Sorry about your sled loss. Lots of good feedback from everyone who's tried the new Ace 600. If you're not counting every penny, I would go with it. Super quiet, super torquey, and good on fuel. No issues with it so far as far as I know.
We just got 2 brand new 2013 Tundra Sport Aces at my work that I can't wait to put through their paces !

 

From the moment you give that ACE motor the throttle you will never regret the
extra cost.

 

The ACE no doubt. The only gripe i have is that unlike the 300 or 550f there is no pull start but the power more than makes up. A little effort in maintaining the battery and the ACE is great.

 

The ACE no doubt. The only gripe i have is that unlike the 300 or 550f there is no pull start but the power more than makes up. A little effort in maintaining the battery and the ACE is great.

That is not true at all. We had this thread about this very subject. Depending on your battery situation. The engine needs to be primed
before starting, that's all.

(1) If you have some battery left, enough to run the pump but to crank the engine, or your battery is OK but your starter
went out, it is easy. Turn the thing on, push the start button. The lights, tach, speedo etc. will come alive. You will hear the
fuel pump hummm and then stop. Your engine is now primed. Then just start it by hand.

(2) The battery has a remnant of life, not enough to run the fuel pump ... you need to prime by hand, then pull start it.

(3) The battery is totally dead, you need to have a load on the system or the engine will start and die. It has been suggested
to have lantern batteries, or even a 12v lamp across the dead battery terminals. A bulb draws current, a dead battery
generally does not. Prime by hand and pull start.

OK. Priming by hand means to take the spark plugs off (don't mix them up and be sure to put them back on the same
position/alignment as they came out). Put a bit of gas into each plug hole, maybe a teaspoonful. Then pull start.

OK. Pull start. SkiDoo, in their toolkit, provided the rope and the clip thingie. It goes on and wraps around the primary
clutch. We all assumed this was useless, but apparently not.

OK. Suggest you try this at home first.

OK. Lastly, if your battery is dead because the alternator or charging went out and the whole thing just drained and
died, then it is probably not going to work because the computer needs that alternator to supply the power for it to run.

 

They also bitched like hell when in 1933 Ford Model T's came out without the feature of
cranking the engine by hand.

At least SkiDoo gives us the tools to pull the engine thru even if the starter is bad or the
battery too low to actually turn it over. Putting a regular recoil starter in this machine
is sort of counterproductive.

It won't fit,
Rope has to be routed.
It still needs to be primed.
Needs a load or some battery life.

Putting a recoil won't accomplish much. It is more weight and more maintenance. It would be one of
those items you never get to use, and when you need it it doesn't work because something vibrated
itself to death. I think the SkiDoo solution to provide the rope and clip is quite good.

This is a 2010 engine, hi-tec. You need to maintain it accordingly. Working on it with a pair of
visegrips, a hammer and a pipe wrench is not going to cut it. If you maintain it, learn the systems,
maybe get a test bulb and a couple of clip leads, it will reward with many many times the mileage
of a 2-stroke before it melts or something bad happen to it.

If you have a two stroke, you are in one of two groups: You have melted a piston, or, you are going
to melt a piston. It is what they do, specially the twin cylinder carburated ones. You will have
many, many more fatal engine problems with a 2-stroke, than you will have starting troubles with
the ACE.

I simply do not see why people obsess about the "lack of hand starting" in the ACE. Since it has
had starting as was discovered (but needs electricity to stay running), this complaint is moot.
I will add that if you have an Electric Start two stroke engine, and you keep having electric
start issues with it, you are simply neglecting the electrics. Nothing could be simpler than
a starter and circuit for it. There is a motor, a solenoid, a relay and a battery. The battery needs
to charge, but that is not germane to the issue.

I think about 80% of the guys I ride with that have 2-stroke electric start have issues. "Oh, the
battery is bad." "Oh, the battery doesn't charge." "Oh, you mean it needs to have a battery?
What battery?" "Oh, the starter grinds." "If I click it 20 times like this it might engage."

That is all simply put, lack of maintenance and issues down the trail are all self-inflicted.

Worse are the guys that say "Oh, one of my cylinders is running a bit lean." "Oh, my compression
is very low, but once it starts its OK." "Oh, I used up all my spark plugs, can I borrow one from you?"
"I don't need to rejet when its -20. The engine starts and sounds ok."

Every one of those my hair sticks up, and often I decline to go along for the ride, and sure enough
the next day I hear about the adventures of Hairy Harry when his Piston melted in Death Valley,
or in West Cattlegap, Egypt and he now has to: Have his buddy bring him home, then go back
out to get the Moose Meat in the sled back there, then find out that the Bears or Wolverines got
into it, and then after the meat is back, then he has to go out there to rescue the machine, and
then the rescue machine MELTS a piston, and now we have two guys shouting on the ham radio
that they are on foot with 48 miles to go to the roadside.

But, in spite of all that, they sure want that Hand Crank on their 2010 Chevvy ... I mean, 2010
600 ACE!

 

Shakes head.

 

Lol... A little sidetracked but ok!?

I vote for the ACE.

 

My opinion is that I would not buy a 550F no matter what chassis it was on due to gas mileage, reliability, and high rebuild cost. I also don't like twin carburators. I don't think the ACE is the only BRP solution as the ETEC 600 seems to be fairly reliable with some of the 2 stroke advantages and double the HP for the weight. Myself, I would like to see a simple and light Tundra again with a single - either ETEC or 4-stroke. Dan

 

Just in case anyone from BRP is reading.

Nor'Bush, too bad about the loss of your Tundra. I rode my 2007 Tundra 300F yesterday. The light weight nimbleness of the sled equates to lots of smiles to the gallon.

With respect to your question, I have a friend who has the 600 ACE in the Expedition. Great motor. I would consider it in the Tundra platform if I was in your predicament.

 

2011 tundra lt rode from 1000 feet to 6500 ish 56 miles 3 gallons of gas for a 18.88 mpg Had I not been chasing summits im sure it would have been in the low 20's Get the ace it is quiet and preforms about the same as the 550f but no smoke smell and less fuel.

 

Thanks for all the responses. I did my tour of the snowmobile dealers in our city and concluded that Tundra was the right replacement. (thought briefly about Yamaha Venture MP, but for our 'bush-trails' style, the skis are too wide and there is no bush-bar). Like TundrManDan, what i really want is similar to the lightweight 2007 Tundra300 (that was stolen). But I won't buy used, so expect to end up with a new Tundra, and probably the Ace 600.

 

So sorry about the loss of your 07 Tundra - that could happen to any of us and would really be a downer. I don't have snowmobile insurance either as it is enough to have to buy insurance for the cars. I'm pretty sure you will be happy with the ACE even considering the weight as that great track will help considerably. I liked the one that I rode. Dan

 

Yay! I'm jealous.

 

If SkiDoo/BRP was to design a new engine, like a 400 single cylinder 4-stroke (a half ACE) or a
300 e-Tec motor, it would be great to have what you all wish.

But the fact stands, what SkiDoo does is they have this lineup of chassis', engines, stances,
tracks and prices.

They mix those up in a big bowl, and pull out all the various permutations, given them a name and
sell it.

The Older Tundras, and even up to the '07 300F had a great weight advantage. Did not take much
to get them unstuck; on the other hand, they do get stuck once in a while.

The 600ACE Tundra LT is heavier. It might be a bear to get unstuck, but the fact is that it
hardly ever gets stuck. I have managed to tip mine over a couple of times, but when rolled
upright it just kept on going. In 2 years (this season is not started here yet, no snow), I
put about 1,400 miles on it and *never* managed to get stuck. Once I thought I was stuck, but
I decoupled the sled and it kept going up thru the willows. Came back for the sled after I
packed a trail thru the nasties, and just kept on going.

Going thru Willows on a fairly steep uphill while pulling a sled is not even remotely
possible on the 300. What happens is as the machine lugs down, you got to give it more
and more throttle. All of a sudden the track breaks loose, and before you can TunDraManDan,
it digs a trench and there you are. The ACE will give that torque at low rpm and it can
continue to CREEP up. The weight helps here a bit because it mashes the willows down, and
that articulated track seems to wrap itself up and over the willows.

Still, I keep my sharp handsaw handy!

Keeping it balanced on willows and hard pack hillside snow is a real bear, though. Carving
it on a hillside on soft snow is not an option. Sometimes this snow on hillsides here is
as hard as cement. You can walk on it with moccasins. Sidehilling a narrow stance machine
in that kind of snow is impossible, hard or just tedious depending on how steep it is.

As for the 550F motor; it is not a bad piece of gear, but having two carbs is just asking
for trouble. One carb plugs up a bit, and leans out, but the OTHER cylinder keeps the
engine running. That lean cylinder proceeds to melt. This is the bane of non computer
controlled twin carb twin cylinder two strokes.

It seems to me that the eTec where each cylinder is monitored and injected separately has
gone a long way to aleviate that problem.

The solution to having a 550 not melt is to run it rich. You just pour the gas into the
cylinders, accept the fuel mileage, and keep your fingers crossed. I stated a few posts
ago that 550F owners are in two groups: Those that have melted a piston, and those that will.

Single carb twin cylinders are rare. I do not know of any recent ones. Those old
Arctic Cats had that setup and it was pretty bulletproof. Mileage was not bad, either.
What was bad is was a lot of motor for the HP developed.

For any given 2-stroke motor you can have reliability, power, torque. Pick two, you can't
have the third. I would rather have a single, smaller single carb, accept the loss in HP,
but gain it in low end torque and reliability. But have to admit that BRP sells engines
on the basis of raw HP.

Although a 600 ACE with its low end torque can beat the pants off a 550F in the slow going,
pulling department; I have found most of my friends complain that the 600 ACE is "weak".
They base this on the fact that when they pin the throttle, the 550 machine will go by it.
They simply refuse, consciously or unconsciously, to even consider things as low end torque
and the ability to pull itself out of a hole, or creep up a steep mountain. To them,
if you are going to go up a mountain, you start out on level ground, pin the throttle
and keep it there to the top. Or to where they high mark and swing back down. This
idea of creeping up a mountain is ALIEN to them and they simply refuse to consider it.

If the hill is long enough, I usually can creep up a hill that even a 800 machine cannot
top. My method is simple: Just aim it up the hill and go. I have failed many times, but
in those cases the high markers were not able to make it either.

Big paddles work on the principle that when the track is moving faster than the machine,
big paddles grab snow and jet propel it out the back. I am not sure that those kinda
paddles are all that useful; they tear up the trail so no one can seem to follow, and
on ice they are an absolute killer. You can't stud them, etc. Not very good. But they
are the Cat's meow if all you want to do is Zoooooom up a hill and high mark it, then
come back own, tip a beer and say "beat that, boys." I usually just watch from the
sidelines, plan my climb, and creep up and then call them from the top and say,
"what's keeping you, guys?" But they all assume it was a fluke because since they do
not have a 600 LT ACE, they simply cannot grasp the principle.

Oh well.

 

Hi Irondoo. I agree with much of what you said and as I said before the 600 ACE in the Tundra LT is a great machine. However, it costs too much and a lighter machine could be developed that would outperform it in all off trail extreme deep powder categories except perhaps pulling. However, my Tundra would pull a lot, especially in Alaska with it's low gearing. And, I guarantee that your ACE would get stuck on one of our SW Colo. trips after a big snow storm. I'm sure I would get stuck too. Now, if the game were that you get your own machine unstuck then who would get further? And, is a stock ACE geared low enough for 12,000 feet and chest deep snow - I wonder. You have 30% more power at sea level. And, lastly, you are right that BRP probably won't build it as it would greatly hurt the sales of the current Tundra's although perhaps it could replace the sport. If they had a new light single, then no more need for the 550F. All I'm saying is that in the right snow conditions any machine will get stuck and if not than you are not pushing it very hard. Any rider on any snowmobile will get stuck if testing the "edge". An experienced rider can choose to not get stuck because they have learned where that "edge" is. The good thing about the ACE motor is that it looks like it would last as long as the 4-stroke in my car. The rest of the machine will probably be long worn out before the motor is. I do wonder why they made everything so inaccessible and the strange hood design. As for the paddle tracks I used to think the same until I owned one. My Tundra with the light weight and smooth power packs a very nice track with the paddles - surprisingly. And, it won't strand me on a slick uphill when the snow gets warm. And, the paddles help greatly with reverse. The 600 and 800 2-strokes tend to dig huge holes with paddles - not the case with the Tundra. Dan

 

The specs that SkiDoo puts out on weight are not to be trusted. I own an ACE 600 tundra, and
I would never believe the weight difference of 18 lbs. There is no way. I believe that this
has been put on scales, but I do not recall the forum, and the 600ACE machine is about 40 lbs
heavier than the 550F machine that is otherwise identical.

This would include the extra weight of the motor, the radiator and fan, and the tunnel coolers.

It would assume electric start on the 550, otherwise the 550 instllation would be another 26 lbs
lighter.

The other one I laugh at is the Tundra 300F is advertised as 380 pounds. Give me that and a
couple dollars and I can buy a cup of coffee. When mine was shipped from the Dealer in Wasilla
to me here in Nome, it was put on the scale in Anchorage. 406 lbs, perfectly dry, brand new.
I was reluctant to believe it, but I put it on the scales out there at Everts Air Cargo, and
it *was* 406. This is for a machine *without* electric start.

If you are ever riding out on a Tundra R, or Tundra II, and you have to strongarm it out of a hole,
you will appreciate that the Tundra II/R is nowhere as heavy as a Tundra RF 300. Sure, the 300
is a light machine, but it is still heavier than the old Tundra R/II it replaced.

Having said all that, this darn Tundra LT 600 ACE ... I haven't managed to stuckitate it yet!
Maybe this winter, and I will report on my Heart Attack and Medevac when it happens.

 

I lied, It's 22lbs on the Lt and 19 lbs on the sport.
Yes, as per Skidoo but they are God. LOL
If it is 40 lbs that's only 4 gallons of fuel. That still makes the Ace lighter for fuel required to make the same distance. Again without smelling the oil.
Happy New Year by the way.

 

Not that it really matters, but gasoline weighs about 6 pounds per US gallon (7.5 pounds per Imperial gallon)

Given that my ACE will go over 200 miles to the tank, it would have taken at least an extra 11 US gallons to go the same distance on my 550f Tundra Sport. That would be 66 pounds of gas, plus the weight of the 2 jerries, plus the inconvenience of having to carry the extra fuel and stopping to refuel somewhere along the way.

The ACE is a superior motor in almost every way. The 550f is old technology, smelly and inefficient. Upgrade to the ACE, you won't regret it.

A friend of mine has a saying. It goes "If you by junk, you own junk!" I'm not saying that the 550 is junk, but for 99% of snowmobilers, the ACE is a better choice. Saving a couple bucks in the short term will end up costing more $ over the life of the sled.

Happy New Year!

 

After hearing about and seeing the fine looking 06 550F SWT that they had where I used to work burn pistons 3 times I would not consider one. It all started with the oil pump and lines and then 2 dealers after completely rebuilding the motor could not get that right. Hopefully the 3rd dealer they took it to did get it right. And, the cost of a rebuild - wow and 3 times - triple wow! No doubt in my mind that non-mechanically minded riders are better off with the ACE because one mistake causing a rebuild and you have paid for the difference in cost. What I mean by that statement is that there are some very mechanically aware individuals who could make a 550 last a long time and would never not fill the oil tank before every outing, or not notice a loose oil pump, etc. Then of course, there can be problems caused by the factory setup such as with the 2010 550Fs.

However, if BRP ever decides to make a real (meaning 100 pounds lighter than the rest of the pack) Tundra (under 400 pounds), they will need something different because the ACE is too heavy for that application.

Dan

 

In the last 6 years, I've been riding with a group of guys (and gals), and as of now I am
the only one with a reliable sled. Let's see:

Kenny has blown his 550's 4 times.
He has blown his 600 HO's 3 times

Keith has blown his Polaris 550 once
he has blown his Polaris 488 once
he has blown is Arctic Cat 440 once
and his Arctic Cat 570 once

Autumn has blown his 600 HO 3 times

Greg bought the 600 HO from Autumn and blew it. Never
rebuilt.

Larry blew his Polaris 340 once.

I've always maintained that if these 2-stroke motors were installed in cars,
you would have lemons that can't be sold.

Just a single melted piston ... just one ... and there went the cost
differential of the ACE vs 2-stroke.

But read these forums here on Doo Talk. These 600 ACE motors down there
in Canada are hitting 10,000 miles and they just keep going like the
energizer bunny. You know, there is a parallel to this.

In the ATV world, it is common to go to the landfill and see a bunch of
old Honda ATV's there. Totally worn out. Wheel bearings that ate thru
the housings, brakes gone, exhaust worn out, seat covers non existent.
But, in 95% of the cases, the motors are still good. In fact, I know
of only one blown Honda motor among my acquaintances. And it was a used
machine, and got fixed up for under $300. They just keep running.

If you compare the Tundra LT 600 ACE to a Tundra 300, then the weight
difference is discouraging. But, compared to anything else, it is
quite favorable.

It is lighter than the Arctic Cat Bearcat (the infamous one ton).
It is lighter than virtually ANY Yamaha.
And compared to a 550F BAckcountry or 550F LT, they are fairly
close.

It is easy and perhaps justified to criticize skidoo for having dropped
the 300 motor from the lineup, but it is unfair to compare the
600 LT ACE to a 300F.

If we confine ourselves to comparing machines manufactured today,
2012-2013, the Tundra LT 600 ACE starts to look a lot better. some
machines are lighter, but they are short tracked and won't go the
first mile off-trail. Basically you can only compare it to machines
in the Long Track category; Summits, Polaris RMK's and the like.

I was in the showroom floor for Polaris the other day, and they had
a couple so called "mountain" and "crossover" machines on display.
I could not pick either end up on them. I barely can on my 600 LT ACE,
so I think -regardless of factory numbers- the ACE is lighter.

Summits are very light, but they cannot creep and thus cannot follow
a Tundra LT in the boonies. I've experienced this first hand.

And, if you get the LT ACE stuck, the way to get it out is NOT to
try and lift it. You will break your spine that way. What I did
on my little 300,and most guys with heavy machines do, is to stomp
along the side, tip the machine sideways, then fill under the track
with packes snow, and flip it back upright. Then walk it out.
The narrow track machines are much easier to get out that way, and
there is no digging, or breaking you jing jang lifting it out.

But, regardless of what I am saying here, if BRP comes out with an
under 380 pound machine of 144 track, I am buying one. Period.

[There is only two kinds of guys: the ones that have got their
Tundra LT 600 ACE stuck; and the ones that are going to!]

 

I don't know about actual weight but I do know that the back end of my RF Tundra or Backcountry seems easier to pick up, or at the very least not any heavier, than the back end of my 88 Tundra LT or any other 'old' Tundra that I have tried lifting.

 

[sup]These answers the same questions I have. Im looking to upgrade my sled with the new summit and at the same time purchase a new sled for the wife. She has next to zero experience snowmobiling. I want something that she can easily move around on, pull a boogan of some kind for the kids, and yet I can have fun on if needed. Im undecided if the Tundra is what I need or if i should move into the Grand Touring.[/sup]

 

How about an Expedition Sport? Fishin Chip can give you the answer on what a great machine it is! Just make sure it's an ACE!

 

Thanks Buckl

 

I just bought a 2011 expedition with a 550f in it and i do love it. It had 934 km's on it or about 600 miles when i bought it and i get a wicked deal on it and ....i m very happy with it. I have heard all the stories about the 550f jetting problems and i did check to see if mine was jetted proper and it is so i hope that i avoid those problems.

So far, i have put about 600 km's on it and its been great...about 13 mpg canadian...or about 15 US mpg, thats ok for me and that is mostly running on lakes where my camp is so im cruzing at 40-50 mph. Top speed is about 65 mph, respectable for a 60 hp engine and a massive 154 inch track i think. The machine operates perfect, i have zero complaints about power anywhere at any speed...with a range of 200 kms on my 550f i cant complain at all cuz there is no dam way ill ever drive that far into the bush anyway....

What people have to remember about these expeditions with the 550f and the 600 ace is that your buying a 60 hp engine attatched to a 500 lb sled with a 154x16x1.5 track......so if you want a rocket or a fast cruzing machine....get the grand touring or a renegade....or at least the 600 etec or 12oo 44 stroke.....the 600 ace and the 550f just dont make the awsome power most expect out of a sled.

Is the 600 ace better...yea...it probably is, its quiet, smooth, great milage, low maintenance and on and on....is it with teh extra 2500 bux....yes in the long run it is...i wish i had one..but if your on a budget....dont let the 550f scare you away....just make sure it has the updated jets....and happy motoring

Keep it in perspective...and buy the right sled for yourself....you dont need 90 mph to have alot ot fun.!!!...been ther done that...paid for the gas...

 

I have an 09 550 LT. It has almost 5500 trouble free km. on it ( knock on wood), I think ive changed the spark plugs once, I turn the key it starts everytime. It has the original battery that i havent even had to charge yet, I have not had a single issue with this sled and am more than pleased with it. Would i like to be getting more than the 12 mpg.? Of course i would. Had the ACE been offered in 2009 i likely would have had one. The only thing i would change about the sled is i wish the two up was removable. Other than that its all good. I don't regret my purchase one second.

Cheers

Terry

 

One thing i find funny is the i suppose you can call them complaints about 4 stroke and weight. If a machine is over all 20lbs heavier (over it's entire form) are you really going to notice the difference when plowing through the snow. I can understand weight reduction on a pure sport or mountain machine that is designed to do tricks. I did try pulling my ice fishing shack (heavy) with the tundra 550, and the xtreme , the 550f was so much better , and the ACE i have no doubt that it will do even better.

I dont' know why skidoo just doesn't take the rotax 400cc lc from the can-am outlander atv and put it in the tundra. 32hp is not so bad and i've ridden outlander 400 max atvs with atv tracks and they have plenty of power.

But i could live happily with a tundra ACE.

 

I will never get a 550f machine again. Every single one I had (3) burned pistons with alarming regularity. Never Got more then 3000 km on a piston without a rebuild. I use my machines for work not touring and they are almost always towing. I realize I work my machines hard but I also maintain them well. Had a 2011 550f Tundra Lt for 1 year and at 750 km burned a piston. Grrrrr. The dealer had tried to talk me into an ACE but thought the extra $1000 wasn't worth the cost. After one year I traded that thirsty machine for the exact same machine with an ACE. I did the math and in one year the extra $1000 was paid off in fuel savings. Gas is $2 a litre where I live. 5 years later and nothing but routine maintenance. Working and pulling as hard as ever. Incidentally the ACE pulls much better then the 550f.