Snowmobile Fanatics banner

1 - 20 of 21 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
459 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Here is a great article I found on real world weights of the new sleds. Great info.


http://www.maximumsled.com/maximumsled/snowmobile/articles_layout.asp?articleid=940&zoneid=4
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,056 Posts
Hmmm. Those twins seem really heavy, about as heavy as my snow-pig Aggressive chassis XCR-800 pig-triple. We all know how heavy the Aggressive chassis is, and how heavy the triples are. Some things never change.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
11,272 Posts
Phazer FX 500-558 lbs
Dragon 700CFI-573lbs

Thats a 15 lb difference comparing a revolutionary new lightweight 500cc 80hp sled vs a IQ chassis 140+hp 700. Just thought that was interesting comparison when you put power/weight into prospective
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,943 Posts
Originally posted by TheKuskokid
[br]Hmmm. Those twins seem really heavy, about as heavy as my snow-pig Aggressive chassis XCR-800 pig-triple. We all know how heavy the Aggressive chassis is, and how heavy the triples are. Some things never change.
So what is the weight of your sled, ready to go, full of everything? Oh, not to mention, the new sleds have twice the suspension travel, many more EPA regulations for sound deadening and emissions output, all of which add weight and all of which your XCR wasn't required to have or didn't have. Add on all the things required of your sled to get it on par with today's sleds and industry EPA standards, and we're back right where we started. [:)][}:)]

Oh yeah, the four strokes have an excuse. [:p]
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,138 Posts
Originally posted by TheKuskokid
[br]Hmmm. Those twins seem really heavy, about as heavy as my snow-pig Aggressive chassis XCR-800 pig-triple. We all know how heavy the Aggressive chassis is, and how heavy the triples are. Some things never change.
Yep Kusko you'd better get rid of that "heavy" ol pig and get yerself one of them there new "lightweight" twins!! That just goes to show ya that SMOOTH advertising can actually convince people that 80 HP is ALOT of power!! LOL [:D]
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,067 Posts
Originally posted by erick
[br]
Originally posted by TheKuskokid
[br]Hmmm. Those twins seem really heavy, about as heavy as my snow-pig Aggressive chassis XCR-800 pig-triple. We all know how heavy the Aggressive chassis is, and how heavy the triples are. Some things never change.
So what is the weight of your sled, ready to go, full of everything? Oh, not to mention, the new sleds have twice the suspension travel, many more EPA regulations for sound deadening and emissions output, all of which add weight and all of which your XCR wasn't required to have or didn't have. Add on all the things required of your sled to get it on par with today's sleds and industry EPA standards, and we're back right where we started. [:)][}:)]

Oh yeah, the four strokes have an excuse. [:p]
I don't know how bright it is to comment on what the Admin says...

But the XCR Xtra-10 was/is a great suspension. I don't really think you need 20 inches of travel.

Sleds are changing, yes. There always has to be new technology to keep things from stagnating in the open market. The mfr's need to "one-up" each other to keep buyers interested and coming back for more.

My complaint, and what Kusko I believe is trying to say is that these uninformed people learn "buzz words" from salesman and others. Suchs as "Lightweight twin" and think that THEIR sled is extremely light compared to the 'older' triples. When in reality they weigh approximately the same. Between regulations and everything else, it's like comparing apples to oranges at this point.

Bryan
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,604 Posts
Originally posted by RMK-KING
[br]Phazer FX 500-558 lbs
Dragon 700CFI-573lbs

Thats a 15 lb difference comparing a revolutionary new lightweight 500cc 80hp sled vs a IQ chassis 140+hp 700. Just thought that was interesting comparison when you put power/weight into prospective
In the pahzor defence its a great sled for beginner sleders. heck its even a fun sled for me to boot around on, plus it jumps great and in the tight twisty ditchs it was right on my buddies rev 440's butt. but i do agree id take a iq over it[:p]
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,943 Posts
Originally posted by ibreakstuff
I don't really think you need 20 inches of travel.
This reminds me of a quote from Bill Gates on computer memory.

"640kb ought to be enough for anyone". Right now the standard memory for a new personal computer is something like 1,048,576 kb [1 GB]. I know it's hard to compare computers to snowmobiles...but you get what I'm saying.

We've been down this road. We know where it leads. Let's not go down it again.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,067 Posts
I thought that was 10 years ago - he said "16 meg is all we'll ever need" and today's Vista is a MINIMUM of 1 Gig.

You're right, I never really though of where this sport could go. 4 inches of travel 30 years ago was luxurious. If they could do it today without making a sled tippy, I'd be all for it (the 20 inches of travel). But that would probably require a 100" ski stance. With today's technology at least. Maybe some kind of Segway-like gyroscopes to keep in balance in the future? Who knows..

There will eventually be a ceiling for most of the things on sleds. They could easily produce a car with 1000 hp and 1100 lb-ft of torque, but they don't need to. Soon we'll see more body changes and comfort added, as well as more reliability and MPG more than anything.

Bryan
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,943 Posts
I agree. Comfort, reliability, and fuel economy are the main things of focus for the future I think.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,165 Posts
wow
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,056 Posts
Erick,

I knew I could draw you out eventually.[Band]

My sled has a claimed dry weight of 575 pounds. 10.7 gallons of gas @ 6.2 lbs/g and 3 quart oil @ ~3 pounds plus antifreeze of 12 pounds. We have 654 pounds. Which is where the other rides seem to be.

Now we use present-day tech: lightweight engine tech for the 2-strokers, metals tech for lightweight and higher strength alloys and yes plastics tech for those nice, lightweight hoods and bellypans. For your emissions fixation exactly the same tech being used now by the major companies. Which as a comp programmer you know is what is allowing us to reach such high H.P. in such small (your 600) packages. You know, 130 H.P.[:0] in a 600 twin was a pipe-dream 5-6 years ago.
We come back full circle to the unmentionable which you didn't want to mention.
If you PM me your mailing address, I will be pleased to send you the promotional DVD by Bombardier that clearly explains the workings of their E-Tech technology, which I think is the very best thing to happen to 2-strokes since the tuned pipe. While it isn't on the level of a white-paper, it has enough info it isn't just propaganda.

And I admit I'll buy a 4-stroke (turbo), when Yammmie comes out with one.

P.S. They DO NOT have twice the suspension travel. The new sleds have less. At least with Polaris. They measure the vertical travel at the rear bumper, not at the rail. I do not know when Polaris began doing that; maybe someone does?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
459 Posts
Discussion Starter #15
Originally posted by erick
[br]
Originally posted by TheKuskokid
[br]Hmmm. Those twins seem really heavy, about as heavy as my snow-pig Aggressive chassis XCR-800 pig-triple. We all know how heavy the Aggressive chassis is, and how heavy the triples are. Some things never change.
So what is the weight of your sled, ready to go, full of everything? Oh, not to mention, the new sleds have twice the suspension travel, many more EPA regulations for sound deadening and emissions output, all of which add weight and all of which your XCR wasn't required to have or didn't have. Add on all the things required of your sled to get it on par with today's sleds and industry EPA standards, and we're back right where we started. [:)][}:)]

Oh yeah, the four strokes have an excuse. [:p]
I agree, the new sleds have come along way in technology, and to keep the weight about the same, or lower in some cases, says alot for new sleds. To use my 700 Dragon as a example, the wet weight is 573.5 lbs! Now compare that with one of my older sleds like my 98 XC 700 (580 lbs according to Supertrax magazine back in 1998). For all practical purposes they are the same weight. . . but my 2007 handles MUCH better than my old 98 (I loved my 98 and think it's still an awesome performing sled). The 1998 XC 700 is about 120 hp+/- and the Dragon is 145 hp (according to Dynotech.com). The handling especially, is head and shoulders above my old 700, not to mention power output, plus you get better fuel economy and it's EPA compliant. Some things do change. [:D]
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
366 Posts
They try to make the case for weighing sleds wet, but it doesn't work. The truth is that it is easier for them because the sleds they weigh sometimes already have some gas and oil in them and it is easier to fill them full than to empty them. In reality, the "Real world" weight can just as easily be with 10 pounds of oil and gas as 70 pounds.

10 gallons of gas can be put in a sled with a 12 gallon tank and make it weigh less than that "lightweight sled" with a 10 gallon tank.

It handicaps a sled that has large gas and oil tanks, which is normally thought of as a good thing.

One of the magazines is finally close to getting it right (Snow Goer, March 2007). But they did not do it completely right in their test.

Sleds should be weighed with the gas ond oil tank empty and the other fluids at their normal levels. That would be considered the "dry weight".
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,621 Posts
To get an accurate comparison they should put enough gas and oil in it to go about 100 miles. Some sleds have smaller gas tank because don't have to carry as much to go the same distance that other sleds need.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
577 Posts
Originally posted by torkerob
[br]To get an accurate comparison they should put enough gas and oil in it to go about 100 miles. Some sleds have smaller gas tank because don't have to carry as much to go the same distance that other sleds need.
So how do you decide what kind of mileage a snowmobile gets? And who Decides?
What kind of surface? What Temp? Studs or No Studs?
Way to many variables to come up with *How much gas/oil* they should put in.

Weigh them all full... Just subtract a couple gallons of gas if there is a difference in tank size. How hard can it be???

Seems like the people complaining own/want the sleds listed as pigs
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
366 Posts
Originally posted by BarkMulcher
[br]
Originally posted by torkerob
[br]To get an accurate comparison they should put enough gas and oil in it to go about 100 miles. Some sleds have smaller gas tank because don't have to carry as much to go the same distance that other sleds need.
So how do you decide what kind of mileage a snowmobile gets? And who Decides?
What kind of surface? What Temp? Studs or No Studs?
Way to many variables to come up with *How much gas/oil* they should put in.

Weigh them all full... Just subtract a couple gallons of gas if there is a difference in tank size. How hard can it be???

Seems like the people complaining own/want the sleds listed as pigs
You are correct in your assertion that there are too many variables.

But why not just weigh them empty? Then there is no subtracting or calculations of any kind.
And how are we to be sure of tank sizes and where the manufacturers consider "full" to be? More variables.
Can we can trust the same people who list the weights on thier sleds to be honest on tank capacities?
 
1 - 20 of 21 Posts
Top