[dstreeker]

I was going to but I didn't think it would drop my RPM enough.
Not sure of how much change it will make. might be a good option for most riders out there tho!

[NMKawierider]

I was going to but I didn't think it would drop my RPM enough.
Not sure of how much change it will make. might be a good option for most riders out there tho!

In time people will try more of these and maybe...just maybe..we'll get some more input on what the results are.

[dstreeker]

I had thought about it but didn't think it would bring the rpm down enough.
I'm not sure what the result would be with it but I'm pretty happy with mine so far.
I hope to get out this weekend and ride a little to test it on some trail riding.
I will follow up with the results!

[DarthStig]

Looking forward to hearing the results with this. Engagement is too high for me and take off isnt as smooth as I would like. hopefully a lower engagement will help.

[NMKawierider]

You do want it at least 300 RPMs higher then idle. Some applications 500-600 but if these stock are engaging at 2200 and the manual states they idle at 1300, that's 900...in the range for drag racing and full-on mud bogg'n not trail riding. 

[NMKawierider]

One thing I didn't mention was what is called "belt deflection". This is how loose the belt sets between the two sheaves when not engaged. This is critical because the looser it is, the more the flyweights have to move to move the primary sheave to engage the belt...ie take the slack out of the belt...and the higher up on the sheave it makes contact which is a higher ratio. You want it to engage as low as possible but there is a minimum amount of play you want....and well as a maximum. For example for my old Brute Force, that play or deflection was 22-27mm. 23-24mm was ideal. One should review the service manual and ensure the belt's deflection is correct before playing with spring rates...IMO 

[dstreeker]

Update on my clutch tuning:
Very smooth on take off now, light throttle to get started. Much better for trail riding.
Plenty of power in all speed ranges.
We have ridden twice this weekend, 27 miles and 42 miles, performs amazingly.
LOVE IT!

[dstreeker]

Another clutch update!
I just changed my primary spring to a #951-014 (200/600).
Still smooth take off, rpms are about 2000-2200, much better, engine braking maybe not quite as harsh also!
I'm also running 1 Pennie behind every other primary weight.
My secondary clutch is clocked at B2.

Pretty nice so far! I need to get out on some trails and test it real good.

Complete different machine then when I got it for sure! I've got about 19 hours on it so it's time to drive it like I stole it!

[hemioutlaw14]

Is this just for the 1000 or the 950 also?

[dstreeker]

I believe the 950 has the same engine and clutch setup as the 1000.
CV Tech primary clutch not the variator style.
My setup is on the new 950!

[mechanicalmike08]

I am not a clutch expert and I know you say you have a penny under every other weight to even it out but isn't it bad that half the weights are slightly different? Will it cause long term issues because not all the weights are the same?

[NMKawierider]

I am not a clutch expert and I know you say you have a penny under every other weight to even it out but isn't it bad that half the weights are slightly different? Will it cause long term issues because not all the weights are the same?

You are 100% correct. The heavier weights will exert more pressure on the cam plate then the lighters ones and that puts more load or pressure on them which will wear their surfaces...both on the cam plate and the weights ..faster. I know this because when I had my Kawasaki, I tuned it's primary to have 2-52 Gram weights and 2-56 Gram weights for an average of 54 grams. But the two heavier ones did wear the ramps and pin bushings faster. So yes, it is preferred to have all with even pressure on the cam plate as well as all balanced...very important for the crank's main bearing.
Additional: Out of curiosity, I weighed two pennies on the same gram scale I use to balance my own flyweights. One was 2.51 grams and the other was 3.07 grams. So none are the same...as expected.. and although one might not think a gram or so is nothing to worry about, it is, and this difference translates into ounces of weight difference at higher RPMs. So, I strongly suggest that if you have found a combination that works well for you and your needs, that you actually get the average of all and get the correct inserts, check their weights, and install on all flyweights. I use a AWS-100 Digital Scale. It was not expensive, but had greatly helped me with my clutch tuning and maintenance.   

[Dnorton1]

I also did the penny adjustments on my primary, and you are correct that they are not all the same. Pennys made before 1983 weigh 3.11g ( googled it, it’s true) I did weigh each one I used to make sure they were the same, all were newer ones at 2.5 g which was perfect to make all my weights 15g when I added 2. After putting some miles on I decided it grabbed a little low so I did remove 1 from  every other one and now I think it’s perfect, so if you do the math ill need 13.75g weights, so I think I’ll be looking to get a set of weights so they all match, you made a good point, thanks

[dstreeker]

Following up on my clutch changes after a few hundred miles of riding.
Following advise here on the forum,  I added a penny behind all the primary weights not just every other one. Seems smoother and also makes engagement a little sooner.
So now I'm running a 200/600 primary spring with 1 penny behind each weight, my secondary is clocked to B2.
I have been riding some pretty rough trails here in Quartzsite Arizona and will say the machine preforms great!
Much smoother on washboard roads and trails than my previous Zforce 800.
My fuel mileage is approx. 17mpg, not bad!