my brother is the one that had the cat and i am a skidoo guy it is running 9 pounds of boost and the doo was running 5 pounds of boost and his cat has alot more motor. if the doo was running 9 pounds it might be different and yes i will be on a turboed doo next year. I do not know what turbo i will run. the garret is about 2000 cheaper!For whatever it's worth...I was up at the snowies this weekend sitting at Lake Marie 10k ft. taking a break with our group.. Plenty of Turbos banging on the 3 ft of fresh..Killer day! A Local dealer had one of the new Aero Etechs up there on 6.5-7lbs boost..letting his customers try it out. One of them had a 22 yr old son with one of VOHK's '10 HCR 800s with 14 lbs, all titanium bolts, lightweight parts etc..Garrett race gas setup.. From what we could see, the boosted Doo without a doubt, had nearly the same climbing ability and hill speed. Both riders switched... Both gave each other compliments, imagine that!. Both were very impressive sleds. Both riders agreed they had nearly the same power..There was a second Etech pump gas setup running at 5 lbs.. most guys said the power was similar to 8-10lbs of other Turbos they had ridden.. All I'm saying is.. there's must be something related to the Rotax motor design and being boosted. They definitety like it. I have no idea if a Garrett would make the same power as the Aero, boost for boost but...I defiinitely like the idea of running less boost/more reliablility and gettting more power to the ground..Rotax has a long history of making big power,,nobody can dispute that.. My 2 cents... from what I was able to witness. One thing is for sure, it's out that the Doo race dept. has several on the snow this year on the RMSHA circuit with some of the best riders in the sport (ie; Vinnie Clark, Snow Week Racer of the Year) to name a few..I'm excited to see how it develops as Rotax and Doo definitely have the budget and resources to get it figured out, otherwise they wouldn't put their name on it..they are Frenchies right? LOL Must be something there huh? I want to say one thing before I quit..Who the heck cares who's kit is better as long as we have several companies investing in our sport and spending valuable resources...all to us, the CUSTOMER"S benefit? Seems like a good deal for us, not necassarily a great financial investment for the turbo manufacturers and suppliers IMO.. We should be more thankful and appreciative we have them ( I mean all of them),, or just go back to riding carbed normally aspirated stockers and shut up. Im really sick of the brand loyal, turbo loyal bashing that is going on this site right now..About ready to check out on this site. It used to be a great source for the sport..now it's become a punk kid, keyboard racing, drama, dik measuring contest every day..I guess in about 10yrs I'll be done riding hard..which is about the same time our sport will be dead at the rate it's going.. I'm done now....
tom's snowmob turbo... 30 hp?
- Thread starter Insaneboltrounder/sjohns
- Start date
Correction then.. it's just what he said when I asked him how much boost the Cat was showing.. There was another Turbo Etech with 6.5 to 7lbs.. must not have been around when you were there.. It was there Saturday as well. Thanks for the correction and facts. Regardless, good to hear another testament to comparable power with less boost by the Etech. I was also told the boosted Pros are seeing the same results...
Well there is one way to find out what your turbo sled makes for HP and spend the money on a dyno. As i have it is a Cat 900 efi 66 aero dual injectors water to air intercooler motor was set up for boost by Brent at Arctic Edge, dyno done by Neil NPP final outcome was 230hp @ 8250rpm and 148ft/lbs. 11.5 lbs boost Intercooler was not working as the water flow was 70 degrees f and is normally 40. When putting this together was told 250-275 hp. If all claims on hp developed by kits that are sold then a dyno sheet shoud acompany the kit. Way to much keyboard testing and i was told this by whichamcollit.
what was the A/F at 11.5 IB's of boost
Thanks
Thanks
Last edited:
Do not run A/f egt was 1425 and the burn line was spot on so the egt is just a number if the plugs look good. I have richend it up a smidge.
If you where to move those probes about a inch farther away from the cylinder you would get a closer #. but as long as you know the plugs are safe at 1425, ride on!
I believe that Tom's Snowmobile has a track Dyno in their shop.
May be why the HP #'s are lower?
May be why the HP #'s are lower?
Perhaps we can clear up some of the confusion and or hypothetical questioning.
1. We are not the manufacturer of the turbo system; Aerocharger is. The people that design, update and put information relevent to our website posted incorrectly. I believe at least some of this information has been addressed.
2. The dyno numbers are from a track or chassis dyno. Simple math dictates a minimum of X 2 hp for a chassis dyno. This would equate to somewhere between a 50 - 60 overall engine horsepower increase.(note; parts of the dyno were not happy with some of the force we were applying to it, during testing!!!) We typically strive for a 58% efficienancy rating, and at times have even reached 62% efficienancy. Our goal was to not offer some inflated or false h.p. number, but rather offer something that people could realistically understand and or use with a certain amount of reliability. It sounds like we might have missed our mark, and or offered potentially mis-understood information.
3. There is obviously some marked and or divided opinions relating to the entire turbo market, including different manufacturer views. While this is all fine, I feel there is a lot of time wasted pondering these views. Turboing todays sleds is the best current logical approach to substantial hp increases for snowmobiles in my opinion.
4. The performance is real from this turbo set up from Aerocharger. Does it have potential for better and be more efficient? I know in my own personal life I have potential to do better and to be more efficient in what I do. And I believe I can do that without causing intentional harm to other people.
Tom Dines
1. We are not the manufacturer of the turbo system; Aerocharger is. The people that design, update and put information relevent to our website posted incorrectly. I believe at least some of this information has been addressed.
2. The dyno numbers are from a track or chassis dyno. Simple math dictates a minimum of X 2 hp for a chassis dyno. This would equate to somewhere between a 50 - 60 overall engine horsepower increase.(note; parts of the dyno were not happy with some of the force we were applying to it, during testing!!!) We typically strive for a 58% efficienancy rating, and at times have even reached 62% efficienancy. Our goal was to not offer some inflated or false h.p. number, but rather offer something that people could realistically understand and or use with a certain amount of reliability. It sounds like we might have missed our mark, and or offered potentially mis-understood information.
3. There is obviously some marked and or divided opinions relating to the entire turbo market, including different manufacturer views. While this is all fine, I feel there is a lot of time wasted pondering these views. Turboing todays sleds is the best current logical approach to substantial hp increases for snowmobiles in my opinion.
4. The performance is real from this turbo set up from Aerocharger. Does it have potential for better and be more efficient? I know in my own personal life I have potential to do better and to be more efficient in what I do. And I believe I can do that without causing intentional harm to other people.
Tom Dines
