Hardcore Sledder banner
61 - 80 of 105 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
180 Posts
My guess is to cut cost.. New doesn't allways mean better. I feel they bullet proof the engine 18/19.. now after more testing they have figured out areas where they can cut cost. They made them run rich was one of the many ways to make sure the 800 ctec2 was to be successful.
cutting costs is definitely NOT the purpose.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,328 Posts
cutting costs is definitely NOT the purpose.
How do you know for sure?
They lowered the cost of buying an 800 for 2020.
And they said changes are made. Sounds to me they cut cost. I'm just going on what I read.
For the cost of retooling and the number of sleds it takes to make up for that cost, doesn’t add up for a “cutting cost” theory. The changes were made to meet the EPA standards. Cat no longer has a bunch of 4 strokes to make up for their dirty 2 strokes so they had to make a change, and a costly one. I’m sure they were able to pick up a few HP along the way as it should be more efficient.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,328 Posts
From what i understand the first ctec2 8000s were supposed to be epa friendly. That's why they walked away from suzuki. Am i wrong?
My assumption is the 600 ctec is but the slotted piston design didn't scale as well to larger bore/more fuel. Just a guess though
I agree. That’s why it took so long to release it as they were trying to get it to work. At WOT the injector continuously sprays fuel even when the piston goes by it. Not very efficient to say the least. Seems to be very difficult to get just the right amount that way. But what do I know.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
612 Posts
I agree. That’s why it took so long to release it as they were trying to get it to work. At WOT the injector continuously sprays fuel even when the piston goes by it. Not very efficient to say the least. Seems to be very difficult to get just the right amount that way. But what do I know.
Exactly as efficient as the Polaris 850. I rode with one and we were within .1-.3 gallons on all 3 fill ups. 10.4-12.6 mpg those 2 days on rock hard trails.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,475 Posts
My 18 ZR 8000 had RPM issues that were not clutch related, It would take off sometimes and hit peak and then the RPM's would fall to 7500-7700 depending on the day, and somedays it would run just fine. I had it re-flashed with the Precision EFI map and it improved the run qualities but the rev issue kept appearing. My dealer worked with me and I bought the 2019, as I wasn't going to keep bringing it back and forth to figure this out, as the lady sez "Ain't Got Time For Dat" On taking out the VForce reeds before I traded it, they were just dripping in oil and that causes me to perhaps assume that too much oil in the intake could have caused my RPM woes. It's funny that we discovered this and then it gets listed as one of the changes for 2020. The 2019 (mine came with the reflash) runs like it should. I have to point out that my 2018 ran best during the 6 hour break-in mode, I never saw those speeds again. The 2019 is out of break in mode and it is over revving which is good as the power is there but I need to clutch for it now. I liked my 2018, but I love my 2019. It's just a better sled, crisper & faster. Consistent and I never really liked the green. This picture was taken yesterday and I was happy to get "One More Ride" +5C out, melting snow and still seeing over 100 MPH. Still hoping for another ride on Sunday!
 

Attachments

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,281 Posts
How do you know for sure?
They lowered the cost of buying an 800 for 2020.
And they said changes are made. Sounds to me they cut cost. I'm just going on what I read.
The lower price of the 2020s is a direct result of a new sales strategy to clear out the line with leftover sleds.
So, to start with the deep discounted prices for pre-season orders.... Cat has taken out all of the hidden costs that are usually built into the sleds. Things like co-op money for advertising. Money to cover extended warranties. Money to cover special financing (which is subsidized by Cat). And floor plan costs. And then used the rebate money that they usually have to provide Jan on to sell left over inventory. Because the 2020 models are "order one or get none" (as the ads say), and dealers aren't going to be able to order any for the showroom floor for next year, there is no reason for
(1) advertising (as the sleds are supposed to be all pre-ordered by people who are buying/ picking them up in the fall )
(2) Floor plan (as the sleds are supposed to be all pre-ordered by people who are buying/ picking them up in the fall)
(3) Rebates for the Jan+ time (as the sleds are supposed to be all pre-ordered by people who are buying/ picking them up in the fall )

And I've also heard they are taking the hold-back money away from the dealers also.

And this is how they have "lowered" the "Snowmageddon" prices below the regular MSRP. On an ZR 8000 RR, this added up to $2800 USD.

So once the 2020 pre-season is over, the only sleds available next fall will be either the current left over units or 2020 units that a pre-season buyer backs out of. However, if a buyer backs out of a 2020 pre-season, Cat keeps the $750 deposit, the dealer is invoiced the additional amount over the "Snowmageddon" discounted cost, and the dealer has something like 15 days to pay the unit off (again, Cat will not have floor plan programs for the 2020s). SO it seems Cat has covered all of the bases when it comes to cutting the costs of selling 2020s and not having any additional NOT SOLD inventory adding up to the current amount of left over sleds there already is. And they will know exactly how many sleds to build for 2020 based solely on the number of units "actually" sold during pre-season.

So I find it hard to connect the discounted "Snowmageddon" 2020 sales prices with anything to do with the revamping of the 8000 motor. They cut the costs out of the overhead that used to be the "normal" part of doing business selling the sleds......
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,281 Posts
I've seen a few people here claim the 19 engine is stronger than the 18, anyone know why?
I can say my 18 stock was 147 and my 19 stock was 155. With everything supposed to be the same (ECU program, etc).....we can only make guesses what was/is really the difference. If it was ECU programming, then after the Cat reflash, that should level it out.......
 
  • Like
Reactions: dskofich

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,328 Posts
I agree. That’s why it took so long to release it as they were trying to get it to work. At WOT the injector continuously sprays fuel even when the piston goes by it. Not very efficient to say the least. Seems to be very difficult to get just the right amount that way. But what do I know.
Exactly as efficient as the Polaris 850. I rode with one and we were within .1-.3 gallons on all 3 fill ups. 10.4-12.6 mpg those 2 days on rock hard trails.
That’s not what I mean by efficiency. I’m talking running efficiently as far as clean burning, Which it does not do very well. Hence the flame throwers and the new mapping to have a high hanging idle to burn off excessive gas and oil.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
491 Posts
Wrong, tranisitor batteries are the future

I think what your referring to is transistor batteries and yeah I heard they were the future 10 years ago. But nobody seems to be developing them. Car companies are looking at and developing solid state lithium-ion batteries. Because they are more stable and still work at -30.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
180 Posts
From what i understand the first ctec2 8000s were supposed to be epa friendly. That's why they walked away from suzuki. Am i wrong?
the first ctec2 800 was certainly more epa friendly than the suzuki, but still not in line with the actual regulations. And they went away from suzuki because their agreement was over, not because of emission or anything else.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,661 Posts
I think what your referring to is transistor batteries and yeah I heard they were the future 10 years ago. But nobody seems to be developing them. Car companies are looking at and developing solid state lithium-ion batteries. Because they are more stable and still work at -30.
but they are being developed in europe and will be out soon
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
180 Posts
Indications say reeds......as mapping and fuel are the same from 18-19 ECU’s.
As i've stated before, the reeds did not change from '18-'19. Any changes found in reeds from different vehicles are simply manufacturing variation.

The ECU's did change from '18-'19, look at the EPA website, it's right there in black and white.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
612 Posts
As i've stated before, the reeds did not change from '18-'19. Any changes found in reeds from different vehicles are simply manufacturing variation.

The ECU's did change from '18-'19, look at the EPA website, it's right there in black and white.
ECU's ran on the dyno's showed EXACT same fuel curve and rates across the entire RPM range. That has been discussed by the companies that dyno'd both. Those same companies found the reeds were the difference in HP.
 
61 - 80 of 105 Posts
Top