G
G
Guest
Looking at Poos....... Again. What comes around goes around.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
non turbo 900 vs viper
- Thread starter flyinfinn
- Start date
This conversation is a perfect example of a violation of one of the first rules of the John Dees site. NO ARGUMENTS ABOUT WHO HAS THE FASTEST SLED. Secondly I hope nobody ever bought either the NA 900 or the Viper thinking they were going to go very fast.
Yep boring like kids arguing about who’s 500 is faster. Lol
Hp sells sleds. Clutching wins races. It has only been like that for, umm, 40 years. All the geezers on this site should know that by now. Unless those brain cells have fallen by the wayside. Hp is just a very minor variable. Especially since nothing made anymore is designed to exceed 100 mph. Except the Sidewinder/TCat. It is all just a race to 100. The difference is just where you want to start from. 0 to 100 or 70 to 100. Factory clutching is one size fits all. Or also one size fits nothing. If you run 70 to 100 all day factory clutching has a lot of room for improvement. However this is 2019. The average slender cares a lot more about properly functioning thumbwarmers than proper clutching. Kind of sad where the whole sport has gone. In another 10 years the last of the hard cores will be gone. What will be left will be pretty boring. Oh and by the way a 2002 Indy 500 xc will give both a Viper and an NA 900 all they would ever want. My how far we have come.
Agree with all that grub! That's why I explained all I had done to the sleds clutching. The clutching is set up to get out of the gate hard, and fast. Higher RPM helps on the top. I had seen what others were doing, and came up with my own modified set up that I like very much as it works for the way I ride. The question was asked, and nor I am arguing, or bragging.
yes but again if you clutch a viper, where does the 900 stand then??Agree with all that grub! That's why I explained all I had done to the sleds clutching. The clutching is set up to get out of the gate hard, and fast. Higher RPM helps on the top. I had seen what others were doing, and came up with my own modified set up that I like very much as it works for the way I ride. The question was asked, and nor I am arguing, or bragging.
as all things can be made to run better, and when you get one machine with more HP up right to one with less, both being all they can be, the one with more HP tends to win(as long as it gets traction and reaction times of drivers are the same)
stock to bone stock, I still say the HP difference and factory settings the larger HP sled win's a race MOST all times(gearing will matter at some point too, but on average I am speaking, two like sleds just one having more HP than the other!
G
G
Guest
Go and find a 2002 pol Indy 500. Or a 1992 pol 500 efi. Or a 1995 Indy 400. All were overachievers. Pol has always built better smaller displacement sleds than 800ish sleds. The 92 efi was such a threat to the rxl of the era that they severely detuned it for 93. The 2002 Indy 5 was and still is one of the ultimate 500s ever made. Bathtub like liquid cooled that looked a lot like like merc snowtwister jugs. Huge pipe stock tuned for heat soaked power. An accident. But very very strong to this day. Again What we have today is no faster than what we had 20 years ago. Or even 30 years ago. An AC ZRT 800 would not be behind anything made nowadays by very much. Pure brute force. Efi and turbos would have all they could do to stay in front.
G
G
Guest
Oh wait you say. We have better suspensions now. Not really. Late 90s sleds had 10 inches of rear suspension. There was adequate front suspension also. In 30 years we have basically stood still. No faster. Not much better mpg. Now we have electric start and reverse and heated seats. Happy day. Despite all the user friendly features the sport as it was invented is all but over.
I agree with a lot of what your saying, the older sleds made the HP< they made the speed they were QUICK, easy to work on tooOh wait you say. We have better suspensions now. Not really. Late 90s sleds had 10 inches of rear suspension. There was adequate front suspension also. In 30 years we have basically stood still. No faster. Not much better mpg. Now we have electric start and reverse and heated seats. Happy day. Despite all the user friendly features the sport as it was invented is all but over.
and had good suspension
BUT There weak link and still a HUGE one, is the riders seating position, knee's up above your waist almost if not
and that is what made them SLOW In the bumps, un less you were is super great shape and had a great back and knee's to hold yourself above them
watch any older 90's snow cross race and watch the riders get tossed about
these newer sleds are like night and day in ride due to JUST where and how you sit on the sleds
in a straight line on super flat and smooth trail them old sleds haul butt and will hang if NOT beat many of the new gen sleds
BUT as soon as you get bumps and moguls,
BYE BYE to them old sleds, and at the end of the day your NOT any where near as sore on a new sled
I 3 yrs agao spent a ton of cash TRYING to make a older T cat ride better, 2006 rear 136 skid, new AGLT front end, 13.5 inches of suspension
on again flat smooth trails was a pure joy to run
but trails like that are far and few where I ride, and as soon as things got some use, and bumps every where, the sled was useless to me, with a bad back and knee's I have!
so, that old stuff, has a lot of negatives to them and that's why they DON"T make em anymore!
we now have higher seating, higher center of gravity sleds, that working on them SUCK IMO, as to older sled
look at stat's from late 90's to new sleds on 1/4 mile and 500-1000, ft and top end speeds, and there about the same as new things, only on NEW sleds you can ride them faster with less effort or pain!
and I'll take smoother riding sleds any day over pure power! I ain't getting paid to race no more!
so, don't need to kill myself to ride a sled!
and since the average age of snowmobiles is getting older and older, I gather more and more feel the same way
My normal riding bud rides a 600 Etec. The 900 4 stroke will pull him, as he is rock stock, hard out of the gate, same as to the YamaCats.
I would never line my 900NA up with a 600 2 stroke....again....because the several times I did, it got destroyed.
I would never line my 900NA up with a 600 2 stroke....again....because the several times I did, it got destroyed.
Well no sh**.....like I've been saying all along, 90-ish hp vs 120-ish = no contest, assuming relatively close rider weight and ability
snobuilder
Well-known member
So much for fancy schmancy drive by wire...less..
KISS
Keep
It
Simple
Skidoo
KISS
Keep
It
Simple
Skidoo
Well no sh**.....like I've been saying all along, 90-ish hp vs 120-ish = no contest, assuming relatively close rider weight and ability
Obviously, my comment was directed at those (and there are many) who think the 900NA is very close in acceleration to a 600cc 2 stroke.
Obviously, my comment was directed at those (and there are many) who think the 900NA is very close in acceleration to a 600cc 2 stroke.
Please just buy the 850 and end this rant.
Bear
Please just buy the 850 and end this rant.
Bear
No interest in downgrading to an 850.
What makes you think I'm ranting?