Is a 200 lb dry sled possible?
- Thread starter AKrider
- Start date
Maybe my dads old 67 olympic.... Man did that thing float though..
I'm just curious to see what people think is possible as far as making a light weight sled. Like any motor sport, people always end up wanting more power, more suspension, on and on and it becomes a vicious cycle of bigger, faster, more specialized, more expensive.
I think a lot of guys would be very happy with a super light weight sled that is fun to ride and throw around, not necessarily the high mark sled or best powder sled. I'd like to make an analogy to sports cars, (but am not as familiar with them) but it always seems like the best loved sports cars are the ones that are small, light and have excellent power to weight ratios as well as handling characteristics.
At one end of the spectrum a guy can build a Yamaha Apex, boost it, and add a 174" long track and go as high or far as they dare, as long as the terrain doesn't get too tight. The same heavy, high HP sled that shines in the open areas, doesn't do as well in the tight and technical.
On the other hand, a guy could build a 600 like LRD and that would be a fun sled for all kinds of conditions. So, what happens if you take lightweight and nimbleness even further and drop a 100 lbs? The engine will be smaller and the track will probably be around a 136, but you've gained so much in the ability to throw the sled around you'll try different lines and really become one with the sled. In addition, because the sled is so light, a guy isn't going to dread getting stuck as much since a light sled is much easier to lift and free from the snow. That alone would make a guy try lines he wouldn't have considered before. I don't care what model sled your on, any of the 150+ track length models are fricking heavy when the suspension is filled with snow.
I just wondering if a physically smaller sled that emphasis light weight over power and super long track lengths could be just as capable as the current sleds we are riding? There are other ways to achieve floatation (belly pan, wide skis) than 163" long tracks. Besides, the less weight you have the less floatation you need.
N
Nikolai
ACCOUNT CLOSED
Lets look at total numbers then...
- 141 powerclaw, ported with half the clips removed and the other half lightweight clips would be a sub 40 lb. track.
- BDX lite gearbox with l/w driveshaft, l/w rotor, drivers, clutch should be around 25 lbs for a complete drive system
- 141 Timbersled rear skid with Fabcraft composite wheels and Ti. bolts could probably hit 30 lbs and still be fairly strong
- 4130 tube chassis with minimal tubing, maybe with a l/w seat frame incorporated
- no oil injection, hand warmers, bar pad, extra zip ties...ect ect.
- no plastic on the front. Design the chassis so you can use minimal skinning to enclose it and just skin it with mesh fabric like the Diamond S. hoods
Biggest question would be motor. I think a big bore small block would be the only way to keep it super light and still have decent power. Anyone know what the lightest middle displacement twin is? Doo 600/700? Doo 670? Pol 600 small block?
If you can make things serve more than one purpose I think you'll start seeing good weight loss. Ex. Maybe have the coolant bottle, pull rope, and electronics all hang off the same bracket. Tie the rear skid mounts into the steering post hoop and seat? I think either way you would need to get the motor, drive system, and suspension together and then build the chassis around them. Make the chassis narrow where you can and keep wall thicknesses to a minimum.
Another big area to lose weight is in the steering. Need to get the post directly over the tie rods to minimize linkage and bearings. I think 300-330 lbs is possible with a lot of out-of the-box thinking and paying attention to every single ounce you can save.
- 141 powerclaw, ported with half the clips removed and the other half lightweight clips would be a sub 40 lb. track.
- BDX lite gearbox with l/w driveshaft, l/w rotor, drivers, clutch should be around 25 lbs for a complete drive system
- 141 Timbersled rear skid with Fabcraft composite wheels and Ti. bolts could probably hit 30 lbs and still be fairly strong
- 4130 tube chassis with minimal tubing, maybe with a l/w seat frame incorporated
- no oil injection, hand warmers, bar pad, extra zip ties...ect ect.
- no plastic on the front. Design the chassis so you can use minimal skinning to enclose it and just skin it with mesh fabric like the Diamond S. hoods
Biggest question would be motor. I think a big bore small block would be the only way to keep it super light and still have decent power. Anyone know what the lightest middle displacement twin is? Doo 600/700? Doo 670? Pol 600 small block?
If you can make things serve more than one purpose I think you'll start seeing good weight loss. Ex. Maybe have the coolant bottle, pull rope, and electronics all hang off the same bracket. Tie the rear skid mounts into the steering post hoop and seat? I think either way you would need to get the motor, drive system, and suspension together and then build the chassis around them. Make the chassis narrow where you can and keep wall thicknesses to a minimum.
Another big area to lose weight is in the steering. Need to get the post directly over the tie rods to minimize linkage and bearings. I think 300-330 lbs is possible with a lot of out-of the-box thinking and paying attention to every single ounce you can save.
T
T-Bone
Well-known member
If a guy was serious about this, would it be smarter to start with a 2moto type snowbike? I'll be the first to admit I don't know jacksquat about bikes but it would seem that you would be way ahead of the game having only 1 ski, a single cylinder motor (125?), and a vast aftermarket dedicated to bikes.
But then again a snowbike and a sled are 2 different animals.
But then again a snowbike and a sled are 2 different animals.
B
bim900
New member
I think if you were going to run a dirt bike engine you would have to make it as light as a dirt bike. a 125 motor isn't going to pull something that heavy a 500 maybe, I have a cr 500 stock there about 65 hp but I know you can get them up to that 80 to 85 hp range somewhat easy either way you would have to make it light to make it feel like you were going to get anywhere
The 2moto's are not as versatile as a regular sled IMO. Plus, since you have to shift gears, they are not going to do well off trail in deep snow. They would be pretty light, but there are too many downsides to make them appealing to me.
Nikolai has some good ideas on how best to build a super light sled. I think the original, Ski-doo series III 600 is the lightest liquid cooled twin. It produces around 110 HP which would be a power to weight of 1 hp to every 2.73 pounds on a 300 lb sled.
I wonder though, if a tube frame would be lighter than a traditional tunnel and bulkhead? Often times with full suspension, free ride type mountain bikes, tube frame bikes weigh more than one made out of sheet aluminum and machined parts. On the other hand, anything other than a tube frame would be more difficult for someone to build I think? Of course, a tube frame gives you lots of flexibility in design. We've not really seen anything too revolutionary when it comes to sled chassis. A tube frame would seem to allow for more components to be shared rather than being riveted or bolted onto traditional tunnel and bulkhead.
I like the idea of using mesh type material to cover the engine and transmission components. Modern sleds have a lot of extra weight from plastic hoods, tubs, trim, etc. Seems like with a wide, plastic skid plate and a bumper on the front, the mesh material would probably survive okay.
Nikolai has some good ideas on how best to build a super light sled. I think the original, Ski-doo series III 600 is the lightest liquid cooled twin. It produces around 110 HP which would be a power to weight of 1 hp to every 2.73 pounds on a 300 lb sled.
I wonder though, if a tube frame would be lighter than a traditional tunnel and bulkhead? Often times with full suspension, free ride type mountain bikes, tube frame bikes weigh more than one made out of sheet aluminum and machined parts. On the other hand, anything other than a tube frame would be more difficult for someone to build I think? Of course, a tube frame gives you lots of flexibility in design. We've not really seen anything too revolutionary when it comes to sled chassis. A tube frame would seem to allow for more components to be shared rather than being riveted or bolted onto traditional tunnel and bulkhead.
I like the idea of using mesh type material to cover the engine and transmission components. Modern sleds have a lot of extra weight from plastic hoods, tubs, trim, etc. Seems like with a wide, plastic skid plate and a bumper on the front, the mesh material would probably survive okay.
L
LRD
Well-known member
The lightest possible XP chassis sled I am pretty sure will be using carbon fiber from C3
http://www.c3powersports.com/store/...ath=74&zenid=f6c0386b382d5d776ba31a19155decce
Their max weight loss they gave at Hay Days was about 50 lbs. This was with carbon chassis with integrated gas tank (molded into top of tunnel) and their coolers and full carbon body panels. This is $8000 and change Canadian.
When you go in this far, Floats all the way around (maybe 4 - 8 lbs) and Alternative Impact TI front A-arms for (7 lbs) and his TI front arm in the skid is amazing light. Lose the oil injection for 10 lbs. Straightline Performance NEW carbon silencer only weighs about 2.5 lbs and is quiet. Sub 350 lbs would be easy with a 600 and I haven't figured the flotation on that weight for quite a while but if a 16 X 121 X 2 is available could lose even more weight and still guessing have flotation of stock 16 X 146.
Good Luck
http://www.c3powersports.com/store/...ath=74&zenid=f6c0386b382d5d776ba31a19155decce
Their max weight loss they gave at Hay Days was about 50 lbs. This was with carbon chassis with integrated gas tank (molded into top of tunnel) and their coolers and full carbon body panels. This is $8000 and change Canadian.
When you go in this far, Floats all the way around (maybe 4 - 8 lbs) and Alternative Impact TI front A-arms for (7 lbs) and his TI front arm in the skid is amazing light. Lose the oil injection for 10 lbs. Straightline Performance NEW carbon silencer only weighs about 2.5 lbs and is quiet. Sub 350 lbs would be easy with a 600 and I haven't figured the flotation on that weight for quite a while but if a 16 X 121 X 2 is available could lose even more weight and still guessing have flotation of stock 16 X 146.
Good Luck
Better so shoot for a bit more weight, you can do about 360-370 lbs with all carbon fibre,titanium,no frills,and a 156 track. Put this with 200 hp and u have a great sled...
Yea I did this and I dont know where else you could lose weight...cause my wallets already empty !!!!!! lol
Yea I did this and I dont know where else you could lose weight...cause my wallets already empty !!!!!! lol
I honestly don't think any thing would be gained by dropping the sled weight. Everything that has been considered doesn't make it perform any better.
This is how I am looking at it (note im am using these numbers hypothetically):
160hp sled that weighs 500lbs has the same power to weight ratio as 80hp sled that weighs 250lbs.........so now u really don't gain anything. In my mind a one cylinder machine isn't going to do the trick.
These next figures are off of TracksUSA's website:
15x121x2 challenger track gives u a surface area of 1815 sq.in. and weighs in at 45 lbs, thus giving u .0247931 lbs/sq.in.
15x151x2 challenger track gives u a surface area of 2265 sq.in. and weighs in at 54lbs, thus givin u a .023841 lbs/sq.in.
What I conclude here is that just because u have less hp and can use a shorter track doesn't mean u have greater flotation....u would still be better off with a longer track.
Its almost like comparing apples to oranges. If u want a light weight sled that has a short track I think one would be better comparing a sled in that category and finding a way to make it lighter without comprimising performance. Same goes for a sled with a long track.
Just my thoughts....got a lot going thru my head how it may or may not be beneficial.
This is how I am looking at it (note im am using these numbers hypothetically):
160hp sled that weighs 500lbs has the same power to weight ratio as 80hp sled that weighs 250lbs.........so now u really don't gain anything. In my mind a one cylinder machine isn't going to do the trick.
These next figures are off of TracksUSA's website:
15x121x2 challenger track gives u a surface area of 1815 sq.in. and weighs in at 45 lbs, thus giving u .0247931 lbs/sq.in.
15x151x2 challenger track gives u a surface area of 2265 sq.in. and weighs in at 54lbs, thus givin u a .023841 lbs/sq.in.
What I conclude here is that just because u have less hp and can use a shorter track doesn't mean u have greater flotation....u would still be better off with a longer track.
Its almost like comparing apples to oranges. If u want a light weight sled that has a short track I think one would be better comparing a sled in that category and finding a way to make it lighter without comprimising performance. Same goes for a sled with a long track.
Just my thoughts....got a lot going thru my head how it may or may not be beneficial.
S
snowhawkaddict
Banned
I'll take one less hole.
BRP, or anybody else could build a liquid 300ETek similar design, include the best CVT tech, they all ready do a fan 300 for the Freestyle.
Build it to scale for the little folks like Bullhead's Snoscoot and wala!
Perfect mill for a second generation entry level Oneski to reckon with the bikes, easily around 200lbs.
BRP, or anybody else could build a liquid 300ETek similar design, include the best CVT tech, they all ready do a fan 300 for the Freestyle.
Build it to scale for the little folks like Bullhead's Snoscoot and wala!
Perfect mill for a second generation entry level Oneski to reckon with the bikes, easily around 200lbs.
didnt some guy in Utah build a single piston motor 151 x 12 inch wide track sled some years back???
R
Rattlin_Ram
Active member
Where's the 383lb 800 guy when ya need him??? lol
Only old time snowesters will know who I'm talkin about...
Only old time snowesters will know who I'm talkin about...
I believe it was a yellow skidoo skandik with a purple m-10 under it. I think I remember him saying that it was just awesome. Not a hill climber, well straight up anyways..
383.. all I remember about that guy was a lot of talk. Man, when he talked it got deep fast. His sled was pretty cool though. It would be interesting to take it for a ride.
Light weight and less power seem to be against everyone's thoughts here.... Maybe it is not for everyone, but they do seem to be more "fun". I guess it isn't a real snowmobile unless you need more then one person to dig it out? ha ha
Last edited:
S
snowhawkaddict
Banned
Now I'm hearing ya Twoski.
I saw a jack thread on here yesterday.
Lighter riders is the real problem, they get bigger every year.
I saw a jack thread on here yesterday.
Lighter riders is the real problem, they get bigger every year.
Similar threads
