09 800 blew
- Thread starter ttgac
- Start date
D.B. Cooper
Member
There's an entire thread on SnoWest pinned at the very top of the IQ section devoted to failed 800's, titled "An OFFICIAL CFI Engine Failure Thread"
The 2008-2010 800's (4-injector) are time bombs, I.M.O.
The 2011 800's (2-injector + less compression) seem to be surviving
Last edited:
polarisrider1
New member
Polaris needs to go public with this issue and make it right with their customers. Loyals are on the fence here. I went doo for 2 yrs. And doo had issues too. Back to Poo but back on the fence. Eteks are now going boom. 2 strokers will not run lean or clean. We need light weight 4 strokes to meet Fed. Regulations. What a quagmire for the Doo,Poo, Cat engineers to be in. Mean time we pay way to much for to little.
cuzzinolaf
Well-known member
Cat's 800 is great. You need to come over the the litter box, Wayne.
indy_500
Well-known member
cuzzinolaf
Well-known member
Cat will also have a new motor out next year. We will see
Haters gotta hate.
700classic
New member
Is it possible they know how to make a sturdy 800, while others don't? Nah, that is silly thinking.
-John[/QUOTE]
Et tu Brutus?
-John[/QUOTE]
Et tu Brutus?
D.B. Cooper
Member
Cat has never had unusual problems with their 800, including the fairly new model that came out last season.
Is it possible they know how to make a sturdy 800, while others don't? Nah, that is silly thinking.
-John
Agreed on the SUZUKI built-in-Japan-not-Minnesota 800's making good H.P. and hold up well, certainly way better than POLARIS 800's (and I'm a POLARIS guy for sleds + RZR's, Sea-Doo for jet-ski's)
Not to sure about Arctic Cat's track record with 37 recalls-on-the-F7 and the Diamond Drive though..........................................
It will interesting to see how Arctic Cat does once they start building their own engines.......................
If POLARIS were smart, they should swallow some pride and at that point they should contract with SUZUKI for their 800+ power-plants
Last edited:
Excellent point. Hopefully not a lot is changed when Cat takes over engine production. Wonder if they can just make the same powerplant or if it is a proprietary thing of Suzuki?
-John
D.B. Cooper
Member
Why Cat would want to even attempt to change a good recipe baffles me.
indy_500
Well-known member
x2, cat has something going with that motor.
But, it don't pass epa crap coming into effect next year. Poop on epa, why don't they come over and test my sled?
dont like the epa stand behind the guys trying to de fund it.and the cat f7 and others had the recals because they stand behind ther product fix issues no matter how small and dont test on buyer then call it abuse and not pay to fix like some others.and poo will never go to suzuki prob because suzuki still is a major stock holder of cat.from what I have gatherd cat will not be fully compliant till late 2012 they hope.
Last edited:
polarisrider1
New member
NEVER! I still have all my Doo gear. Not jumping ship (again) yet. Poo had a pretty good thing going for years with the Fuji Engines from Subaru Heavy Industries. Lets hope Cat isn't making the same mistake.
D.B. Cooper
Member
F-7 and 37 recalls in the same season is perhaps standing behind the product, but try telling that to the Guy who just plunked down $7,000 in hard earned cash and can't ride as the snow is falling because his sled is in the shop awaiting install of recall #'s 21-26.
Fact:
SUZUKI is a 20% share-holder in Arctic Cat last I read, but that is subject to change at any time.
That being said,a SUZUKI power-plant in a non- ARCTIC Cat Chassis is not out of the realm of a possibility in the foreseeable future.
You have to ask yourself this question;
After all these years, with consistently good H.P. AND RELIABILITY out of the SUZUKI Power-plants, why would Arctic Cat decide to go off and build their own engines?
Something else is going on that we're not being told
Last edited:
D.B. Cooper
Member
They're out there, it's common knowledge. Even chassis gussets and stiffeners to hold it all together. My bud that rides with me had one for a short period of time, traded it in on a ZR 900 in the middle of one trip, he was so aggravated with it (seriously) But a real fast sled not only for it's time, but still today, the 2003 F-7's dominate the 700 drag class
Look just for the record, I.M.O., SUZUKI has the best engines out there for BOTH power + reliability. Period.
And I.M.O. POLARIS the BEST chassis, period,
Combine the 2 (from the factory) is what I would pay extra to have.
Last edited:
skiroule
Well-known member
I'm just amazed by the problems with the later model engines. Like others have suggested, I think we can point to the "Mountain out of a Molehill" E.P.A. as a major source of the problem. On a given day, how many sleds are running compared to on-road vehicles. These standards are simply ludicrous. Believe it or not, my weed whacker has to meet E.P.A standards.
The carburetor versions of the liberty engines and dare I say it, the 488 Fuji, are indestructible. My brother bleeds Polaris Blue but he won't buy a post-2004 model because of the engines.
We've known for years that if you lean em' out, they'll run like wildfire...for a while.
I feel some sympathy for the engineers. They're trying to provide what the riders want with one hand tied behind their back.
The carburetor versions of the liberty engines and dare I say it, the 488 Fuji, are indestructible. My brother bleeds Polaris Blue but he won't buy a post-2004 model because of the engines.
We've known for years that if you lean em' out, they'll run like wildfire...for a while.
I feel some sympathy for the engineers. They're trying to provide what the riders want with one hand tied behind their back.
D.B. Cooper
Member
That's certainly part of the problem.
However (and this can be confirmed on the Thread on SnoWest) a lot of the 800 Pooos that failed prematurely had PC-3's or PC-5 fuel controllers that richened them up in the mid-range LEAN areas, and they still didn't last.
4500+ miles on my 2007 DRAGON 700, pull the rope + go, never had the heads off.