Can-Am Maverick Forum banner

1 - 20 of 104 Posts

·
Vendor
Joined
·
594 Posts
Discussion Starter #1 (Edited)
I have a question, the way I understand this only a few of these clutches are coming apart or whatever while the largest majority are problem free.

My question is, is this happening after someone either the owner or dealer did something to the clutch or it did it from factory and never been touched by anyone else?

The one where someone else touched it is easily explained and easily fixed but I am want to know who exactly is having this issue.

I don't believe the sky is falling on this clutch system.

Please clue me in.

Todd
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,621 Posts
I didnt have a single problem with mine,but I didnt want to wait until I did either. So I replaced mine just for insurance purposes. However, I don't the like the fact that the Can-am clutch is designed to slip. That loss of hp transfer is stupid IMO.
 

·
Vendor
Joined
·
594 Posts
Discussion Starter #3
I didnt have a single problem with mine,but I didnt want to wait until I did either. So I replaced mine just for insurance purposes. However, I don't the like the fact that the Can-am clutch is designed to slip. That loss of hp transfer is stupid IMO.
Who said it is designed to slip? It's not

I have a ton of information on this clutch, I have a inside track to some information but so much wrong information is out already I am kinda scared to talk about it just yet.

This is what I will say about what I think you are saying. There are two parts that mate together that are beveled, they actually are beveled to give more surface area to stop slipping. The only time these slip is when the mating surfaces are not machined good and or improper torqueing.

This clutch if gone into by anyone else other than Can Am factory has to be done one way and it seems to be fine then except in rare cases.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
545 Posts
Will respectfully disagree with you on part of this.
Less than .5 hrs - Pulled the covers and marked the bolt.
At 3.5 hrs pulled the cover to check- bolt had tightened 1/2 a turn....
Installed STM clutch to prevent pending failure.

Mine had the slippery washers installed at the factory. It had never been touched by anyone than the factory or my sharpie.

Upon teardown inspect I found the tapers are not the same angle, thus slippage occurs due to only partial contact. Verified this when I tried to lap the tapers, they are hardened, and total contact width is less than 1/16". Small contact patch equalls lack of friction leading to excessive slipping, leading to more rotation than the slippery washers are designed to handle. This in turn tightens the bolt to the point of failure. It appears the issue might be with the machining of the taper areas.
There are two parts that mate together that are beveled, they actually are beveled to give more surface area to stop slipping. The only time these slip is when the mating surfaces are not machined good and or improper torqueing.
 

·
Vendor
Joined
·
594 Posts
Discussion Starter #5
Will respectfully disagree with you on part of this.
Less than .5 hrs - Pulled the covers and marked the bolt.
At 3.5 hrs pulled the cover to check- bolt had tightened 1/2 a turn....
Installed STM clutch to prevent pending failure.

Mine had the slippery washers installed at the factory. It had never been touched by anyone than the factory or my sharpie.

Upon teardown inspect I found the tapers are not the same angle, thus slippage occurs due to only partial contact. Verified this when I tried to lap the tapers, they are hardened, and total contact width is less than 1/16". Small contact patch equalls lack of friction leading to excessive slipping, leading to more rotation than the slippery washers are designed to handle. This in turn tightens the bolt to the point of failure. It appears the issue might be with the machining of the taper areas.
You are not disagreeing with me, I didn't say it was happening, I was asking how often it is happening.

IT does appears yours was not machined correctly and I see your point.

In my quote I said when they are not machined right and yours is one of them. I am just thinking this is a minor number of people is all.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,621 Posts
You are not disagreeing with me, I didn't say it was happening, I was asking how often it is happening.

IT does appears yours was not machined correctly and I see your point.

In my quote I said when they are not machined right and yours is one of them. I am just thinking this is a minor number of people is all.
So how can the consumer know if theirs is not machined properly? therefore it may be better to just replace the problem instead of trying to deal with it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
707 Posts
Mine exploded with the factory clutch prior to slippery washer recall. Destroyed everything. Had the slippery washer installed with whole new CVT system and less than 10 hours did the same thing. Sheared the bolt in the secondary again destroying everything. Both times were running flat terrain. Granted I was flogging it but it still came apart both times.
 

·
Vendor
Joined
·
594 Posts
Discussion Starter #9
I have not figured that one out yet, it is a minor number of people and we do sell stuff but at same time I hate selling people they don't need. We have only had our Maverick a few weeks and I am still waiting on Admin to get my vendor account here going. What I can tell you is I am deep with several companies including BRP dealing with belt and clutch issues, parts and fixes.

I suppose what worries me is the sky is the falling mentality.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
545 Posts
You are not disagreeing with me, I didn't say it was happening, I was asking how often it is happening.

IT does appears yours was not machined correctly and I see your point.

In my quote I said when they are not machined right and yours is one of them. I am just thinking this is a minor number of people is all.
Can't say how many % wise - not all failures are posted here; in the grand scheme of things this is a small community.
And if those that have failed, has any one taken the time to determine why? Or are they just putting on another hoping to fix the issue. IMHO stronger bolts are not the answer, just a mask for the issue. My guess is the factory would want the damaged ones back to CSI them. BRP is a smart bunch, it will get figured out.

In all fairness it is a decent clutch for stock. IF the tapers matched I would keep it for a spare.

If you are consulting with them, my first place to look would be the bevel mismatch. Mine might be a rare machining issue, don't know. Will even up the offer- you can CSI mine, in exchange for whatever is next...

The STM was not because the sky was falling- the bolt was tightening, the tapers were off, and doom was coming.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
853 Posts
I'll just say this..... Hunterworks, you very obviously have absolutely no mechanical knowledge at all!
Glamisfan, This statement couldn't be further from the truth. I've had the pleasure of working with Todd on my Rhino and this guy is one of the best mechanics I know. I don't know him personally but have talked to him on the phone several times. He helped me dial in my Rhino like no one else could. Check out his website, read some of his technical documents and watch some of his videos. This guy is the best and I am happy he is jumping on the maverick band wagon.
 

·
Vendor
Joined
·
594 Posts
Discussion Starter #13
Can't say how many % wise - not all failures are posted here; in the grand scheme of things this is a small community.
And if those that have failed, has any one taken the time to determine why? Or are they just putting on another hoping to fix the issue. IMHO stronger bolts are not the answer, just a mask for the issue. My guess is the factory would want the damaged ones back to CSI them. BRP is a smart bunch, it will get figured out.

In all fairness it is a decent clutch for stock. IF the tapers matched I would keep it for a spare.
Not new to UTV's by no stretch, actually helped BRP develop the Commander but just trying to do some investigative work before heading off in a direction to help people.

I know can am is changing it, I know there are already a couple people offering replacements and two more coming. So what I am doing is gathering information that helps us that in turn will help you guys.

One thing about Hunterworks is we don't like you spending any more money than you have to as long as you accomplish the goal.

To be honest with you, I think the issue is ill fitting mass produced clutches that with a less HP machine do fine. Again I really have not formed a definite opinion yet. The jury is still out with me so far.

Todd
 

·
Vendor
Joined
·
594 Posts
Discussion Starter #14
Glamisfan, This statement couldn't be further from the truth. I've had the pleasure of working with Todd on my Rhino and this guy is one of the best mechanics I know. I don't know him personally but have talked to him on the phone several times. He helped me dial in my Rhino like no one else could. Check out his website, read some of his technical documents and watch some of his videos. This guy is the best and I am happy he is jumping on the maverick band wagon.
Thanks!!!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
545 Posts
To be honest with you, I think the issue is ill fitting mass produced clutches that with a less HP machine do fine. Again I really have not formed a definite opinion yet. The jury is still out with me so far.

Todd
Seems like a good place to start.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,621 Posts
To be honest with you, I think the issue is ill fitting mass produced clutches that with a less HP machine do fine. Again I really have not formed a definite opinion yet. The jury is still out with me so far.

Todd
Sounds reasonable to me
 

·
Vendor
Joined
·
594 Posts
Discussion Starter #17 (Edited)
As mentioned I get to talk to a lot of people that know way more than me on this.

Here is the recommendation for now.

Brand new maverick, remove the front half of primary, clean the bevel portion with break clean, reinstall bolt, tighten and torque to 95ftlbs, drive it around a few minutes starting and stopping, kinda get on it a bit then retorque to 95 again but do NOT loosen it.

This recommendation comes from someone who wants to remain nameless but says this should hold it.

Again we are not resting, and will form a better recommendation in the future.

Todd
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
707 Posts
As mentioned I get to talk to a lot of people that know way more than me on this.

Here is the recommendation for now.

Brand new maverick, remove the front half of primary, clean the bevel portion with break clean, reinstall bolt, tighten and torque to 95ftlbs, drive it around a few minutes starting and stopping, kinda get on it a bit then retorque to 95 again but do NOT loosen it.

This recommendation comes from someone who wants to remain nameless but says this should hold it.

Again we are not resting, and will form a better recommendation in the future.

Todd
That's it? Seriously
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,127 Posts
Okay, here's what would I like you to do so you will understand what the problem is. Do Google search, using the images search function. Search pictures of the Yamaha Rhino primary and how it is locked together. it has some little spline on the outside steel thing that make the outside house locked together with the inside half. then do a search on the CVTech primary. study how its locked together. there is a hexagon cut into the outside steel thing, that locks it to the inside half. you can do this for the STM and the QSC also. now take a maverick or commander primary in your hand and understand how it does not lock together. once you understand that fully, then you would have to agree that there is a design flaw in the way that BRB make things. If after all of that you still don't agree that there's a design flaw in the fact that the two half do not lock together, then I would have to once again say that you have no mechanical understanding at all.
 
1 - 20 of 104 Posts
Top