• We are no longer supporting TapaTalk as a mobile app for our sites. The TapaTalk App has many issues with speed on our server as well as security holes that leave us vulnerable to attacks and spammers.

Real World 1500 Mile Low Down of new Ski Doo XR-S 900 Turbo vs. SideWinder

stevewithOCD said:
Let me ask this question to maybe clear the air.
That first "grunt" when we crack the throttle, is that Torque or Horsepower?
I realize HP & rpm's wins races, but what gives us that arm pull?
I think this is what the Squatch is talking about.
I know my Ninja 1000 or FZ-1 was WAAAAYYYY "faster" then every Hardley i've ever ridden with, but some of those built ones could pull hard on the bottom especially without shifting gears. I would have to down shift & keep rpm's above 10,000. HP and aerodynamics would take over once i got going.
So, wasn't that their V-twin torque that would get me on throttle up since their HP was lower then mine?
Orrrrrrrrr, do they have have more HP at the bottom and that's why they stretch the arms cuz mine didn't build the HP until after 6000 or so just like our Winders?
Click to expand...

Your operating out of the powerband of the engine which is easy to do with a high rpm high horsepower engine. Harley’s have almost maximum torque off idle. If bikes had a CVT transmission this would never happen because the engine would rev up then shift out, next time downshift then floor it.
Your old APE is a bike motor, did it feel sluggish?
 

YukonMP said:
In the spirit of reconciliation why don't you both unite under the banner ... RPM is KING.
Or not. Whatever.
Click to expand...
Sounds good to me F-it
 
stevewithOCD said:
Let me ask this question to maybe clear the air.
That first "grunt" when we crack the throttle, is that Torque or Horsepower?
I realize HP & rpm's wins races, but what gives us that arm pull?
I think this is what the Squatch is talking about.
I know my Ninja 1000 or FZ-1 was WAAAAYYYY "faster" then every Hardley i've ever ridden with, but some of those built ones could pull hard on the bottom especially without shifting gears. I would have to down shift & keep rpm's above 10,000. HP and aerodynamics would take over once i got going.
So, wasn't that their V-twin torque that would get me on throttle up since their HP was lower then mine?
Orrrrrrrrr, do they have have more HP at the bottom and that's why they stretch the arms cuz mine didn't build the HP until after 6000 or so just like our Winders?
Click to expand...

Where’s the frickin humor?
If we’re gonna get 200 pages outta this thread you need to step up your game.
Let’s talk about why that sled in your head is a Ski-Doo chassis.:dunno:
 
KnappAttack said:
I ran 5.20 in 660 with the little 800 V-Max.
Click to expand...
Ya that's fast Mike, did you know Don and Lori when they raced there indy 650's? kinda funny watching Don beat Tim Butterfield's over-bored 1100CC Pat Hauke RX1 Bender turbo-charged Yamaha in 1000 feet on ice over and over
 
Sasquatch said:
Now if you want to talk about fake news. Please show me where I said anything would lay waste to my sidewinder? I made a simple statement that even you have failed to prove wrong. More torque = More hp. Instead you go on the attack and make up fake news. I have never said hp does not win races but I did say without torque there is no hp. Right from the beginning I have said you can't have hp without torque, more torque more hp, less torque less hp. No one has proven that to be wrong. I have even said when people seemed to be thinking I meant peak torque that I did not mean that at all.

Plug in any torque number at 20000rpm calculate hp now plug in a higher torque number at 20000rpm and calculate. Did the hp increase? Guess what its not fake news torque did that. Now to the Apex not making more then 77 ft/pd of torque. Yes I used clutch speed because guess what the clutch is connected to the crankshaft via a gear reducer which increases torque. Rpm is 8500 at the belt how can I use torque at crank speed before the reducer? I have to use it after the reducer as in clutch speed. Why does everyone seem to have a big problem with this?
Click to expand...
I thought i saw a sasquatch once ,ended up being a sqawsnatch had to use all the hp i had to get out of there
 
Lmfao
 
Fast said:
I thought i saw a sasquatch once ,ended up being a sqawsnatch had to use all the hp i had to get out of there
Click to expand...

Yes both are big and hairy with pink lips, easy to get them confused!
 
Sasquatch said:
Because some people do not seem to understand torque

Winder is making 122ft/pds at 8800 clutch speed to make 204hp. It makes over 120 pds of torque for over 3,000 rpm. Talk about a torque monster!

Apex engine at 77ft/pds 10600rpm = 156hp. Apex engine with gear reduction increases torque to 97ft/pds 8500rpm clutch speed = 156hp. Gear reduction changes torque not hp.

100 ft/pds 8500rpm = 161 Think Apex
102.5ft/pds 8500rpm = 165
105 ft/pds 8500rpm = 169
122 ft/pds 8500rpm = 197 Think Sidewinder
122ft/pds 8800rpm = 204 "
115ft/pds 9100rpm = 199 "

So if you can just increase torque by 2.5 ft/pds you get 4 more hp, by 5 you are rewarded with 8 more hp. If torque curve is flat then hp stays close to peak. Yet torque is not important? Less torque less hp. more torque more hp. 22ft/ps of torque gets you 40 more hp, so you winder guys didn't want that torque? Why? Obviously it worked out for you!

So to say torque is not important only hp is simply not true, they are directly related and the flatter the curve the better.
Click to expand...
Thought i would shed some light on this topic from a long time legend in the snowmobile world back in the day Rob Schooping, check out this article he wrote:http://www.amsnow.com/how-to-tech/2001/03/your-broad-band-engine
 
Last edited:
Sasquatch said:
The motor at the clutch makes 100ish ft/pds of torque, if you put a dyno on the clutch shaft it will read a higher torque then the crankshaft to which we can not bolt a dyno. We can only bolt it to the clutch. I think what you are trying to say is the gear reducer bolted to the engine is now not part of the engine but yet we bolted a clutch to it and now want to compare it to an engine without a gear reducer. Only way to compare apples to apples is off the clutch after the reducer not before it. Gear reducer increases torque, reduces rpm and makes no difference to hp. It is as fast as an engine with 100 ft/pds or torque because it has a 100ft/pds of torque and at the same rpm the same hp because of 100ft/pds of torque. Why is this so hard to grasp?
Click to expand...
Again, an Apex engine doesn't make 100 pounds of torque. With respect, when you are able to grasp how an engine with 83 pounds of torque can be as fast(with everything else being equal) as an engine that makes 100 pounds of torque, you will understand why HP is king.
 
74Nitro said:
Again, an Apex engine doesn't make 100 pounds of torque. With respect, when you are able to grasp how an engine with 83 pounds of torque can be as fast(with everything else being equal) as an engine that makes 100 pounds of torque, you will understand why HP is king.
Click to expand...

LMAO! End of the motor yes it does
 
Sasquatch said:
Yes it does, you are correct and I have never made a case against hp, only one of there is no hp without torque. HP is a derivative of torque times rpm. More torque=more hp. Hp does not exist without torque. A dyno does not see hp it sees torque and rpm. HP is a calculation made from those numbers based on work (torque) time (rpm) divided by the constant of 5252 the mathematical formula was derived by the amount of work a horse could do in a given time = horse power. Some have said hp is king and torque is not king yet ironically increasing torque increases hp. So torque is king and hp is the result.
Click to expand...
This post was mostly correct until the last two sentences.
You are ignoring the definition of horsepower.
Let's use the highest reving sled engine ever produced, the Yamaha Phazer.
Peak torque of 42.4 at 8800. HP - 71
Peak HP of 81.2 at 11200. Torque - 38.1
Since HP is defined as the rate at which work is done, even though the Phazer had less torque at 11200, it was still able to do more work in the same given time than what can be done with the higher torque at 8800. That, my friend, is called HP, and that is why HP rules!
 
Fast said:
I thought i saw a sasquatch once ,ended up being a sqawsnatch had to use all the hp i had to get out of there
Click to expand...
ClutchMaster said:
Yes both are big and hairy with pink lips, easy to get them confused!
Click to expand...

Now you guys are getting into name calling. Maybe you need to read the site rules!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.


Back
Top