to fail if running at lower revs. What wears out prematurely? Data please.

 

[Illinois Boy]

I'm not ignoring this to my peril. What is the type of failure related to too much time at low revs? I am reading anecdotal evidence not proper science. I do realise this topic has been discussed from the moon and back, but I cannot find say e.g. this 998 has spent 80% of its time at 2000rpm, 5% at 3000, 5% at 4000 .....and it's crankshaft is bent, the piston have melted.....etc.; as opposed to this engine has spent 80% at 5000 rpms.....etc and the engine is glowing with health.(or whatever happens). Data?

I am not arguing that the 998 was designed to rev high to get max power but about it's longevity if run this high, and what doesn't fail that claims to fail if running at lower revs. What wears out prematurely? Data please.

You have valid questions.

First, all engines will have wear, as you know; and certainly there are various types of wear on an engine depending on how it is run, or how it is operated under load.

The recommendations for the higher rpm's on the 998 engine is primarily due to its underwhelming power at lower rpm's.

However, if you have a paddle-shifter, the clutch does not fully lock (engage) until 3200 (+/- 200) rpm's. Running a Spyder in any range where it is not fully-locked causes wear due to the clutch slipping. Over a long period of time, slippage will cause excessive wear on the clutch; if not clutch failure. (An example of clutch failure was provided by a member who refused to run his Spyder as suggested, and he paid the price of having to replace his clutch.)

So you have a couple issues facing you if you have both the 998 and a paddle-shifter.

Now, to further help explain the information provided in the first thread relates to the power-band of the 998 engine (not the 1330). As you know, if an engine is run consistently in a range below or above its power band, the engine is not working at it optimum efficiency -- which translates to increased stress (load) on all of the engines components exposed to this load.

An example would be if you were riding a 10-speed bike up a hill in 10th gear. Your body will be considerably more stressed from the workout from doing so; versus if you were to have used a lower-gear (1st for instance). If you were to have used first gear to climb the same hill, you would have peddled considerably more times (higher revs); however it would have also been considerably easier (less stress) in first gear versus 10th. I believe you get the point. It is similar to an engine.

In addition: the added load on a Spyder's drive-train, when running a 998 engine below its power band, has been noted many times with people having to replace their primary drive bearings and other components. While an engine's speed (rpm) can cause wear and heat, the load factors are an important factor in drive-train failure.
Refer to this info for more detail of a study on aircraft engines: http://www1.coe.neu.edu/~smuftu/doc...gs and Splines (Schaubhut Suomi Espinosa).pdf

When operating any engine below it power band exposes the engine and its drive-train to potential excessive load; which over time can cause failure of components receiving the load.

Lastly, anyone who is a expert rider/driver/pilot will tell you it is best to maintain the vehicle at all times within it optimum range of power and torque for safety and control reasons. More accidents happen when a vehicle is in too low or high of a gear for a specific situation requiring power to avoid it.

You had great questions; and I hope this helped some.

Ride safe...