Power or Weight? what wins....

[overkill131313]

You need to be a HEMAN to toss around a Yammie all day. Very few can.

hey Cale....the freak is saying we are Heman since we ride for how many days in a row? yes it takes a real man to tame an Apex but well worth the ride! my back hurts more from digging other people out than from riding my Apex! yes I will help anyone out that I see stuck!

 

[Modman]

I built a Mod Indy Lite Fancooled with a forward rolled chaincase in 2002 that weighed 364 lbs. and at 65 HP would get around in DEEP fantastic,compared to the 500 lbs. 800's at the time.When you do the lbs. per HP the Lite shoud not have worked at all?

"getting around" in the deep stuff and climbing a hill are 2 different things. You still need the HP to turn the track speed, regardless of how light the sled is.

 

[WesG]

Riding area and riding partners play a much bigger role in this question than power or weight. Do you even need to lose weight or have more power? Evaluating your area and partners sleds/abilities should be your first consideration. Having a turbo sled is not much fun when your area is tight and not much room to open it up. I know, I know they go better in the trees than a stocker. Very true they can go amazing places even in super tight stuff (I rode a t-apex for 3 years and it could do simply retarded things in the trees), but if you get there in one or two pulls and it takes your buddies half to 3/4's of an hour to get there, who had more fun??? They did b/c they were riding the whole time working there butts off having a blast getting up or through that spot challenging themselves to make it. Now if your riding group is running big iron, that changes the whole outlook for this. Weight is always nice to take off the sled so long as it does not comprimise strength. Lite sleds are much easier to ride and wear you down less throughout the day.

As for the topic power or weight, if you are looking to go the farthest up the hill the power will get you there. It has been proven over and over again via large displacement turbo's. Weight is much nicer to ride but can only take you so far (it will help out more so in more technical riding areas). Weight seems to be a road of diminishing returns for your dollar ie. you get good returns for the first bunch of lost weight but after that it really slows down. Power seems to be limited only by your bank account these days.

JMHO

 

[Longhairfreak]

Riding area and riding partners play a much bigger role in this question than power or weight. Do you even need to lose weight or have more power? Evaluating your area and partners sleds/abilities should be your first consideration. Having a turbo sled is not much fun when your area is tight and not much room to open it up. I know, I know they go better in the trees than a stocker. Very true they can go amazing places even in super tight stuff (I rode a t-apex for 3 years and it could do simply retarded things in the trees), but if you get there in one or two pulls and it takes your buddies half to 3/4's of an hour to get there, who had more fun??? They did b/c they were riding the whole time working there butts off having a blast getting up or through that spot challenging themselves to make it. Now if your riding group is running big iron, that changes the whole outlook for this. Weight is always nice to take off the sled so long as it does not comprimise strength. Lite sleds are much easier to ride and wear you down less throughout the day.

As for the topic power or weight, if you are looking to go the farthest up the hill the power will get you there. It has been proven over and over again via large displacement turbo's. Weight is much nicer to ride but can only take you so far (it will help out more so in more technical riding areas). Weight seems to be a road of diminishing returns for your dollar ie. you get good returns for the first bunch of lost weight but after that it really slows down. Power seems to be limited only by your bank account these days.

JMHO

Are you high?

 

[WesG]

lmao not the last time I checked lhf :d

 

[powderpilot]

I just wanted to add in a little comment on a post awhile back about rider weight. It seems to me that rider weight would make much less of an impact on a 600lb sled with a 3lb/HP ratio than a 450lb sled with the same ratio.

The 600lb sled at 200 hp, and the 450lb sled at 150 hp... Add a 200 lb rider. The 600lb sled goes to 4lbs per hp, and the 450lb sled goes to 5lbs per hp.

I say again, bring on the BOOST. And throw in some beer and donuts!

:d:d:d:d:d:d:d:d

 

[Modman]

I just wanted to add in a little comment on a post awhile back about rider weight. It seems to me that rider weight would make much less of an impact on a 600lb sled with a 3lb/HP ratio than a 450lb sled with the same ratio.

The 600lb sled at 200 hp, and the 450lb sled at 150 hp... Add a 200 lb rider. The 600lb sled goes to 4lbs per hp, and the 450lb sled goes to 5lbs per hp.

I say again, bring on the BOOST. And throw in some beer and donuts!

:d:d:d:d:d:d:d:d

the 450 lb sled would weigh 650 lbs and make 150 HP, meaning the lbs/HP is 4.3, not 5. A 450 lb sled with 150 HP and a 200 lb rider, and a 600 lb sled with 200 HP and a 200 lb rider are basically equal.

A lot of you seem to be missing the point of this thread, its not just about throwing on some "BOOST" to make more power if that HP costs your wallet big $$$$. Like I stated, if $$$ was no object we'd all be riding 300 lb magnesium sleds.....

If you could get to 4.3lbs/hp, have a better handling sled and spend under $1000, why would you add boost for $6K?

 

[overkill131313]

the 450 lb sled would weigh 650 lbs and make 150 HP, meaning the lbs/HP is 4.3, not 5. A 450 lb sled with 150 HP and a 200 lb rider, and a 600 lb sled with 200 HP and a 200 lb rider are basically equal.

A lot of you seem to be missing the point of this thread, its not just about throwing on some "BOOST" to make more power if that HP costs your wallet big $$$$. Like I stated, if $$$ was no object we'd all be riding 300 lb magnesium sleds.....

If you could get to 4.3lbs/hp, have a better handling sled and spend under $1000, why would you add boost for $6K?

My turbo cost me nothing.......I bought an Apex and the turbo came with it! lol

 

[powderpilot]

My oops... But my point still stands, the rider weight makes LESS of an impact on a heavier, more HP sled.

I didn't pay for my turbo either. In all honesty, wouldn't be riding one if I had to cough up the $$$, just because I wouldn't be able to afford it, or justify spending that kind of money on the sport.

I'm grateful I have the opportunity to try one cause gawdam boost is hella fun!!!! :d:d:d:d Perma-grin!

 

[Carbon]

I definitely did light weight deal (carbon fiber chassis)and loved it,but no matter what you do you lose power in elevation right.......?And i love the power that stock gives.....tuning in the clutch and giving it the air it needs in powder,but want that pull,the "150hp"stock horsey's i have at parking lot/5500ft Ya no,when coming down the mtn end of day and you notice way more snap/power.....what"s out there in lines of just keeping a true stock hp at 8000 ft/riding elevations....

Do i make sents.....cant fine grease nipple on computer lol

 

[pirate31red]

so explain to me why a 2stroke loses so many hp at higher altitude but a 4stroke does not im a lil fuzzy on this

 

[dvst8r]

They both loose ~ equal power at altitude. Forced induction motors do better, especially with boost control, as they you truly can make up for the lost atmospheric pressure. (Obviously to a point, either turbo or octane, or motor limited)

 

[kenvb]

350 HP and lightweight ok for mountains and soft snow..if you have Deep Pockets

150 HP w strong tunnel for trail riding. unless you can afford both


Im dam near 60 , one of my sleds , pick back end up, set on endgate, pick up frt and slide it in, try that with your sleds at half my age?

oh, did I say it weighs less than 300 lbs ... cant do this with my 800 VE Polaris