Past m8 riders?

[WyoBoy1000]

You dont see any of us in the Cat section bashing them do you?.

There are plenty that do, part of how it is and you don't see them getting the stfu either. There are also plenty of cat guys saying they like the pro, me being one of them.

Again where is the bashing, only stating what it would take for me, I'm hard on stuff. Why don't you just say and try and tell everyone the poo 800 is better in every way than a cat 800, or even equal. constructive criticism when comparing, the pro has a better chassis the cat has a better motor, choose what is more important.

 

[Super Dave3]

There are plenty that do, part of how it is and you don't see them getting the stfu either. There are also plenty of cat guys saying they like the pro, me being one of them.

Again where is the bashing, only stating what it would take for me, I'm hard on stuff. Why don't you just say and try and tell everyone the poo 800 is better in every way than a cat 800, or even equal. constructive criticism when comparing, the pro has a better chassis the cat has a better motor, choose what is more important.

Just because I happen to think that the Pro is better in every way then the Cat, I dont think it gives me the right to bash other brands. I know I am able to express my opinion, I just choose not to. I dont understand why you dont get it. We are sick to death of your fawking opinion. So once again STFU.

 

[WyoBoy1000]

Arguing approach angle is a different story, though that wasn't the argument you are making.

Just for kicks (and to further illustrate how ridiculous your theory is) you pointed out the difference in flotation between a 155 and a 163, yet the polaris engineers saw fit to tip the rear of the skid up to allow easier turning in marginal snow conditions. They also state this track off the ground situation would not reduce flotation, I'm willing to wager you are nearly the only person who doesn't think you don't know what you are talking about.

Maybe I am wrong??? but no one in the last year has given a definite reason to prove me wrong

The tip in the rail helps for turning and does not hurt flotation other than it will lift the skis faster, I'm talking about the amount of track that will be in the snow running more or less flat. The point you are trying to make is half the pro track is not on flat ground when on hard ground meaning it has half the footprint than any other. Which contradicts my statement of saying it puts down more track than any other skid. The argument that the pro puts down more track from the arc of the rail to the real wheel is what I am talking about, go measure it and prove me right. I am rather getting a kick out of arguing something no one else has taken the time to figure out. The difference is obvious, it may not be what makes all the difference but out of everything it is a very big difference and I think it translates to performance. Now if you guys can get over thinking I am "hate everything Polaris Minded" and open your eyes to all the good I speak of them you might be amazed at what you will find.

Also look at where your feet are when standing to the front of the boards on the pro, the skid puts the track down right under your feet, the cat puts the track down behind your feet. With the right suspension it is the equivalent to the rider input going into the track at a more central weight balanced location of the chassis. The weight of the rider is apply straight down unlike the others where its a teeter toter between the track and skis. Its part of why it handles so well and floats, add that to the right geometry of the skis and a-arms and you have something that was very well developed. For the life of me I can't figure out why after so long the others havent copied it, polaris did it right and its been that way for a while.


SD3, I'm not bashing only comparing for the life of me I can't figure out why you can't get it, SIUYA

 

[hyperduc]

I could care less about your brand allegiance, I personally left AC last year for this sled (and I was a very happy AC customer)

Your entire argument about track on flat ground measurements is useless when you consider that the sled is constantly sitting up to its belly pan in snow . Which means even the approach portion of the track is engaged in snow at all times.

No one is going to argue with the fact that the sled works, the reason isn't a mystery. The pro and the dragon have nearly identical skids, so common sense would dictate that this wouldn't be difference between the two.

Common sense would also tell you that the roughly 10% reduction in weight, and the narrowed body work are the biggest contributors to equation.

I'm not going to go out and measure anything with a tape, the ONLY thing that would prove is that two idiots had measured how much track was on the ground.

 

[veritascs]

Maybe I am wrong??? but no one in the last year has given a definite reason to prove me wrong

The tip in the rail helps for turning and does not hurt flotation other than it will lift the skis faster, I'm talking about the amount of track that will be in the snow running more or less flat. The point you are trying to make is half the pro track is not on flat ground when on hard ground meaning it has half the footprint than any other. Which contradicts my statement of saying it puts down more track than any other skid. The argument that the pro puts down more track from the arc of the rail to the real wheel is what I am talking about, go measure it and prove me right. I am rather getting a kick out of arguing something no one else has taken the time to figure out. The difference is obvious, it may not be what makes all the difference but out of everything it is a very big difference and I think it translates to performance. Now if you guys can get over thinking I am "hate everything Polaris Minded" and open your eyes to all the good I speak of them you might be amazed at what you will find.

Also look at where your feet are when standing to the front of the boards on the pro, the skid puts the track down right under your feet, the cat puts the track down behind your feet. With the right suspension it is the equivalent to the rider input going into the track at a more central weight balanced location of the chassis. The weight of the rider is apply straight down unlike the others where its a teeter toter between the track and skis. Its part of why it handles so well and floats, add that to the right geometry of the skis and a-arms and you have something that was very well developed. For the life of me I can't figure out why after so long the others havent copied it, polaris did it right and its been that way for a while.


SD3, I'm not bashing only comparing for the life of me I can't figure out why you can't get it, SIUYA

Good comments. But don't all sleds' tracks, when the tracking is RIPPING around, end up having somewhat of an arc due to centrifugal force (obviously talking about powder, hard pack would make the track conform to the rails)? If so, then wouldn't the bent rails really only have an affect on the trails?

 

[WyoBoy1000]

brand allegiance, not hardly, I was doo guy for years.

2 seconds after you hit the throttle the approach angle is out of the snow as it is in most riding. In a side hill dropping it down sooner will make contact faster, in most cases on the others while sidehilling the approach angle wont even touch. I am not discounting the factors of weight and chassis either, its not like I am saying this is everything and the only thing.

Heres the lengths and how much track sits on the ground from the arc of the rail to the center of rear wheel.

XP 154-- 48x16 =768 square inches
AC 153-- 46.5x15 =697.5
AC 162-- 51x15 =765
PRO 155-- 50x15 =750
PRO 163- 55.5x15 =832.5 that's about what a 174 AC would lay down. it also should be about the same as a 163 XP.
And you wonder why it gets on the snow.

I am not stating this is the end all factor but it is a big difference, big enough to play a role. I am talking about when you are on the throttle how much track is making positive contact, yeah there are variables but on a overall the arc of the rail to the rear wheels is what counts.

 

[hyperduc]

Hears the lengths and how much track sits on the ground from the arc of the rail to the center of rear wheel.

XP 154-- 48x16 =768 square inches
AC 153-- 46.5x15 =697.5
AC 162-- 51x15 =765
PRO 155-- 50x15 =750
PRO 163- 55.5x15 =832.5 that's about what a 174 AC would lay down. it also should be about the same as a 163 XP.
And you wonder why it gets on the snow.

Ignoring the fact you spelled hear incorrectly, the PROBLEM with your ASSumption is all of your measurements are based on a sled sitting on FLAT GROUND. What part of deep snow are you missing here?

I'm going to be pissed off if I have to model this in FLOW-3D just so you can be confused even further by the ACTUAL physics of this discussion.

 

[WyoBoy1000]

I am not discounting the approach angle, but I have never had a sled that didn't pull the belly pan out of the snow right away and lift the approach angle up high enough to where it wasn't making positive contact. You are only trying to prove me wrong rather than being open to anything else. Do you ride a sled that rides on the belly pan and just plows the snow out of the way.

When under throttle how much track is making positive contact with the snow, I posted it above.

 

[SSWIM]

Back on topic. Shell Guy, last year in my stable of sleds I had an OVS Tial TM1200 with Fastlane Tunnel, Timbersled suspension, etc. An 09 OVS Tial TM8. A TAPEX with 174", EZ Ryde, mid mount 3071, LCC Tunnel etc. A stock 2010 M8 and a stock Pro. The sled I rode the most, and absolutely had a BOMB on was the Pro. I have since sold both the TM1200,TM8 and stock M8. I bought a new Pro and Proclimb. I will turbo one of those. Have not decided which yet. It will be a great year regardless which one gets boost.

Good luck with your decision

Sam

 

[hyperduc]

You are only trying to prove me wrong rather than being open to anything else. Do you ride a sled that rides on the belly pan and just plows the snow out of the way.

I'm trying to keep from repeating the same misguided assumption in multiple threads, think of it as public service. Do you really think your sled functions like a hydroplane with the skis sitting on top of snow?

This isn't a pissing match, or me right you wrong. This is physics against your understanding of how a tape measure makes the pro chasis better.

 

[m8magicandmystery]

how are things over in the cat section??? haven't been there in awhile. you should give a pro a ride, might make ya' come join me!!!

How are things in the Cat section...well i figure quite abit of apprehension on the new 2012 proclimb chassis..we will see if its cream that will float or a turd that will sink..i would love to try the new pro...i have the Timbersled barkbuster on the way for my sled with the evol shocks so im excited about that to tandem my Timbersled rear skid....and im just about to order Mods skis..have a great season...!!

 

[WyoBoy1000]

I'm trying to keep from repeating the same misguided assumption in multiple threads, think of it as public service. Do you really think your sled functions like a hydroplane with the skis sitting on top of snow?

This isn't a pissing match, or me right you wrong. This is physics against your understanding of how a tape measure makes the pro chasis better.

you obviously are not understanding what I am getting at, if you compare the two you will see the difference, if you think I pulled out my crayons and saw a difference in numbers and didn't factor in physics, geometry, weight etc.... your way off.