The only benift it will give u is either longevity and or the option to spin the tyres
The only thing I think they could argue is u can gear higher due to the fact u can feather the clutch to get moving
But ain't most of u running a tensioner clutch
If u start selling 1 inch versions ill certainly be intrested
Yes- the norm is either a belt tensioner system, or in some classes a centrifugal clutch. I can see this manual clutch tolerating the heat and abuse better than a C-clutch, and with no parasitic drag from a belt. In addition,
not using a belt means getting rid of the sideloading on the PTO and tranny input shaft. This potentially extends bearing life. This will also take the guesswork out of selecting an appropriate belt size, which can be hit-or-miss with a tensioner setup.
This could also sut down on belt slip, which could easily be seen as a clear advantage against other racers.
Gearing higher, however, may bot be all it's cracked up to be. I'm still up to my schnozz in research, but it would seem that gearing is a delicate balance. I'm sure kart racers on this forum would agree. Yes, you want the high speed, but need to be able to rapidly accelerate out of the turns, and we're talking fairly short tracks, here. Gear too high, and you're now slipping the bejeezus out of that clutch to avoid bogging- thus losing any advantage you had.
The BIG issue, as I see it- is convincing the race gods to let me try it. This is "new". If they don't understand it, they won't allow it. If they think it's "voodoo", it's out.
Hence, more info is better. Presenting the unit in person is one thing. Having a spec sheet, and technical drawing may help explain it. But in my limited experience to date, they seem to blindly stick to policy, and don't seem particularly interested in illustrating the scenario(s) that led to the policies.
That said, I'm still waaaay interested! Sponsorship?
