Finally getting caught up here after much testing all weekend.
First off, lets just back up a bit as to this particular thread's OP. While I understand threads take on a life of their own and it's good to move onto other theories, let me just begin with what i was attempting to figure out in the OP.
Clutching Issues:
I had a Mach revving 7400-7500 right next to an Adrenalin revving 7900-8000. Both brand new sleds of 2022 model year. So the clutch component swap was on, and first proved the ADR ramps would make the Mach rev the same. First question was answered and concluded the Mach did have same power as the Adr.
Hated the Mach ramps, got the Daltons very fast from Chris and slapped them in. Set them up initially from the testing experience at 2.7g to center of body(bottomed) with tip open @77.6g total. This worked quite nicely, and had the Mach revving 8200 cold, and 8000 warm with a long haul fall back to a solid 7900 hot lap.
The big test came Sunday with our big local lake being ready to get onto ice(Lake of Bays).... side by side with Dano's test mule Adrenalin bone stock. Just to refresh memories, the Adrenalin initially had 5mph and 500 rpm over the Mach. Now with the Dalton adj ramps, these two sleds were basically identical in speed. Tapped 112 & 113GPS in some sections of the lake which has less snow than others.
So this was my goal of this thread, to answer the question why my Mach was so far off from the Adrenaline. I do think the 880 ramps are much nicer then the Mach ramps overall, however I love the Daltons for their obvious adjustability as I can dial in rpms for diff belts ect ect.
For me this is how you clutch, start with ramps with a range, now I will move to the springs of my choice(Dalton brand) that will not sack over time, I do this on all sleds I own, not just this Mach. I also believe we need less helix angle, and will be ordering that as well.
Other issues:
After a long day of lake running and watching the tach, I have some conclusions.
First off, i do not feel there is any octane(or lack of octane) ECU intrusion. We tried alot of short and very very long pulls holding WOT for 3-4 miles even, and my RPMS held solid. Longer hauls would stick at 7900 once all was hot. Never below.
When hitting snow/ice sections the Rpms drop a fair bit though, then come back fast.....this is telltale sign of too soft back-pressure or in other words secondary spring not holding solid rpms. Secondary is reacting to the surface change from ice to snow. My answer will be more spring and less helix combo. Always been a big fan of Dalton helix too, Dale works his magic on the design and top quality bushings, all measured in equal manner as BRP helix. 47 is far too steep for start, and 40 is too steep for finish. I will certainly post what I end up with after testing down the road. Also will be adding more primary spring as well, along with Ultimax.
In the end, this ECU is not producing anywhere near 17.6PSI IMO. It certainly feels strong in middle but top end just doesnt have it. I would be surprised if this was anywhere over 14psi peak boost.
I really dont think this will change either. The more miles I get on this sled, the more I think there is NO break-in 'chip' at all. It's been running exact same since day 1. I have close to 300 miles now on ticker and have gone through well over 3 tankfuls with no change in power.
I do not think there are any boost leaks as I have checked every connection, and I do not think that there is any crack pressure issue being too low ect.
Unless the ECU magically unleashes more boost at 1000 miles or something, i think BRP will need to come out with a reflash or something. For them to advertise 17.6PSI last fall and suck us all in, and deliver 14-15psi or so is really terrible.
And Nick has been testing the standalone from Hurricane with great success over 20psi or so, and crack pressure hold fine, and i think his forearms are sore from holding on! So these engines as designed can run strong, its the ECU holding us back and likely BRP can fix that but will they???
Dan