2010 m8 -m1000

[backcountryislife]

I'm going to have to call BS on anyone that thinks a 141 1000 can go everywhere a 162 M8 or M7 for that matter can go in 3-4 feet of powder.....

Look, if it's compact snow then no sh!t.... 3-4 feet of powder??? You can't go slicing through the trees....ravines.... or anything that requires quick changes in direction. If you just bang up an down a hill to see who has the biggest d!ck then that is not my kind of riding. Anyone with two years of riding under their belt can do that...

What are we talking about again??

You bring that 162 M8 out to play in my backyard, no way-no how (esp. with the old track!).

And YES I mean 3-4 feet. One of the biggest things I realized about riding a shorter track after going back from a long track was that when you're right on the edge of stuck you can whip the sled straight up & run it back down the hill, the longer tracks are MUCH harder to turn out at the absolute edge of stuck. The other thing to keep in mind is the track speed issue, the 141 holds notably more track speed which helps kee it going at the top of the hill.

I ride with these sleds every day, 1000 153's, very strong running modded M8 162's & 153's, the fact that you think an M7 is gonna compare is funny. How many 141's do you ride with in these type of conditions? It's not what I expected it to be, I was VERY pleasantly suprised by how well it does. Keep in mind that 50-60 lbs off & 180+ hp helps a touch also, I'm not comparing a stocker 141 to the mod 153's or 162's, nobody rides stock aorund here!

 

[Fordman]

You bring that 162 M8 out to play in my backyard, no way-no how (esp. with the old track!).

And YES I mean 3-4 feet. One of the biggest things I realized about riding a shorter track after going back from a long track was that when you're right on the edge of stuck you can whip the sled straight up & run it back down the hill, the longer tracks are MUCH harder to turn out at the absolute edge of stuck. The other thing to keep in mind is the track speed issue, the 141 holds notably more track speed which helps kee it going at the top of the hill.

I ride with these sleds every day, 1000 153's, very strong running modded M8 162's & 153's, the fact that you think an M7 is gonna compare is funny. How many 141's do you ride with in these type of conditions? It's not what I expected it to be, I was VERY pleasantly suprised by how well it does. Keep in mind that 50-60 lbs off & 180+ hp helps a touch also, I'm not comparing a stocker 141 to the mod 153's or 162's, nobody rides stock aorund here!

I ran 141 and 153 for hillclimb racing and i just don't see it happening that way. If I come upon someone with that set up then I'll give it a try and see how it goes.

 

[mrquick68]

I ran 141 and 153 for hillclimb racing and i just don't see it happening that way. If I come upon someone with that set up then I'll give it a try and see how it goes.

i know you guys hate XPs, but my good bud runs a 146 XP and that things is a ripper! He goes everywhere we go in the deepest of snow and does just fine in it all. He's damn good rider, but he flat out makes that little XP work.

 

[Killerk]

I'm going to have to call BS on anyone that thinks a 141 1000 can go everywhere a 162 M8 or M7 for that matter can go in 3-4 feet of powder.....

Look, if it's compact snow then no sh!t.... 3-4 feet of powder??? You can't go slicing through the trees....ravines.... or anything that requires quick changes in direction. If you just bang up an down a hill to see who has the biggest d!ck then that is not my kind of riding. Anyone with two years of riding under their belt can do that...

What are we talking about again??

Where did I say that a 141 would go everywhere a 162 can go?

Climbing, I agree... The longer track will have the advantage.
To say you can't go slicing through the trees, ravines, or anything that requires quick changes in direction is just an ignorant statement.
Because we all know a longer sled is easier to change direction on
I didn't post to argue with you... Just a difference of opinion.
I have seen 141's and 144's set up correctly that are absolutely amazing in the deep.
Hell, I took my F-7 144 places that even surprised me.

Not calling you out, but if you decide to come down to utah and ride some dry fluff, hit me up.
I will be happy to follow you through the trees, ravines, etc... If I can't follow, then more power to you.
If I pass you because you are riding too slow so you can manuver your long sled, then I apologize in advance.
KK

 

[HMC 399]

I think we have a third party ready to fight. How thick of trees, how steep of hills and how much coin? Can I come watch? Skinner are u bringing the popcorn? I don't need to go to chris's backcountry andventure I can test my skills with u boys. Who's serve?

 

[tsnowak]

reports on the 09's have been excellent, but the revised 800 should change

things for cat- again. had an 09' CF SP leftover already picked out, have

changed my tune- will be snowchecking a 10'. with the extra 15hp and six

more pounds off it looks like the way to go. hopefully bottom end and

mileage dont suffer too much. 141' powerclaw, and m rear cooler are here, all

I need is sled!




/

 

[WoodeeeM1000]

Ttt

 

[backcountryislife]

Ttt

Seriously?

Like we haven't seen enough of this thread!?!

 

[Jcat]

Will the new 2010 m8's take mods well like the 07, 08 & 09 models?

 

[shanny]

I will have to agree with Backcountry on this one cause I see it every weekend riding with him. We thought he was nuts buying a 141 for the places we ride, until he high marked a whole group of 53s & 62s. I can honestly say there are only a couple heavily modded 153s and 62s that can top him out. Seriously considering jumpin on a 141 next year.

 

[backcountryislife]

I will have to agree with Backcountry on this one cause I see it every weekend riding with him. We thought he was nuts buying a 141 for the places we ride, until he high marked a whole group of 53s & 62s. I can honestly say there are only a couple heavily modded 153s and 62s that can top him out. Seriously considering jumpin on a 141 next year.

There are a few guys that have ridden that thing & decided to go shorter with the next sled, I think a lot has to do with the fact that what we think of for a shorter track is no doubt a 99 or so 136ish sled that didn't have the chassis, power or light weight of the new sleds. When you compare apples to apples it's suprising.

Hey, don't get me wrong, put me on a 10 deg hill with no start, 3-4 feet and a big steeper hill in front of us & the 141 is gonna get handed on the first try, but boy does it whip around & take the next try so much easier!!

 

[mrquick68]

There are a few guys that have ridden that thing & decided to go shorter with the next sled, I think a lot has to do with the fact that what we think of for a shorter track is no doubt a 99 or so 136ish sled that didn't have the chassis, power or light weight of the new sleds. When you compare apples to apples it's suprising.

Hey, don't get me wrong, put me on a 10 deg hill with no start, 3-4 feet and a big steeper hill in front of us & the 141 is gonna get handed on the first try, but boy does it whip around & take the next try so much easier!!

this is exactly what we've found. if we put the short(er) track in our group at the bottom of the hill and he just pins it, he'll have to turn out a bit sooner, but if he can get a run at the fresh or track poach for just a few seconds, he'll climb with all of us, or sometimes even higher. Pretty surprised...

 

[Sparx]

Awesome post! I have to agree, I always found that the shorter tracks once they got up on snow heald track speed much better than the longer tracks and would climb as high if not higher depending the conditions that day. The main thing affecting the short tracks as mentioned is that they need a "run" at the hill with some good speed and tend to be more difficult to start on uphill take offs when on the throttle hard. You have to more or less finess the short tracks more from getting stuck on take off since they spin and break the tracks loose so much quicker and suddenly that they dig down quick as a result and you can get stuck if you are too aggressive. I find as well that my 153" climbs with the best of them irregardless of how deep the day is due to the sufficient floating and strong track speed.

The area I noticed the long tracks earn their merit is on uphill takeoffs from a dead start in 2ft plus deep snow, and in real tight trees riding at less than 5MPH in real technical super slow speed tree boondocking. As well, I do feel from experience that I prefer a shorter track that is 16" wide over a longer 15" wide track. I have ridden a rev with a 144X16X2" track and thought it hooked up alot better than my 153X15X2.25" track in the deep tight in the trees with the extra width. I would rather a 153X16 if it would fit, but I think I will try a 162" when I boost my next sled.... Really curious to know how a 16" wide would affect the M chassis handling??? (If it would fit or they made a wider tunnel down the road to fit them)

 

[tsnowak]

the RIDER makes the most difference when comparing apples to oranges, a

shorter sled than your buddies will def make you a better ...or longer armed

one


backcountry, what gearing are you running in the wheelie monster?

also, how has the belt life been?



.

 

[backcountryislife]

the RIDER makes the most difference when comparing apples to oranges, a

shorter sled than your buddies will def make you a better ...or longer armed

one


backcountry, what gearing are you running in the wheelie monster?

also, how has the belt life been?
.

65/55 if I recall correct. I thought I would change it right away but aside from belt heat I don't have a reason to. Off the line a 153 with exact same mods pulls in front because mine spins more, then mine walks away 1-2 lengths, then they hold even with the 153 behind. (seems like 65/55 should slowly pull away but it doesn't ??)
On a climb if we have hardpack or a track for at least 20 feet the 141 tops the 153, if we start with little run in deep the 153 has the 141 by a bit.

Belt life is poor, better now that I vented (still no side vents, but 3 florites in front) If I can skip hitting a hill or a jump OVER & OVER again they last pretty well. Current one has 350 on it. I've added 6 gms to stock & still over revving by 200+, need to add more but I'm out of 80gm weights. (measured at 12,500 or so)

I'll never go back.

 

[speeddemon]

wow i ask a simple question and i get 5 pages of what ? whats the hp on the 2010 m1000 LOL
mike

 

[WyoBoy1000]

I think, last year snowest had an article where they took a couple of sleds from each manufacturer and tested them. Most stock and straight out of the box but each was aloud one well tuned and slightly modded sled. the first two days the m1000 was wiping up because of the power then it snowed some crazy fluff and the m1000 was third without even making the top of the hill, fell short about 3/4 of the way up, the first sled was a 154 xp and it went over the top. second was a 146 xp and it also topped the hill. But I think if your a heavier person there is a balance on over all length. My 07 m1000 162 was definetly the best length for that year but these 09 m1000 are 31lbs lighter with a track that works way better and I think a 153 for my weight might be an option.

 

[snakedoctor]

I don't care what you all say... It's still a pig.

The 1000 motor is great for running trails or lakes but in the woods the M 8 walks all over it. And now with the new motor it just doesn't make any sense. Notice how nothing was done to the M1000 for 2010.... why is that???? Because it's on the way out.

If you just pound the hill all day long then you've got me there...but don't you get bored with that?

I guess will see how well AC makes there own motor , suzuki makes a great motor, they take pride in their work and put out some great products. My M1000 runs like a top and has tons of torque it is a great sled

 

[Vorman]

I ran the 153" and 162" on the same sled and...

Went from 2.25 x 153 to 2.5 x 162 and though I feel my sled is a slower turning sled now, it tears everything up better than the 153". Doesn't get stuck easily, don't have to feather it, climbs better and eats stock anything for dinner. It does help being a Cutler 1000 in the '05 M7 chassis. I found that in the deep and heavy WA snow, longer is always better. Before the swap I was having my butt handed to me by 162 x 16 x 2.5 King Cats and 162 x 2.25 1000's while trying to hill climb out of a short run up in the deep. Had to track poach to get speed and then could outclimb them, but only after several runs. A 141" with anything other than a 125 pounder on it couldn't have made it to he base of that hill. WY or UT is a different story, but WA and some OR riding, no comparison. Shorter than a 153" isn't really a mtn. sled over here, its just a bad handling trail sled. That said, I would still trade it straight across for a stock or lightened '09 1000 so that my ear drums can heal and so that I can get more than 45 miles from a tank of 20% race fuel! But in a 162 of course.

 

[slyrydr]

I think, last year snowest had an article where they took a couple of sleds from each manufacturer and tested them. Most stock and straight out of the box but each was aloud one well tuned and slightly modded sled. the first two days the m1000 was wiping up because of the power then it snowed some crazy fluff and the m1000 was third without even making the top of the hill, fell short about 3/4 of the way up, the first sled was a 154 xp and it went over the top. second was a 146 xp and it also topped the hill. But I think if your a heavier person there is a balance on over all length. My 07 m1000 162 was definetly the best length for that year but these 09 m1000 are 31lbs lighter with a track that works way better and I think a 153 for my weight might be an option.

....the problem with the snowest comparison was that the cat dealer that set them up reversed the tracks (works good for set-up snow but not for deep powder).....anytime there's a comparison test, the details matter....