My take on this from a non-technical aspect. My background that I speak from is that of many years of experience in the product development and new product introduction process from a service, sales, and marketing perspective. Also significant experience in business, finance, and account management.
Two people can absolutely have different opinions here and not be completely wrong. Dan is very specialized and offers a very high performance, high quality, high(er) price, long durability, LOW volume option. Polaris and every other manufacturer offers some measure less in the first four and a significant measure more in the last.
Quality measurements for NPI (new product introductions) are interesting and are determined in large part by the test/life cycle/performance parameters that are spelled out in the project specs. This is difficult in an industry where there is very little or no consistency in the environment...meaning you have Chris Burandt or TRS, the local 400lbs guy that doesn't even get up off the seat to put fuel in, and everything in between... Polaris, just like every other manufacturer, is not developing a product that is meant to survive forever in any possible situation that can be thrown at it. They are developing a product that will provide acceptable longevity for the majority of the market they are going after, meet specific performance specs that have been defined, and do it at a specific cost structure that provides the appropriate ROI for the project. Warranty expense is absolutely a measurement in that calculation...it is not expected or anticipated to be zero. It's a fine line that gets walked between cost/price, quality, performance, expectations, function, and volume. If you think it's as simple as "just build it so it doesn't break", you've never been part of a product development team for a mid-volume consumer product... Automotive is getting somewhat close to that due to the extreme volumes and regulations, but even they aren't there yet.
Does the simple fact that Dan puts out a better product than Polaris mean that the Polaris engine is doomed to failure 100% of the time? Absolutely not! It does mean there are going to be situations where a failure could occur or the durability isn't as good as the product Dan provides...I'd say there's no doubt about it. I'd also say there's a reason Dan does business with "X" number of people and Polaris does business with "X" times a lot. They each have their market segment they go after with the appropriate brand promise. Dan's is of unmatched durability and longevity...The Polaris brand promise is far more focused around the performance characteristics, image, and experience than around any measure of durability or longevity.
This is absolutely not a knock on Dan so don't take it that way, but Dan's business is very much dependent on his ability to inform and define the differences and improvements he offers that the manufacturer doesn't. There are going to be those improvements...a sled built to the highest standards in every category would be too...everything... and Polaris would do 10% of the volume they do today. It is also very possible one of the items he's pointed out (or others he hasn't yet) will turn out to be something that causes a higher "in service" failure rate than Polaris anticipated through the metrics they learned in their testing. In that case, there would likely be a campaign/recall to fix them...or goodwill support available to customers that experience it.
Second to last note...I know (because I know one of the people doing it), that Polaris has a pretty good initiative in PCO (product cost optimization). All companies do this and it's like a pendulum...sometimes it swings too far one way and you run into more problems than you anticipate. It's important for a company to do this to ensure funds are available for future investments, but it can cause some issues.
Last note...I am not with Polaris or any other power sports manufacturer. I'm in a different industry all together. I actually don't really like Polaris, but feel this thread has gotten way out of hand...
My $.02, they're worth what you paid for them. Good day
