[Turbo Doo]

Body work , comfort , tippiness...and fixes to make it trailable ...its all starting with the gen4 being more of a mountain sled body.......Anybody that rode early 2000 era sleds @ about 140-160hp knows why the newer sled wont mph....I mean theres absolutly nothing magic nor any mystery lol....Dyno comparison is like comparing your dick....it has no purpose unless you use the same dyno the same day ,,,it is a tuning tool shouldnt be used as a salesman pitch thats it...

Good post....

 

[BCX]

Dynotech on average is about 7% higher than what any other dyno reads that I have seen. Take off 7% from their peak numbers and you should have an accurate power number.

So who has the most accurate dyno then?

 

[900mac]

So who has the most accurate dyno then?

For an accurate total HP number, no one has it, PERIOD. These things should only be used same day to measure increases or decreases. Too many variables to put real absolute number on it. Just a great tool to measure same day changes. If you look at all the 900t numbers they all show different, but the increases are pretty close. One shows 195 tune, one shows 180 tune. One starts at 165, the other starts at 150. But big numbers sell. You need to look at it all and get out and run them to see who has what.

 

[SKIDOOCHRIS]

a dyno uses a giant math equation to calculate hp

 

[MX-Z Man]

a dyno uses a giant math equation to calculate hp

Well, not that big...

HP = Torque x RPM / 5,252

Torque is the big one, yet so few ever talk about that number.

The old saying - Torque does the actual work but HP sells.

The old 800 Etec was a perfect example of people buying HP but the tq curve sucked. The torque curve of the 850 is nice - 4 stroke like nice. I'm thinking the boost jets are the answer.

The dyno sheets I've seen on the 900R tell me I'd be happy around 7,600-7,700. That's where my 900T ran and it was fast, fun, and pulled hard. I liked it a lot more running there than I did at 8,000.

I'm looking forward to my 900R next season and seeing how that one works.

 

[A7M266D]

For an accurate total HP number, no one has it, PERIOD. These things should only be used same day to measure increases or decreases. Too many variables to put real absolute number on it. Just a great tool to measure same day changes. If you look at all the 900t numbers they all show different, but the increases are pretty close. One shows 195 tune, one shows 180 tune. One starts at 165, the other starts at 150. But big numbers sell. You need to look at it all and get out and run them to see who has what.

Perfectly worded.

 

[In2racn]

BRP is a marketing company. They continuously pull the marketing blanket over our eyes to help them sell product. Their "warranty" on anything they make is often laughable. I had a 260 HP Sea Doo with nine hours on it, the machine wouldn't do 30 mph. They wouldn't cover the engine issue. I had a 1800 mile 1.6 Ice Cobra missing 40% of the lugs, they wouldn't cover it. They said it was used on low/poor snow conditions. All of the miles were good, deep snow, groomed Quebec trails.

Then you have the "M-Forge" illusion.... "lighter than carbon fiber". Anyone that has weighed a Oxygen helmet knows it is one of the heaviest helmets available. M-Forge may be light, but it must be weak, so they need a lot of it to make a safe helmet. But that is the BRP marketing... they served up that magic Kool Aid and everyone keeps calling the Oxygen light. It is really not a lightweight helmet. Funny, now for the 2023 season, they have a carbon fiber Oxygen helmet.

Despite all that, I have a lot of BRP items including a Mach Z. I like some of the innovations that BRP brings to the table. But I have learned not to expect anything back from them. As soon as another company offers the features I like, I will give them a shot. Love the engineering and bravery to bring new features, really dislike how they treat their customers and dealers.

More concerned about launch control....They never advertised what HP range for launch control......what they did state is that the sled builds 9lbs of boost. He was pretty proud of that during the video intro for the Mach Z. My sled only builds 4lbs of boost and BRP does not give a crap!!! They basically told dealer to disregard any comments about boost.
Don't get me wrong, I love my Mach Z but BRP pulled a marketing sheet over our heads on this one.

 

[MX-Z Man]

^^^ I never heard the Oxygen helmet marketed as light, just warm.

My Doo branded MForge SnoX helmet is a few grams lighter than my Doo branded Carbon Fiber SnoX helmet so I'm not sure what your beef here is - seems like an unfounded complaint to me.

 

[muskokadoo]

How's this have anything to do with the BRP 900R update 🤔

 

[stoney]

How's this have anything to do with the BRP 900R update 🤔

Sometimes you have to read between the lines….lol

 

[Xrsphil]

Anybody else take a look at the 2023 900r parts diagram? Looks to me like the primary/secondary springs, helix are the same with 880 ramps…. Hmmm, so what’s the deal with this update.

 

[thinksno]

My bet is 2023 900R gets a programing fix.

 

[krm]

Last year with my Mach what made it come alive was putting the 880 ramps in it with that Goodwin dark blue orange spring and running that g-boost wbb 383 belt remap this year from Lewis

 

[**sj**]

Great stuff.

You can listen to who you chose, one whose career is writing programming for engine builders, or one whose carreer is spending money and posting on here all day every day forever.

Easy pick.

The 05 twin of 17 years ago is faster, no question. Shameful.

The update wont change that, it will just bring the sleds in for a look.....smart owners will talk to their dealers and ask for a status after first look over and plug in, to see if something is found before agreeing to the one and only part change offered.

Swap the two motors in those chassis ( as if it was possible) and see the difference....another factor is the 05' had no concerns for emissions whereas I suspect the 22' does..and ride the 05 on a 250 mile day (now) vs the g4 r motion (which a wide, non aerodynamic and big suspension) ...just saying..

 

[Daag44]

Swap the two motors in those chassis ( as if it was possible) and see the difference....another factor is the 05' had no concerns for emissions whereas I suspect the 22' does..and ride the 05 on a 250 mile day (now) vs the g4 r motion (which a wide, non aerodynamic and big suspension) ...just saying..

An FYI, all OEMs had major concerns with the EPA for their sleds in the early 2000s which would be in preparation for the next level of regulations that would take in effect in 2006. The sleds in those years are often referred to as being except to the EPA, when in fact the OEMs were pushing themselves to lean fuel and oil remarkable far. In those years BRP had dropped the oil consumption, yet Polaris had reached even further to meet the EPA and show better oil consumption than their competitors. Fast forward to when Polaris developed the Patriot 850, oil consumption was on par with the Ski-Doo E-TEC, and both have high oil consumption when run hard.

Another thing worth noting, the OEMs were pushing their sleds prior to 2006 to meet or surpass EPA standards to use as credits for the upcoming 2006 model year. In my opinion, any Ski-Doo with the new adjustable oil cable in the early 2000s had a large disadvantage, and so did Polaris. What I don't understand is how Arctic Cat seemed to have escaped this fate. Arctic Cat was late to meet the latest emissions and had to scramble to reach the 2010 standard with the Suzuki engine by replacing their round counterbalance weights with pork-chop design to better emulsify the gas, and would eventually design their own two stroke for future EPA standards. Arctic Cat had their own problems, but not the same ones as Ski-Doo and Polaris.

I am just saying that Ski-Doo was indeed concerning themselves with emissions back in 2005.