M-20 Airwave suspension video (new full length version)

[jzack]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dhu6JQVRU24

 

[Metallicat]

I don't at all believe the "stutter bump" comparison. I've hammered my LTX through 4-6" stutters and it never bucked like the Attak in the video! Even at 70mph I am in complete control in the stutters with very little kick or feed-back through the chassis. WTF kind of valve job does that Attak have?

 

[jzack]

I don't at all believe the "stutter bump" comparison. I've hammered my LTX through 4-6" stutters and it never bucked like the Attak in the video! Even at 70mph I am in complete control in the stutters with very little kick or feed-back through the chassis. WTF kind of valve job does that Attak have?

I am sure there are some Mono's out there that can handle the 4-6" chop better than the one in the video, however, I doubt they could also handle the 10-18" stuff very well w/o serious set-up changes. Yamaha has done a good job trying to bring a competent monoshock skid to snowmobiling but the performance window of a single shock skid is always going to be very small.

I am one of the inventors of the Airwave and we are very proud of the huge performance window this skid is capable of providing. It goes well beyond what any OEM skid is capable of. We hope this is evident in the video. A rider can go from 2" to 18" bumps and beyond and still have excellent ride-quality and control w/o adjusting, calibrating, clicking, etc...

BTW, your comment in an earlier post about the Mono being falling-rate I believe is false. Please take a look here....

http://www.yamaha-motor.ca/technology/t ... p=S&tech=A

 

[ahicks]

While being the first to admit your suspension design appears to work really well, you say your "performance window", "goes well beyond what any OEM skid is capable of". May I ask what you have done that will improve/allow holeshot capabilities that previously don't even come close to comparing with what's available with the late Yammi Nytro, Doo, Cat, and Poo suspensions? Have you addressed the other well known issues regarding top end loss when compared to the OEM skids? I'll go you an expanded performance window with your new design, but I'm struggling with your statement regarding the noted issues... especially in light of your asking price. -Al

I don't at all believe the "stutter bump" comparison. I've hammered my LTX through 4-6" stutters and it never bucked like the Attak in the video! Even at 70mph I am in complete control in the stutters with very little kick or feed-back through the chassis. WTF kind of valve job does that Attak have?

I am sure there are some Mono's out there that can handle the 4-6" chop better than the one in the video, however, I doubt they could also handle the 10-18" stuff very well w/o serious set-up changes. Yamaha has done a good job trying to bring a competent monoshock skid to snowmobiling but the performance window of a single shock skid is always going to be very small.

I am one of the inventors of the Airwave and we are very proud of the huge performance window this skid is capable of providing. It goes well beyond what any OEM skid is capable of. We hope this is evident in the video. A rider can go from 2" to 18" bumps and beyond and still have excellent ride-quality and control w/o adjusting, calibrating, clicking, etc...

BTW, your comment in an earlier post about the Mono being falling-rate I believe is false. Please take a look here....

http://www.yamaha-motor.ca/technology/t ... p=S&tech=A

 

[Metallicat]

I don't at all believe the "stutter bump" comparison. I've hammered my LTX through 4-6" stutters and it never bucked like the Attak in the video! Even at 70mph I am in complete control in the stutters with very little kick or feed-back through the chassis. WTF kind of valve job does that Attak have?

I am sure there are some Mono's out there that can handle the 4-6" chop better than the one in the video, however, I doubt they could also handle the 10-18" stuff very well w/o serious set-up changes. Yamaha has done a good job trying to bring a competent monoshock skid to snowmobiling but the performance window of a single shock skid is always going to be very small.

I am one of the inventors of the Airwave and we are very proud of the huge performance window this skid is capable of providing. It goes well beyond what any OEM skid is capable of. We hope this is evident in the video. A rider can go from 2" to 18" bumps and beyond and still have excellent ride-quality and control w/o adjusting, calibrating, clicking, etc...

BTW, your comment in an earlier post about the Mono being falling-rate I believe is false. Please take a look here....

http://www.yamaha-motor.ca/technology/t ... p=S&tech=A

jzack, are you the inventor of the airbag suspension originally fitted to a Polaris rear end?

The reason I called the mono a "falling rate" design is because that is what I was told by either Pioneer or Hygear (don't remember).

I've logged thousands of miles on the original M-10, installed on a Cat ZR700. The M-10, in my opinion, offers a ride like nothing out there. I consider my mono to offer 80% of the ride quality, maybe less, of an ideally tuned M-10 in the smaller stutters, equal to an M-10 in the large 12-18" bumps that are spaced a skid length apart, and maybe 70% of the M-10 in the 6-8" tightly spaced bumps at higher speeds. If the airwave is that much better, then it should be an amazing rear suspension. But the mono is the first rear suspension that hasn't made me want to go out and buy and M-10 right away. And I still have reservations about the video...my sled with the stock valving just does not react like the bucking bronco Attak.

 

[jzack]

While being the first to admit your suspension design appears to work really well, you say your "performance window", "goes well beyond what any OEM skid is capable of". May I ask what you have done that will improve/allow holeshot capabilities that previously don't even come close to comparing with what's available with the late Yammi Nytro, Doo, Cat, and Poo suspensions? Have you addressed the other well known issues regarding top end loss when compared to the OEM skids? I'll go you an expanded performance window with your new design, but I'm struggling with your statement regarding the noted issues... especially in light of your asking price. -Al


Good questions. First, to be clear, when I mention "performance window" I was referring to a skid's bump performance and how it will handle different sizes and frequencies.

About the transfer, yes M-10/Airwave geometry does transfer less than OEM. Remember, this helps the ride quality. However, there is more transfer with the Airwave than the M-10 because of how the airspring is mounted and acts on the rear torque-arm. Also, a huge benefit with air is you can lower the sled's ride-height at the touch of a button in a drag race situation. Many Airwave users have done this with good results.

I'm not sure there is a significant top end speed loss. Maybe years ago when M-10's were replacing tiny, 6" travel OEM skid's there was a noticeable difference. But now the OEM's have ALMOST caught up in travel numbers. Last season I saw 103MPH on my 600IQ at normal ride-height. Pretty much on par with the stock skid.

Take a look at what others have said about their M-20 Airwave's.

 

[ahicks]

With all due respect, comments shown in your attachment are similar to what I was reading when converting a sled to (metric) M-10 a few years back. That install was such a dismall failure - for reasons noted earlier - I never finished the season with it. That suspension was pulled and replaced with an OEM - with similar travel (Edge vs. M-10) - and WOT speed loss noted with M-10 was gone. I blamed it on approach angle - but acknowledge I'm no engineer....

I'll agree your suspension may be (probably is!) the best available for guys using their sleds as cruisers - but I'll stand by the opinion they have no business under a performance sled..... not one of mine anyway. Your 600 performance noted...interesting. Result could be due to changing track tension as the suspension cycles? Better approach angle? -Al

While being the first to admit your suspension design appears to work really well, you say your "performance window", "goes well beyond what any OEM skid is capable of". May I ask what you have done that will improve/allow holeshot capabilities that previously don't even come close to comparing with what's available with the late Yammi Nytro, Doo, Cat, and Poo suspensions? Have you addressed the other well known issues regarding top end loss when compared to the OEM skids? I'll go you an expanded performance window with your new design, but I'm struggling with your statement regarding the noted issues... especially in light of your asking price. -Al


Good questions. First, to be clear, when I mention "performance window" I was referring to a skid's bump performance and how it will handle different sizes and frequencies.

About the transfer, yes M-10/Airwave geometry does transfer less than OEM. Remember, this helps the ride quality. However, there is more transfer with the Airwave than the M-10 because of how the airspring is mounted and acts on the rear torque-arm. Also, a huge benefit with air is you can lower the sled's ride-height at the touch of a button in a drag race situation. Many Airwave users have done this with good results.

I'm not sure there is a significant top end speed loss. Maybe years ago when M-10's were replacing tiny, 6" travel OEM skid's there was a noticeable difference. But now the OEM's have ALMOST caught up in travel numbers. Last season I saw 103MPH on my 600IQ at normal ride-height. Pretty much on par with the stock skid.

Take a look at what others have said about their M-20 Airwave's.

 

[kinger]

Looks sweet just way to expensive for the gain over a mono or even my ZX2 which I would put up against this skid for a "performance" suspension not a cruiser.