In a conventional motorcycle or powersports business you tend to see a big surge of sales in the middle six months of the year.  Typically, that's where all the money is made and the store tries to stay busy enough through the winter to break-even or at least minimize losses.  In our case, the snowmobile business has always been so big that we had the exact opposite seasonal trend.  We were really busy in the winter but struggled to stay busy enough in the summer, especially in parts and service.  Although the ATV business has been really good in the summer, ATV customers simply don't tend to need as much "gear" as sled guys and ATVs are typically not used as intensively as snowmobiles.  That intensive usage tends to generate more parts and service business per machine sold.   

In mid-2005, we had the opportunity to add Yamaha and Suzuki in Castle Rock, build a new store, and really engage in the motorcycle business.  With a good selection of metric bikes, plus Victory and now Spyder, Castle Rock has a much flatter seasonal trend.  While there are still ups and down in the trend, the business is really much closer to being round throughout the year.  Naturally, we started thinking that some bike business at the north store would be good, but it's difficult to pitch that idea to any manufacturer when there's a dirt road in front of your store. 

As our business grew in Castle Rock, we also became friends with Stan and Scott Elmore at Twin Peaks Powersports.  They were a natural trading partner for us.  Our two stores were close making it easy to share inventory and we were selling a lot of the same products.  Like in Castle Rock, eventually it became clear that our two stores really each had half of the business that we needed to be successful year round.  They were slammed in the summer when we were slow in Dacono and they were dead in the winter while we were buried in snowmobile season.  About a year ago, we started talking about how we could combine the operations to really make one bigger store work.  In the end, we decided that it made the most sense for us to buy their business, combine it with ours, and move in to their facility.  With their store's location, accessibility, and size, it's a great upgrade for us.  Logistically it will work much like Castle Rock - we can continue to store crates and excess inventory at our old location while keeping a great selection on hand at the store without all the clutter.  Over Easter weekend, we moved to the new location.  The new store is located at Highway 66 and I-25, about 8 miles north of our current location.  If you're coming from Denver, it takes about 5 minutes longer to get there.  Although it's further, you do save all the time spent on the frontage road and going slow down the dirt road. 

As we grow the business again, we're always mindful of the challenge of maintaining great customer service and the small store feel that our customers value.  In the last year or so, we've focused a lot on building and defining our corporate culture.  When the business consisted of Mindy, Dad, and myself, plus a couple technicians, defining and maintaining our culture and values was relatively simple.  We agreed (mostly) on how to handle situations and if we didn't agree, we discussed it and made a decision.  As a company grows and more employees join the team, that question of culture and values becomes more complicated.  Everybody has their own set of personal values and in a large group, even if everybody shares similar values, there will be some differences.  In order to ensure that we, as a business unit, are acting as a cohesive group and making decisions with the same frame work, we've defined our company values.  Those shared values now guide all business decision making, irregardless of our personal values.  This process is, for sure, a work in progress but I believe we've seen our team really evaluate situations keeping our core values of integrity, team work, success, and quality in mind.  I know we've handled some challenging situations better in the last year than we would have ten years ago.  In spite of a strong focus on budgets and making our numbers work, we've also clearly stated as a group that we will not violate our integrity and team work values just to make money. 

With that all having been said, one of the really neat aspects of this acquisition and merger is that Scott and Stan share our values and their business culture is very close to ours.  Although it seems that the culture and mentality of that store wasn't that way before they bought the store, great customer service has been one of the pillars of their business.  It's worth knowing that Stan was the founder of Stan's Automotive and I think it's fair to say that you don't make it in the auto repair business for long without great service and being fair and honest with customers.  With the business growing again, it's awesome to be gaining staff that shares and understands how we want to do business.  I also truly believe that customers choose businesses that share their values.  Since our philosophies have been very similar, I believe both our existing and their customer bases will enjoy continuing to do business with us. 

The new north store now carries Polaris ATVs, snowmobiles, Rangers and Victory, BRP Can-Am ATVs, Can-Am Spyders, Sea-Doo, and Ski-Doo, and Yamaha motorcycles, ATVs, Rhinos, and snowmobiles.  We will continue to carry Suzuki and Kawasaki motorcycles and ATVs at the south store. 

For our new customers that did business with Twin Peaks, it will be business as usual.  All prepaid maintenance packages, service work in progress, etc. will continue seamlessly.  For our customers, we hope you'll stop by the new location and check out all the cool new stuff we have to offer. 

Once again, thanks for the business and helping us continue to grow!
Donavon

Test & Tune: 

'08 Ski-Doo Summit 800 X (with RMX kit, skis, suspension upgrades, etc.)
'08 Ski-Doo Summit 800 Everest
'08 Ski-Doo Summit 800 Everest with electric start
'09 Polaris Dragon 800 155
'08 Polaris Xtreme Mountain King (700 Dragon RMX with 50# weight loss, RMX++)
'08 Polaris Dragon 800 163 Turbo
'08 Polaris Dragon 800 155 RMX (+7hp from stock)
'08 Polaris Dragon 800 155 Stage III (+15hp from stock)
'08 Yamaha Nytro MTX
'08 Yamaha Apex MTX

Since there are really no new engine or chassis configurations from anybody in '09, the '08s should give you a great feel for next year's product. 

For 2009, we'll be offering an XMK package once again.  It's a 700 RMK with about 50# of weight loss and a super tight, RMX++ head.  It's the most fun snowmobile I've ever ridden and is simply the easiest to ride boondocking sled we've ever built. 

For the big horsepower fans, you won't want to miss the Turbo Dragon 800.  We look forward to seeing everybody there! 

2009 Xtreme Test & Tune / Demo Rides
March 29-30
Sat 10am-5pm
Sun 10am-3pm
Muddy Creek Parking Lot at Rabbit Ears Pass

Thanks,
Donavon

While there is currently a waiting list for deliveries, we do have a very limited allocation of Spyders available for delivery this spring and summer.  Thanks to the generosity of our friends at BRP and to acknowledge our involvement with the Spyder Dealer Council, Mindy and I will be riding one of the very first Spyders to roll off the line this summer.  We hope you'll be riding one too! 

Thanks,
Donavon

Take care,
Donavon

In addition to stock Dragon 800 numbers, I've also posted the dyno results for the Turbo M8 and Turbo 700 RMK.  When you look at the turbo results, keep in mind that you're seeing a Boondocker Kit with a Garrett turbo turned all the way down in both cases.  Given the Air/fuel ratios, it's also safe to say that leaning on the fuel would bump the horsepower some more.  Based on our previous 5000+ dyno runs, these are very impressive numbers for sleds with the boost turned down and the excess fuel running out of the tailpipe.  We also have a Turbo 800 Dragon with about 400 miles on it under boost and 30+ demo rides in Gould last weekend that is proving to be a lot of fun.  The Apex Turbo really was a hoot but similar weight/horsepower numbers in a lighter and easy to ride sled really is fun.  So far, the bottom end is not as smooth and predictable as the Apex yet but the sleds are proving to be very ridable.  They're still not the weapon of choice for a day of serious tree bashing but that horsepower is a real rush headed uphill.  Last weekend at Rabbit Ears, we literally couldn't find anything to point it at that making it to the top was ever in doubt.  Let's hope the deep snow continues!

Polaris 800 RMK Dyno Sheet

Polaris 700 RMK Turbo & Arctic Cat M8 Turbo Sheet

Thanks,
Donavon

We've now spent several days working on the '08 Summit 800 clutching.  We tried several ramp and spring combinations before settling on one that we really like.  As usual, the stock clutching picks an RPM based on speed and doesn't stay consistent like it should.  The new setup gets the clutching back in a smaller window and holds the engine where it makes peak power.  In our back to back testing, the new clutching also significantly reduces the operating temp of the clutches.  In addition, this combination also coasts better and reduces the lurchiness of the stock clutching. 

We've also had some good really deep snow to test in on the way to Buffalo from Rabbit Ears.  Kenny Huismann, our resident professional hillclimber, has also been riding our test sleds and his new X, which means there's been plenty of "hold it to bar" kind of rides.  In spite of really abusing the sleds and running a belt that the stock clutching had pulled some of the cord out of, we haven't had any more belt problems. 

As always, the new clutching will be installed on any sled that we sold at no charge.  The clutch kit will also be available for $399 installed for anyone who would like the added performance.  As always, I'm still a big fan on the side panel vent kits.  Anything we can do to get some hot air out of the sled is a good thing.  We've been extremely busy in service so please give the guys a call to coordinate a time to get the updates done. 

In addition, we have also finalized our Xtreme setup on the Yamaha Nytro MTXs.  Like the Apexes before, the Nytros have a very nice flat powerband but it's still important to have the clutching right and be turning the right RPM.  We found the stock clutching was close in hard pack conditions at relatively low altitudes, but it still underrevs in deeper snow or at higher altitudes.  To that end, we have a new combination with some modified weights that will keep the RPM correct.  In our comparison testing with other sleds, the updated clutching makes the Nytros even more competitive.  As with the Ski-Doos, the clutching is free for those folks that purchased from us and also available for $399 for anyone who wants to upgrade. 

Thanks,
Donavon

Now that some of the Dragon 800 155s have shown up, we had the opportunity to weigh one of them and a Summit X 154.  Comparing the weights of the two Polaris Dragon 155s (700 & 800), you'll see that they are virtually identical.  I wrote earlier in the week that riding the 800 felt a little different than the 700.  Given that the weights are the same, that slight difference must have been the track length, not the nose weight of the sleds.  It's also interesting that the Summit X is only about 5 pounds lighter than the Everest.  Ski-Doo said 10, but that was figuring the X had the Challenger Lite track and the Everest with the Powdermax.  As we've said before, the Challenger Lite track really doesn't work in the soft snow so its' weight is really a moot point.  At this point in the year if you're considering a new sled, the good news is that the penalty for not ordering an X is not as great as it's been in previous years.  Below you'll find the updated chart with the new weights included.  Pictures of the Dragon 800 and Summit X hanging on the scale are also in the photo gallery. 

Thanks,
Donavon

Ski-Doo:  The Rev XP production sleds feel and act much like the prototypes that I wrote about in the spring.  It’s really a lighter Rev.  Unfortunately, like last year, Ski-Doo did a very poor job on the stock clutching and it’s erratic at best.  We didn’t change the stock clutching much since Ski-Doo had already changed ramps, springs, and the entire driven clutch for 2008, but now we know we’ll need to.  There’s a lot of chatter on the net about belt failure and belt heat.  We did observe and confirm that the clutches and belts are running hotter than normal.  It appears that the first thing that happens is the cord starts to come out of the belt.  If you stop and trim the cord, it seems that the belt will continue to work okay but if the cord continues to unravel, eventually the belt will come apart, sometimes in spectacular fashion.  We experimented some with a setup similar to what we ran in the 2007s with good results and will do some more testing this weekend.  I'm hoping we can test enough to feel comfortable finalizing the setup.  So far, that clutch scenario is much more consistent and does lower the belt and clutch temps significantly.  As has been the case with Ski-Doo, installing a set of aftermarket vents in the side panel is also a worthwhile upgrade to help dissipate that heat.

Service Bulletin:  XP customers also need to know that there is a bulletin out to replace the handwarmers, as they will all eventually fail.  As of today, parts are still scarce to perform the bulletin but please be aware that the update will need to be done.  It appears that running them on low might extend the life somewhat but that data sample is also small enough to just be a guess at this point.

Polaris: The new Dragon 800 is really what we all hoped for.  It feels a lot like the 700 with more power.  Compared to the spring prototypes we rode, the production engine feels stronger in comparison to the 700.  In our preliminary tests against the Ski-Doo, it appears that the Dragon 800 and Rev XPs are very close.  As we've said before, the choice really comes down to a question of which chassis feel you prefer.  The XP is more stable, especially when you’re making a banzai run up the hill, but the Dragons really roll around and are easy to sidehill.

The 700s also continue to be great sleds that offer a lot of bang for the buck.  The 700 RMX kit has very similar power to the 800, especially on the bottom end where compression helps throttle response a bunch at altitude.  It is also worth noting that while the 800 doesn’t feel heavy, you can tell that the 700 mill is just enough lighter that you can feel it.

Cat: The M8 has almost become the forgotten sled for 2008 with all the excitement over the new XPs and Dragon 800s but it’s still a really decent sled. For most guys, the handlebars are too low, but that’s a $40 fix.  We also found on the dyno that the new Cats, both the M8 and M1000, are about 3.5 horsepower better than the ’07 models.  That still leaves Cat a little low compared to Polaris and Ski-Doo but an RMX kit would help close the gap further.  The new steering geometry also really helps with turning radius and gives you better control when you tip the sled over since the skis can turn further in the opposite direction.

The M1000 is still king in the horsepower department and it still shows in the field.  The combination of some extra horsepower and the three tower clutch has also combined to improve the big Cat’s throttle response.  It’s no wonder that Polaris and Ski-Doo gave up on the big bore class since Cat has the only sled with a big engine that’s still really fun to ride.  The 900 RMK was low on horsepower and the Summit was just too heavy.  The Cat also has the advantage of being able to bolt an RMX kit on which bumps the high altitude dyno number past 137 horse and really makes it fun to ride.

Yamaha: The turbo Apex is fast. Even with the boost turned down and the fuel turned way up to make it safe for anybody we put on it, it’s still considerably faster than anything else around without a turbo.  However, we did run in to some turbo two strokes that were right there with it.  We just had a turbo Dragon 700 on the dyno and are building an M8 turbo currently.  Given that the Dragon 700 would happily make 175hp on fairly low boost, it makes sense that the two strokes are in the ballpark with the Apex on low boost.  Time will tell, however, if the two strokes will take the continual flogging without failure that the Apexes have over the past few years.  It will also be interesting to see where the edge of the envelope is with the two strokes.  We’ve made about 260hp on the drag sled engine which is still basically stock with the boost turned up.  In the old days playing with two stroke turbos, we called big boost "Angel Boost" because when you got there it wasn't long before the engine was dead and the angels were singing.  It should be interesting to find out where that line is that summons the angels with the current generation of turbos. 

The new Yamaha Nytro MTX also proved to be a crowd favorite.  Yamaha has finally hit the four stroke ball right down the center.  For most folks, the Apex is too heavy and the Phazer is not enough snowmobile.  The prior Vector Mountain was built on the old RX-1 platform and the engine response was about like riding a sewing machine.  To say that the Nytro is different would be a massive understatement.  It revs fast, the chassis is nimble and easy to ride, and the four-stroke power band gives it a lot of bottom end.  It’s not an 800 class machine but when you consider that it comes with Yamaha reliability which means twisting the key and riding, it’s at least worth considering.  Unlike their previous sleds, the Nytro really will appeal to and be a decent fit for a wide variety of riders.

All in all, it looks like it’s going to be a good fun winter with the new product. We have some fine tuning to do but it appears that most of what the OEMs told us in the spring is fairly accurate which is nice. 

Thanks,
Donavon

Over the years, we’ve been involved in testing and riding lots of modified sleds and ATVs. In fact, when we named the store, we picked “Xtreme” because we wanted the name of the dealership to reflect our commitment to really making our machines run well. In stock form, that means having the clutching, jetting, gearing, etc. all optimized for a variety of conditions. The reality, though, is that no matter how much tuning you do with a stock engine, there’s only so much horsepower there to work with. Once you have the air/fuel mixture set for peak power, tuning on the drivetrain really is a question of using that power efficiently. In very simple terms, the function of the clutches are to hold the engine at peak horsepower RPM so that the engine can generate peak power.

We had about a $15k experiment with a Dynojet track dyno years ago before we really understood that if you don’t make more power at the crankshaft, no amount of tuning is going to make the sled appreciably faster in MULTIPLE conditions. While it is possible to gain performance if the clutching is markedly off, fine tuning the setup really can’t make the sled better in every condition. It’s possible to build a setup that drag races really well or one that’s really snappy in the trees, but as they use to say in my economics classes, “there’s no such thing as a free lunch.” If you make the sled better in one spot, there’s always a trade-off. For example, at Bandimere and a quarter mile drag race, we run absolutely the heaviest clutching the engine can handle without underreving. The faster the sled upshifts, the faster it goes down the track. We don’t normally need the clutches to backshift nor does throttle response matter since we only mash the throttle once. The track dyno essentially told us the same thing: the faster you upshift the clutch, the more power gets to the track sooner. That’s great until you actually go ride the sled and find out that it simply doesn’t backshift and has no throttle response because the clutching is so heavy. In real life, it’s fun to go fast in a straight line across the meadow. However, when you have to lift in the trees and then get back in the throttle and the engine takes an eternity to return to peak RPM leaving you with the headlight pointed at the sky and the track buried in a big hole, that’s not so much fun.

That trade-off is really the reality of clutch tuning that the purveyors of magical, mystical snake oil clutch kits don’t want the average consumer to understand. That’s certainly not to say that having a good clutch setup isn’t important, but there is simply no clutch kit or setup that works “perfectly” all the time. Why? To start with, we have to agree that if you want the snowmobile or ATV to perform at its’ best, it has to turn the RPM at which the engine develops peak horsepower. If you want to understand why clutching for peak torque or any other RPM doesn’t work, there’s a great article on www.dynotechresearch.com where Jim Czekala discusses that. In short, horsepower is a measurement of work done. In our case, the work we want done is propelling the machine and peak power RPM is, by definition, the RPM that most work gets done. Generally when we do all of our clutching calibration, we are looking for a setup that keeps the engine at or near peak power RPM most of the time. That’s sound a little like a hedge, doesn’t it? The plain truth is that given a strictly mechanical CVT, any time horsepower changes, the RPM that the clutches operate will change as well. You simply cannot vary the horsepower and not vary the RPM.

For example, I always like to think about riding in Grand Lake one day and then heading over to Vail the next day. If you do that, the engine will make a considerably lower amount of power on Vail than it did at Grand Lake. Therefore, if we don’t change our clutch components, the engine will turn less RPM. With less power at the crankshaft and the same load being exerted on the engines by the clutches, the engine simply won’t have the power to spin the clutches as fast. Less power also means the machine will obviously accelerate more slowly. If your clutching was truly optimized at Grand Lake, you’ll actually have a double whammy at Vail because you’ve lost horsepower at higher altitude and then the engine won’t be turning peak power RPM, thereby inducing additional power loss.

Looking at the M8 RMX dyno curve below, we can see how this double loss of horsepower would actually play out. To put things in context, it’s beneficial to note that the M8 engine, especially with the RMX kit, has a fairly broad powerband, obviously tuned by the Suzuki engineers to have good bottom end and mid-range power. The phenomena we’re discussing here could actually be much worse with a “peaky” engine that had been tuned for maximum horsepower at peak RPM. Again, there are no free lunches so if you have an engine that makes more peak power, it’s at the expense of low and mid-range power. A Polaris 700 with no compression and twin pipes would be a good example of that type of powerband. For reference, our dyno sits at 6,500’ and the data is corrected to 23.80” Hg, 60° and dry air. If you do the density altitude calculations, you’ll find the atmospheric conditions at the dyno are roughly equivalent to 8,000-8,500’ of altitude at our typical 0-30° riding temperatures. For the sake of simplicity, let’s assume that our M8 RMX is ripping across Grand Lake turning right at 7600rpm, and, therefore, is making the dynoed horsepower of 113.54. If we then load the sled up and head to Vail, we would probably see the atmospheric pressure drop roughly about 2” Hg as we gained that 2,500’ in altitude. The calculator tells us that a 2” Hg loss in atmospheric pressure would then cost the sled about 9.2% of its power, and we’d end up with about 103hp. All our testing over the years has taught us that snowmobiles lose about 100rpm per 1,000’ of altitude gained, in stock or modified form. Getting back to our M8 at Vail, we’ve already lost about 13.5hp to the thinning air. Because the clutching is now not optimized, the sled will be turning 7300-7400 rpm. Looking at the dyno curve, we see that at 7400 rpm, the engine only made 109.79 hp at our baseline altitude, and only 107.81 at 7300 rpm. Let’s split the difference and figure we had about 108.8 hp at 7350. If we then correct that number to the 11,000’ atmosphere, we would then only have 98.8 hp. Wow, one little trip from Grand Lake to Vail and we’ve gone from riding a 113.5hp sled to riding one only making 98.8 hp. That’s essentially a 15 hp loss, or a whopping 13% of the measly amount of power we had to start with. No wonder those 125hp 600s feel so good at sea-level compared to what we’re used to!

Now that we understand the effects of altitude on crankshaft horsepower and how that effects our clutching, what’s the solution? The reality is, given the physics that we’re dealing with, you really have only two options. You can continually adjust the clutching as altitude changes to keep the engine right on the sweet spot or you can set your clutching up to work most of the time. When we develop our setups for how the ATVs or sleds leave the shop, our intent is to find the best all around setup. For snowmobiles, at 9,000’, the sled has to overrev some, they’re very close to peak horsepower RPM at 10,500’, and they underrev 100-200 rpm as you climb up to 12,000’. If we have customers who tell us they always ride someplace high like Cottonwood or Vail where it’s tough to hold RPM, we lighten the clutching up for them. If they go to Grand Lake and ride, will the sled overrev and be slower than it should be? It has to. Ski-Doo has addressed the problem somewhat with the TRA series clutches and its’ clickers which allow the rider to easily change operating RPM, without changing clutch parts. The drawback to the Ski-Doo clutches is that they generally are not as stable as the other style clutches used by Polaris, Cat, and Yamaha. It’s good they are adjustable, because it’s almost inevitable that they’ll need to be adjusted.

The fundamental conclusion after this discussion is that if there was a “perfect” clutch setup, it would only be perfect for a certain set of conditions. Changing the terrain, atmospheric or snow conditions, or even rider weight would certainly make the setup somewhat imperfect. For those riders who really want to maximize their sleds’ performance, the only answer is to watch the tach and adjust if you find the engine is not turning peak horsepower RPM most of the time. Thankfully, the manufacturers are finally giving us some accurate, digital tachs that we can watch and read. If, however, your sled is turning nearly peak horsepower RPM, enjoy the ride knowing that you’re sled is running well and no magic clutching would make it appreciably better.

As has been well documented, the biggest predictor of any vehicle's performance is how much it weighs and how much power its' engine produces. With high speed vehicles like race cars, motorcycles, or airplanes, aerodynamics also plays a big role in determining top speed and high speed acceleration. In the case of snowmobiles, especially mountain snowmobiles, the weight to horsepower equation has proven over the years to be an almost flawless predictor of relative performance. At our riding speeds, aerodynamics is just not a big factor. We know that things like clutching efficiency, track design, and chassis setup all can make a big difference in performance characteristics, but weight and horsepower are still the basis of performance. Over time, the OEMs have generally gotten closer on the other factors, although they still manage to improve or degrade performance occasionally. For example, the Challenger Lite tracks found on the 2007 Summit X and XRS models were bad enough to give the sleds serious flotation issues in deep snow in spite of being lighter. We have proven over the past couple years as well that IQ based RMKs do float better and work better in deep snow than similarly powered Edge models, which means the chassis is more efficient. We have also observed over the years that certain sleds work better in certain circumstances. Dragon 700s out in the meadow proved to be very fast for the amount of horsepower they make. If you raced a Summit 800 and a Dragon across the meadow, more times than not, the Polaris was faster. But, if you pointed them uphill on a deep day, the Dragon was no match for the Summit and you could really see the extra horsepower do its job at those slower track and ground speeds. Likewise, the Apex shows lots of speed on the trail in spite of its monster track, but suffers more in the deep snow. Of course, when you turn the horsepower way up with the turbo, the equation changes entirely. Therefore, the data presented here should not be used as a performance guarantee but simply a starting spot to evaluate the realm of performance that could be expected from any model.

As many folks know, we have probably spent far more time, money, and effort building our dyno to accurately assess horsepower than we probably should have from a strictly business perspective. Unless noted as estimates, the horsepower numbers quoted below were all tested on our dyno and corrected to the same high altitude atmospheric conditions. In order to really get some great weight data, we invested in a new hanging scale this fall. We had been using a set of race car style floor scales but they required adding up three different weights and manually picking up the sleds and putting them on the scales. We also didn't also get great repeatability with them as we'd often see the weight vary a couple pounds between sessions. Given our excellent results with the S-Beam style load cell found on our dyno, using a similar setup with a remote display seemed like the way to go here as well. In order to weigh the sleds, we simply hooked the S-Beam to our forklift with a strap and then hooked the other side to the sled via a soft strap around the steering post and a steel hook. Lifting from the steering post gave us a single pick point and didn't require extensive rigging to make it work. As for repeatability, we weighed several of the sleds multiple times and found the scale to repeat to within 0.2 pounds.

As for the inevitable discussion about dry weight versus wet weight, we opted to weigh everything full of gas, oil to the full line, and coolant at the full mark as well. To be fair, we stuffed as much gas as we could in the sleds, just the way you'd normally leave the parking lot. Can we say with certainty that one sled didn't have a couple tenths more or less fuel? Absolutely not, but all the sleds were definitely "full" of fuel. It's possible to debate which weight is really the right weight to compare but from a field perspective, attaining dry weight is simply not possible to do with any accuracy. When the OEMs talk about a dry weight, they are often deducting things like shock oil, chain case oil, etc. in addition to the fuel, oil, and coolant we normally talk about. Trying to duplicate those conditions is simply not practical, nor does it really tell you much since you need all those fluids to ride the sled.

It is also unfair to "penalize" the sleds that hold more gas for weighing more. When you look at the chart, you'll see a truly full weight and a weight without fuel. In order to get a feel for how the sleds would compare without fuel, we did take the full weights and backed out 6.1 pounds per gallon. However, only the Phazer and the M1000s would switch positions when they are ranked by weight without gas. One disclaimer here as well - we did not attempt to determine the actual capacity of the tank but simply used the listed capacities. Are the OEMs telling the truth about capacity any more than the typically do about dry weight? We don't know but we'll hope that they're close. The other question is really how much gas do you need to carry to cover a given distance? Yamaha argues that the four strokes are more fuel efficient and, therefore, the tank can really be smaller. We've known since the 1997 700 RMKs that the fuel mileage game with snowmobiles isn't really won or lost at wide open throttle but rather at part throttle. As much as we think we run around taped, the statistics simply don't bear that out and even a mountain sled spends most of its life at part throttle. Therefore, full power fuel flow numbers gathered on the dyno help us predict if we have enough fuel not to burn the engine down but do little to predict how much fuel the sled will actually use in normal riding. It does seem reasonable, then, that fuel injected sleds might do better on fuel since they can more precisely control and meter fuel than a carburetor. That gain, however, would be true on both a two or four stroke engine. It also seems likely that the lighter a sled is, the better it will do on fuel since it needs less power to keep it moving. It is then somewhat ironic that the lightest sleds (the new Summit 800s) still have carburetors while the heavier sleds are mostly fuel injected. If we find out that the Nytro rider really has to haul another 3 gallons of fuel on the sled to ride all day, that means that its' actual weight savings versus the Apex are not nearly what they seem and it may be considering the bigger Apex engine. If, however, it really takes less gas to ride all day, then the weight savings are really usable.

There are also one other set of numbers worth considering in the deep snow. Track FP (footprint) is simply the width of the track multiplied by the length. It does not attempt to predict how much track is actually on the ground, although with everybody using longer travel suspensions, the overall track length is a close approximation of the actual footprint. From there, we can figure the weight/footprint ratio which gives us a rough idea of what kind of flotation to expect. Again, this is only a mathematical guess and folks really shouldn't be deciding which snowmobile or track length to buy based on this one factor. However, if going straight uphill or not getting stuck on the worst days is a priority, this is a good metric to consider. It's also neat to see a sled like the Summit 550 Fan show us that flotation is possible without horsepower. We've all seen those light sleds with the kid riding that goes everywhere we do, just not as fast.

With all the data compiled, are there any big surprises here so far? It doesn't really seem so. It does seem that if you opt for a Sno Pro Cat, you should do so for the better suspension of the air shocks, not necessarily for weight as the standard and Sno Pro models are very close. It's also interesting that the gap between a 600 RMK 144 (carb) and a 700 RMK 155 (fuel injected) is almost 20 pounds. There is still some penalty for all that electrical equipment and the bigger engine, in spite of it being built on the same basic crankcase. As far as the Yamahas go, they've pointed out that their sleds are competitive with Cat & Polaris in the short track models in terms of weight. That would appear, looking at the mountain sled numbers, to be a function of the other guys getting heavier in the chassis designs rather than the four stroke engines really getting lighter. I absolutely think that if you want a mod sled, there's no better choice than a boosted four stroke, but a person has to realize that the sleds are still heavier and do handle differently because of that. Even the M1000, the sole survivor in the two stroke big bore class that couldn't support 900 RMKs or Summit 1000s, packs an approximately 30 pound penalty versus an M8. Sure, with a lightweight can and a little work, the gap can be reduced, but stock for stock, there's a difference. Thankfully, the difference is reasonable and the M1000 makes signficantly more power than an M8 - the Summit 1000 was at least 80 pounds heavier than the 800s and the 900 RMK was similarly heavy and low on stock horsepower. Finally, we included the data on Kellie Bayne's 600 RMK. It was weighed with no gas so keep that in mind when you look at the numbers. As many people know, Jon is obsessed with light weight and he's proven once again why their sleds work so well. With lots of weight removed and an RMX engine, Kellie's 600 should outdo a stock Dragon and be nearly 70 pounds easier to ride - that sounds like a fun combination.

The bottom line on 2008 is that there are lots of good choices. I believe that if we can do a good job matching a rider's style with the right machine, there's a fit for all of these sleds. The Ski-Doo looks hard to beat pointed straight uphill with its weight and power, but a lot of folks will opt for the Polaris and Cat simply because they like the chassis feel. For tree riders, that's more important than putting the high mark on the hill. For others, the Yamahas make a great place to start building big horsepower or the durability of the four stroke simply is more important than the weight penalty. At any rate, it sounds like it's going to be a fun winter.

Thanks,
Donavon

Please click the Photo Gallery to see pictures of all the sleds hanging from the scale.