So it is a rainy day today, so no riding unfortunately, but plants and lawn will be happy. So I was looking through the shop manual for my 2013 ST Ltd and reading about the drive belt tension, wondering if this is something I could do myself; check to ensure it is good. I don't have a belt tension gauge at present, so was just reading up on how doable this would be for someone like myself that is not overly mechanical, but not scared to try things out. Anyhow, I see in the manual the drive belt tension procedure and at the end, the last step is to tighten the rear axle nut and they provide the torque spec as 225 Nm or 166lbf.ft. Then I read on to the next instructions to ensure the belt is aligned correctly.. thus the Drive Belt Alignment section of the manual. And again at the end the last procedure is to tighten the rear axle nut, however this time they have the torque spec to be 130Nm or 96lbft.ft. Why would the two be different specs for the same nut, and an important one at that!
-
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.
drive belt - rear axle nut torque
- Thread starter lebon
- Start date
Peteoz
Well-known member
Someone hasn’t done their proofreading correctly, lebon. For the 2013 models to current, BRP upped the axle torque from 96 to 166 ft lbs (+/- 10%). No one has yet found a reason for that, of which I am aware.
The above info (except for the “no one knows why” bit)
is direct from BRP themselves.
Pete
The above info (except for the “no one knows why” bit)
is direct from BRP themselves.Pete
funny coincidence
Ah, thanks Pete ... and now for the funny coincidence.... the first to reply to my post is a fellow from Harrington, Australia.... and Harrington happens to be my sir name! Go figure! Cheers mate. Simon
Someone hasn’t done their proofreading correctly, lebon. For the 2013 models to current, BRP upped the axle torque from 96 to 166 ft lbs (+/- 10%). No one has yet found a reason for that, of which I am aware.
The above info (except for the “no one knows why” bit)
Pete
Ah, thanks Pete ... and now for the funny coincidence.... the first to reply to my post is a fellow from Harrington, Australia.... and Harrington happens to be my sir name! Go figure! Cheers mate. Simon
Similar threads
