Ski-Doo Snowmobiles Forum banner
121 - 140 of 156 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,296 Posts
Never seen welds that bad on those. The kink is always there in Kimpex, they never could make the bend without kinking it, but maybe not as bad as that. Think I would have refused/ returned them if possible. That weld is not normal - even for those.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
508 Posts
Discussion Starter · #122 ·
Never seen welds that bad on those. The kink is always there in Kimpex, they never could make the bend without kinking it, but maybe not as bad as that. Think I would have refused/ returned them if possible. That weld is not normal - even for those.
I called Dennis Kirk. They checked their warehouse and they said that they are all like that. They refunded 50 but I'd rather have good quality skis. I then went to contact Kimpex. Their contact tool is not working. When the original owner dropped off the jacket, he said he might still have the slides for it as well as some track clips. I need about 6 of them.
 

·
Registered
91 Plus, 93 Mach 1 and 97 Mach Z.
Joined
·
1,638 Posts
Hmm...I considered bidding on a pair of those skis on ebay the other week...After seeing your pictures, I am happy I did not...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,296 Posts
Why don’t you give Hudon’s a call. I know people that have bought the Kimpex ones from them and were fine. Maybe they have some older stock that is better. Something changed, as the were not that bad in the past.

Looking at the picture on the Fortnine site here in Canada, the welds look terrible as well. Hopefully you can atleast let them know this is just not acceptable quality. They were not better before.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
508 Posts
Discussion Starter · #125 ·
I'm going to contact Kimpex first and see what they have to say.
I hope to do my leak down test this week. I am going to split the cases and replace the outer seals regardless. The center seals are bathed in RV oil. Can I check just the center seals by pressurizing the RV oil compartment?
 

·
Registered
91 Plus, 93 Mach 1 and 97 Mach Z.
Joined
·
1,638 Posts
Really, what happened to the good old Kimpex company...? Chasing too much cost reductions, ending up with poor quality...? I have noticed there is almost no aftermarket parts branded Kimpex anymore, at least not over here...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,296 Posts
Yes you can check all the rotary valve seals with that pressure test. Procedure is in the manual. Just a few pounds pressure ( check the manual but max 5 psi.) For 5 or 10 minutes. I can check the exact specs in a manual if you don’t have one.

As for the skis, I doubt if Kimpex will care, likely figure they still have a functional part, but the price is high enough that quality control should be better, but gotta remember all this stuff is likely contracted out now, maybe they ordered a batch of a 1000 and they all came in like this and now they are stuck with them. They used to be stamped made in Canada, hope these new ones aren’t. Not sure how any machine or person could weld that bad. I bet the way Kimpex dropped most of their parts for old sleds, that we will eventually just see the PRS skis and trailing arms discontinued.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
508 Posts
Discussion Starter · #129 ·
I have the Bombardier 1985 Shop Manual PN484050300 but cannot find the procedure or limits.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
508 Posts
Discussion Starter · #132 ·
Thanks Pete. What manual did that come out of? Still cannot find that in mine. Looks like I will need a head, pistons, rings, pins. The jugs look great but will need to dimensionally check. The rotary valve plate looks untouched also. Crazy how much metal has liberated from the piston and the motor turns over like nothing ever happened. Just before I split the crankcase, I will check the RV compartment.


Automotive tire Motor vehicle Automotive exterior Automotive fuel system Automotive wheel system
White Gas Automotive tire Flowerpot Metal

Automotive tire Motor vehicle Automotive lighting Rim Audio equipment
 

·
Registered
91 Plus, 93 Mach 1 and 97 Mach Z.
Joined
·
1,638 Posts
After seeing that piston and combustion chamber, please don’t hold back on checking anything…That looks like it’s been through some serious detonation, indicating that cylinder is running super lean.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
508 Posts
Discussion Starter · #134 ·
After seeing that piston and combustion chamber, please don’t hold back on checking anything…That looks like it’s been through some serious detonation, indicating that cylinder is running super lean.
Oddly, the PTO side had a ripped boot and the MAG side did not. Yet all the damage is on the MAG side. Yes, full disassembly except the RV shaft if it holds pressure. That has a separate oil system. As for super lean, did you see the picts of the fuel system (carbs, pump, tank)?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,296 Posts
That came out of an 82 manual that I had in the house here, actually I think its one that you gave me. I have newer 90s manuals in the shop, they are all basically the same procedure.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
508 Posts
Discussion Starter · #136 ·
My RV shaft has some wear grooves in it from the front seals. I saw this on my 79 7500 as well, but not nearly as bad. My plan is to add one extra spacer ring (red arrow) between the seal and the bearing so that the two seals will contact the shaft just forward of the grooves. There seems to be plenty of clearance between the front seal and the impeller to configure the seal/bearing stack as such. Thoughts??
Light Automotive tire Gas Cylinder Auto part
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
52 Posts
Comment about the carb specs from early on in this discussion: I had an 85 MX and a buddy of mine had an 85 Plus. We both got them used in 89. The 86 versions of both of these models were substantially detuned from the 85 versions and the 87s got back to where they should be (a buddy had an 87 MX). That suggests to me that the motors in the 85s might have been running on the edge. For what it's worth, might consider going a tad fat on the jetting at least to start with. There was also a factor safety recall on the driveshafts. Originals were made of aluminum (ooops!) and factory changed them out with steel units due to shearing under high stress.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
508 Posts
Discussion Starter · #138 ·
Comment about the carb specs from early on in this discussion: I had an 85 MX and a buddy of mine had an 85 Plus. We both got them used in 89. The 86 versions of both of these models were substantially detuned from the 85 versions and the 87s got back to where they should be (a buddy had an 87 MX). That suggests to me that the motors in the 85s might have been running on the edge. For what it's worth, might consider going a tad fat on the jetting at least to start with. There was also a factor safety recall on the driveshafts. Originals were made of aluminum (ooops!) and factory changed them out with steel units due to shearing under high stress.
Hello JP. My 85 Plus has a steel jackshaft. I had an 85 MX that I bought new in 84. I never knew about the aluminum shafts or the recall. Mine was steel as I recall. Interesting hough.

As for the jetting, the more recent manuals call for the numbers in red for the 85 Plus. I think I will stick to those yet monitor plug color frequently. The motor went 3700 miles and would have melted down earlier if it was jet size that caused it. The fuel system in this sled was so bad, I am pretty sure that it leaned out from contamination and corrosion. Motor Album:


Rectangle Slope Parallel Font Number
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
52 Posts
That's a great project. Fun walk down memory lane looking at your engine photos.
 
121 - 140 of 156 Posts
Top