So why is it?

[Jaynelson]

Another year, another round of questions in the manufacturer sections of why your brand new sled doesn't perform like you thought (or hoped) it would.

My question is, what exactly do snowmobile manufacturers test when they test mountain sleds? Logic would dictate they test said sleds in said mountains, but that seems more theory than reality. They obviously take these things somewhere and ride them around....so when their test mule is blowing belts, not running the correct RPM, or not handling bumps as its expensive shocks say it should....what happens? It costs just as much to put the wrong clutch or suspension parts in a sled as the right ones, so what gives?

As an example, my sled comes with a slash on the tachometer showing the optimal RPM it should run at. In stock form, the machine is not capable of hitting this mark, so why put a mark there? So the test pilot picks it up....rides it....it doesn't hit the mark they say it should....he brings it back aaaaaaannnnndddd ?? What happens? I'm not chived about this in particular, but it's a good example.

This isn't a thread to bash any one brand as, lets face it, they're all guilty to some extent. Is it a lack of testing, a lack of commitment, a lack of money, pure lazyiness?

What's your take?

 

[cmantle1]

IMO dude its a big combo. First and foremost, i think the companies use the "average" rider to do thier testing, not someone who really pushes the limit of the machine. ALot of people on this site ride sleds pretty agressivley compared to the average rider who buys a snowmobile and puts on 500 miles a year....

I also think that they try to make them to new every year. i thought it was a great idea that cat stuck to the M chassis and tried to refine it and drop weight. I personally feel that before the XP came out doo should have gotten a good fuel injected 800 engine in thier mountain sleds. Instead they just have a light chassis that had recalls....(not brand bashing i ride one).

Its my guess that before sleds go into testing they have a HUGE amount of problems that we dont see, and to meet the said demand for a "new and improved" sled they prolly want to at least get the thing running and able to sell before they get it runnig like it should....

i dunno.....my thoughts....

 

[mtn_extreme]

Also, I know from experience that you cannot test a product ENOUGH to anticipate all that will happen when it finally reaches the public. People have a way a doing some strange things to products

 

[switchback800]

Lets think about it. They build their test sleds and throw someone on it to evaluate it. At the end of the day they have a dozen mechanics tear it down, check parts, put it back together again. Having a dozen of their best mechanics work on a sled makes it better than stock, thus preventing a lot of the minor problems people have with their new sleds. The possibility of tearing up a belt or throwing a bearing is slim to none because most of the test rides take place over 4-5 days, not a full season like the rest of us. Also, they are putting the cart before the horse in many situations because as the test rider is on the slopes, they are ordering parts, building machinery, programming robots etc to build the sled...major problem will be fixed but the minor ones cost too much for companies to fix. Not an expert on it, but it makes sense in my book

 

[Steve D]

Mine is performing like I expected it too...

 

[Coxy]

I gotta agree with ya Jay, i cant figure out why either. I mean, its not like the basics of clutching, or suspension, gearing, etc has changed. It would be nice if a guy could get more then 30 miles on a new broke in belt without cords hanging out, or like you say, hit the target rpm on stock clutching... Hell, just make the sled run to its potential stock, that shouldnt be too much to ask for, for 15 grand... is it?

 

[Gettin2old]

Good topic, Lets take a look at the 2005 RMK and the 2005 Fusion for a fine example of "it costs just as much to put the wrong parts in a sled as it does to use the correct parts"

Look at how F'ed up the clutching was for both the mountain and trail sleds.

What are they testing? Obviously some clown-shoe engineer looked at the HP/Clutching charts for a P-85 secondary and figured it would work in the TEAM secondary.

So the clutching was so wrong it was exploding belts, busting cranks, tearing motor mounts apart and seperating bulkheads from the tunnel, cracking intakes and bellypans. What was their answer?? lets try a different belt!!! instead of looking at the clutching. Oops, that didn't work, lets try a different belt. And they still do not admit to the clutching being totally wrong!

Anyone else want to add to this?? Please do!

 

[kane13]

Good topic, Lets take a look at the 2005 RMK and the 2005 Fusion for a fine example of "it costs just as much to put the wrong parts in a sled as it does to use the correct parts"

Look at how F'ed up the clutching was for both the mountain and trail sleds.

What are they testing? Obviously some clown-shoe engineer looked at the HP/Clutching charts for a P-85 secondary and figured it would work in the TEAM secondary.

So the clutching was so wrong it was exploding belts, busting cranks, tearing motor mounts apart and seperating bulkheads from the tunnel, cracking intakes and bellypans. What was their answer?? lets try a different belt!!! instead of looking at the clutching. Oops, that didn't work, lets try a different belt. And they still do not admit to the clutching being totally wrong!

Anyone else want to add to this?? Please do!

I have a 2005 rmk i have done some minor slp mods, not many miles on it yet but it works fine i think the best thing i did was balanced the clutch,time will tell but i got a buddy and he tore apart belts constantly until he had the motor mount update he has over 3000 miles and its still running strong from what i hear some were bad and some were good.Polaris sent all rmk 900's out with the same weights in the clutches 70's i believe when i first got it it was reving way to high this can be a real problem if you don't watch it, i like what Arctic cat did with my m8 and sent the right weights for my area right from the factory to be installed by the dealer it probably saves them a lot of money in the long run i love my 08 m8 but i wish it had all the options the rmk has, seems like sometimes that Polaris bit of a little more than they could chew with the rmk 900 and said here's technology make it work for us k and it is amazing what cosumers and aftermarket manufacturers have done but it should'nt be that way at all, it seems that you spend a lot of money and then you just have to spend more regardless of the manufacturer and i can't figure it out why they can't even figure out how to properly vent the engines IMO venting is so important, hopefully one day they will start getting it right.

 

[Ollie]

It's really quite simple.
It is a number of reasons why.
One, as has been stated. We ride the sleds a little harder than the average rider. Sort of like a guy that owns a truck yet never tows anything will have less problems than someone who tows a 6 place enclosed all over the country.

Also has to do with testing.
They test maybe a hundred sleds and try to cure the problems.
We run 10,000 sleds and find problems.
Oh well. If you want new, these are the problems you run into.
The alternative is to buy an older sled that you know all the issues on and mod the daylights out of it.

 

[Bagger]

Also sounds to me like some dealer setup issues.......

B

 

[snowmobiler]

nothing new.i remember back in 70s, new sleds needing air vents and carb plates to prevent vapor lock.

 

[Clarke673]

Most of the clutching issues have to do with dealers.

I don’t care if nasa starts making sleds, there is no way you can make a sled have spot on clutching and gearing for every elevation, snow type, riding style, or what ever. They simply pick the broadest settings so it will work the best for the highest percentage of its sales, therefore making the most amount of customers happy.

Every stock sled needs to be clutched and re-geared. Things have not changed in 15 years. As Far as your sleds not performing as good as you expected.... Sounds like you need to start riding a poo.

 

[raceu4it]

has anyone met a test rider?

if you think consumer sleds are finicky, could you imagine a proto.

 

[Steamboat-RN]

Imagine the expense that a company would incure if they built hundreds of prototype sleds for every model every year. Then the time involved in collecting the data on every little problem for each sled/rider combo. Then re-work each sled and repeat the testing. Add different altitudes, snow conditions, temps, skills...etc. It would take years for new sleds to hit the snow. By then there would be new technology and we would all be demanding the improvements right now. Re-tool the factory and start over.
Sure we could have all the latest and greatest in a bullet-proof ultralight mega-hp package. IF we were willing to drop 20 grand on a stocker. But how many would they sell. Right now they can't give new sleds away. $8000. for a NEW 08 M1000!
09 Dragon 800s for 9000. XPs for (well who cares?)
Any way, It is good business to get input from thousands of average riders and tweak new products to fit over time.
Same thing for dirt bikes, watercraft, atvs, even cars.
Most get consumer inspired changes every year.

 

[skibreeze]

Imagine the expense that a company would incure if they built hundreds of prototype sleds for every model every year. Then the time involved in collecting the data on every little problem for each sled/rider combo. Then re-work each sled and repeat the testing. Add different altitudes, snow conditions, temps, skills...etc. It would take years for new sleds to hit the snow. By then there would be new technology and we would all be demanding the improvements right now. Re-tool the factory and start over.
Sure we could have all the latest and greatest in a bullet-proof ultralight mega-hp package. IF we were willing to drop 20 grand on a stocker. But how many would they sell. Right now they can't give new sleds away. $8000. for a NEW 08 M1000!
09 Dragon 800s for 9000. XPs for (well who cares?)
Any way, It is good business to get input from thousands of average riders and tweak new products to fit over time.
Same thing for dirt bikes, watercraft, atvs, even cars.
Most get consumer inspired changes every year.

We're riding the prototypes and doing the testing, and paying to do it. Actually I can't complain much, all I have done on my dragon was buy silicone to seal the intake, buy a real bumper, buy better boards, buy scratchers, buy weights, buy storage bags, and buy venting. I've accepted the fact that we have to add stuff to get them were they should be when we pick them up.

 

[winter brew]

Because the consumer is SO demanding. We damand something bigger, lighter and faster every year. If a mfr. tries selling the old junk the consumer will go to another brand to get the "latest and greatest". If a mfr loses much in sales they will be closing their doors. So to stay competitive they must rush the product to market.

 

[Jaynelson]

^ I can agree with that.

If we borrow a page from the auto industry, the average turnover of a complete body-style change is every 5 years, with a facelift at the 3 year mark. The last 2 years should be open for R&D on the upcoming model, giving them enough time to put out something decent from the get-go. Do you think snowmobile consumers would be happy with that?

 

[Gettin2old]

Most of the clutching issues have to do with dealers.

I don’t care if nasa starts making sleds, there is no way you can make a sled have spot on clutching and gearing for every elevation, snow type, riding style, or what ever. They simply pick the broadest settings so it will work the best for the highest percentage of its sales, therefore making the most amount of customers happy.

Every stock sled needs to be clutched and re-geared. Things have not changed in 15 years. As Far as your sleds not performing as good as you expected.... Sounds like you need to start riding a poo.

I am not referring to a few grams of weight up front or a different primary spring for altitude, I am referring to the TEAM secondary they used in 2005.

Look at all the problems everyone had, Belts completely blowing apart in less than 50 miles on a flatland sled!! Broken plastic panels, wrecked cranks, busted mounts. and the mountain riders were seeing less time out of them. What was thier fix? Hmm, must be the belt? lets send them new belts. Ooops, that didn't work, lets try a different belt. All the R&D money spent on trying to get a belt to stay together and then giving out the parts to dealers, then them selling the belts instead of giving them to the customer.

All it would have taken is a different helix in the secondary because some overpaid under-brained engineer chose the wrong helix for the 900 engine.

I bet the mounts would have lasted if the clutching was closer to correct then what they put out

 

[Super A]

^ I can agree with that.

If we borrow a page from the auto industry, the average turnover of a complete body-style change is every 5 years, with a facelift at the 3 year mark. The last 2 years should be open for R&D on the upcoming model, giving them enough time to put out something decent from the get-go. Do you think snowmobile consumers would be happy with that?

No I don't think snowmobile consumers would be happy with the same model for a couple years. If we look back at the Polaris RMK/Edge/Escape, they were all basically the same sleds for quite a period of time. How many of us jumped ship to the new firecat chasis or the original Rev Chasis when they came out. The manufacturers have seen what happens when they sit on their hands to long, Polaris is only now gaining back many of the customers that they lost to the first M7's and Rev's.

Manufacturers want to have the crowd around their booth at the expo, it flat out equals sales, no one wants to be the the company with new paint and 3 pounds lighter, it has proven not to sell.

Anyways that is why I think we continue to get a lack of refinement in our machines, customer need to have the lasted and greatest coupled with a very competitve market place equals less than perfect product in the field and plenty to squawk about on this forum.

Great thread, enjoy hearing everyone's opinion

A

 

[AdrenalineAddict]

I'm don't think the consumer is over demanding, just get it close and I'd be happy. I was on a test ride of the 2009 Cats last spring. I'm pretty sure they were trying to sell more of the competitions sleds than there own. Every sled I test drove was off the mark by 200 to 300 RPM's and getting stomped by the locals old technology machines. I believe this was simply a case of shear laziness on the dealers part. I don't understand how or why this kind of thing could happen when you have Joe-Blow the mechanic and a parts trailer 6 miles away. Everybody I spoke to that took them for a spin said,"I think I'll stick with what I'm riding". I personally will only deal with one dealer, with a little R&D he gets it right the first time. I can jump on his well tested and proven sleds and ride them for years without touching a thing, he's a little spendy but more than worth it.