Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
How is the new seat? I am not too crazy about them making it wider, I really like the fact that it is shorter but one of the things I love about the PRO is how narrow it feels when you stand on it, I am not exactly a tall guy and when I stand on the running boards there is nothing rubbing on my legs like on some other sleds. Is the new seat that much wider or is not really noticable?
I say these demo rides were a fake! MH dropped his camera, Scott's computer is acting up... Folks, it never happened! Lol
To the dude referencing the duece in the fuel tank... bwaaaaaahaha, thank you for the laugh!
Here's my thoughts on Friday's Demo!
gear ratio is 21/44 i do believe. I think i posted it on BCR when i got home. distance from eye to eye is the same as current chaincase. Also belt drive is not offered on the assaults.
Best way is to compare by riding 2013, then switching to 2012 then back to 2013. You can feel the refinements in the chassis working for you.
Shocks on 2013 are 1/2" shorter eye to eye, but have the same stroke. Super disappointed in that one because i wont be able to bring my exit shocks on to the 2013. Never got a solid answer on A-arms being able to bolt up.
I can tell you i missed the 2013 on my ride Saturday...
Looks to me like the Polaris engineers don't ride with children ever. I have four with the youngest two riding with me on my sled when they go. Sorry, but the mountain strap is actually a handle for your kids and you just put the kill switch under their right hand. I see lots of bad things in the future for this design. Great in theory but not in application. Just my opinion since I am sure I am the only one who has a child ride with them occasionally.
I'm just saying guys, I've seen some pretty crappy things done to folks sleds, and other property is all. It's not about having faith in "humanity," it just looks like one more thing susceptible to vandalism. The idea of someone cutting your drive belt is not a dumb reason for a cover, it's a great reason! How cheap would something like that cost? Mere dollars per sled? I mean, why not have one?
Also, anybody saying, "That's just a dumb reason to put a cover on it. They could cut ANYTHING in the engine..." Is not thinking straight.
That's the same logic as saying, "Why close my garage door, or, lock the doors while I'm gone? If they want something, they'll just take it anyway." Yet I doubt you sleep with the doors to your home open, your shop doors rolled all the way up with the lights on at night, and leave your keys in the car parked on a busy street.
We lock and cover things so that if someone DOES decide they want what I have, or for some reason, really want to tear up a piece of property, they can inflict MINIMAL damage. I'd rather pay an extra $15 bones ontop of the total price of a sled then buying a whole new drive belt at what is sure to be more then the cost of a piece of stamped aluminum, with 4-5 bolts. And don't forget about replacing "anything else" a vandal might damage through his journey of mayhem that is mine, or anyone else's sled.
In regards to the comment of, "It would be easier to cut your track off than open up a side panel and cut this drive belt."
Panels come off relatively easy, and a drive belt is what, 1/10th the width of a track? I'll race you, I try cutting that drive belt, and you try sawing the track in half, and we'll see who wins. Tracks are tuff as hell to cut off. If you don't believe me, take a utility knife to one and see how long it takes you to cut one clean across, have fun!![]()
Mathematically that ratio does not work with the CtoC distance. Did you actually count both sprockets? My guess is you counted the upper and knew the FB bottom was 44. The first picture shown in the FB release was likely a flat lander ratio from what I've been able to count and deduce from crunching numbers. (see post number 78 in this thread) I might be off a tooth or two but I counted and measured off the ones I couldn't actually see, so I'm pretty positive I'm in the money ratio's wise. I hope they offer more than one as by all appearances they showed the flatlander ratio in the Face book photo but it is way too high to be what you all rode. Which likely was the 21/49 for 2.333:1.
Did polaris say why they won't be putting the belt drive on the Assaults for 2013?
I am pretty sure this is the least of their worries. I don't remember, but I thought there was a sticker on mine that had a "No Multiple Riders" circle with a slash through it.
phatty, as far as laying the sled over on it's side, was there a big difference on the ease of doing so, compared to a 2012. I guess why I'm asking is because I had a sled with a belt drive and it was the easiest sled to lay over that I ever rode. There were some other factors involved but I did everything at once so I wasn't sure which made what. If it is that much easier I'm getting one for my wife.
Did polaris say why they won't be putting the belt drive on the Assaults for 2013?