-
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.
**** "DO'S & DO NOTS" for NEW SPYDER OWNERS... ****
- Thread starter Illinois Boy
- Start date
Illinios Boy thanks for the effort in replying and supplying the bearing and spline info re aircraft engines.
I know the clutch issue with SE5 998 motors, and now I know of primary drive bearing failure and I take it wear failure within the gear box?
This all leads me to believe that the engine was not adequately designed for use with the Spyder as I don't think that engine in the Aprilla had any of those issues. It is hard to understand why at low power (particularly noted as low torque) and low revolutions that people take that as creating greater stress within the engine. I would have also thought big end bearing failure would occur before crankshaft bearing failure, if that was the case.
I suspect that (also from reading the article) the issue can only be of poor oiling of those bearings at low revs, causing greater friction heat build up that is not efficiently dissipated.
I suspect the drive train failures (I don't know yet which components they might be), are not only due to insufficient lubrication and heat dissipation, but due to weak strength. Yes we do understand that revving higher in a geared up situation distributes the load (say on gears) over more teeth because of the greater ratio. But we are transmitting the maximum torque through this drivetrain in doing so.
On that point of ratios why would you not make the top gear correspond to top speed allowed or what would reasonably be cruise speed. Highway speed does vary over the world, I am limited in my country to 110km (65mph) but more of 100km (60mph) and maybe I am a little unreasonable to expect top gear (5 on 998) should be the gear selected to cruise all day on. What I am saying it makes more sense to use all these gears, unless the 998 has extremely good strong low range gears clearly contradicting my proposition that they have not. Many vehicles, cars and bikes have traditionally low gear failures due to excessive use of these gears that they were not designed for.
It is strange to me why people believe there is something special about how we should use of the Spyder engine, not done anywhere else in the world of motors (possible overexaggeration by me!); when it can IMO be because a shear lack of adequate design.
Illinois Boy
New member
The post was/is merely a suggestion from many who have years (since the Spyder inception), and miles of experience with the 998 Spyder. Your view would be a minority view. However, there are some who simply cannot bring themselves to run any engine at a higher rpm no matter what. Again, that is their choice.
Rosebelle, this 'driving in the optimum rev range' thing isn't unique to Spyders with the 998 motor; you might benefit from spending time reading 4WD forums in Aus, or talking to truckers, heavy transport drivers, earthmover operators, & even taxi drivers - most of whom who have learnt that instead of dropping into your highest gear as soon as you get moving & ignore the lugging engine, you really do need to try to run your engine at its most effective & efficient REVS for the majority of the time & simply use the gear selection to allow you to drive at the road speed you desire atm!! It doesn't matter what the engine is, that's how you get the best overall fuel economy in the real world rather than when on an economy run under un-realistic conditions; and that's how you minimise your maintenance & repair costs too!! Modern vehicles rarely suffer too much mechanically from being driven in their lower gears instead of overdrive, altho that may have been an issue some decades back, it isn't nowadays, with modern manufacturing & tolerances, etc. In fact, many modern auto's even refuse to select their highest gears until specific speed & throttle load conditions are met, so they almost always run in their lower gears! But still, the number of newbie operators who either destroy engines, gearboxes, &/or clutches thru just picking their highest gear too early might astound you; & that IS in these automotive industries that make a big deal of teaching their new operators to always run/drive in the efficient REV range for the engine rather than just going for the high gears straight away & then letting the engine lug along below its efficient minimum, or for that matter, running the engine out beyond its greatest efficiency at the top end!!
Even most recreational 4Wheelers have managed to learn this; engines have an efficient rev range, & driving under or over that 'best for power, torque, & fuel economy' rev range just to stay in their 'overdrive' gear too much will cost in the long run - maybe largely in excess fuel costs, (yes, they've learnt the hard way that running in a high gear too much & lugging the engine as a result only wastes fuel!) but often also in maintenance & repair costs as well as in their vehicle's long term reliability, especially for their clutches & over-drive gears!! In reality, most Vehicle manufacturers give us gears because it's too hard for them to develop an engine that runs at its most efficient across its entire rev range, or to develop an engine that will deliver power & economy across the entire speed range that the users want or desire from the vehicle!! The only vehicle manufacturer that's managed to get around those problems that I'm aware of is Tesla, & guess what?? Their vehicles run engines that are always at their most efficient so they don't have any other gear choices at all!! You either go forwards, backwards, or stop! But they can drive as fast or as slow as the operator wants (weeeellll, I hope you get the drift!
)
How do you think truck engines & gearboxes manage to reliably reach the millions of kms they do between major overhauls? It sure ain't thru lugging their engines along along at 600 rpm & effectively idling with 15th gear selected behind an engine that's designed to run at it's most efficient between 1200 & 2400 rpm, nor is it thru spending most of their time running in their highest gear 'cos it's more economical to get it into their top cruising gear quickly' - it just isn't economical or viable to do that when you are driving in the real world! Conditions & posted speed limits don't always permit that, so they run their engines in the engine's most efficient REV RANGE, & select whatever gear will give them the ability to move efficiently & economically at the road speed they currently want - so for the vast majority of their driving, they aren't going to be in their highest gear! And in the long term, doing this pays off handsomely in reduced fuel bills, reduced maintenance costs, and reduced repair costs! :thumbup:
Some of us have learnt the hard way that running in the engine's efficient rev range rather than dumping it into top as soon as we are moving actually works with our V-twin Spyders, & some of us have learnt that it isn't always necessary to repeat others' mistakes to learn the very same lessons.
Even most recreational 4Wheelers have managed to learn this; engines have an efficient rev range, & driving under or over that 'best for power, torque, & fuel economy' rev range just to stay in their 'overdrive' gear too much will cost in the long run - maybe largely in excess fuel costs, (yes, they've learnt the hard way that running in a high gear too much & lugging the engine as a result only wastes fuel!) but often also in maintenance & repair costs as well as in their vehicle's long term reliability, especially for their clutches & over-drive gears!! In reality, most Vehicle manufacturers give us gears because it's too hard for them to develop an engine that runs at its most efficient across its entire rev range, or to develop an engine that will deliver power & economy across the entire speed range that the users want or desire from the vehicle!! The only vehicle manufacturer that's managed to get around those problems that I'm aware of is Tesla, & guess what?? Their vehicles run engines that are always at their most efficient so they don't have any other gear choices at all!! You either go forwards, backwards, or stop! But they can drive as fast or as slow as the operator wants (weeeellll, I hope you get the drift!
)How do you think truck engines & gearboxes manage to reliably reach the millions of kms they do between major overhauls? It sure ain't thru lugging their engines along along at 600 rpm & effectively idling with 15th gear selected behind an engine that's designed to run at it's most efficient between 1200 & 2400 rpm, nor is it thru spending most of their time running in their highest gear 'cos it's more economical to get it into their top cruising gear quickly' - it just isn't economical or viable to do that when you are driving in the real world! Conditions & posted speed limits don't always permit that, so they run their engines in the engine's most efficient REV RANGE, & select whatever gear will give them the ability to move efficiently & economically at the road speed they currently want - so for the vast majority of their driving, they aren't going to be in their highest gear! And in the long term, doing this pays off handsomely in reduced fuel bills, reduced maintenance costs, and reduced repair costs! :thumbup:
Some of us have learnt the hard way that running in the engine's efficient rev range rather than dumping it into top as soon as we are moving actually works with our V-twin Spyders, & some of us have learnt that it isn't always necessary to repeat others' mistakes to learn the very same lessons.
Last edited:
New rider-2 days experience
Ridden two wheels for 40 years, current 2 wheeler Kawasaki GPZ900R and Victory Vegas, world's apart but the Spyder is a whole new Universe!
After reading the above on revving I've marked the tach at 5000 and trying to stay above that.
It feels manic and like an old RD350 2-stroke riding like that, just rode up twisty Springbrook mountain and then Beechmont mountain and stopped at the general store and I'm exhausted!.... Gotta be 100% on the ball, I've got the handlebar action and weight shift happening. Picking lines into corners that keep me in my lane....and it's hard work!
Ridden two wheels for 40 years, current 2 wheeler Kawasaki GPZ900R and Victory Vegas, world's apart but the Spyder is a whole new Universe!
After reading the above on revving I've marked the tach at 5000 and trying to stay above that.
It feels manic and like an old RD350 2-stroke riding like that, just rode up twisty Springbrook mountain and then Beechmont mountain and stopped at the general store and I'm exhausted!.... Gotta be 100% on the ball, I've got the handlebar action and weight shift happening. Picking lines into corners that keep me in my lane....and it's hard work!
Rosebelle, this 'driving in the optimum rev range' thing isn't unique to Spyders with the 998 motor; you might benefit from spending time reading 4WD forums in Aus, or talking to truckers, heavy transport drivers, earthmover operators, & even taxi drivers - most of whom who have learnt that instead of dropping into your highest gear as soon as you get moving & ignore the lugging engine, you really do need to try to run your engine at its most effective & efficient REVS for the majority of the time & simply use the gear selection to allow you to drive at the road speed you desire atm!! It doesn't matter what the engine is, that's how you get the best overall fuel economy in the real world rather than when on an economy run under un-realistic conditions; and that's how you minimise your maintenance & repair costs too!! Modern vehicles rarely suffer too much mechanically from being driven in their lower gears instead of overdrive, altho that may have been an issue some decades back, it isn't nowadays, with modern manufacturing & tolerances, etc. In fact, many modern auto's even refuse to select their highest gears until specific speed & throttle load conditions are met, so they almost always run in their lower gears! But still, the number of newbie operators who either destroy engines, gearboxes, &/or clutches thru just picking their highest gear too early might astound you; & that IS in these automotive industries that make a big deal of teaching their new operators to always run/drive in the efficient REV range for the engine rather than just going for the high gears straight away & then letting the engine lug along below its efficient minimum, or for that matter, running the engine out beyond its greatest efficiency at the top end!!
Even most recreational 4Wheelers have managed to learn this; engines have an efficient rev range, & driving under or over that 'best for power, torque, & fuel economy' rev range just to stay in their 'overdrive' gear too much will cost in the long run - maybe largely in excess fuel costs, (yes, they've learnt the hard way that running in a high gear too much & lugging the engine as a result only wastes fuel!) but often also in maintenance & repair costs as well as in their vehicle's long term reliability, especially for their clutches & over-drive gears!! In reality, most Vehicle manufacturers give us gears because it's too hard for them to develop an engine that runs at its most efficient across its entire rev range, or to develop an engine that will deliver power & economy across the entire speed range that the users want or desire from the vehicle!! The only vehicle manufacturer that's managed to get around those problems that I'm aware of is Tesla, & guess what?? Their vehicles run engines that are always at their most efficient so they don't have any other gear choices at all!! You either go forwards, backwards, or stop! But they can drive as fast or as slow as the operator wants (weeeellll, I hope you get the drift!
How do you think truck engines & gearboxes manage to reliably reach the millions of kms they do between major overhauls? It sure ain't thru lugging their engines along along at 600 rpm & effectively idling with 15th gear selected behind an engine that's designed to run at it's most efficient between 1200 & 2400 rpm, nor is it thru spending most of their time running in their highest gear 'cos it's more economical to get it into their top cruising gear quickly' - it just isn't economical or viable to do that when you are driving in the real world! Conditions & posted speed limits don't always permit that, so they run their engines in the engine's most efficient REV RANGE, & select whatever gear will give them the ability to move efficiently & economically at the road speed they currently want - so for the vast majority of their driving, they aren't going to be in their highest gear! And in the long term, doing this pays off handsomely in reduced fuel bills, reduced maintenance costs, and reduced repair costs! :thumbup:
Some of us have learnt the hard way that running in the engine's efficient rev range rather than dumping it into top as soon as we are moving actually works with our V-twin Spyders, & some of us have learnt that it isn't always necessary to repeat others' mistakes to learn the very same lessons.
Peter, fellow Australian, don't you realize that our vehicles are under less stress than most of the "up and over" world. Something to do with not having to contend with gravity, I've been told before. Our issues are around requiring stickier tyres to stop us from falling off the earth, aren't they
Thanks for your detail, I'm still asking for actual figures (% of Spyders) where normal (old fashioned?) revs have been used to cause significant failures/premature wear - I was not initially arguing the "against" the higher revving argument. But I see things creep into people's opinion that may be questionable/illogical.
The point is made, and accepted, that driving in an optimal rev range produces the best power but economy not necessarily so, and what does fuel economy have to do with the subject anyway?
Silly examples that don't support the argument:
I've heard aeroplane engines need to rev. on this thread: what 2700rpm is high?
You have written not to "lug" truck engines at 600 rpm. Who does that?
How does trucks running at 1200 - 2400rpm equate to faster running engines? For a few examples.
Often I hear the implied stupid argument that an engine uses the least amount of fuel at the highest torque or power revolutions. Laws of Physics suggest otherwise.
Not trying to be too picky but "modern cars refuse to select their highest gears" is not universal at all. The ones that I have come across all do go to the top gear quickly. Yes they have learned behaviour controlling gear changes, based on load/throttle position etc, but that is to maintain adequate power, and control emissions.
You mentioned 4WD I've had quite a few, just looking at a new Prado (top popular 4WD) to replace the wife's. It is offered with 6 speed (2 overdrives), the 4th gear no different to past 5 speed model, strongly suggesting the designers are targeting economy.
My Mitsubishi Challenger switches to top very quickly, adding a "chip" has created more power and torque but the engine spends even more time at low revs, and with improved economy. No discernible extra wear. Reading 4WD mags , the Internet and Forums don't suggest revving engines at all, on my readings. First 4WD bought new 1983, probably driven 0ne million Kms in them. My various F100/Bronco's clearly ran most efficiently at low low revs (did probably 400,000 Km's in those (bullet proof). I can go on. You did not mention marine engines - tell me about these modern engines! ha
.
Tesla? isn't "don't have any other gear choices at all" because they are electric?
Maybe I haven't learnt the hard way yet. But the last fifty years of extensive driving numerous types of engine things does not support the argument "revving is better", if I am now to argue the "against" case.
I'm not saying that you should "lug" an engine at all. Sensible driving of course (I understand what has been said and there is some truth in it all).
Evidence on Spyders, other than anecdotal please.
Shifter, I remember the Yamaha RD350 2 stroke. What did you get out of the tank when running the old ton? Something like 50 miles, refuel every 1/2 hour?. How long did it last doing that? 5000 miles? Not much was it, to have to rebuild it. That bike doesn't support the argument on this thread either.
Yeah heavy on fuel and 2 stroke oil but big on excitement!
Was a long time ago, owned both the RD350 air cooled as well as an old XS650 twin, world's apart.
Didn't really own it long enough to rebuild it but throwing rings in an elderly 2-stroke is a walk in the park
After posting elsewhere and getting more reaction I now see I've both misread and mis interpreted the OPs sticky post......I'll move my 1/8" masking tape line down to 3500rpm as the NO GO area.
I'll see what revs it's pulling at a legal 60kph(37mph) in third as riding around at 5000 at that speed sounds and feels ridiculous and cruel to the engine,
I know not to lug a modern V Twin engine, I also own a Victory Vegas cruiser 1700cc and it don't like to lug either, it'll do it but it's cruel on the engine.
It's best at 3000 and up, the factory limiter comes in at 5100 on my model but with the pipes, intake, advance,as well as Power Commander V and dynotuned I've had it lifted to 5500 and will have it extended to 6500 once hotter cams and big bore kit go in later this year.
But that's apples and oranges and pumpkins really.
The Polaris V Twin and the Rotax V Twin are different animals entirely.
I've got to do a run today to see a herbalist who is making me up some Comfrey ointment as the strong stuff is unobtainable here right now.
And my wrist is still sore from the Spyder bite last week
Troublesome
New member
Trailer
What is the ideal trailer size for the 2013 RSS?
What is the ideal trailer size for the 2013 RSS?
Last edited by a moderator:
WilderThomas
New member
I'm not sure what, or where my problem lies. The 2012 Can Am Spyder RT-S I own, has a display that went dark. The bike can be turned on, but cannot be shifted into any gear. All others things, signals, head, fog, and tail lights work. The fuses are good, the one battery terminal I can get to, has a tight connection. And as the situation left me stranded, I had the insurance company's roadside service come out and cart the Spyder back to the house. I hope, that it doesn't need a new display.
Suggestion
Thank you for this list of recommendations and for keeping it current. I have a suggestion for us non-US readers. Can you put kph equivalents beside the mph numbers? In Canada our speed limits generally go from 40 to 100kph in increments of 10. ( 40-50 for side streets; 60-70 for main roads; 80-90 for highways; 100 for freeways)
thanks!....brian
Thank you for this list of recommendations and for keeping it current. I have a suggestion for us non-US readers. Can you put kph equivalents beside the mph numbers? In Canada our speed limits generally go from 40 to 100kph in increments of 10. ( 40-50 for side streets; 60-70 for main roads; 80-90 for highways; 100 for freeways)
thanks!....brian
Do not hide behind the windshield?
So I am a brand new Spyder owner. I've ridden less than 100 miles on my used 2008 GS SM5. I've done the drills and read the manual. Starting off slow as I learn this new way to ride. I've done some things right and some things wrong already. (Going to shift later and help the clutch and motor live longer!) I don't understand the "Don't try to hide behind the windshield" reminder. Can you give me some context? My used Spyder has an aftermarket tall wind screen which extends out to the grips. On a hot day I get almost no airflow through the vents on my ballistic jacket. I have the original short wind screen. Thanks for the great info. I'm going to check the fuses and battery connections when it comes back from the shop. Thanks again for the info and all of the helpful Spyderlovers out there!
So I am a brand new Spyder owner. I've ridden less than 100 miles on my used 2008 GS SM5. I've done the drills and read the manual. Starting off slow as I learn this new way to ride. I've done some things right and some things wrong already. (Going to shift later and help the clutch and motor live longer!) I don't understand the "Don't try to hide behind the windshield" reminder. Can you give me some context? My used Spyder has an aftermarket tall wind screen which extends out to the grips. On a hot day I get almost no airflow through the vents on my ballistic jacket. I have the original short wind screen. Thanks for the great info. I'm going to check the fuses and battery connections when it comes back from the shop. Thanks again for the info and all of the helpful Spyderlovers out there!
Last edited by a moderator:
El Dorado
New member
Peter, fellow Australian, don't you realize that our vehicles are under less stress than most of the "up and over" world. Something to do with not having to contend with gravity, I've been told before. Our issues are around requiring stickier tyres to stop us from falling off the earth, aren't they
Thanks for your detail, I'm still asking for actual figures (% of Spyders) where normal (old fashioned?) revs have been used to cause significant failures/premature wear - I was not initially arguing the "against" the higher revving argument. But I see things creep into people's opinion that may be questionable/illogical.
The point is made, and accepted, that driving in an optimal rev range produces the best power but economy not necessarily so, and what does fuel economy have to do with the subject anyway?
Silly examples that don't support the argument:
I've heard aeroplane engines need to rev. on this thread: what 2700rpm is high?
You have written not to "lug" truck engines at 600 rpm. Who does that?
How does trucks running at 1200 - 2400rpm equate to faster running engines? For a few examples.
Often I hear the implied stupid argument that an engine uses the least amount of fuel at the highest torque or power revolutions. Laws of Physics suggest otherwise.
Not trying to be too picky but "modern cars refuse to select their highest gears" is not universal at all. The ones that I have come across all do go to the top gear quickly. Yes they have learned behaviour controlling gear changes, based on load/throttle position etc, but that is to maintain adequate power, and control emissions.
You mentioned 4WD I've had quite a few, just looking at a new Prado (top popular 4WD) to replace the wife's. It is offered with 6 speed (2 overdrives), the 4th gear no different to past 5 speed model, strongly suggesting the designers are targeting economy.
My Mitsubishi Challenger switches to top very quickly, adding a "chip" has created more power and torque but the engine spends even more time at low revs, and with improved economy. No discernible extra wear. Reading 4WD mags , the Internet and Forums don't suggest revving engines at all, on my readings. First 4WD bought new 1983, probably driven 0ne million Kms in them. My various F100/Bronco's clearly ran most efficiently at low low revs (did probably 400,000 Km's in those (bullet proof). I can go on. You did not mention marine engines - tell me about these modern engines! ha
.
Tesla? isn't "don't have any other gear choices at all" because they are electric?
Maybe I haven't learnt the hard way yet. But the last fifty years of extensive driving numerous types of engine things does not support the argument "revving is better", if I am now to argue the "against" case.
I'm not saying that you should "lug" an engine at all. Sensible driving of course (I understand what has been said and there is some truth in it all).
Evidence on Spyders, other than anecdotal please.
You logic seems to use common sense, but one thing that could enter the equation. There has been no mention of how the computer controls the fuel map and timing. could be very possible that excess rich or lean situations can occur the way it is set up. Note, that I have zero idea how it is set up. I do know that running for long times either rich or lean and or retarded or advanced timing can certainly lead to issues. As the rider, We do not have the necessary sensors and gauges to assess those conditions and must assume that keeping it in the suggested power band will have the engine run at its best efficiency either for power, economy or both. I know this is my first post and I am a NOOBIE to this forum and a Spyder owner, but I have had a career in aviation as a mechanic and Aircraft inspector. Those engines have most of that work done by the pilot through RPM control and manual mixture control and to some extent engine cooling, so it is much different.
classicvw
New member
:agree: Thank You
GrayAuthor
New member
Awesome Thread!!
Newbie here
. Thank you so much for sharing your advice!! I am almost finished reading my manual. You have educated me on areas not mentioned in my manual.
Thxs!
2017 Can Am Spyder F3 Limited (Black)
Newbie here
. Thank you so much for sharing your advice!! I am almost finished reading my manual. You have educated me on areas not mentioned in my manual. Thxs!
2017 Can Am Spyder F3 Limited (Black)
Illinois Boy
New member
I have mine hooked-up at all times when not riding, with the top-cover on it. That is the smaller cover that only covers the top-half of the Spyder. A full cover would likely not present a problem since it is a tender instead of a charger; however, for myself, I would allow for some circulation if possible.
