By the way, are we sure of the material from which the cup washers have to be made? I have visited a specialist in steel manufactures and he says that more hardness also implies more fragility. Of course may be he is not right because after 1 hour he was not sure what recommed to me due to the "complicated" work that the cup washers have to perform ... so may be at the end he is not as specialist as he says... I don't know According to the forum should be of a hardness between 45-55 HRZ. According to this man it is really hard. The original washer, according to the test he did have a hardness of 31HRC. Mines were not broken after 23.000 km So I have not asked for them yet because now I doubt what really ask for. May be 35,75895 HRC is the proper value Anyway, something to take also into account, don't you think?
All this worry so late in the game, so to speak. These higher quality washers have been going into peoples clutches for a long time now, with no reports of failures, this is enough proof of the method, Q.E.D.
@DYNOBOB Thanks for posting the pictures, I'm waiting for the cup washers to arrive. I still can't figure out if this problem is due to bad materials, improper dimensions, improper assembly, improper use of the MC or the lack of a cush hub because my washers still look good after 37000 kms.
I believe Husky may have a jig that clamps the pieces together during assembly similar to what I made. What my approach did was draw the basket and gear together enough that the top "spring retention plate" was sitting flush on the three legs of the basket while the rivets went in. There was no chance that assemble was out of true when finished. In reality though, the act of hammering the rivets may draw the plate down tight to the basket legs anyway. .
You're welcome. In hindsight, I wish I had left the basket alone. My washers probably wouldn't have looked much different with twice as many miles on them. I also question what affect the added thickness of the new washers has on the intended cush action. The increased cumulative stiffness from additionally compressing six springs may be a significant % change. I know when I added thin washers to compress my CBR900RR clutch basket springs it had a big affect on clutch slippage under boost. I know many had no choice but to address the issue, I only question if it's the best thing to do for those of us with little wear. My 2 cents... .
I was thinking about that while mounting the new washers on the springs and trying to fit one to the basket. The increased preload is not insignificant considering the K that those springs have. My old washers were practically perfect except for 3 which had slight wear on them (pics later). I would like to think that the pre-Agusta models used better materials and whatnot, but I had a '99 SM610S for a short while before my '00 and I recall finding a piece of a cup washer when draining the oil, and the bike had about 27k kms. Look, in the end I don't think the bikes will suffer this modification. Undoubtedly more force will go down the transimission but it's not like it won't cush anymore. And in my case the clutch was getting strangely noisy anyway, in fact I think it was the spring retaining part being particularly worn. Who knows at this point? EDIT Today I went to the local shop I use when I need help so I got to speak with the mechanic about this. He said that it's better for the springs to have some preload so the cushing action doesn't compress the spring right away like it does with stock washers, which I thinl could be tied to the premature wear on a lot of them. The rattly sound these clutches make could also be caused by that. However he appointed that the springs and the rivets will receive more stress with the higher preload and will inevitably loosen/break earlier. Here are the pics of my cup washers at 37000 kms. As you can tell, very little wear. The plate is badly scarred though
I think that those rivets are supposed to just bottom out. I have a hunch that if you installed (not permanently, only to check the clearance) the gear on the basket without the two components #54 and #55 between them, regardless of how hard you hit the rivets you would easily notice clearance between them because they could wiggle. IMO when everything is assembled including #54 and #55, even if the rivets have been completely smashed, that cone shaped spring is only preloaded and can still be compressed, thanks to the fact that -I guess- the three bosses of the basket are thick enough to leave some play. The function of that spring is -still IMO- to prevent the components from wiggling.
The function of the cone washer and flat washer is to separate the basket and gear just enough that they don't rub as the cush function takes place (and provide the pivot surface). .
I agree with you on that, but you also wrote, if I got it right, that the more you squeeze the rivets, the more you squeeze the cone washer and that therefore, if you squeeze them unevenly, the gear will be tilted in respect to the basket. I can't be sure about this, since I don't have those components disassembled in front of me, but I guess that the gear and the basket are likely to have been dimensioned in a way that prevents that from happening. Since I recently downloaded Fusion360 and I wanted to try it, I've drawn a representation of the situation (some details/components are misssing and the proportions are wrong, I know): In the picture, the surfaces A and B are flush with each other and there is a gap between the gear and the basket. IF I am right about that gap, then you can smash those rivets as much as you want and you can smash one more than the other two, but unless you warp the basket and provided you have squeezed them all completely, there will always be the same gap between the gear and the basket and it will always be even on the three bosses of the basket. Then, the cone washer keeps some preload between the basket and the gear, keeping them separated and preventing them from wiggling easily. To sum it up, IMO with those rivets we can apply the same concept that we usually aplly when installing a bearing into its seat: we just have to press it in until it touches the bottom, then we can apply some more pressure to make sure that it's completely in, but unless we really put too much force and bend/break something, the job is done. I have this opinion becuse a design in which the amount and the evenness of preload of the cone washer depends on the rivets would be possible but probably disadvantageous for the factory itself.
Just started it tonight, runs great. New voltage regulator is fantastic, voltage dead steady at 14.3 volts at idle or rev'd. .
I remember the washers now, one cupped as a stand-off, but not them being an issue on reassembly. I just slammed 'em back together. Done two of them now - no issues. But then I'm just a shade-tree mechanic.
Anyone have any issues with the new cup washers not wanting to sit flush in the springs? I'm thinking maybe my springs are toast too.
I think this is interesting. In the spare parts superdual catalogue, you can not order rivets nor cup washers... What do you think? the other pieces seem to match I'm going to ask how much money costs piece number 26...
And some references are the same but a lot of them are different. What do you think? Transmission ratio has changed?
29 is the rivet. 53 is the spring cup washer. Order the rivets if you can get them, but get hardened steel washers made or sourced from someone that can make them. This is an easy and permanent fix for a weak point in the clutch assembly. If they come apart the pieces go through your motor. That's not a happy time.
Of course I know 29 is the rivet. 53 is the spring cup washer. This comes from TE630´s spare parts catalogue. What I was trying to say is that in the Superdual Catalog you can not order rivets nor washers.... ... do that suggest you something ?
