New Cyclone Xmas tree

[Bufficus]

I got my new Xmas tree today, but it is very different to the one that broke.
Third and fourth gears are now much thinner than before with a gap inbetween. They are now thinner than the loose gears.
I am guessing this is a redesign? Can anyone confirm theirs is the same before I email Dean?

Buff.

[Timbo]

A mate of mine agrees with what you've said....

[Lambretta Sash]

Had two arrive today and noticed the difference and assume they are the same as 1st batch or this is modification ...?

Sash

[stu69]

Buff, Yes mine's the same. I only picked it up on the way to work, so haven't compared it to the old one, but could see straight away that the gap was a new addition. I was under to impression that they would be a copy of the first batch. Although this would explain why they took so long testing, if they were testing a new design. I trust it will do the trick, although there will be some comments about that.

Stu

[a.lo.v2]

oops, just seen this thread after posting on the other cyclone one.the gap is confusing me as how does the relative gap appear with the loose gears? will go to shed and stack them on a layshaft.

[Bufficus]

I emailed Dean to ask about the 'redesign' last night but have yet to receive a reply.

[Speed Demon]

What you have there is the 3rd version of the xmas tree.

Version 1 had 1st and 2nd machined onto the shaft and 3rd, 4th and 5th pressed on with a specific interference fit which worked fine in testing and caused no problem.

Version 2 was the same design but the interference fit was made tighter for some reason, which in theory should have made it less likely for the pressed-on cogs to spin on the shaft, but which actually caused some of the pressed on gears to crack in use, hence the recall.

Version 3 instead has 3rd and 4th gear machined as a single part and pressed on which means a looser interference fit can be used because now there is double the contact area holding these cogs to the shaft. 5th is still pressed on individually but this is not a problem because there is less torque going through it because it is spinning fastest.

The compromise in making 3rd and 4th as a single part is that there still needs to be a machined gap between the rows of teeth for the cutting tool, so unfortunately the teeth are slightly narrower, but this part has been made out of a much higher grade material in order to increase the robustness of the teeth.

This set-up has been tested fairly thoroughly before it was put into production...

[twenty eight]

got mine today don't care has long as it works

[a.lo.v2]

as a manufacturing solution its probably better but as i offer the cluster to the stacked gears either 2nd or 4th does not align correctly to the corresponding cog.admittedly this is onlyme holding the two components together and i am struggling to take a photo, if i align the 5th gears 4th only seems to make 80 % contact with 4th on the cluster, but i suppose the proof will be on fitting and riding, here goes

[speedball]

Nearly all the replacement new version clusters have now been sent out. Sticky has explained the changes clearly enough so no point going over that, although it's worth adding that these should be a straight swop for the previous clusters, with no need to re-shim anything. Make a quick check with an iphone down the side of the endplate if you wish but all should be as before. As the 3rd and 4th gears are now a one-piece unit on the cluster (with the actual teeth being slightly narrower), it stands to reason that the loose cogs will be bigger than those on the cluster. For those of you fitting Cyclones for the first time, the only cogs that need to align perfectly are the 5ths, simple. If the 5th's align well, everything else will be fine. If anyone has any questions whatsover, please email me directly at the shop.