Damn that's a lot of riding in one year. I'm jealous!!!
stick to your guns
- Thread starter beamslayer
- Start date
Damn that's a lot of riding in one year. I'm jealous!!!
Wow I am truly hurt I got my first BAD report out of 40 good ones I guess I should not voice my oppioion. Well I am over that now sure felt bad for a second their.
We have been the test mules for sleds since they first came out ,my first sled was a 1972 292 sno jet now their was a sled . I can remember my father an my uncles always working on them and bitching about the mfg.They would would build wideners for their skis,weld bracket on the tunnel for more clearance,bore them out,shave the heads ect ect. My point is if it was not for that type of person where would we be today?
I will gladly keep everyone that is interested in the 858 build informed.For those that are content with your stock sleds thats great.
Their are leaders and their are followers I just happen to like to lead it must come from having a small pair.
We have been the test mules for sleds since they first came out ,my first sled was a 1972 292 sno jet now their was a sled . I can remember my father an my uncles always working on them and bitching about the mfg.They would would build wideners for their skis,weld bracket on the tunnel for more clearance,bore them out,shave the heads ect ect. My point is if it was not for that type of person where would we be today?
I will gladly keep everyone that is interested in the 858 build informed.For those that are content with your stock sleds thats great.
Their are leaders and their are followers I just happen to like to lead it must come from having a small pair.
That sucks, I hate the whole thumbs up thumbs down crap
Thanks for that.
A
aebsledder
Well-known member
Here's another way of looking at things:
In all fairness, I guarantee no one even has enough miles on enough different sleds on the RKT drop in kit to say it completely "fixes" the issues. Ya, in threory it should, but if you compare the # of actual Pros out there with how many have this drop in kit its not too much. In a way I think the guys who are running these new drop in kits are kinda test mules for this kit. I'm not saying they don't work, they may, but the jury is still out IMHO. Hell, when the Pro first came out everyone said they were reliable for the first year, give or take. We see how that is playing out.
Hell, if you listen to what Indy Dan has to say about these Polaris 800's he says its definately a rod ratio problem, all the way to the point that he has a kit together that offers longer custom rods and spacer and used stock pistons(he also beefs up the cylinder skirt) & puts a warrenty on it. If you listen to RKT he says it definately is NOT a rod ratio problem, just needs his special design piston and the problem is "fixed". So who the hell are you going to listen too? So who has more miles on these things, who has seen the insides of these motors more?
We are all screwed for buying a Poo 800, LOL
Not bashing Kelsey at all, but doesn't Indy Dan's kit come with a 5 year warranty? Just sayin, he must be pretty confident in his theory.
T
TurboMatt
Well-known member
Everyone has their own theory I guess.
I say CANNOT more than will not...
Have 2011 pro and share much of these feelngs. The stock pro is an awesome sled and I just want to do some minor tweaks to "complete perfection".
And this is where the crappy engine design comes in to play... I hesitate to touch a single thing from fear that a dealer might use any and all modifications to get out of warranty work.
My 1029 price with 220Hp@9400rpm is pour gas and go, but my stock pro??
Now my sled has some sort of fuelling issue. Backfires on startup, exhaust smells "sour" and it burbles up to 6000rpm!? Is it "just" injectors? Gummed fuel system? Or will I be sad when I inspect my rings?
The fact that we come online here and say "we'll just have to live with it" from bith Cat, Doo and Poo is nothing short of a disaster. Granted, EPA has made their task harder, but I will not be lied to so if you cant build an engine that lasts THEN SAY SO in your adds.
Hard-core sno-X sleds were sold without warranty and had better statistics.
What to do... (Oh, I stil ride it).
Have 2011 pro and share much of these feelngs. The stock pro is an awesome sled and I just want to do some minor tweaks to "complete perfection".
And this is where the crappy engine design comes in to play... I hesitate to touch a single thing from fear that a dealer might use any and all modifications to get out of warranty work.
My 1029 price with 220Hp@9400rpm is pour gas and go, but my stock pro??
Now my sled has some sort of fuelling issue. Backfires on startup, exhaust smells "sour" and it burbles up to 6000rpm!? Is it "just" injectors? Gummed fuel system? Or will I be sad when I inspect my rings?
The fact that we come online here and say "we'll just have to live with it" from bith Cat, Doo and Poo is nothing short of a disaster. Granted, EPA has made their task harder, but I will not be lied to so if you cant build an engine that lasts THEN SAY SO in your adds.
Hard-core sno-X sleds were sold without warranty and had better statistics.
What to do... (Oh, I stil ride it).
Sell your Pro and buy something else.
S
Super Sled
Well-known member
I looked up the M8 specs the have the same bore and stroke as the poo 800 except suk has only 794 cc and poo has 795 cc.
I am not here to critique on Indy Dans theory or anyone else.but the facts say they are the same bore and stroke so why does one engine break skirts while the other makes more hp and is more dependable.
Does anyone have a 800 suk apart and could measure cylinder skirt thickness and piston to cylinder clearance. I would love to tear both engines apart and compare.
I am still waiting to hear how my friend makes out at the dealer and as soon as I hear I will post the results.
I am not here to critique on Indy Dans theory or anyone else.but the facts say they are the same bore and stroke so why does one engine break skirts while the other makes more hp and is more dependable.
Does anyone have a 800 suk apart and could measure cylinder skirt thickness and piston to cylinder clearance. I would love to tear both engines apart and compare.
I am still waiting to hear how my friend makes out at the dealer and as soon as I hear I will post the results.
Last edited:
Sic 'em, OS. Sic 'em! Good stuff.
Indy Dan has looked at both. He talked about it when referencing his newly designed motors.
"By adding the corner sleeve supports to the cylinder 2 things have been accomplished.
1 - sleeve strength increased.
2- the overal radial length of the sleeve has been increased & resonant frequency has moved reducing stress on the sleeve.
Its not just rod ratio that causes the the sleeves to break.
And yes the warranty is Good with the Power Addiction Head.
Dan"
From what we have read the Suzuki motor is beefier construction at the cylinder skirts.
beam...rod length is independent of bore and stroke...even just a .050" change in rod length can make or break cylinder loading..also the wristpin in the piston can be moved around(normally moved closer to the intake side)which can drastically change cylinder loading as well...and everything has dramatic effects on port flows and HP/torque and drivability.....
It has been mentioned here, the rods are even a tad bit shorter on the Cat. But Cat has a much beefier piston and cylinder wall to take a beating.
I also think their piston clearance can be tighter due to less distortion.
The piston pin is said to be offset towards the exhaust/intake side, so the load from combustion pressure is transferred with a better geometry/less angular force towards cylinder wall.
Someone correct me if I'm wrong.
I also think their piston clearance can be tighter due to less distortion.
The piston pin is said to be offset towards the exhaust/intake side, so the load from combustion pressure is transferred with a better geometry/less angular force towards cylinder wall.
Someone correct me if I'm wrong.
O my buddy Kipp just blew up his 2012 with 850 miles on it, and got a new motor within 2 weeks. but he did say he had to force them to do it as the cases were back ordered as you stated. but they did have complete motors.
I thought stroke was the length of travel of the piston. We use to move the crank pin toward the out side of the flywheels to lengthen the stroke and use the same rods with shorter pistons.
Is that what suki does except they use a shorter rod? If so would that not make for greater rod angle?
Is that what suki does except they use a shorter rod? If so would that not make for greater rod angle?
rod ratio is the length of the rod vrs the length of the stroke...normally..a longer rod breathes better and makes more top end hp..but causes a sacrifice of bottom end/midrange power and fuel economy...its a very fine balancing act that has to be carefully planned...port volume/flow, rpm range needed,and motors intended use...as the rod length is increased the wrist pin gets moved closer to the dome of the piston to keep the same deck height(which can lead to ring issues as the wristpin moves up into the ring lands)its hard to imagine but rod ratio has a large effect on piston speeds at each end of the stroke...and thus on engine breathing....
So what is your theory why the skirts are breaking, rod ratio,skirt thickness,piston design ect. Their seams to be different opinions on what is causing this some even want to believe it is not even a issue.
It is just weird how it is not specific to the amount of miles or useage or the build date.
Has anyone had one go down running a turbo?
It is just weird how it is not specific to the amount of miles or useage or the build date.
Has anyone had one go down running a turbo?
