[finally conviced her]

After many hours of wearing out google searching for

• Maverick Clutch failure
• QSC clutch problems
• STM clutch explodes
• CVTech Clutch issues
• and probably 50 variations of anything that can relate to Maverick aftermarket clutching issues

I came to the decision that I was doing the same as most on here have QSC/STM. But the deciding factor was 2 part.

1. Local dealer stocks QSC/STM
2. Didn't get response from..... (you know who)

BUUUUUUUUTTTTTT I found out something this morning.
And I'm sure all you patriotic Americans will appreciate this
CVTech.AAB is a Canadian company and while its not well advertised (no idea why) but I have local dealers of CVTech
So I get to buy a clutch that I couldn't find any overwhelming bad reviews of for a 1/3 the price of what it was going to cost me to get the QSC up here. (allot of that price difference is import duties, shipping etc. etc. etc......)

I will post customer service reviews, either positive, negative or neutral. May give others options they didn't know they had.

So I will start down that road today, and see where it leads.

 

[Tomcat]

FYI, do a bit more research, I've heard and read that the cvtech while it will work on the maverick was not designed to. It was designed for can am atv's, not sure it will hold up to the extra weight and power, one guy on here was not pleased AT ALL with his cvtech. QSC pulls like a freight train tho.

 

[finally conviced her]

FYI, do a bit more research, I've heard and read that the cvtech while it will work on the maverick was not designed to. It was designed for can am atv's, not sure it will hold up to the extra weight and power, one guy on here was not pleased AT ALL with his cvtech. QSC pulls like a freight train tho.

I've found lots that weren't happy with everything. But in my opinion the QSC and CVTech are equal in reliability and lack of catastrophic failures.

In my reseach I found that CVTech now (not sure when they started) build an HD version that was designed for the extra forces involved with the Maverick

 

[Benzo]

the cv tech is a good inexpensive 1 piece primary , and will help with the belt slipping ,

but does not put any more power to the ground , not sure why , or how others put more power to the ground when there kinda the same thing, ,

 

[Andy]

the cv tech is a good inexpensive 1 piece primary , and will help with the belt slipping ,

but does not put any more power to the ground , not sure why , or how others put more power to the ground when there kinda the same thing, ,

Umm, don't know where you got that info, but 1st hand experience tells me otherwise. 1st, if it's not slipping the belt it has to be getting more power to the ground. 2nd, when coupled with the STM secondary, it pulls the front wheels off the ground (no bouncing involved) on pavement. 3rd, the pic I posted in another thread shows how hard it pulls climbing sand dunes. I think the CVTech works great tuned properly. I had Adam ///Airdam do some tuning on it last Thanks Giving. my belt temps after his tune were 164* duning, and 192* after 4 back to back runs on Olds. I will admit I lost some top end compared to stock, but I believe it has more to do with too heavy a spring in my secondary

 

[Benzo]

Umm, don't know where you got that info, but 1st hand experience tells me otherwise. 1st, if it's not slipping the belt it has to be getting more power to the ground. 2nd, when coupled with the STM secondary, it pulls the front wheels off the ground (no bouncing involved) on pavement. 3rd, the pic I posted in another thread shows how hard it pulls climbing sand dunes. I think the CVTech works great tuned properly. I had Adam ///Airdam do some tuning on it last Thanks Giving. my belt temps after his tune were 164* duning, and 192* after 4 back to back runs on Olds. I will admit I lost some top end compared to stock, but I believe it has more to do with too heavy a spring in my secondary

I didn't mention it paired with a stm silly lol

and glamisfan and mega raced and were dead even stock vs cv tech - no gain there

no mention of a stm - but yes a stm diff story


like I said u would think it would be more hp to the ground with the 1 piece design , but must take the stm to do it

 

[Andy]

Actually it was a 3 way race. I was there. L'île i Saïd.wé post s little top end speed.

 

[Benzo]

Actually it was a 3 way race. I was there. L'île i Saïd.wé post s little top end speed.

huh ? u guys seen more top end with the cv tech ?

 

[Andy]

huh ? u guys seen more top end with the cv tech ?

Sorry, I was posting from my phone, without my glasses :disappointed: Getting old sux ass. It should have read " Like I said, we lost a little top end speed."

 

[Benzo]

Sorry, I was posting from my phone, without my glasses :disappointed: Getting old sux ass. It should have read " Like I said, we lost a little top end speed."

ah I see I see , lol

thx 4 the info

 

[jlrenken]

good info in the deciding faze too. money is an issue but not as much as reliability.

 

[finally conviced her]

Sorry, I was posting from my phone, without my glasses :disappointed: Getting old sux ass. It should have read " Like I said, we lost a little top end speed."

I read and understood what your first post meant. I'm well trained, I have a 20yo son who doesn't EVER proof read texts

 

[AReed]

QSC will be releasing their Gen 2 primary clutch very soon.

 

[Tzenev]

Is the price going to go up at all Alex?

 

[///AIRDAM]

andy i have a feeling that your bike is suffering from the same thing as charles. the RPMs are low, meaning the engine is low on power. when i adjusted the clutch i changed the weights around. and had to go lighter than any other mav i have ever had to do in order to get the RPMs up where they should be. which means on my end, your power is less. the weights in the primary overcome the springs tension at a certain RPM based on the amount of torque you apply to the clutch. its a very simple algorithm. when i had to lighten the weights in your primary as light as we had to go, i dont remember if i ever said anything to you, but thats the lightest weight i have ever had to put in a maverick to make it pull RPM. which means that your engine is lower on power than a normal mav. adjusting the weights got the RPM up but it can not make up for lost power. which in charles case he had an ECU that was pulling timing for some reason. his car was most definitely low on power. now i can adjust the weights and make the RPMs right, but i cant magically gain the power back from an ECU thats pulling 10+ degrees of timing and almost 10hp less than stock. by having to go so light on your weights i think your ECU has you pulled back into a lower power setting. the reason you lost your top speeds and cant run 75+ anymore is possibly because your engine is low on power. i know it seems fast out of the hole, and pulls hard, BUT i myself think you are still lower on power than a brand new machine. the clutch is telling me so. every CVT works the same. the spring tension is overcome by the weights overall mass at a certain RPM based on power applied. i know the spring tension in your primary, and the mass of the weights. and with that combination that had to be used to get your RPMs right i would venture to say your engine is lower on power than a stocker. which could be one of the reason your machine dont have neck breaking top speeds.

 

[AReed]

Is the price going to go up at all Alex?

Its suppose to be $875 from what i understand. Don't hold me to that though.

 

[Tzenev]

Ok. Are you going to be testing one?

 

[AReed]

I should have one within the next week or two

 

[Andy]

andy i have a feeling that your bike is suffering from the same thing as charles. the RPMs are low, meaning the engine is low on power. when i adjusted the clutch i changed the weights around. and had to go lighter than any other mav i have ever had to do in order to get the RPMs up where they should be. which means on my end, your power is less. the weights in the primary overcome the springs tension at a certain RPM based on the amount of torque you apply to the clutch. its a very simple algorithm. when i had to lighten the weights in your primary as light as we had to go, i dont remember if i ever said anything to you, but thats the lightest weight i have ever had to put in a maverick to make it pull RPM. which means that your engine is lower on power than a normal mav. adjusting the weights got the RPM up but it can not make up for lost power. which in charles case he had an ECU that was pulling timing for some reason. his car was most definitely low on power. now i can adjust the weights and make the RPMs right, but i cant magically gain the power back from an ECU thats pulling 10+ degrees of timing and almost 10hp less than stock. by having to go so light on your weights i think your ECU has you pulled back into a lower power setting. the reason you lost your top speeds and cant run 75+ anymore is possibly because your engine is low on power. i know it seems fast out of the hole, and pulls hard, BUT i myself think you are still lower on power than a brand new machine. the clutch is telling me so. every CVT works the same. the spring tension is overcome by the weights overall mass at a certain RPM based on power applied. i know the spring tension in your primary, and the mass of the weights. and with that combination that had to be used to get your RPMs right i would venture to say your engine is lower on power than a stocker. which could be one of the reason your machine dont have neck breaking top speeds.

I have the same feeling Adam. I have tried every other thing to get up to speed. I followed Charles post on what he found out on the ECU. I am seriously concidering haveing the ECU re-flashed.

 

[Cinergyswedge]

Poor fuel quality.. faulty knock sensors.. those types of things can cause timing pull....

Sent from my SCH-I545 using Tapatalk