Hardcore Sledder banner

21 - 40 of 59 Posts

·
Vendor
Joined
·
10,095 Posts
we will have a 650. it will be torn down and all port heights etc. measured. my thought is timing is going to make a big improvement here. compression is also only 110 p.s.i. so wicking this up will most likely gain mid range power. but good high octane fuel will have to used. we also will have a clutch kit for it as fast as possible. we have some of the best clutching out there. a number of polaris dealers sell our clutch kits though there dealerships now. this will be the same. relentless testing will bring results. we are going to run this in the 800 class at local radar runs etc. to see just how close it is? i have a little inside info here. the 650 has better numbers then the 2002 800 ves motor. this of coarse on a dyno but better is better. that was though out the whole rpm range. the 650 built better power in a lot of the lower rpm range and had more torque. torque is what moves a sled not h.p. i think this out of the box will be 700/800 ves power.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,023 Posts
It would seem that prototypes run like a a consumer sled 2-4 years into production . I feel like they tune the protos to what is possible. Then they detune and crank up the protections for consumer models and as the product proves itself they loosen up the protection and crank the tune back up with some consumer tested tweaks, To a happy medium.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
431 Posts
We all know how prototypes run compared too what production sleds run like .......................
Couldn’t agree more ! Cat has done it before as well. In 97 we got our hands on a pre production Cat 500. It ran dead nuts with 600’s. In 98 when in full production, NOPE !!
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,701 Posts
Discussion Starter #25
Rick, I'm liking the sounds of the low/mid tq. That should make this a fun sled at trail speeds (30-60 mph).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,413 Posts
Couldn’t agree more ! Cat has done it before as well. In 97 we got our hands on a pre production Cat 500. It ran dead nuts with 600’s. In 98 when in full production, NOPE !!
True, but in this case, the 650 should be easier to make nazi compliant, I mean epa compliant, simply because it's a smaller engine. Think about it. It takes a certain amount of fuel to make a certain amount of power, +/- a small amount depending on the overall efficiency of the design. If they made compliant the 850, that's 30+ more horsepower, it takes more fuel to do that by default. And, since Polaris sorta "detuned" the 650, making it make max power on 87 octane, and they are reported to get stellar mileage in the range the epa is most interested in, which means it's tuned lean, chances are they thought about all that in the design phase. It's possible, nothing will change. Which would be good.
 

·
Vendor
Joined
·
10,095 Posts
from what i know what was ridden in the late season last year is what we are getting. at the factory they or a employee has a pristine untouched 2002 800 ves. the 650 beat it every run. mostly pulling it low/mid range. ran about even top end. so matched what the dyno showed. which doesn't always happen either. i think they have a winner here? time will tell.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
4,551 Posts
Where should I start...

I haven't seen anything from Polaris that said the Patriot 650 will make MAXIMUM power on 87 octane. I would be shocked if it did NOT have 2 fuel types it could be set to run on. Now, they definitely said it would run 87 octane, and like the 850 Patriot, they now have a few more sensors that can help do that WELL, and while protecting the engine. It is of no great complication to the engine itself, to have 2 different fuel maps, for different fuel types. We've been doing that for some time.


Optimized for 87 octane fuel and up to 10% ethanol with the ability to run premium. Oil consumption is reduced by 10%*

Optimized means it will get all the power out of 87 octane 10% ethanol fuel, that can be had. It does not mean that it can't get more from premium fuel.

The processing power of the ECU has gone up quite a bit, and it will be able to use the new inputs it is getting, to compute much better fuel delivery, exhaust valve position and spark timing solutions. They now have fuel pressure and fuel temperature sensors, which can allow the programming to do a fine line tune, because it doesn't have to ASSUME that the fuel pressure will be 60 psi +- 5psi. The ECU will know what the fuel pressure & temp. is, and adjust the injector cycle to deliver the exact fuel load the engineers want it to have, under the current circumstances.

They've improved the cooling system, to the point where the coolant flow thru the motor is the same pattern, regardless of the position of the thermostat/bypass, because they are external to the engine. This will help eliminate hot spots especially around the exhaust ports and allow a tighter tune. It costs power and/or economy to use fuel, to try to keep the motor cool or avoid detonation. The hall effect TPS sensor will eliminate scratchiness and inconsistency in the throttle position input to the ECU.

The electronically controlled 3 stage E VES II, will eliminate to a great extent one of the built-in faults, that ALL the previous Polaris 600 Exhaust Valve motors had to live with. Somewhere in mid-range rpm, where a lot of riders would like to be running for good trail speed and fuel economy, the 2 position Exhaust valves, would be in Low port, and not letting the engine make power like it should, or in High port mode and wasting fuel and torque. This change alone will provide power gains and economy gains.

If you look at my signature, you can see that I put my money where my mouth is.

I look forward to strolling into Blink Bonnies in St. Germain, Wisconsin and let 1fastpolaris, keep my 650 SBA 146 warmed up, while I'm eating. Oh, and to save time, just get a Leinenkugels ready for me.
 

·
Premium Member
20 850 Assault
Joined
·
2,524 Posts
So you are saying you aren't going to like your new 650? I think you need to re-read my comment. I'll gladly go out and pound the snot out of your new ride while you sit inside telling everyone how awesome you are. You could show them your signature. 😂
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
4,551 Posts
So you are saying you aren't going to like your new 650? I think you need to re-read my comment. I'll gladly go out and pound the snot out of your new ride while you sit inside telling everyone how awesome you are. You could show them your signature. 😂
I prefer sitting inside a pitstop, and as riders come in, that I passed on the way there, they can tell everyone how awesome I am.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
6,279 Posts
from what i know what was ridden in the late season last year is what we are getting. at the factory they or a employee has a pristine untouched 2002 800 ves. the 650 beat it every run. mostly pulling it low/mid range. ran about even top end. so matched what the dyno showed. which doesn't always happen either. i think they have a winner here? time will tell.
lol 02 03 800 ves were turds in stock form thats not a good bench mark at all
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,701 Posts
Discussion Starter #33
Optimized for 87 octane fuel and up to 10% ethanol with the ability to run premium. Oil consumption is reduced by 10%*

Optimized means it will get all the power out of 87 octane 10% ethanol fuel, that can be had. It does not mean that it can't get more from premium fuel.
You answered yourself. Yes, optimized for 87 means that's it. Adding any higher Octan will do nothing for performance. Just as in your pick up truck, going from 87 to 91 will get no gains. The only thing 91 might do for the 650 is help with any detonation knock. But if they tuned this to run on 87 I doubt it will even make a difference in that aspect as well. 91 will only make a difference when timing, compression and other mods come into play. I am no engine builder, but with my limited brain power that's what I take away from the information given to me.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
16,101 Posts
You answered yourself. Yes, optimized for 87 means that's it. Adding any higher Octan will do nothing for performance. Just as in your pick up truck, going from 87 to 91 will get no gains. The only thing 91 might do for the 650 is help with any detonation knock. But if they tuned this to run on 87 I doubt it will even make a difference in that aspect as well. 91 will only make a difference when timing, compression and other mods come into play. I am no engine builder, but with my limited brain power that's what I take away from the information given to me.
You are comparing 4 stroke type engines with 2-stroke. 4 strokes have camshafts, and many are variable. 4-strokes also use high swirl cylinder motion to improve fuel mixing and combustion. This can make the 4-stroke capable of making good hp even with 87 octane fuel. Today's modern 2-strokes have variable exhaust systems and more importantly tuned exhaust systems, but not much use of high swirl. This tuned exhaust acts as a supercharger. The more aggressive the exhaust pipe design, the more it raises dynamic cylinder pressure within a specific range. Variable exhaust broadens that range. Proper control of the variable exhaust valve can increase/reduce the supercharging effect. The detonation sensor can allow as much power as is tolerable for a given octane without severe detonation. Thus, 87 octane fuel could be optimized but isn't necessarily the highest power that could be made with higher octane fuel if also optimized. These differences can influence whether you can gain hp with higher octane fuel in a 2-stroke. Octane is the fuel's ability to resist detonation/pre-ignition. The higher the cylinder pressure, the more likely is detonation. Also, because they fire every revolution, 2-strokes tend to be more sensitive to fuel octane/quality.

As for torque being more important than hp as stated by some, torque is hp. The higher the torque at any given rpm, the higher the hp at that rpm. Read this Hot Rod article:
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,701 Posts
Discussion Starter #35
Though I agree with your explanation of what octane is as well as the difference between 2 strokes and 4 strokes. I still do not believe that a 2 stroke that is designed to make max HP on pump 87 is all of a sudden going to make more HP on pump 91/93. Running some exotic blend of VP specific 2 stroke fuel yes I would buy that as you would be adding lead or more oxygen or something like that into the mix. But to just run a cooler burning 91 pump I don't see it on a sled that has one ignition/fuel curve. Now if it had 2 different maps stock like a 850 then we would be agreeing that 91 would benefit this engine. But the 91 wouldn't be making the extra power, the extra power would be via the more radical fuel/ignition curve on the 91 octane map setting and the 91 fuel would just be keeping the sled from reaching detonation on this map setting.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
16,101 Posts
Though I agree with your explanation of what octane is as well as the difference between 2 strokes and 4 strokes. I still do not believe that a 2 stroke that is designed to make max HP on pump 87 is all of a sudden going to make more HP on pump 91/93. Running some exotic blend of VP specific 2 stroke fuel yes I would buy that as you would be adding lead or more oxygen or something like that into the mix. But to just run a cooler burning 91 pump I don't see it on a sled that has one ignition/fuel curve. Now if it had 2 different maps stock like a 850 then we would be agreeing that 91 would benefit this engine. But the 91 wouldn't be making the extra power, the extra power would be via the more radical fuel/ignition curve on the 91 octane map setting and the 91 fuel would just be keeping the sled from reaching detonation on this map setting.
Agreed, premium fuel doesn't add hp, it just allows more hp with adjustments to the tune. These changes in the tune can happen based on detonation sensor activity. There really is much more than one ignition and fuel curve even with 87 octane. It varies with many sensor inputs such as fuel temp, intake temp, coolant temp, exhaust valve position, detonation, etc, etc.

Take a look at this article:
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,701 Posts
Discussion Starter #37
Agreed. And if you have guys constantly running theses at max rpm I could see those riders wanting 91 in an effort to stay off the knock sensor, assuming that they are seeing knock issues and reduced performance via the ECU protecting the engine. But I'm going to hope that has been thought of and will be a non issue.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
87 Posts
Adding my 2c, 650 is more than likely the turbo motor coming. Put a turbo on an efficient 650 and kicking the crap out of the big bores would be intriguing.
Makes sense. That's likely why the Matryx chassis currently has the large storage compartment under the windshield. Ideal place for the intake on a turbo sled.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
4,551 Posts
... I still do not believe that a 2 stroke that is designed to make max HP on pump 87 is all of a sudden going to make more HP on pump 91/93. .. on a sled that has one ignition/fuel curve. ...
Where did you get the idea it was designed to make max HP on pump 87?

Where did you get the idea it has one ignition/fuel curve?

There is a difference between saying it gets the most power possible out of pump 87 (it is optimized for that fuel, when running that fuel)
and that it does not make more hp when running higher octane, and different DET/EGT/etc. sensor inputs and a different fuel type setting.

With good Detonation, Exhaust Gas Temp., Throttle Position, Ambient Air temp. & Barometric Pressure & Engine Coolant Temp. sensors, and the ability to control Electronic Fuel Injection, Digital Ignition, and 3 stage Electronic Variable Exhaust Systems, the "maps" are really just complex formulas/rules constantly being recalculated in a very fast computer.
 
21 - 40 of 59 Posts
Top