Some 2013 info to wet the tongue..

[IQRIDR]

Useless without pics. Until then it's some guy f*ckin with ya.

I can assure you this is right from someone who has RIDDEN the 2013s in Jackson. Someone very close with Polaris, I won't spill the beans but I'm not a bull****ter, mmmmmkk? The power bump is the only thing I don't have confirmed.

 

[akgiauque]

Glad I didn't get the '12! I probably won't get the '13 either since I opened my big mouth in front of my wife..."this thing is awesome['11]! There's no way they can get any better! I'm keeping this thing forever!!" Stupid me.

I am going to start trash talking my 12 right now by March I will be able to Snow Check. I can hear it now, "What the hell is wrong with the one you have now!"

Good news, brand wars are great for all of us. HP to weight makes sense and makes for an easier ride.

 

[AkLogan]

2011 for sale

 

[pura vida]

i'll take weight loss over hp gains anyday!!!

not me. don't get me wrong lighter is "always" better but if i had to choose between 15 less pounds or 10 hp, i'd take the hp every time.

pv

 

[CATDIESELPOWER]

I want one. Taking donations.

 

[AKSNOWRIDER]

not me. don't get me wrong lighter is "always" better but if i had to choose between 15 less pounds or 10 hp, i'd take the hp every time.

pv

cory. the other brands have us by 15-20 hp on the dyno now.....yet the lighter sled still performs....taking another 15-20 pds...is going to outperform 10 hp....at least on this light of a chassis to begin with....

 

[theultrarider]

cory. the other brands have us by 15-20 hp on the dyno now.....yet the lighter sled still performs....taking another 15-20 pds...is going to outperform 10 hp....at least on this light of a chassis to begin with....

So ill skip breakfast, let you pack my extra fuel, and add some goodies

 

[AKSNOWRIDER]

So ill skip breakfast, let you pack my extra fuel, and add some goodies

did we or did we not see that the other day when we rode?

 

[cjgodden]

I hope it is a better belt drive system than came stock on the snowhawk, That thing was a pile of poopie, could not handle even the 600HO hp let alone a 800. Replacement belts were $180 and they were a pain is the rear to change. I ended up converting to chain drive to eliminate the hassle and cost.

 

[LoudHandle]

Originally Posted by m8sandman
i'll take weight loss over hp gains anyday!!!


I concur, the lighter sled will be more playful and perform better. It is far cheaper to add HP but to truly make a sled perform it will need to be light enough to handle. My preference is to lighten and tune the suspension before worrying about adding HP.

"If the major manufactures were not located in the midwest and staffed by out of work midwest farmers we could be riding sleds as light as the current motocross bikes. Because at the mass production level they could be utilizing all the currently available space age materials correctly without increasing the sticker price substantially."

For comparison:
'2012 Stock ~430 and ~140HP equals a power to weight ratio of 3.07#'s/HP
if the '20013 ~415 and ~150HP equals a power to weight ratio of 2.77#'s/HP
an improvement of 10 nearly 11% which is a good margin (not where we could be today, if not engineered by midwest farmers but that is the reality of it)

"If there was a manufacture based in the West with the right people involved todays sleds could be near or sub 300# dry easy and still be very durable and trouble free. Which would put the power to weight ratio much closer to todays fighter jets which if memory serves is close to a 1.5#'s/HP if not 1#/HP for a 600cc turbo sled."

 

[800dragonwillrockyou]

No need to bash any farmers buddy!

 

[LoudHandle]

I thought I might get a little flak for that. My last name means "Farmer". Not trying to offend, but your typical farmer throws more iron at a broken part just to get the implement repaired to get the job done. From my 30 or so years of sledding that is what I've seen from the big four. Twenty years ago I was putting together mountain sleds that were sub 400# and it pissed me off that the big four were still insisting on taking the heavy iron reinforced trial sleds and stretching them to make "mountain" sleds. If they had substituted the steel and other heavy parts and engineered them for a decent strength to weight ratio. Todays Mountain sleds would be 250-350# dry tops.

 

[rmk727]

I just can't believe all you young bucks are so worried about getting permission from your wife, geez who's the boss? What did you buy her for except cleaning and cooking and practicing to have offspring, be a man like me. Just have a moving van pull up to the house and start unloading new furniture and low and behold the last piece goes in the garage ( new sled). PS, love what those farmers are doing.

 

[2XM3]

Belt drives a pretty good thing, but I would love to finally see them get on the ball and give us a nice full 2.5 paddle track with room for a 3" right out of the bag instead of this .0000000007 clearance to tunnel deal ( lmao) without a new chaincase. I do think that they could still lose maybe 10 pounds or so in addition to the chaincase if they went to aluminium and composite in a few more areas. Hood alone could lose 5 pounds+ easy, all mil spec aluminium heim ends another pound, ect ect But we are pretty much at the point of the weight reduction getting very expensive, and i'm sure with the current economy ect they will not go overboard and price themselves out of sight.

 

[tdblakes]

Twenty years ago I was putting together mountain sleds that were sub 400# and it pissed me off that the big four were still insisting on taking the heavy iron reinforced trial sleds and stretching them to make "mountain" sleds. If they had substituted the steel and other heavy parts and engineered them for a decent strength to weight ratio. Todays Mountain sleds would be 250-350# dry tops.

Sounds like you should have started building and selling mountain sleds 20yrs ago. oops missed the boat on that one. Silly farmers, building sleds for a business, making money and trying to avoid hand building $25K sleds that the common consumer can't fix once he breaks it (cuz you know we will). The price of a aftermarket carbon fiber chassis sure does show you how big the market is for that kind of light weight high performance material. Love the idea of a 1:2 hp/lb ratio but its not realistic to do with purely materials on a large scale right now. Why hasnt GM come out with a 1000lb 500hp car that we can all buy for 30K and will last 200k miles. Oh wait, they're based in farm country too! them darn farmers

lol

I think its pretty cool if they start making belt drives standard equipment. If it costs me $2500 for a CMX belt drive that will make my '12 just like a '13, then I'm cool with that. It'll cost that much to trade up anyway. anxiously waiting for more snow.

 

[winter brew]

If they can drop a little more weight they will be down to what my 1980 el tigre weighed with all steel bulkhead, steel suspension, leaf springs and 2 gas tanks!

 

[AndrettiDog]

2011 for sale

Another 2011 for sale. Only mine is cheaper and better than his ^^^

 

[Minten]

Well if you look at the Iq there is a pattern of noticeable changes. Every 2 years something big changes with little changes every year.

05 - 06 Non-Raw
07 - 08 Converted to Raw
09 - 10 Smaller front end on raw

So if they continue this pattern something new will be coming out.?

Just my thought.

I thought I saw a 50% Plastic 50% Carbon Fiber with a 900 Direct injection turbo in it.

 

[Old Scud-doo]

What seems to be only touched on is that the belt drive is more efficeint. More hp to the track whether it be added hp or more efficeincy gives one the same result. If you could get 100%, impossible really, of the 140 +/- hp to the track at all time the machine would plain rip your arms off and beat you with them! Anybody else up for a good beating?

 

[winter brew]

Is a belt more efficient at transfering power?? Or just less rotating weight?
Chain/case is what, like over 98% efficient, so not a heck of a lot left there besides the weight loss and simplicity.

I would like to see some gains/redesigns in the power lost through the CVT....now there's an area leaving A LOT on the table for improvement!