Hardcore Sledder banner

1 - 20 of 20 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
588 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Pretty cool display at Haydays at the Poo both. They had a new fusion sitting on scales, one under each ski, one under the track. They were zero'd to the weight of the machine so you could see how your weight bias was.

Sitting down, with the handlebars at "cruising position, obviously most of the weight is on the rear.

Raise the handlebars to the "aggressive" position, and the sled was within
2 POUNDS of being PERFECTLY BALANCED. I thought this was a WAY cool thing to have for a demonstration. That should be way cool to "play" with in the rough or powder. No wonder the race sleds did so well last season.

They also had the instrument cluster set up so you could scroll through the options on the digital stuff. Seeing I didn't have my sled yet, it was neat to play with and see how it works. I definitely want to get the altimeter and the outside temp options, that was sweet!

NICE JOB by Polaris for once
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
445 Posts
the alt option is a bit of a joke

it is just a relative measurement combining temp and pressure( not really alt)

i have left my house ( 1400ft) and rode around
only to get back home and the reading is different depending on the temp.

if i get home and it is warmer the reading is higher
if i get home and it is cold the reading can be as low as 650 feet

same kind of thing happens when a high or low travels through my area :dunno:
 

·
Premium Member
‘21 Indy 600 SP 137 & 2015 RMK 155 LE
Joined
·
25,367 Posts
Originally posted by F7 Racer@Sep 20 2005, 11:49 PM
And what makes you think 50/50 is a good thing ? ?

Amazing how all these companies hype the stupidest crap !!!!!
<div align="right">index.php?act=findpost&pid=884775
[/quote]

what makes you think it isn't? what's the rev's wieght
balance? firecat's? if you want to squash the hype, ya'd
better prove their wrong. :div20:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
484 Posts
Originally posted by shed@Sep 20 2005, 09:49 PM
the alt option is a bit of a joke

it is just a relative measurement combining temp and pressure( not really alt)

i have left my house ( 1400ft) and rode around
only to get back home and the reading is different depending on the temp.

if i get home and it is warmer the reading is higher
if i get home and it is cold the reading can be as low as 650 feet

same kind of thing happens when a high or low travels through my area :dunno:
<div align="right">index.php?act=findpost&pid=884709
[/quote]

I have the altimeter and it's not really as much of a joke as you may think... Pilots are constantly resetting an aircraft's altimeter to the local altimeter setting which is provided in inches of mercury, for example 29.92 Hg.

Just like aircraft, the Fusion altimeter is an aneroid barometer claibrated for altitude... An increase in altidude decreases air pressure (less atmosphere above you) at a known rate (1000ft per 1 Hg).

Problems with the Fusion altimeter:

1. You span wide areas on a sled and especially if it's windy, the local altimeter setting is constantly changing.... So the altimeter loses it's initial reference, just the same as the most expensive altimeters in aircraft, it constanly needs to know the local reference

2. Nobody is available while sledding to provide you the local setting

3. Barometric pressure changes constantly in the same location... What do you think the H and the L mean on the weatherman's map? Why it's High and Low pressure, of course and I'm certain it's rained where you live if it's snowed...

4. You need to constantly reset the altimeter.... Personally, I couldn't do it religiously like I do when flying... But then again while flying I'm much more concerned about altitude and it's a heckuvalot easier to twist the altimeter on an airplane than it is to program the Fuze altimeter to the local setting... Plus the local setting is readily provided by local weather stations AWOS, ASOS, ATIS, controllers, etc.

5. The Fuze altimeter can only be set using a height above MSL value in feet... In other words... Even if someone could provide you with the local altimeter setting in Hg, you wouldn't be able to set the altimeter with the value without stopping to run some heavy mathematics and consider some additional variables.

In short... The Fuze altimeter sucks unless you're in a stable atmosphere or at the very least can modify the local setting and have it available but that won't work because it's programed from a reference altitude in feet.

Oh and BTW - The altimeter on the Fuze doesn't ever consider outside air temperature to provide a reading... Instead, it's based solely on the reference value and then the deviations that are imposed upon a measured diaphragm as the weight of the atmosphere changes.

My solution... Expand the screen on the LCD and install a WAAS enabled GPS with altitude. WAAS provides a greater degree of verticle accuracy because satelites above the GPS primarily measure horizontally (across the Earth) WAAS provides a land based reference completing the altitude equation better than non-WAAS equipped GPS... No pressure values are needed.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,876 Posts
Originally posted by F7 Racer@Sep 20 2005, 10:49 PM
And what makes you think 50/50 is a good thing ? ?

Amazing how all these companies hype the stupidest crap !!!!!
<div align="right">index.php?act=findpost&pid=884775
[/quote]

Because 80/20 doesn't handle near as well in the corners. That's what all this weight centralization movement is about. That's why the REV chassis was made and why both Cat and Yam reconfigured rider position on their sleds... to get weight more centrailized. Moving the bars up on the Fuse and getting yourself moved up to the center of the sled and getting 50/50 distribution helps cornering in the fact that you no longer have 100 extra lbs swinging around on the back of a sled.

In a different perspective, look at the praise the new Corvette get's for it's 51/49 weight distribution... balance equals control. It's a proven theory, watch ice oval racers, they sit way up on the tank in the corners... better balance, better cornering. That's what makes me know that 50/50 is a good thing.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,518 Posts
Originally posted by F7 Racer@Sep 20 2005, 09:49 PM
And what makes you think 50/50 is a good thing ? ?

Amazing how all these companies hype the stupidest crap !!!!!
<div align="right">index.php?act=findpost&pid=884775
[/quote]

I agree with F7 Racer, who would want the weight perfectly balanced front to back??? Wouldn't 80/20 be so much better???? :dunno:

THIS IS A SARCASTIC POST :wut60:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
588 Posts
Discussion Starter · #8 ·
Originally posted by XtremeXC@Sep 21 2005, 08:19 AM
Because 80/20 doesn't handle near as well in the corners. That's what all this weight centralization movement is about. That's why the REV chassis was made and why both Cat and Yam reconfigured rider position on their sleds... to get weight more centrailized. Moving the bars up on the Fuse and getting yourself moved up to the center of the sled and getting 50/50 distribution helps cornering in the fact that you no longer have 100 extra lbs swinging around on the back of a sled.

In a different perspective, look at the praise the new Corvette get's for it's 51/49 weight distribution... balance equals control. It's a proven theory, watch ice oval racers, they sit way up on the tank in the corners... better balance, better cornering. That's what makes me know that 50/50 is a good thing.
<div align="right">index.php?act=findpost&pid=885031
[/quote]

Well said. If anyone has ever ridden a Yamaha you'd know what I mean. I had a chance to ride the 05's last year, and i'll tell ya, you understand weight bias very well. They handled terrible to say the least. Ever watch them jump 4 stroke yammis? SCARY.

My point was that if you are riding it aggressively, or playing in powder, balance is everything. It can only be a good thing. Suspension adjustment will allow for personal preference I'm sure if you're not happy with it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
445 Posts
O K fyoushun
i stand corrected
it wasn't the change in temp that changes my alt
it is the change in pressure :div20:

it is still a bit goofy

does anyone know if it goes above 3500ft ??

high altitude riders ??
Thanks
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
152 Posts
Originally posted by F7 Racer@Sep 20 2005, 10:49 PM
And what makes you think 50/50 is a good thing ? ?

Amazing how all these companies hype the stupidest crap !!!!!
<div align="right">index.php?act=findpost&pid=884775
[/quote]


How come the CAT guys make all the DUMB ASS comments?
:frech32:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
382 Posts
Originally posted by yamahawr250f@Sep 25 2005, 11:27 AM
How come the CAT guys make all the DUMB ASS comments?
:frech32:
<div align="right">index.php?act=findpost&pid=891455
[/quote]
No. 1 - The question is valid. On a car, you usually have 4 tires of the same size, therefore it makes sense to load all of them equally to maximize the potential grip in corners. On a sled, you are comparing skis (relatively small contact area) with a friggin' tank track (huge contact area). The rules that apply to cars don't necessarily apply here. Maybe more weight on the front is better. Maybe it's not. It depends on the riding style. For a manufacturer to imply that the sled is optimally set up just because it has a 50/50 weight balance is not necessarily the truth. It's called marketing, folks. It's mostly perception.

No. 2 - Depending where the scale is under the track, you will get a different reading. I'm sure the rear scale was intentionally set up so that the 50/50 result would magically show up when the bars were in attack position.

No. 3 - What this demonstration does show is that there is a meaningful weight transfer that occurs when the bars are moved. Kudos to Polaris. I will agree that more ski pressure will improve the handling of a machine, but I'm not quite sure the 50/50 figure is a magic sweet spot.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
588 Posts
Discussion Starter · #14 ·
Boy am I sorry I said anything. Should have posted it in the Polaris only forum I guess.

I'd be curious to see what other sleds can claim this feature. The only reason I posted it was I was thinking about playing in the powder or breaking trail, you know, REAL snowmobiling. What a GREAT benefit that would be for doing those things.

Maybe the bias should be different for razor cornering who knows. Once I ride it, I'll be able to tell.
 

·
Premium Member
‘21 Indy 600 SP 137 & 2015 RMK 155 LE
Joined
·
25,367 Posts
Originally posted by jsteigerptd@Oct 29 2005, 10:07 PM
No. 1 - The question is valid.  On a car, you usually have 4 tires of the same size, therefore it makes sense to load all of them equally to maximize the potential grip in corners.  On a sled, you are comparing skis (relatively small contact area) with a friggin' tank track (huge contact area).  The rules that apply to cars don't necessarily apply here.  Maybe more weight on the front is better.  Maybe it's not.  It depends on the riding style.  For a manufacturer to imply that the sled is optimally set up just because it has a 50/50 weight balance is not necessarily the truth.  It's called marketing, folks.  It's mostly perception.

No. 2 - Depending where the scale is under the track, you will get a different reading.  I'm sure the rear scale was intentionally set up so that the 50/50 result would magically show up when the bars were in attack position.

No. 3 - What this demonstration does show is that there is a meaningful weight transfer that occurs when the bars are moved.  Kudos to Polaris.  I will agree that more ski pressure will improve the handling of a machine, but I'm not quite sure the 50/50 figure is a magic sweet spot.
<div align="right">index.php?act=findpost&pid=965926
[/quote]

1. i see your point but, i still think for overall "bump-ability" a 50/50 split
would be ideal. i.e. rev platform style ride.

2. where is the "ideal" spot under the track?
i would have to say that wieght displacement throughout the track should
be fairly equal, no?

3. correct. that is why they build sleds with moveable handle bars. still tend
to disagree that in a bumpy trail ride that 50/50 wouldn't be the "sweet" spot
though.....
 

·
Premium Member
‘21 Indy 600 SP 137 & 2015 RMK 155 LE
Joined
·
25,367 Posts
Originally posted by polarisboy@Oct 29 2005, 10:21 PM
Boy am I sorry I said anything. Should have posted it in the Polaris only forum I guess.

I'd be curious to see what other sleds can claim this feature. The only reason I posted it was I was thinking about playing in the powder or breaking trail, you know, REAL snowmobiling. What a GREAT benefit that would be for doing those things.

Maybe the bias should be different for razor cornering who knows. Once I ride it, I'll be able to tell.
<div align="right">index.php?act=findpost&pid=965947
[/quote]
i may be able to pull off such an experiment. i'll see what i can do. :div20:
 
G

·
Originally posted by polarisboy@Oct 29 2005, 09:21 PM
Boy am I sorry I said anything. Should have posted it in the Polaris only forum I guess.

I'd be curious to see what other sleds can claim this feature. The only reason I posted it was I was thinking about playing in the powder or breaking trail, you know, REAL snowmobiling. What a GREAT benefit that would be for doing those things.

Maybe the bias should be different for razor cornering who knows. Once I ride it, I'll be able to tell.
<div align="right">index.php?act=findpost&pid=965947
[/quote]
You made a good point on a good topic.Other brand loyal's r always going to have there input and this is what makes it interesting,but some guy's do get out of line.Add up all the wins for polaris and doo on the sno-cross(WSA 2004/2005),which both have more rider forward position than cat and yammie.It's hard to argue that the centralized mass dosen't work.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
669 Posts
Rider forward, weight centralization etc is a bad thing.
I know because it says so in the 04 Poo bochure. Polaris reps also re-inforced this theory at the 04 spring tour. Thats why the REV chassis is so crappy.
Polaris Believe it
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,927 Posts
Originally posted by Energeezer@Oct 30 2005, 12:22 PM
Rider forward, weight centralization etc is a bad thing.
I know because it says so in the 04 Poo bochure. Polaris reps also re-inforced this theory at the 04 spring tour. Thats why the REV chassis is so crappy.
Polaris Believe it
<div align="right">index.php?act=findpost&pid=966922
[/quote]


AWWW looks like someones jealous.

:gtyof:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
123 Posts
Rider forward, weight centralization etc is a bad thing.
I know because it says so in the 04 Poo bochure. Polaris reps also re-inforced this theory at the 04 spring tour. Thats why the REV chassis is so crappy.
Polaris Believe it[/b]
That was funny! I just thumbed through my copy of the '04 Polaris brouchure on Friday. I liked how they displayed the Edge rider position compared to the REV.

Anyway, I agree that by moving the scales you could get them to read differently. But if all kinds of riders of all different weights and sizes sat on the display and it showed the sled being pretty much balanced. That seems like a good thing.

I believe that a balanced sled is far better than one that is unbalanced. I've got an old '81 Blizzard MX. You know, the "Yellow Submarine"? That sled is very nose heavy and does not go though any type of powder.

I guess in a month or so we'll start reading posts about people's experince witht he Fusion 600 HO and then know how it is.
 
1 - 20 of 20 Posts
Top