Three cylinder commonality across Yamaha in

[stgdz]

So summer is here and I'm hearing that triple and seeing people zooming around on mt-09's.


Just curious how much commonality are their from a design perspective there is with the Yamaha motors. Are the cylinders and heads essentially the same just machined out differently?

Still don't understand why the yfz doesn't come with a factory turbo. I know you can get it out of the factory catalog.

 

[number1kyster]

I don't understand it either. I also don't understand why they aren't offering a N/A 998 in sleds. Isn't the Viper the only product in the company still utilizing the 1049cc engine?

Yamaha also produces a 125hp version of the 998 for Arctic Cat's Wildcat XX. I believe it has different cams than than YXZ engine.

 

[earthling]

I didn't get it either so I looked into this a year or so ago. As I understand it, the reason it the YXZ doesn't have a factory turbo is probably rooted in the ROHVA definition of what defines a UTV. Since most states adopted the definition (under 1000cc, certain dimensions, etc) the manufacturers who are all members of ROHVA have followed those guidelines because that is what is legal (by definition) in most jurisdictions. The first question is 'what does 1000cc mean', that's just displacement which taken on its own does not forecast horsepower capacity but for many common folks (politicians) 1000cc has an implied power limitation. If you have ever had to dumb something down for a committee of non-technical people to understand you would appreciate how the discussion works. That's not a knock on them, they really just don't know. By mansplaining to the average committee that 1000cc in a UTV (car-like) is way smaller than what's in their car and its also seen as the cutoff point by many insurance companies it sounds like a naturally limiting size. But it isn't. Just be glad they didn't pick a limit on horsepower.

Putting a turbo on was always going to be a chicken/egg thing because 1000cc is an arbitrary limit all on its own and the manufacturers were rightly concerned that making UTVs more powerful would upset the state regulators, all it would take is a couple of big states saying they are switching from displacement to horsepower limits and it would be game over as far as 1000cc + turbos go, conversely competition has forced everyone to start adding turbos. Yamaha just recently updated the 998 in the YXZ to better internals (better rods, etc) so it is ready for the bolt on turbo. Product Management for the YXZ is probably chomping at the bit to add the turbo from the factory but they still have to justify the additional cost on an already expensive toy. At the end of the day, demand and competition will drive them to make the right decisions.

Not replacing the 1049 is probably about managing the overall lifecycle of the engine and related components. It is not easy to EOL/EOS (end of life, end of sale) a product that has been in production for so long. They will have shelves full of parts for warranty, and its probably pretty economical to build the motor. As long as their is demand somewhere for that motor in a new product it is easier to not change anything (switch to new motor) than it is to modify something newer. That is just a guess of course but its the real world headache of all product managers.

 

[74Nitro]

I don't understand it either. I also don't understand why they aren't offering a N/A 998 in sleds. Isn't the Viper the only product in the company still utilizing the 1049cc engine?

Yamaha also produces a 125hp version of the 998 for Arctic Cat's Wildcat XX. I believe it has different cams than than YXZ engine.

I don't see any advantage to reducing the 1049 to 998 aside from missing the import tariff and lower insurance costs.
Owners already complain it lacks power.
If anything, they should bump it to 1200, or bolt the apex engine into the viper.

 

[biffdotorg]

Racing placed the 1000cc limitation more than state laws. State laws in most places were around weight and width.

Let's keep in mind, Polaris just ignored that with the release of their latest RZR's as well. Folks kept asking for more displacement, so they literally gave it to them. The dune folks are gonna love that beast.

I have no "need" for it in MN, as it's too wide and too heavy. I will stick with my Class II rated Polaris General G4. It's just slightly under 64" and slightly under 2000lbs. It's next to perfect at 100hp as well.

 

[Turboflash]

I don't understand it either. I also don't understand why they aren't offering a N/A 998 in sleds. Isn't the Viper the only product in the company still utilizing the 1049cc engine?

Yamaha also produces a 125hp version of the 998 for Arctic Cat's Wildcat XX. I believe it has different cams than than YXZ engine.

The 998 in the YXZ1000R has high compression head (smaller cc chamber), different pistons, and different cams than the 998 that's in the Winder or TCat. There are aftermarket companies that sell all the go-fast stuff to hop up the stock 998 YXZ 998 to put on the turbo, etc BUT anyone doing that needs to change the head, cams, pistons.

 

[Turboflash]

I didn't get it either so I looked into this a year or so ago. As I understand it, the reason it the YXZ doesn't have a factory turbo is probably rooted in the ROHVA definition of what defines a UTV. Since most states adopted the definition (under 1000cc, certain dimensions, etc) the manufacturers who are all members of ROHVA have followed those guidelines because that is what is legal (by definition) in most jurisdictions. The first question is 'what does 1000cc mean', that's just displacement which taken on its own does not forecast horsepower capacity but for many common folks (politicians) 1000cc has an implied power limitation. If you have ever had to dumb something down for a committee of non-technical people to understand you would appreciate how the discussion works. That's not a knock on them, they really just don't know. By mansplaining to the average committee that 1000cc in a UTV (car-like) is way smaller than what's in their car and its also seen as the cutoff point by many insurance companies it sounds like a naturally limiting size. But it isn't. Just be glad they didn't pick a limit on horsepower.

Putting a turbo on was always going to be a chicken/egg thing because 1000cc is an arbitrary limit all on its own and the manufacturers were rightly concerned that making UTVs more powerful would upset the state regulators, all it would take is a couple of big states saying they are switching from displacement to horsepower limits and it would be game over as far as 1000cc + turbos go, conversely competition has forced everyone to start adding turbos. Yamaha just recently updated the 998 in the YXZ to better internals (better rods, etc) so it is ready for the bolt on turbo. Product Management for the YXZ is probably chomping at the bit to add the turbo from the factory but they still have to justify the additional cost on an already expensive toy. At the end of the day, demand and competition will drive them to make the right decisions.

Not replacing the 1049 is probably about managing the overall lifecycle of the engine and related components. It is not easy to EOL/EOS (end of life, end of sale) a product that has been in production for so long. They will have shelves full of parts for warranty, and its probably pretty economical to build the motor. As long as their is demand somewhere for that motor in a new product it is easier to not change anything (switch to new motor) than it is to modify something newer. That is just a guess of course but its the real world headache of all product managers.

Demand, competition, AND their corporate legal team will drive them to make the "right" decisions. I can only imagine what the conversation in the room would be like if/when the marketing/sales team brings up that they need to put a turbo on the YXZ. I imagine the lawyers laughing and saying "What? You mean you think we should sell a 210 HP YXZ1000? NOT on our watch!" (Never mind that then a mild tune takes it up to 230 or 240 and beyond!

 

[tsiceman]

I don't understand it either. I also don't understand why they aren't offering a N/A 998 in sleds. Isn't the Viper the only product in the company still utilizing the 1049cc engine?

Yamaha also produces a 125hp version of the 998 for Arctic Cat's Wildcat XX. I believe it has different cams than than YXZ engine.

I don't understand it either. I also don't understand why they aren't offering a N/A 998 in sleds. Isn't the Viper the only product in the company still utilizing the 1049cc engine?

Yamaha also produces a 125hp version of the 998 for Arctic Cat's Wildcat XX. I believe it has different cams than than YXZ engine.

The 1049 is also in the new stand up jetski

 

[SidewinderConvert]

The 1049 is also in the new stand up jetski

Is it completely the same? I have been looking at a super jet for a while now...

 

[twyztid]

The 998 in the YXZ1000R has high compression head (smaller cc chamber), different pistons, and different cams than the 998 that's in the Winder or TCat. There are aftermarket companies that sell all the go-fast stuff to hop up the stock 998 YXZ 998 to put on the turbo, etc BUT anyone doing that needs to change the head, cams, pistons.

And the companies that really want to build up a turbo YXZ prefer to start with a 1049cc engine. I believe there are a number of them that have swapped in 1049's into YXZ's.

 

[Turboflash]

And the companies that really want to build up a turbo YXZ prefer to start with a 1049cc engine. I believe there are a number of them that have swapped in 1049's into YXZ's.

No replacement for displacement

 

[Big_Phil]

The 998 in the YXZ1000R has high compression head (smaller cc chamber), different pistons, and different cams than the 998 that's in the Winder or TCat. There are aftermarket companies that sell all the go-fast stuff to hop up the stock 998 YXZ 998 to put on the turbo, etc BUT anyone doing that needs to change the head, cams, pistons.

Just need a headshim to lower compression if you want to run more than 6psi or so. Same as adding a turbo to a viper.