Axys 174 vs 165 G4

[snopro]

I am sure but has nothing to do with the rider, more that when your are ripping on the trails the sled has way less drag then when it is super deep. Once it is up to speed it is cruising, even if your going 100 mph, but the mountain sleds are constantly having to accelerate through deep snow resistance. Hence more oil in the mtns, and less oil usage on the trail. Braaaap!

So what you are saying is that BRP is claiming only 40% better oil economy on the trail version and not the mountain version?? I totally understand that a mountain sled will use more oil than a trail sled based on load,drag and use of throttle in deep snow but how does the design of the motor not live up to its billing in the Summit as well? If half your ride for the day is on a trail to get to the alpine then theoretically you will be saving oil in that process? You may not see exactly 40% savings but if it was possible to ride an 800 and an 850 etec "exactly" the same throughout a 6 hour day I'm betting the 850 uses less oil. Less throttle use because of a better oil use design and more power should save both oil and fuel. Back in the day when we used to port cylinders on our mountain sleds we found better fuel economy came along with the increased performance. Free're breathing and less throttle through out the day to achieve our riding goals added up at the end of the day. I totally understand the test results were based off of trail testing but I have yet to find an area where we are in the alpine right out of the trailer.

 

[Clode]

So what you are saying is that BRP is claiming only 40% better oil economy on the trail version and not the mountain version?? I totally understand that a mountain sled will use more oil than a trail sled based on load,drag and use of throttle in deep snow but how does the design of the motor not live up to its billing in the Summit as well? If half your ride for the day is on a trail to get to the alpine then theoretically you will be saving oil in that process? You may not see exactly 40% savings but if it was possible to ride an 800 and an 850 etec "exactly" the same throughout a 6 hour day I'm betting the 850 uses less oil. Less throttle use because of a better oil use design and more power should save both oil and fuel. Back in the day when we used to port cylinders on our mountain sleds we found better fuel economy came along with the increased performance. Free're breathing and less throttle through out the day to achieve our riding goals added up at the end of the day. I totally understand the test results were based off of trail testing but I have yet to find an area where we are in the alpine right out of the trailer.

maybe oiler output is based on engine load, the ecm then increases oil pump output(rpm)....automotive industry has load based engine tuning for years and maybe BRP is using similar ideas

 

[pfi572]

Maybe they "BRP" have the clutching much better to keep the rpms down on trail riding and still back shift .
IMO , if your clutching is set right that is the fuel and oil savings.
They all burn lots if under heavy load , plain and simple.
It amazes me how all people can talk about is power ,oil consumption,weight and so on.
If you can make the CVT way better you can accomplish way more for less .

 

[snopro]

maybe oiler output is based on engine load, the ecm then increases oil pump output(rpm)....automotive industry has load based engine tuning for years and maybe BRP is using similar ideas

The etec engines have always had their oil pumps calibrated electronically via the ecm. It computes rpm's, altitude and the software also increases oil flow for the initial break in period. I'm not sure if the ecm takes in to account load in the engine persay Claude? I have never been told that or read anything in our one day manuals. It is a question I will ask my buddy Rich Klein at BRP maybe Monday when I am at work?

 

[snopro]

Maybe they "BRP" have the clutching much better to keep the rpms down on trail riding and still back shift .
IMO , if your clutching is set right that is the fuel and oil savings.
They all burn lots if under heavy load , plain and simple.
It amazes me how all people can talk about is power ,oil consumption,weight and so on.
If you can make the CVT way better you can accomplish way more for less .

You are right pfi. Clutching can make a world of difference in not only fuel but oil consumption running down the trail. It would be interesting to know how BRP went about the trail test? Did they just put a big gear in, tone down the ramp and cruise along at 50 km down a flat, groomed trail all day? I doubt we will ever know. Lol.

 

[Clode]

The etec engines have always had their oil pumps calibrated electronically via the ecm. It computes rpm's, altitude and the software also increases oil flow for the initial break in period. I'm not sure if the ecm takes in to account load in the engine persay Claude? I have never been told that or read anything in our one day manuals. It is a question I will ask my buddy Rich Klein at BRP maybe Monday when I am at work?

taking into account TPS position, RPM, Altitude, Temp, Knock count the ecm would know how hard it is working, and adding extra oil in these conditions would increase engine life.....if they are doing this hats off to them

 

[fredw]

All the G4 will need is a better skid and it will kill the Poo.. We all new that nothing new and now we side hill better than they do.. We all new that as well

20hp difference will show its head quickly, and once skid is corrected, or a baker skid installed, domination will prevail.. Good article

 

[LennyR]

All the G4 will need is a better skid and it will kill the Poo.. We all new that nothing new and now we side hill better than they do.. We all new that as well

20hp difference will show its head quickly, and once skid is corrected, or a baker skid installed, domination will prevail.. Good article

20 HP , lol, like most of your info, half real, half Fredw'ized ! I think the changes are great and will probably work very well, but in the back of my mind I can't get it out of my mind how well the 07 XRS and the 08 XP proto types performed, then the production models hits the snow like a travelling $hit show. Hope I'm wrong but first year any brand just scares me.

 

[dragonweld28]

I find it so funny that this new G4 needs a new skid and revised shock settings to beat the stock Polaris!! Polaris has always been down on power and was just behind the Doo in climbing abitity. Everyone knows that the Polaris handles and sidehills better. Now the Axys is an even better chassis with great power and is better than the Doo in every way.

 

[Rulonjj]

I find it so funny that this new G4 needs a new skid and revised shock settings to beat the stock Polaris!! Polaris has always been down on power and was just behind the Doo in climbing abitity. Everyone knows that the Polaris handles and sidehills better. Now the Axys is an even better chassis with great power and is better than the Doo in every way.

It dosen't need a new skid to beat a stock Polaris. A stock 165 G4 will beat a 163 Axys with a can. With video to prove it. Not to mention, a completely stock suspension leaves a lot of performance on the table. But that's another discussion all together.

 

[Lund]

20 HP , lol, like most of your info, half real, half Fredw'ized ! I think the changes are great and will probably work very well, but in the back of my mind I can't get it out of my mind how well the 07 XRS and the 08 XP proto types performed, then the production models hits the snow like a travelling $hit show. Hope I'm wrong but first year any brand just scares me.

Let me add, 2004 Summit, $hit show. 2000 Summit, $hit show. 2003 Rev Summit $hit show. 2005 Summit RT, $hit show.........LOL
Before 2004, anything with the name Bombardier on it was $hit show, unless you lived back east.
And the show must go on.

BRP has a great PR department. IMO the best in the industry. LOL

 

[Summitric]

Hmmm, kinda like the poo 800 ENGINES that couldn't stay together, and a "fix kit" to keep them together, or the glue together pieces coming apart..... Etc etc etc lmao

 

[steveo10]

All I know is my dad can beat up your dad!!

 

[Rulonjj]

Let me add, 2004 Summit, $hit show. 2000 Summit, $hit show. 2003 Rev Summit $hit show. 2005 Summit RT, $hit show.........LOL
Before 2004, anything with the name Bombardier on it was $hit show, unless you lived back east.
And the show must go on.

BRP has a great PR department. IMO the best in the industry. LOL

Hmmm, kinda like the poo 800 ENGINES that couldn't stay together, and a "fix kit" to keep them together, or the glue together pieces coming apart..... Etc etc etc lmao

Seeing how people are bringing up old problems let's not forget the awesome 900 Polaris used to build. Now THAT was a sh!t show. Enough to make up for anything wrong that brp ever did. Lol


Oh wait. I guess poo's engine problems aren't all that old. My bad.

 

[pistoncontracting]

Good thread. I like how weight comparisons now include different tracks lengths, and various amounts of fuel.

And now, guys are finally saying that *maybe* the T motion should be locked out to improve performance.

And that all you need to do to an amazing machine, is change the skid. That'll make it eat the competition....


Why can't we just all say that BRP truly dominates the middle. It truly is an amazing, average machine for the masses. That is the one thing it truly does the best. It doesn't handle gnarly terrain the best. Track length and amount of fuel being equal, it's not the lightest. It's not the most powerful. It's not the longest.

It is still the only mountain sled with torsion springs in the rear skid. It is the only mountain sled offered with horizontal steering. It is the only one to offer a pivoting rear skid (that many are chooseing to lock). Up until this year, it sounds like they were the only one to guarantee you won't run out of fuel, but it also sounds like they may have fixed that....

If you want a sled that does most things average, in stock form, you won't go wrong with a BRP. If you want the most powerful, buy a yammy. If you want high performance, buy a polaris. If you want performance, and to last longer then a year or two, buy a cat.

 

[dragonweld28]

That's comparing the 2016 axys to the 2017 Doo. the 2017 174 axys is better than the 2017 Doo. stop making excuses!

 

[Bnorth]

Good thread. I like how weight comparisons now include different tracks lengths, and various amounts of fuel.

And now, guys are finally saying that *maybe* the T motion should be locked out to improve performance.

And that all you need to do to an amazing machine, is change the skid. That'll make it eat the competition....


Why can't we just all say that BRP truly dominates the middle. It truly is an amazing, average machine for the masses. That is the one thing it truly does the best. It doesn't handle gnarly terrain the best. Track length and amount of fuel being equal, it's not the lightest. It's not the most powerful. It's not the longest.

It is still the only mountain sled with torsion springs in the rear skid. It is the only mountain sled offered with horizontal steering. It is the only one to offer a pivoting rear skid (that many are chooseing to lock). Up until this year, it sounds like they were the only one to guarantee you won't run out of fuel, but it also sounds like they may have fixed that....

If you want a sled that does most things average, in stock form, you won't go wrong with a BRP. If you want the most powerful, buy a yammy. If you want high performance, buy a polaris. If you want performance, and to last longer then a year or two, buy a cat.

This actually very true. I bought my last Doo because it was the best all around machine. Polaris has a better chassis but if you put on a lot of miles or are a bigger guy get ready for reliability issues. Yamaha is king of the alpine but struggles in technical terrain. Cat is good all around but not quite as good as the Doo mostly due to build quality issues.

 

[pistoncontracting]

This actually very true. I bought my last Doo because it was the best all around machine. Polaris has a better chassis but if you put on a lot of miles or are a bigger guy get ready for reliability issues. Yamaha is king of the alpine but struggles in technical terrain. Cat is good all around but not quite as good as the Doo mostly due to build quality issues.

When a person enters terrain, away from the average rider, they will feel more comfortable on a cat, then a summit. And upper average, un biased rider can jump back and forth between a Cat and a pro, and not notice to much difference. The same simply can't be said about a summit. The summit works great, but it simply doesn't excel at anything.

And there is nothing wrong with that. It is more practical for most people to buy an f150, as to a Raptor. Both trucks will perform truck activities just fine, the f150 better in MOST situations. Some people like to push the limits though, and that's where the Raptor shines. It burns more fuel, and breaks down more. But in those same situations, it still performs better then it's competitor.

 

[Summitric]

EVERYONE IS A FRICKIN EXPERT ON ALL THREE SLEDS, BECAUSE EVERYONE HAS OWNED AND RIDDEN NEW SLEDS.... RIIIIIIGHT

TO EACH THEIR OWN.

 

[Summitric]