Yamaha motors

[DoktorC]

Yamaha had the two stroke industry by the go nads from the 70's to early 20's, superior two strokers bar none.
Why did they phase them out?

With the threat of the EPA regs they either had to develop a new DFI 2-stroke or use existing 4-stroke tech from their Motorcycle division. They were able to use the older R1 motor in a PWC and Sled which previously had unique 2-strokes. Now you see them using the same Sidewinder motor in Side-by-sides, pwc's and obviously the sled. Makes sense for what is primarily an engine manufacturer to try and limit the number of unique engines they make.

I loved my red headed triple...with power inc pipes and all the fun mods...but my stock apex would stomp it and runs on regular. It doesn't care if it's -30 or +7 and rides and handles WAY better. Both were very heavy if you were stuck or lifting it in a truck...

 

[Sasquatch]

Best move Yamaha ever made was four strokes! Going back to a two stroke would be almost impossible!

 

[earthling]

Warranty claims are not money makers for dealers. That parts mark up is gone and warranty labor times are typically 40% less then that same job pays if it's none warranty.

I stand corrected. At the auto dealerships it is one of their (dealer) profit centers.

 

[Yamajon1]

Automotive is my field, warranty work is not a money maker. It is captive business and is better then nothing but not a great money maker.

 

[earthling]

Automotive is my field, warranty work is not a money maker. It is captive business and is better then nothing but not a great money maker.

But it is a profit center. I have no idea of the quality of that revenue. (what are the margins). I have only read the industry reports which puts me about two steps removed from what the real world does with warranty claims. Maybe i was reading service bay revenue and conflating that with warranty work.

 

[Vmax]

With the threat of the EPA regs they either had to develop a new DFI 2-stroke or use existing 4-stroke tech from their Motorcycle division. They were able to use the older R1 motor in a PWC and Sled which previously had unique 2-strokes. Now you see them using the same Sidewinder motor in Side-by-sides, pwc's and obviously the sled. Makes sense for what is primarily an engine manufacturer to try and limit the number of unique engines they make.

I loved my red headed triple...with power inc pipes and all the fun mods...but my stock apex would stomp it and runs on regular. It doesn't care if it's -30 or +7 and rides and handles WAY better. Both were very heavy if you were stuck or lifting it in a truck...

I agree with the ride of the Apex being much better than the older 1997 VMax 700 sled but disagree that the Apex will stomp the VMax 700 and both have the same weight issues. I ride with a buddy that has a 2007 Apex and my VMax will take him in a short drag race, his better top end is not what most would think. Weight wise, the Apex is much heavier than my VMax 700.
As far as motor warranty issues everything I have read about the Yamaha triples is that they where very reliable, a least the red heads.

I am not going to debate a two stroke over a four stroke, they both have there advantages, it just seems strange that every manufacture has maintained a bunch of two stroke models to date and Yamaha gave up on them years ago

 

[Augie]

I agree with the ride of the Apex being much better than the older 1997 VMax 700 sled but disagree that the Apex will stomp the VMax 700 and both have the same weight issues. I ride with a buddy that has a 2007 Apex and my VMax will take him in a short drag race, his better top end is not what most would think. Weight wise, the Apex is much heavier than my VMax 700.
As far as motor warranty issues everything I have read about the Yamaha triples is that they where very reliable, a least the red heads.

I am not going to debate a two stroke over a four stroke, they both have there advantages, it just seems strange that every manufacture has maintained a bunch of two stroke models to date and Yamaha gave up on them years ago

 

[superfan75]

I had a SXR 700 and unless you have that thing piped there is no comparison in power between that and a 4 cylinder 4 stroke. Stock those machines made maybe 115 HP and the 4 strokes make way more torque to. I'm not bashing that red head motor because they were great reliable engines, but if you compare those two engines in stock form there's it's really not close.

 

[Vmax]

Check out you-tube sled drag races

 

[superfan75]

I'm just saying I had a 700 and I now have a Warrior and the power difference is very noticeable. The SRX I had would be very close. I'm comparing stock to stock no mods. I'm sure if someone played with a 700 they could beat a stock Apex in a short drag, but then if the Apex is played with the results will be different. Traction and suspension set ups also make a huge difference in a drag race. Like I said I'm not bashing a great motor, but when an Apex makes about 35 more up that's a power difference you can really feel. As far as YouTube goes you can make any result you want on there.

 

[blueironranger]

I'm just saying I had a 700 and I now have a Warrior and the power difference is very noticeable. The SRX I had would be very close. I'm comparing stock to stock no mods. I'm sure if someone played with a 700 they could beat a stock Apex in a short drag, but then if the Apex is played with the results will be different. Traction and suspension set ups also make a huge difference in a drag race. Like I said I'm not bashing a great motor, but when an Apex makes about 35 more up that's a power difference you can really feel. As far as YouTube goes you can make any result you want on there.

We have a Red head 700 with the reed cage mod and a thinned head gasket in our family still and it's no where close to keeping up to my Viper, can't imagine a set of pipes would put it on par with my Viper let alone an Apex. That Red head will do about 110 on its speedo, which is right around 100 on my Viper which is where they both top out. Viper kills it out of the hole due to 141 cobra vs 121 ripsaw and from a 30mph roll.

 

[earthling]

I agree with the ride of the Apex being much better than the older 1997 VMax 700 sled but disagree that the Apex will stomp the VMax 700 and both have the same weight issues. I ride with a buddy that has a 2007 Apex and my VMax will take him in a short drag race, his better top end is not what most would think. Weight wise, the Apex is much heavier than my VMax 700.
As far as motor warranty issues everything I have read about the Yamaha triples is that they where very reliable, a least the red heads.

I am not going to debate a two stroke over a four stroke, they both have there advantages, it just seems strange that every manufacture has maintained a bunch of two stroke models to date and Yamaha gave up on them years ago

Its exactly what you said. Both motors have their advantages but if EPA regulations are the benchmark of measurement then 2-strokes are clearly behind. But 2-strokes will always have that special attraction

 

[Vmax]

It is very obvious that most on this site are 4 stroke lovers because if you ride Yamaha sleds you have no choice.........I will likely end up with a 4 stroke soon because like you I am a Yamaha lover and my VMax will not last forever.
Question: some have mentioned that EPA is why 2 strokes will not last much longer, why then do several reputable magazines and TV shows constantly boast that the ski-doo ETec 2 strokes are as clean, and some even claim are cleaner than the 4 strokes?

 

[earthling]

It is very obvious that most on this site are 4 stroke lovers because if you ride Yamaha sleds you have no choice.........I will likely end up with a 4 stroke soon because like you I am a Yamaha lover and my VMax will not last forever.
Question: some have mentioned that EPA is why 2 strokes will not last much longer, why then do several reputable magazines and TV shows constantly boast that the ski-doo ETec 2 strokes are as clean, and some even claim are cleaner than the 4 strokes?

Which 4 stroke did they compare to, I am sure it wasn't too hard to find one that measured worse. ICE designs are just now in the last 15 years really getting a lot of attention, prior to that, we have been pretty lazy as it was relatively simple to squeeze out the first round of cleaner burning 4-stroke engines. It was a lot harder to do the same with 2-strokes. I believe (but I am not sure) that the EPA set the regulations around acceptable levels of emissions, they didn't specifically target 2-stroke engines, it was just harder to hit the right levels with a 2-stroke. 4-strokes are more complex by nature (more moving parts) and harder to improve in total operating efficiency because you have to account for all of the frictional losses as well as manage the fuel system plus you are starting from a point of greater fuel burning efficiency (at lower mechanical efficiency) to begin with. But... you simply have more variables that you can play with in a 4-stroke. Variable valve timing combined with separate intake and exhaust strokes ensures that you can get to cleaner burning easier than with the limited capabilities of a 2-stroke. But then you run into mechanical design issues which ultimately limit overall operating efficiency. That is why you are seeing the introduction of miller cycle and Atkinson cycle engines which introduce more fundamental changes to the design to achieve even greater efficiency. Toyota announced a 1-liter 4-stroke (Atkinson cycle) which can achieve 78 MPG. Of course those engine designs have no or exceedingly few applications in snowmobiling.

When it comes to magazines and marketing you have to be really careful about how you read the claims. I haven't read through SkiDoos (mostly because I don't care) but I did at one point read through one of the outboard manufactures and happened to notice that they were using the terms clean and efficient interchangeably. Having written enough marketing material and having been misquoted enough times in the trade magazines I can tell you that it would be easy to make statements where claims of clean burning and efficiency would be easy to read as the same thing but in fact they may be two different things.

Ameritech announces its 2018 E-jet 1000cc 2-stroke BlueFire engine. The new engines are a clean design which employ new unobtanium coated, powerwall cylinder heads, and advanced spherical entry fuel injection system featuring a electronically controlled fuel diffusion system. "This new fuel injection system is our secret sauce" says Ameritech engineering manager John Smith. "The new fuel system is actuated by an electronic resonance which carefully controls the timing of the fuel injection, we call this Fuel Air Resonance Tech. The injector timing optimally creates a diffuse cloud of liquid and gas which ignites easily and burns cleanly". He goes on to state "This is our cleanest burning engine ever, it doesn't smell like a 2-stroke, it sounds different, is clean burning, and more efficient than many 4-strokes"

More efficient can be operationally efficient (true). Anyhow the bottom line is that ICE engines are just now getting the right amount of engineering attention and it will be interesting to see where we end up, who knows maybe someone will come up with a 2-stroke design which allows for greater control over all of the variables involved.

 

[Mountaintech]

2 strokes are still a 100% oil loss platform. That oil all goes out the exhaust in one form or another.