Essarex
Pro
Here is another way to look at the analysis of short track vs. long track, in terms of top speed.
Generally speaking, the easiest way to attack a complex problem, is to reduce the problem to absurdly simple terms. Then, the answer becomes trivial.
Imagine two scenarios, one sled with an extra long chain case such that its drivers were in contact with the ground. And, the ground is a very long track cut across its width and laid out to form the surface. In other words, the sled would simply run along this laid out track without having to continuously rotate it. Lets say the laid out track was 1/4 mile long.
Now imagine the opposite scenario, where the sled has a conventional chain case and a conventional track, except that the track is 1/4 mile long (like in the first case).
Both sleds line up for the drag race, and the flag is dropped.
What happens? The outcome is obvious. Even though the second sled would only need to rotate its track once going down the 1/4 mile, the first sled without the burden of rotating any track mass, would finish the race and have time to turn around and come back before the second sled finished.
Yamaha has extended this line of reasoning to their CVT belt design. You will notice that Yamaha belts are significantly shorter than Polaris, Arctic, SkiDoo. Yamaha has been know to have higher driveline efficiency,,,,that is why seemingly better hp/weight ratios of the other brands just don't seem to translate to shootout results each year.
One downside though of shorter belts and tracks (besides traction), as was mentioned previously there will be more internal friction generated in the rubber due to more revolutions per driven mile. Friction is hp not put to the ground. But, it is a easy trade for the reduced mass of the shorter track. Why?, because internal friction is linear with rotational speed, while the force required to increase rotating speed increase with the square of speed (Kinetic Energy = 1/2 * Mass * speed * speed).
Generally speaking, the easiest way to attack a complex problem, is to reduce the problem to absurdly simple terms. Then, the answer becomes trivial.
Imagine two scenarios, one sled with an extra long chain case such that its drivers were in contact with the ground. And, the ground is a very long track cut across its width and laid out to form the surface. In other words, the sled would simply run along this laid out track without having to continuously rotate it. Lets say the laid out track was 1/4 mile long.
Now imagine the opposite scenario, where the sled has a conventional chain case and a conventional track, except that the track is 1/4 mile long (like in the first case).
Both sleds line up for the drag race, and the flag is dropped.
What happens? The outcome is obvious. Even though the second sled would only need to rotate its track once going down the 1/4 mile, the first sled without the burden of rotating any track mass, would finish the race and have time to turn around and come back before the second sled finished.
Yamaha has extended this line of reasoning to their CVT belt design. You will notice that Yamaha belts are significantly shorter than Polaris, Arctic, SkiDoo. Yamaha has been know to have higher driveline efficiency,,,,that is why seemingly better hp/weight ratios of the other brands just don't seem to translate to shootout results each year.
One downside though of shorter belts and tracks (besides traction), as was mentioned previously there will be more internal friction generated in the rubber due to more revolutions per driven mile. Friction is hp not put to the ground. But, it is a easy trade for the reduced mass of the shorter track. Why?, because internal friction is linear with rotational speed, while the force required to increase rotating speed increase with the square of speed (Kinetic Energy = 1/2 * Mass * speed * speed).
