Install the app
How to install the app on iOS

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.

  • Don't miss out on all the fun! Register on our forums to post and have added features! Membership levels include a FREE membership tier.

ON-THE-SNOW RIDE IMPRESSIONS: 2016 AXYS-PRO RMK ... OUR DAY IN APINE WYO.

Status
Not open for further replies.
mtnpull said:
It may be just me, but I thought the footwells seemed tighter. But I did not throw a tape on them, just seemed to feel that way to me. Go figure, everyone else says they were more roomy.:face-icon-small-sho
Click to expand...

I agree they seemed the same or tighter. I did get my boot caught under the hoop (why is that there?), luckily it happened away from any trees!!
 
LoudHandle said:
Here is a few of my observations; While the theoretical realized ratio may well be 2.25. To get there they they actually geared it higher at the QD. From the pics it is now a 43 Tooth lower sprocket (was 44 Tooth on the PRO). The center to center distance is only ~1/4" longer (scaled from the pics). Which makes sense if we assume they are continuing to use the same top sprocket and QD belt. That means they made up the 11mm (one tooth pitch) of distance gained by stretching the center to center distance. The PRO QD was a 21/44 for a ratio of 2.0952:1 the AXYS QD by all indications is a 21/43 for a ratio of 2.0476:1 it only comes close to the 2.25:1 when you add in the driver size change to 7 Tooth.

I'm not a fan of the status quo accepted use of the smallish 7 tooth driver. And I'll never run a seven tooth driver, even 8 tooth is too small for my liking. That said, I understand why most of you have chosen to endorse it's use. As that is what the market will tolerate cost wise. I find it SAD that the factory engineers have endorsed it's use and actually built a sled using this crutch necessitated by their poor engineering on the PRO-Ride chassis. When the next lug size track gets developed, will we go to 6 Tooth drivers, 5 Tooth? For this reason the engineering staff responsible for this portion are Idiots, IMO. Complete lack of forward thinking. No room for growth or expansion.

I may be alone on that sticking point, but I'm not budging from it. And no one to date has had a valid argument for going to the seven tooth. It is cheaper, period! NOT better by any stretch of the imagination.

In spite of that; I can see a easy sub 390# dry weight for far less than cost of a new Skidoo. First a Diamond S Ti silencer. Replace the fasteners with Titanium starting with the largest most stressed ones. Replace the smaller low stress fasteners with hard anodized Aluminum (like the tie rod boot bolts and others that are just holding plastics in place and such, no need for heavy steel or expensive Ti for those). I suspect that for about the cost of a new Skidoo we can have a 375# sled and for a bit more a 350# sled.

All without sacrificing any Reliability.
Click to expand...

In theory, I agree with the 7T not being as efficient as a larger diameter driver. However.....with the lighter, thinner, more flexible tracks being used vs a few years ago, I think the difference in efficiency is lessened.
I know on the T3 and likely the Axys there is room to go 8T? Right away, guys tried 8T on the T3 and in a few days there were pics of bent shafts from the drivers now being more susceptible to damage. So, from a mfr standpoint I can see wanting to find a balance between durability and performance. The lower ratio of the smaller driver is also a factor in belt life with the bigger tracks. It's tough to gear low enough with 8t to avoid clutch heat issues with today's bigger lug tracks.
One other potential positive aspect of the smaller driver is the steeper approach angle. I know we have spent decades trying to shallow the approach angle to help the sled stay on top and float better, but with the 2.6 and 3" tracks becoming common, the issue of traction and forward propulsion is no longer a issue. Now the issue (trend?) is making the big track sleds more agile or "flickable". I hate that word...lol. The bigger drivers make a sled feel more planted and less agile in most cases.
The changes in driver design are also making the smaller drivers more efficient than the old, basic designs we are used to. The drivers on the Axys are new and designed to avoid some of that loss of efficiency. If it was purely a cost cutting issue, I think they would have stayed with the old driver design.
 
Iceman56 said:
Man I really wish I could get Loudhandles honest opinion on 7 tooth drivers Ive never heard it before...



So is the new track 2.7 or 2.6??? Where are you guys getting 2.7 I keep seeing 2.6
Click to expand...


It's a 2.6.

Not a 2.7.
 
My best regulation bench press was 425 lbs. Of course, that was about 30 years ago when I was a powerlifter. It would be a nice publicity stunt to have someone do that with an Axys. They just need to find the balance point so the weight is equal for each arm. It could be done. It is my understanding from a very reliable source who has rode the new Axys that it is as much better than the Pro as the Pro was over the Dragon. That includes in sidehilling and uphill turns. I hope that is true. I will have to ride one before I put my money down though. I hope that Polaris makes some demos available to some of the bigger dealers so we can put in some handlebar time on the sled.
 
Sheetmetalfab said:
The sled is taller.
More clearance to the snow.
But the approach angle is better. :)

Liking the new fuel tank.
Console removal without taking the stupid nut off the gas tank. ��
Click to expand...

I don't think the approach angle changed at all. I asked them about that. The front end is taller, the plastic is pulled in tighter out of the way but the suspension mounting hole in the front is lowered and the drop brackets are taller. Different arms on the suspension.
 
milehighassassin said:
I don't think the approach angle changed at all. I asked them about that. The front end is taller, the plastic is pulled in tighter out of the way but the suspension mounting hole in the front is lowered and the drop brackets are taller. Different arms on the suspension.
Click to expand...

I was basing that on profile shots and manual measurements.
 
Sheetmetalfab said:
I was basing that on profile shots and manual measurements.
Click to expand...


I'm guessing you were basing that off the profile pics in post #9, I too thought the AXYS looked like a shallower angle, but after looking again, I think that is due to you actually being able to see the flat on the AXYS and on the PRO you are essentially guessing what and where the flat is because it is mostly obscured by the tunnel and plastics. From the pics and how you judge the PRO I think it could go either way. Also in the photos they are not truly parallel to each other, nor flat to the plane of the picture in either direction.


Time will tell when we get them in our possession.
 
LoudHandle said:
I'm guessing you were basing that off the profile pics in post #9, I too thought the AXYS looked like a shallower angle, but after looking again, I think that is due to you actually being able to see the flat on the AXYS and on the PRO you are essentially guessing what and where the flat is because it is mostly obscured by the tunnel and plastics. From the pics and how you judge the PRO I think it could go either way. Also in the photos they are not truly parallel to each other, nor flat to the plane of the picture in either direction.


Time will tell when we get them in our possession.
Click to expand...

Hey I did my best! Lol
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

C
2016 Polaris Axys Pro RMk black snow check 163 3" Sidekick Turbo 183 miles $17,250
Replies
3
Views
3K
revrider07
R
M
2016 Pro Rmk Axys Snow check only 76 miles
Replies
3
Views
3K
mxman901
M
bobback
PART 4: ON-THE-SNOW RIDE IMPRESSIONS: 2016 AXYS-PRO RMK ... OUR DAY IN APINE WYO.
Replies
3
Views
7K
NapaMatt
NapaMatt
Premium Features
Join Now Free!



Back
Top