[Guest]

look corey, ive heard from a cat/polaris/yamaha dealer that polaris does have the best 800 twin out there. torque numbers stand at 15 more lbs. torque and he stands by it. so believe what you want to hear and keep your mouth shout

p.s. your 700 rmk and my xc600sp-any time, any place

 

[Guest]

Tell you what, I know an engineer for Polaris and I will email him today and get the exact torque number. And I would love to go against your 600 Where are you?

Corey in UTAH

 

[Guest]

When you two get done comparing dick sizes maybe someone could answer my ques.
about how the Ski-Doo will compare to the Artic Cat. I know just Proto's have been out so far but has anyone had the chance to run these two together. Funny how Doo has had Exhaust valves for years and now that other manufac. have come up to speed the rags are just facinated by them

 

[Guest]

The mags are fascinated because the exhaust valve is controlled by the timing curve, not a mechanical valve.

I would go with the Doo, even know I like Cat better. I think the Cat has way more potential and should be stronger in stock form, but Cat needs to prove they can build a reliable sled. Also, the Doo is available in a 151"

Corey in Utah

 

[Guest]

me personally, i like the doo just cause of looks and graphics, but both motors are junk

 

[Guest]

still waiting for the numbers there corey, unless you know i am right i accept your apology

p.s. i know people who know numbers too so dont give me a line of bs

 

[Guest]

According to the article "Stage tuning the Polaris 800 RMK" in the Winter 1999-2000 SnowTech magazine, one of the few
magazines I trust, the stock 2000 800 RMK made a peak of 86.3 ft lbs of torque at 7400 RPM with a top H.P of 126.8 at 8000 RPM.
The most they could make out of the motor in the tests was 158.7 HP at 8300 RPM, 101.6 ft lbs at 8200 RPM. No way in hell the
new 2001 800 RMK will make over 100 ft lbs of torque stock without some serious engine redesign, such as stroking the motor with
crank and rod redesign. The CDI upgrade will clean some of the power up, but no way will it increase torque by 17 ft lbs.

If you can't buy what you want, BUILD IT!!

 

[Guest]

Well said... I assume the 158 HP motor had some mods? I was a little reluctant to give the numbers, but he said 131-135 HP with around 88 ft-lbs of torque. I think your dealer is feeding you a line of $hit if he is saying 120 ft-lbs. If it had that much torque, I would have one tomorrow So, no apology needed

Corey

 

[Guest]

Yeah, roger that. To get 158.7 H.P. they needed SLP twin pipes, billet heads, high flow airbox, V Force reeds and porting. Also
needed a diet of 1 gallon race gas to 4 gallons 91 octane pump gas to run good.

If you can't buy what you want, BUILD IT!!

 

[Guest]

the mag is talking track torque i am talking engine torque, trucks have a hard time putting 158hp to the rear wheels so they measure at the flywheel, like the dealer said, 120 lbs

 

[Guest]

I believe Snowtech's report. Best snowmobile magazine out there. However, I thought the 120's was the hp not the torque. There I go for saying stuff from memory.

Trails are made for flatlanders.
/wwwthreads_images/icons/tongue.gif

 

[Guest]

Sorry mrpwr, your argument is getting a little thin. You're saying that Snowtech measured crank H.P. and track torque?? Then listed
the results in the same chart?? Get a life man. Both numbers were CRANK measured. I'll publicly appologize to you if you can
e-mail me a scanned copy of an actual dyno sheet of a stock 800 RMK producing over 100 ft lbs at the crank. I'll be gone for a week,
so you've got plenty of time to come up with one.

If you can't buy what you want, BUILD IT!!

 

[Guest]

i said torque and hp at the rear idlers, i doubt any sled can put 100lbs of torque at the idlers. you send me some proof and then i will get a life till then i hope your wife isnt sleeping around on you when your gone.

 

[Guest]

A fairly reliable source told me today that their independant dyno test showed 130 HP and 90 ftlbs of torque on the stock '01 RMK 800. But 145 HP and 110 ftlbs of torque after porting only. I can't wait to add the pipe! I am also told, by the same source, that the stock '01 RMK 800 will smoke the '00 RMK 800 with pipes and porting.

Mark
PowderBound

 

[Guest]

Hey Mark!!

I can definately agree with your reliable source (Jack?) on the results of pipe and porting, but I have ridden the 2001 and it is not even close to the piped and ported 2000 that we both rode....

Corey

 

[Guest]

I too have riden a 01' 800. There is no way in hell that it will hang with my ported and piped 00'. Not trying to start an arguement here
just telling my experience.

 

[Guest]

Like I said, this came from a good source not me. I have ridden the '00 sled, stock, piped and ported and the '01 stock. But not side by side. So until next November, I will not have my own opinion on the subject. I do know that my new '01 RMK 800 will be ported, have the SLP single pipe and Heelclicker weights at the beginning of the year and an additional 2000 miles added by the end.

Hope you guys find a way to figure this all out over the next five months or so?

I also plan to run over as many 1" diameter trees as possible and chase the buffalo in Yellowstone National park for one last year. (just kidding) The ban on sleds is really going to hurt some folks!

Mark
PowderBound

 

[Guest]

No 800 is putting over 120hp to the rear idlers either, not with the norm of nearly 40% of crank H.P. lost on it's way to the track.
Why should I send you proof? You claim to have read the same article as me, which measured CRANK hp and torque. Once again,
the arcticle I quote is in the Winter 1999-2000 Snow Tech magazine, written by Jerry Mathews at Starting Line Products, go get your
own damn copy.

If you can't buy what you want, BUILD IT!!