I thought that vtwin fad died long ago but Im not heavy into bikes anymore.Id still prefer an inline bike engine in a race.
Just think about what they used to do with just a 3.0 liter 10 cylinder f1 engine.
New Catalyst
Starting this thread in the hopes of having a good, logical and informative conversation about the new chassis without having 6000 ZR RR act as self appointed moderator to every post made.
141 - 160 of 178 Posts
Just think about what they used to do with just a 3.0 liter 10 cylinder f1 engine.
agree about the V10s (though the Ferrari 12s sounded better, until they were no longer competitive). You want to see a feat of engineering, look up the Honda NR500...I thought that vtwin fad died long ago but Im not heavy into bikes anymore.Id still prefer an inline bike engine in a race.
Just think about what they used to do with just a 3.0 liter 10 cylinder f1 engine.
It matters but trying to explain technical details on this site to people who have not worked in this field is useless.
I matters and doesn't matter all at the same time and here's why I say that.Its like saying that a 300 hp v6 tows the same as a 300 hp v8.It just doesnt.
Everything in a race sled is an extreme and doesn't apply in the world of non-race sleds. I mentioned in an earlier post I used to race ovals and Dale Loritz helped tune my sled. When I first started racing his twin-tracker was still the 340 rotax and essentially the same motor use used to win back to back WC's. When he dyno'ed the motor it made peak HP at 9,000 RPM. He clutched to 11,000. I didn't understand that in the least and he said if I'm still making enough HP on the backside of the power curve and I'm turning 11,000 RPM then I have faster track speed at full shift than a guy tuned to 9,000 RPM. Years later I became friends with a guy that worked at PSI during their heyday. He told me Norman Ball used to use the same philosophy.
On the opposite end of the spectrum I was racing a Rotax 503 fan cooled with 34MM carbs, stock Y-pipe and single tuned pipe with mild porting. I probably made around 60-65HP. I used to test with the Mad Scientist Dean Schroeder and one day on the lake he started throwing weight at the clutch. We ended up with 64g weights, a blue drive spring and a 42/36 progressive helix. There is nothing in any clutch tuning book that says any of the setups I've mentioned should work.
They just want to argue about triples here. Silly.So, does anybody know when Cat plans on releasing more details? I think they said something along the lines of trickling them out over the next 4 months. Do we know when we're supposed to get the next few drops?
I think the Catalyst looks great and want to know more too.
The peak HP number is just one single brief moment in time on the dyno curve. It’s not like you get on a sled and it’s got 2 speeds…idle and peak HP. The total power underneath the entire dyno curve make a HUGE difference. Furthermore, some engines can peak at 125 HP and then fall off like a cliff. Some engines can peak at 125 HP and then hold longer. Power bands matter…far more than the one number that everyone focuses on…Nice try, but physics is physics. hp is hp no matter how you try to spin it. Can triple be made to make more power? YES. Does a 125 hp triple make more power than a 125 hp twin? NO. It's like the old "what weighs more, a pound of feathers or a pounds of steel" question... Is a12" piece of wood longer than a 12" piece of aluminum? See where I'm going with this?
study up…
LOL, you're assuming I don't know that... joke's on youThe peak HP number is just one single brief moment in time on the dyno curve. It’s not like you get on a sled and it’s got 2 speeds…idle and peak HP. The total power underneath the entire dyno curve make a HUGE difference. Furthermore, some engines can peak at 125 HP and then fall off like a cliff. Some engines can peak at 125 HP and then hold longer. Power bands matter…far more than the one number that everyone focuses on…
study up…
If you want to be specific, it's the AREA under the curve that matters. I also didn't mention that engine rpm affects clutching efficiency in a CVT system, and many other things, should I be chastised for that too?smarten up and don't assume, it makes you look like a certain RR fellow, lol
P.S. the word is powerbands, not power bands...
I bet @Gym Ramstud uses power bands to improve arm strength so he doesn't fall off while ripping wheelies and spraying roost.LOL, you're assuming I don't know that... joke's on you
smarten up and don't assume, it makes you look like a certain RR fellow, lol
P.S. the word is powerbands, not power bands...
What they're doing with 1.6L V6 Turbo Hybrids is pretty impressive. 1000bhp and more reliable and efficient than the V10s were.agree about the V10s (though the Ferrari 12s sounded better, until they were no longer competitive). You want to see a feat of engineering, look up the Honda NR500...
A 3.0L V10 at 19,000 rpms is quite the sound though. The 2.4L V8 years with the blown diffusers were pretty amazing too. That off-throttle sound was sweet.
Thanks for clearing that up; I couldn't for the life of me understand what these had to do with the discussion:I bet @Gym Ramstud uses power bands to improve arm strength so he doesn't fall off while ripping wheelies and spraying roost.
LOL
,
I don’t know where you got those other bands but Gym is going to be mad you stole his orange bands!🤣Thanks for clearing that up; I couldn't for the life of me understand what these had to do with the discussion:
View attachment 2136017
LOL
,
I am not averse to sharing, especially with a legend!I don’t know where you got those other bands but Gym is going to be mad you stole his orange bands!🤣
At the end of the day the sled is a year out.They rushed the release (well not really as it's 4 yrs late) and for that, disappointed alot after hyping and teasing the fan base. I truly hope they knock it out of the park.i, like many, started out on Cat and would love to go back. Things are so bad I'm on a Poo now, this needs to change and fast
Sent from my SM-S901W using Tapatalk
Sent from my SM-S901W using Tapatalk
F-3's and ZRT's also weighed a hell of a lot more than the current sleds, its kind of amazing they were as fast as they wereYou can thank the chassis' aerodynamics for that more so than the engine. I had a 96 F3 (LOVED the engine, though the chassis was horrible) and many buddies had ZRT 6's and they were great sleds, but a modern 125 hp 600 is just as potent as a triple 600 (hp is a measure of an engine's ability to do work, and 125 hp = 125 hp; can't fool mother Physics)
Weight affects acceleration way more than top speed. I am sure with a snowmobiles poor drive train efficiency, weight plays a bigger role than it would in a car or motorcycle. Aerodynamics will be a much greater hindrance to top speed in that situation.F-3's and ZRT's also weighed a hell of a lot more than the current sleds, its kind of amazing they were as fast as they were
out of curiosity how much do you think aerodynamics matter on something thats 40" wide and 36" high? The F-3's had a pretty sleek cowl design on them. Ironically the TNT RV had a flat square nose and they were supposed to be a race sled. I had a 96 F3 too, I would really like to ride that sled with Etec injection and multi stage Raves and some of the othe tech the new sleds have.Weight affects acceleration way more than top speed. I am sure with a snowmobiles poor drive train efficiency, weight plays a bigger role than it would in a car or motorcycle. Aerodynamics will be a much greater hindrance to top speed in that situation.
The aerodynamics on the new sleds is terrible.
Years ago the short windshields would give you some top end speed but now its the other way around because there is no place to duck below the bodywork.Triangles on top of triangles isnt good for airflow.
Ideally you want to be the shape of a bullet.
Years ago the short windshields would give you some top end speed but now its the other way around because there is no place to duck below the bodywork.Triangles on top of triangles isnt good for airflow.
Ideally you want to be the shape of a bullet.
Ever wonder why the factory cross country race sleds come with real windshields??? Because they reduce aerodynamic drag, increase top speed, lessen rider fatigue, and make for a warmer ride.The aerodynamics on the new sleds is terrible.
Years ago the short windshields would give you some top end speed but now its the other way around because there is no place to duck below the bodywork.Triangles on top of triangles isnt good for airflow.
LOL at the trail riding, Johnny Snocross Wanna-bees that are killing their top speed and freezing their you-know-whats off. I hate riding with those guys because they constantly bitch about the cold and can't handle a big mile day. But hey, their sleds look like a Snocross race machine parked outside of the tavern while the real riders are out racking up miles.
Cat had a big display at Wide Open Wisconsin last weekend with the regional rep present as well as some other Cat employees. One of the employees was very honest with me and said she has not even ridden a proto type model. Pretty much the only people riding the new chassis are engineers, team racers, and other development people. She said the details about the 600cc engine are being released around February. She would not give me a specific weight of the trail sled but she said it's "about" 100 lbs lighter than the old chassis! I asked if I could remove the side panel and have a look and all 3 reps standing within earshot said "NO".So, does anybody know when Cat plans on releasing more details? I think they said something along the lines of trickling them out over the next 4 months. Do we know when we're supposed to get the next few drops?
lol I had also gotten the same response when I asked if they could remove the side panel.Cat had a big display at Wide Open Wisconsin last weekend with the regional rep present as well as some other Cat employees. One of the employees was very honest with me and said she has not even ridden a proto type model. Pretty much the only people riding the new chassis are engineers, team racers, and other development people. She said the details about the 600cc engine are being released around February. She would not give me a specific weight of the trail sled but she said it's "about" 100 lbs lighter than the old chassis! I asked if I could remove the side panel and have a look and all 3 reps standing within earshot said "NO".
Impressive!!!She would not give me a specific weight of the trail sled but she said it's "about" 100 lbs lighter than the old chassis!
141 - 160 of 178 Posts
- This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Hardcore Sledder
A forum community dedicated to snowmobile owners and enthusiasts. Come join the discussion about performance, trails, riding tips, modifications, classifieds, accessories, troubleshooting, maintenance, and more!
Full Forum Listing
Explore Our Forums
Top Contributors this Month
View All
xhardcorerider
56 Replies
patrioticinnovations
46 Replies
northstarrick
44 Replies
Recommended Communities
