E-Tec worth the extra coin?

[glengine]

the basic math calculates to these figures: 154x16=2464 and 163x15=2445 and 163x16=2608 (just to throw that out there). That is the area of the track or the total footprint if the track were cut in half and laid out flat.

What are your figures for the actual track on the snow? I'm thinking the 16's have more but until we actually have numbers or facts are we just "thinking so"?

Ok so a question for yah with that math how often is your entire track cut and laid out on the snow. The actual footprint of the track is not it's total overall lengthxwidth, that is total track surface area. What i classify as footprint is the track that is on the ground taht is getting used when riding and in the past when i measured the amount of track on the ground was different between the different brands. I wont disagree that yes the 16" wide does have a larger footprint but just not as much as the 154 claiming to be the same as a 162.

 

[glengine]

Whats this i hear about DOO having a recall on etec pistons???? Kinda brings poo poo's to mind.. LOL..

 

[jbb]

ok so a question for yah with that math how often is your entire track cut and laid out on the snow. The actual footprint of the track is not it's total overall lengthxwidth, that is total track surface area. What i classify as footprint is the track that is on the ground taht is getting used when riding and in the past when i measured the amount of track on the ground was different between the different brands. I wont disagree that yes the 16" wide does have a larger footprint but just not as much as the 154 claiming to be the same as a 162.

so do you think that because its a 162 it has 8 more inches on the ground?

 

[bad santa]

This guy rocks the BRP underwear and has owned alot of sleds and the etec is by FAR the best one. I never owned anything other than carbed sleds so I was real hesitant to snowcheck an etec last year but after riding it all year I don't think I could go back.

 

[glengine]

so do you think that because its a 162 it has 8 more inches on the ground?

I never said that 162 was 8" longer than a 154. I know it is only 4" longer on the ground. I've been around this industry for over 20years. I have had this very discussion about the 16" wide versus 15" wide with a few doo dealer people and they always stand firm that no a 154 16"wide is the same footprint as a 162 15" wide. But i remeber once i went and measured the track on the ground of a doo then did the same for a cat and yes the doo did have more in the same track length 15-16" but it wasn't the same as a 162". Because the thing that a person has to also remeber is that not all brands suspensions are designed the same so the actual amount of track on the ground isn't neccesarily the same between same track lengths sled but different brands.

 

[old mountain man]

Should likely be considering amount of track on the SNOW rather than a ground measurement.
That angled portion of the track does contact the snow but not so much on the ground.

 

[snopro]

I never said that 162 was 8" longer than a 154. I know it is only 4" longer on the ground. I've been around this industry for over 20years. I have had this very discussion about the 16" wide versus 15" wide with a few doo dealer people and they always stand firm that no a 154 16"wide is the same footprint as a 162 15" wide. But i remeber once i went and measured the track on the ground of a doo then did the same for a cat and yes the doo did have more in the same track length 15-16" but it wasn't the same as a 162". Because the thing that a person has to also remeber is that not all brands suspensions are designed the same so the actual amount of track on the ground isn't neccesarily the same between same track lengths sled but different brands.

Glen, I think your splitting hairs here. The amount of track that is actually on the ground can vary depending where the sleds limiter straps are set as well. I believe it is all relative to track width and length between each model. That is the fairest way to do it. Now if you went with your method then the Freaks wedge wouldn't have any track on the ground with the uuuuunnnnnbeleivable attack angle he is sporting. And we all know that thing climbs like a scalded cat.........errrr poo.

 

[glengine]

I agree that there are differences between models and such. The size of the drivers, size of rear wheels, limiter strap length, overall height of rear skid all these things have to be taken into account to actual amount of "usuable track" that a sled has as a footprint. I agree the best way to compare is 154 to 154 and 162 to 162. I just find it funny how some people say that the only way to go is a 16" wide track because it is like having the next length available in a 15" wide and that all brands should have it, and yet there are quite a few guys out west that are actually putting 15" wide tracks on there doo's and lovin how they work. So it once again boils down to a personal preference thing. Man am i glad that all the brands are different and all do different things better than each other. It drives our sport forward to get all of us better consumer sleds from all manufacturers.

 

[ferniesnow]

What are your figures for the actual track on the snow? I'm thinking the 16's have more but until we actually have numbers or facts are we just "thinking so"?

Ok so a question for yah with that math how often is your entire track cut and laid out on the snow. The actual footprint of the track is not it's total overall lengthxwidth, that is total track surface area. What i classify as footprint is the track that is on the ground taht is getting used when riding and in the past when i measured the amount of track on the ground was different between the different brands. I wont disagree that yes the 16" wide does have a larger footprint but just not as much as the 154 claiming to be the same as a 162.

Before I answer your question, how about answering mine? What is the actual figure for the amount of track on the snow? It doesn't help the argument when you say you measured it once but haven't got the figures. BTW, theoretically, with the 163 there should be another 16 sq. in. on the snow as compared to a 162 of the same width.

 

[tantrumpipeline]

I'm not sure about the 154-162 thing but as much as I hated the handling of my buddies 154 freeride I did pull a bit higher than my 162 M8 and the 163 powertek was 50 ft under us both, maybe 60 under the freeride, all 3 tried and only once did my M8 outclimb the freeride, the etec seems like a pretty good motor, we get around the same fuel mileage his may be a little better but my 11 M8 uses a lot more oil it seems, ride with all brands in our group, personally not biased, they all work good and it's what you get used to

 

[venom]

My TM8 has only 2"s of track on the gound. WtF Lol man is it fun!

 

[POWDERCHOWDER]

ive ridden both, not even the same sled. Go with the etec, it the only thing that keeping skidoo in the running these days with all the changes in the poo and kitty lineup.

As for the light throttle pull, it is a big deal, if you ride the 2 back to back you will never want to ride the ptek again.



Good luck

x2 x2 x2

 

[takethebounce]

So did the muffin man ever get some useful answers, cause I am hearing a lot of my Dad can beat up your Dad any day of the week stories.

 

[jbb]

My TM8 has only 2"s of track on the gound. WtF Lol man is it fun!

lmfao. ya i hear ya. foot print is irrelevant on my turbo yammie to. i go higher on the last 6" of track then they can with full foot print. lol

 

[TheMuffinMan]

So did the muffin man ever get some useful answers, cause I am hearing a lot of my Dad can beat up your Dad any day of the week stories.

I learned more than I cared to know about track footprint, but I think I got some useful information out of that. Sounds like a ptek with an e-start and trimmed throttle springs is the machine for me

 

[JaySimon]

So did the muffin man ever get some useful answers, cause I am hearing a lot of my Dad can beat up your Dad any day of the week stories.

Fawk off! My dad could totally school your dad....

 

[glengine]

I learned more than I cared to know about track footprint, but I think I got some useful information out of that. Sounds like a ptek with an e-start and trimmed throttle springs is the machine for me

I would be extremely cautious about changing the throttle return spring tension. On the doo since about '01 or '02 i think they dont have seperate springs for each carb so you cant just trim it abit shorter, it is one spring for the two carbs and what you have to do is unwind the spring one wrap. That was exactly what was done to a sled last winter that the guy brought in to me after riding it for a day and he had the crap scared out of himself when the throttle stuck wideopen until he pulled the tether.

 

[ferniesnow]

Fawk off! My dad could totally school your dad....

now now children.....we mustn't quarrel!! ........just