<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (MotorCityCat @ Nov 11 2009, 07:28 PM)
<{POST_SNAPBACK}></div>
I'll be more specific, the design is more for deep snow/mountain conditions that put more snow in the cooler.
Which is exactly why it will work for a non-mountain sled too. More cooler surface area = more snow hitting the cooler, resulting in increased btu/hr heat removal, won't it? As far as I can tell, that is exactly what my sled needs considering how it overheats too easily. Also, a rear mounted cooler will put the weight of the cooler & coolant at the rear and as you mentioned and as we all know, less weight at the rear is better..
The stock coolers are borderline for the snow conditions we have in our area. What I have found is if the snow is sparse, and I can keep my speed up around 60-70 mph, the engine temps climb very slowly and are safe for quite a distance. If I drive slow with sparse snow, the temp guage will climb to unsafe temps in under a half mile. This reveals to me that if enough air is moved through the tunnel, the air alone can cool the sled but the stock cooling surface area is likely insufficient.
With more surface area the FabCraft cooler adds, air alone may be enough to cool the sled for the occaisonal low-snow road side runs we need to do to connect trails. The air alone at lower speeds may provide enough cooling if the finned surface area is greater. When the new cooler is installed, I will post the results... So we'll see how it turns out after a real world trial.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (MotorCityCat @ Nov 11 2009, 07:28 PM)
<{POST_SNAPBACK}></div>
Regardless your going to have issues with the outer sides of that design due to the fact that your track is going to hit that tunnel cooler.[/b]
My current non OEM track doesn't have the lugs cut out that line up with the clips as the original AC OEM track did. The lugs have already been contacting the coolers for many years, as the ribs of the cooler fins wearing slight lines in the tips of the lugs is clearly visible so I know it makes contact but have yet to find damage.. It has not been a problem/issue for 8000 miles. I cannot foresee it becoming an issue. If there is, I will detect it and go from there.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (MotorCityCat @ Nov 11 2009, 07:28 PM)
<{POST_SNAPBACK}></div>
Adding more weight to the rear of the sled, adding push in the turns. [/b]
I have been riding with the extra weight on the back for over 10000 miles, and yes, it is a handling handi-cap. Running out of gas on our long rides is an even greater handi-cap. Without gas, there will be no push in the turns at all!!! Sometimes there are unavoidable trade-offs. Just the way it goes.
This year I have a 6 USgal tank for the rear rack with a fuel barb in the bottom of the tank. I will be plumbing it into the breather line of the main tank to function in the same way a Tour Buddy works. This means while I ride, it will use the rear fuel first and will lessen the handling handicap issue.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (MotorCityCat @ Nov 11 2009, 07:28 PM)
<{POST_SNAPBACK}></div>
Moving the center of gravity even higher.[/b]
Yes, but if I do end up getting a taller lugged track one day, it is just another unavoidable trade-off. Life isn't perfect, neither is any sled.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (MotorCityCat @ Nov 11 2009, 07:28 PM)
<{POST_SNAPBACK}></div>
Scroll further down on the Fabcraft web-site page that you stole the picture from.[/b]
Well, I suppose you can call it that if you insist. See the attached pic of the e-mail. Don't believe it? Think it's forged? Send Mike an e-mail to verify. :chug: