Can-Am UTV Changes in 2015: A technical discussion

badassmav

Well-Known Member
Jun 11, 2013
1,379
182
63
60
Jamul
Has anyone heard word of significant OEM changes in the long travel UTV market for 2015? I'm not talking about paddle shifting 500 cc UTV's, I specifically am interested in what we race in the desert. The pro-sportsman class of UTV racing. We are all waiting to see what develops in the drive train area, namely the CVT system. The manufacturers are pretty tight lipped about that though, I guess in an effort to reduce their current inventory before introducing desirable and mechanically advantageous changes to a specific model line.

I heard that for the 2015 model year, Can-am will be taking a page from the Monster Mav's playbook and aligning the rear CV joints (If that happens, you all will never hear the end of it from this member:cool:!) That's a serious change! I spoke in depth with the Can-am guys at this years Mint regarding CV joint alignment, and the kinematics of work being transmitted through an angle. Torsional forces, like linear and angular forces, are always vulnerable when asked to change the direction, or method in which they originated.

We all brag about BHP (horse power that is measured at the crankshaft), but really, what matters is what percentage of that horsepower is lost by the time it reaches the ground. If you put your hand on the cv joint(s) of your car immediately following a race, you will feel a certain amount of heat, usually between 150 and 300 degrees F. The heat is due to friction, and friction is the product (in this example) of the horse power being asked to change directions. It is natures way of being lazy. The energy (horsepower) that the engine generated was not "stored" somewhere for use at a later time, but rather wasted due to our need for it to go where it does. The product of that is heat. I guarantee you that the cv's on our Mav after a race are much cooler than those on another Maverick (without the differential mods that we have done) after the same race. I did not understand how a company that builds airplanes did not rank this area higher than they did when deciding to introduce compound working angles to the cv joints.. Perhaps an educated engineer can chime in here. I have no degree in engineering (although I have taken a couple of semesters in physics). I'm only self taught, and the majority of that is compliments of the resource center we all know as the web.

I will try to get the Monster Mav over to Nate at Alba sometime this year and compare dyno numbers from a stock Maverickk, to our race configuration. I will share the results here when I do.

I applaud BRP and Can-am if they implement such a change. It would be evidence that they are listening and learning from what we are doing with their product, and are striving to make a better product for all of us (albeit harder to improve upon!)
 

JoeyD23

#utvunderground
Jan 9, 2009
18,569
1,368
113
44
North County San Diego
www.utvunderground.com
I don't think we will see a major change in transmission / CVT from Can-Am, Polaris or Arctic Cat but I have been wrong before.

FYI the same company building planes is not the same one building off-road ATVs and UTVs. They parted ways some time ago.
 

madviking

Member
Mar 15, 2014
71
3
8
I don't have any concrete knowledge to share about future transmission tech. that will make its way into the UTVs. Only what we have been discussing... Properly designed and sized air flow w/ management. The constant tension belts with centrifugal clutch are also a good idea... the clutch just needs to be sized for the power.

There are some promising cv joint technologies out there. NTN, which is an OE for many, has several neat solutions. First are their EBJ and EDJ 8 ball cv joints. They have been out in oem automotive apps for some time now, which shows, to me at least, that they have some benefits. I have been looking at them for use in many projects. The following tech paper about them also touches on the hollow drive axles, too.

http://www.ntn.jp/english/products/review/pdf/NTN_TR75_en_P010.pdf

NTN also recently introduced the CFJ, which shows efficiency gains over the EBJ.

http://www.ntn.co.jp/english/products/review/pdf/NTN_TR80_en_094_100p.pdf

They also have an ELJ 10 ball cv joint, but it can only operate up to 23 degrees, so it's likely not suitable for our application.

http://www.ntn.co.jp/english/products/review/pdf/NTN_TR79_en_p069_072.pdf
 

badassmav

Well-Known Member
Jun 11, 2013
1,379
182
63
60
Jamul
Welcome to the thread, Alex! This is a great opportunity for you to educate yourself in the area of angular momentum. In response to my claim in a previous thread of how we achieve more power at the wheels by straightening out the cv's, you made the comment that you didn't understand how engine horsepower (torque, if you will) knows the difference whether or not it is transferred through an angle, or through a straight line, therefore, how can it be less at the wheels than when it was when it left the motor. Automotive researchers and engineers do not spend the time that the links provided here suggest because they are bored. They do it because there is tangible results to be had by improving cv joint design. Remember Constant Velocity does not mean Consistent or efficient torque transfer. It only means that the rotational velocity, or speed of a shaft does not change as the driven shaft rotates like a u-joint design does.

The technical discussions on CV joint technology that MV referenced in this thread may add some clarity for you. Don't be so stubborn:D! You, like me, are a fabricator. I would think that you would want to learn the most you can about your craft. Only so much can be learned by trial and error, or track time. Add to your wealth of experience some technical research, away from the track, and it will broaden your knowledge, and make for a more efficient, and competitive product.

Read for yourself from people who have nothing to gain in our puny world of UTV racing, what you refused to accept from me:rolleyes:!
You don't need to understand the math behind it. Just the fact that it (efficiency of work being transmitted through an angle) exists, and more importantly, that it has a significant impact in our world. It is after all, a fundamental fact
 

badassmav

Well-Known Member
Jun 11, 2013
1,379
182
63
60
Jamul
I don't think we will see a major change in transmission / CVT from Can-Am, Polaris or Arctic Cat but I have been wrong before.

FYI the same company building planes is not the same one building off-road ATVs and UTVs. They parted ways some time ago.
What I meant was that Lear Jet

http://us.bombardier.com/us/home.htm

is under the same umbrella of companies as Can-am, a conglomerate of companies owned by Bombardier.
 

AReed

Member
Oct 2, 2012
234
2
18
Relax dude

I never said that it didn't add power, what I said was it's not going to gain the numbers that you claim.

No wonder you get so defensive about people's comments towards your posts. When you belittle people by telling them "it's a great time to educate yourself" when you dont know them, you're bound to get some negative comments.
 

badassmav

Well-Known Member
Jun 11, 2013
1,379
182
63
60
Jamul
Relax dude

I never said that it didn't add power, what I said was it's not going to gain the numbers that you claim.

No wonder you get so defensive about people's comments towards your posts. When you belittle people by telling them "it's a great time to educate yourself" when you dont know them, you're bound to get some negative comments.
Maybe it's just me and my position in life, but it always seems like you challenge my posts. I know you have tons of experience w/utv's. More than I'll ever have. But the last thing I am trying to do is belittle you.

You make your living by working with recreational vehicles, so I know you are well versed in that area. I am the first to admit when I've learned something new, and admit publicly that I am self taught. I enjoy being corrected, if it means that I learned something from it. I did not mean imply that,nor do I think, that you are not an educated man.

My math says the figures that I've shared in these forums regarding cv joints and horsepower reaching the wheels are accurate, and I should be able to get our car on a dyno by years end to confirm it. Right or wrong, I will share those results when I get them.
 

the stripping shop

RACER - UTVUnderground Approved
Jan 29, 2009
1,101
137
63
peoria,Az
www.strippingshop.com
free HP is the best HP. I have been playing with these can am and there is a lot of power you can get out of them but you have to change so much. stock can am numbers on dyno 69.7 hp to rear tires.i am up to 79 cant get past 80 yet but still playing and I haven't touched the motor still stock.
 

badassmav

Well-Known Member
Jun 11, 2013
1,379
182
63
60
Jamul
free HP is the best HP. I have been playing with these can am and there is a lot of power you can get out of them but you have to change so much. stock can am numbers on dyno 69.7 hp to rear tires.i am up to 79 cant get past 80 yet but still playing and I haven't touched the motor still stock.
Do you mind sharing in what area did you gained the additional 13% at the wheels? Is your rear diff still in the stock location? I know you said a stock Can-am gets 69.7 hp at the wheels, is that with stock diameter tires also, and at factory ride ht?
 

AReed

Member
Oct 2, 2012
234
2
18
Do you mind sharing in what area did you gained the additional 13% at the wheels? Is your rear diff still in the stock location? I know you said a stock Can-am gets 69.7 hp at the wheels, is that with stock diameter tires also, and at factory ride ht?
You're going to see roughly 68-72 hp to the wheels with a bone stock Maverick. That's the standard that we've been seeing.
 

the stripping shop

RACER - UTVUnderground Approved
Jan 29, 2009
1,101
137
63
peoria,Az
www.strippingshop.com
69.7 was with power commander and 30" ultracross tires and gmz wheels. 62-64 was stock before we cleaned up fuel table and played with tuning. this is just base on this dyno I know every dyno/dyno shop can change that number. But we have had many problems with power commander putting it into limp mode. So know we had company brake into computer.Get ride of all torque crap and move fuel/timing table around works good. Picked up a lot of torque but only about 3-5 hp. But that created another problem that piece of crap clutch slips when you don't want to but grips when you don't want to. Now badass there is were all the power is. Just like you I believe,we had to put stm secondary on. But primary I didn't do stm don't like the weight. first tried to modify clutch just doesn't do it. Know we are testing air dam primary and QSC new one or should I say still waiting on QSC. But with airdam one it does everything it should back shifts rev to limiter now. with the clutches able to lock out much easier we pick up another 4-5 hp. with airdam clutch you lose about 3 lbs of rotating weight. free hp. stock exhaust with cat removed and air filter.
 

Members online

Forum statistics

Threads
17,292
Messages
179,387
Members
12,145
Latest member
felipebenjamin000