"Totally Non-Biased Comparison Video"

[icr]

I pay 4% on my sled loan. My investment portfolio averaged 12% over the last five years. Call me stupid all you want, doesn't hurt my feelers a bit.

 

[CO Powder]

Sorry, rub you the wrong way. It's not arrogant just the truth. Homes are completely different, poor comparison. Better comparison would be leasing a vehicle. Sleds cost what they cost because people are willing to pay what they pay for them. That's simple. They can pay that price because they can get a lone for it. I agree with buying new over used but just not the way you choice to do it. Save money, pay cash, sale the sled in a few year, take that money add more and buy new again. Same concept you doing right now but you don't have to pay interest and finance charges. That's a smarter way to do it and in the end you'll have more money. It take more self control to do it that way, which most people that are poor lack.

I think I will take my reply to PM lest we stray even further OT.

You are a very presumptuous person Sharp, and oh so wrong...

 

[Killer Time Racing]

wave 8000 cash in the swapmeet.youll find one.

Drive here and you'll find a 13' with 252 miles for that !!!

 

[polaris dude]

Christopher that answer makes a lot of sense in terms of conditions and starting weights.

But just look at the pictures you took and compare them to the video. Does the amount of snow in the track look comparable? I will be the first to agree that the Polaris probably DOES retain the most snow out of the 3, but I just have a hard time imagining there is 120 pounds of snow on it. Especially when it looks like the skis have snow loaded on them and the a-arms look packed with snow.

Edit: looked at your pictures again and noted that there is hardly any snow in the a-arms and not nearly as much on top of the skis.

 

[christopher]

I wish I could say that I was there on that day.
OH HOW I WISH I could have been there so I could directly address all of the questions that came from that video.

But I had nothing to do with it being shot.
All I have to go on is the video and what Ryan told me after the fact when I asked him.

But I do think it is VERY safe to say one thing in specific.
The CONDITION/DENSITY of the snow would have a PROFOUND impact on those weights.

 

[Sharp]

I pay 4% on my sled loan. My investment portfolio averaged 12% over the last five years. Call me stupid all you want, doesn't hurt my feelers a bit.

That's not bad. Good to here that you're doing good. Sounds like you make smart choices. I wasn't trying to hurt anyone feelers.

 

[Sharp]

[QUOTE=christopher;

Do you think the running boards look more snow packed then normal? That doesn't look normal to me. I got the skinz boards on mine due to the snow buildup on the stock boards.

 

[polaris dude]

I wish I could say that I was there on that day.
OH HOW I WISH I could have been there so I could directly address all of the questions that came from that video.

But I had nothing to do with it being shot.
All I have to go on is the video and what Ryan told me after the fact when I asked him.

But I do think it is VERY safe to say one thing in specific.
The CONDITION/DENSITY of the snow would have a PROFOUND impact on those weights.

Oh, sorry I thought that Ryan's email ended after his name.

But yeah I imagine conditions do have a huge impact, but still 120lbs of snow is mind blowing. consider that a cubic foot of water is 7.4 gallons and 60 pounds... Assuming the snow is wet and heavy it is typical for a factor of 1 to 5 for conversion of liquid h2o to snow that means there is 5 cubic feet of snow per 60 lbs of water. Since the poo had 120 lbs of extra weight that means 10 cubic feet of snow are somehow stashed on it? And obviously some of the weight is in liquid form on the sled, but still even half of that total is 5 cubic feet of snow + 5 gallons of water somehow on the sled.

The numbers for all 3 sleds don't really make that much sense to me.

 

[Bobby26]

Wasn't the Cat's icing up so much that it would bend the tunnel.

 

[shattuck]

I wish I could say that I was there on that day.
OH HOW I WISH I could have been there so I could directly address all of the questions that came from that video.

But I had nothing to do with it being shot.
All I have to go on is the video and what Ryan told me after the fact when I asked him.

But I do think it is VERY safe to say one thing in specific.
The CONDITION/DENSITY of the snow would have a PROFOUND impact on those weights.

Is there a reason Ryan wont come here and comment on the test he agreed to be a neutral observer? Lets hear it from him.

 

[christopher]

What it looks like to me is that they all went OUT of their way to NOT stop the boards clean and just let them pile up over time.

 

[christopher]

Oh, sorry I thought that Ryan's email ended after his name.

But yeah I imagine conditions do have a huge impact, but still 120lbs of snow is mind blowing. consider that a cubic foot of water is 7.4 gallons and 60 pounds... Assuming the snow is wet and heavy it is typical for a factor of 1 to 5 for conversion of liquid h2o to snow that means there is 5 cubic feet of snow per 60 lbs of water. Since the poo had 120 lbs of extra weight that means 10 cubic feet of snow are somehow stashed on it? And obviously some of the weight is in liquid form on the sled, but still even half of that total is 5 cubic feet of snow + 5 gallons of water somehow on the sled.

The numbers for all 3 sleds don't really make that much sense to me.

Honestly not sure what to tell you.
I do NOT think the actual hung weights were misrepresented though.
What the scale displayed was what the sleds each weighed.

How they got to that weight is WIDE OPEN for discussion.
But I DO think the displayed digital weights were true.

 

[christopher]

Is there a reason Ryan wont come here and comment on the test he agreed to be a neutral observer? Lets hear it from him.

That post from him that I posted was his reply to the original thread.
You can go over to the YAMAHA forum, and into the Viper subforum and see his original reply to the original video post. I just copied and reposted it here from 12 months ago.

 

[Lorduss]

Did I do the math right? The Polaris had the equivalent of 14.8 gallons of water stuck to it? Are they sure a 10 pound rock didn't accidentally get stuck in the tunnel? Can we believe the horsepower figures?

you loose at least 3% of HP per thousand feet, Test at 9K elevation? at least a 27% loss in HP, so to me using rough math the HP figure seems legit.

 

[BLSDEEP]

Ryan Harris
You got Played.
Sorry but those Yami guys are making you look like a fool.

 

[Bobby26]

I contacted RYAN HARRIS and asked him that point blank.

This is HIS REPLY..

===========================
RYAN HARRIS, SNOWEST MAGAZINE.

This is legit.
But there are a few background notes that I find important to point out:

1. Both the Pro and the Summit were equipped with electric start.
That's why the wet weights are higher than what we have measured in our own testing.
The Viper is electric start, too...

2. The Summit was an SP, not an X.

3. The Viper 153 was not a Float-equipped SE version.
It was the base model with coil spring shocks.

3. The snow conditions on the day of this ride were what I would define as March snow: dense powder up high and heavy wet down low. And the tree weights were done at a lower elevation where the snow was heavier. But all three sleds were ridden for a couple hours, filled up, ridden around again and driven right to the hanging scale. In my opinion, that's why the weights on the Pro and Summit are higher than what the Cat video showed.

4. I was shocked.
As stated in the video, it still feels like you're riding a 4-stroke and it still feels heavier in the snow, but with the 180 boost kit, it was light enough to feel fun. Wasn't expecting that.

5. The results have already been pointed out to some extent in Cat's tree-weight video.
The ProClimb chassis just doesn't carry as much weight in snow.

6. It doesn't mean the Pro and Summit suddenly suck (although social media will probably take it that way anyway).
All I take it to mean is that Yamaha has made big progress toward having a 4-stroke mountain sled that is competitive with the 8s and is actually fun to ride. It is fun to ride.

That's my take. Read into it however you want.

-Ryan Harris


Here's some iphone shots I took on that ride before the weigh in up higher on the mountain.

Flame on...

Those are before riding pictures. Here is the Turbo after riding

 

[shattuck]

Snow Weight & Volume Calculator New Snow is about 8% by volume of Water or 12.5 inches per inch of Rain
Snow Inches Ratio Rain Inches per Inch of Snow
Champagne Powder 14 to 1 0.07143
Average Fresh Snow 12 to 1 0.0833
Snow Ball and Snow Man Making Snow 8 to 1 0.125

If this means what I think it does the PRO can definitely hold some snow.

 

[christopher]

Those are before riding pictures. Here is the Turbo after riding

Holy Cow is that some horrible ice buildup!

 

[shattuck]

SNOW TO LIQUID EQUIVALENT

METEOROLOGIST JEFF HABY

The snow to liquid equivalent is the amount of liquid precipitation that is produced after melting snow. The temperature profile of the troposphere and the surface temperature are important factors that determine this value. The "average" snow to liquid ratio is 10:1. This is saying that if 10 inches of snow fell and that snow was melted it would produce 1 inch of liquid precipitation in the rain gauge.

Correct me if i'm wrong the Polaris gained 124 lbs so that is 14.8 gallons of water in the form of snow at a ratio of 10-1 that would be 148 gallons of snow. Am I missing something?

 

[Bobby26]

how many pounds of snow does it take to bend the Cat tunnel?