• Don't miss out on all the fun! Register on our forums to post and have added features! Membership levels include a FREE membership tier.

800 ho makes 160hp

T
Oct 14, 2014
40
29
18
I think it is a HUGE mistake to brag about a 2 stroke being good on fuel. Fuel and oil lubricate the engine, skimping per the EPA is the real problem with todays engines.

Hopefully they took a page from SkiDoo and really fattened it up under WOT. My buddies e-tech is a pig when ridden hard, only one to run out of gas last winter. You will notice though that Doo has ditched the "replace your top end each year" program. Polaris is still stuck there...

I would love for it to be powerful and durable because powerful and siezed is a no fun combination.
 

RMK935VA

Well-known member
Premium Member
Jan 14, 2008
1,054
431
83
71
I have 2 seasons on my 13 Pro with stock motor (no oil pump adjustment) and a 3" Camoplast track/Avid 7 tooth driver combination. It has some venting and shock work too. SLP Mohawk skis round it out. No engine issues. No drive belt issues. That being said, I am looking forward to the 16 Pro with the H.O motor. I will snowcheck one of those for sure.
 
G

gman086

Well-known member
Feb 5, 2008
1,347
572
113
Portland, OR
The 146 number (all the Doo guys point to) was on a motor with nearly 2,000 miles on it and no telling what shape it was in so I would take Dynotech's numbers with a grain of salt. Nearly every other speed shop that dyno'd the current Pro model has it in the 150-155 HP range. So... getting to 160 isn't as big a deal as many of you are making this out to be. IAC I am looking forward to a better motor!

Have FUN!

G MAN
 

Iceman56

Well-known member
Premium Member
Nov 27, 2007
1,249
466
83
The big deal is they dynoed a Doo and Cat back to back against the Polaris HO same day same dyno and it out did the Doo by 5hp and cat by 2hp
 

AndrettiDog

Well-known member
Lifetime Membership
Dec 23, 2007
6,329
2,478
113
Colorado
I think it is a HUGE mistake to brag about a 2 stroke being good on fuel. Fuel and oil lubricate the engine, skimping per the EPA is the real problem with todays engines.

Hopefully they took a page from SkiDoo and really fattened it up under WOT. My buddies e-tech is a pig when ridden hard, only one to run out of gas last winter. You will notice though that Doo has ditched the "replace your top end each year" program. Polaris is still stuck there...

I would love for it to be powerful and durable because powerful and siezed is a no fun combination.

Ski Doo brags about using less fuel and oil. In fact their marketing for the etec was based on this as it helped offset the more expensive etec stating that the extra fuel/oil in a Pro over time would even out the costs.
 
T
Oct 14, 2014
40
29
18
Ski Doo brags about using less fuel and oil. In fact their marketing for the etec was based on this as it helped offset the more expensive etec stating that the extra fuel/oil in a Pro over time would even out the costs.


Right... However, the e-tech burns as more or more fuel than the Pro, and burned even more than the Cat one powder day. That was with the 140 lb guy on it with the Poo and Cat ridden by guys 200+ lbs.

Go ahead and brag about less consumption to fool the EPA into thinking you have complied. Once that thing is WOT it needs fattened up, I WANT it to go through fuel and oil like my M7. That is what makes 2 strokes last.

Just seems like poor marketing to those who understand 2 strokes.
 
S
Mar 6, 2008
510
346
63
Northern Sweden
Regardless of what you say the E-tec uses less fuel on average than at least the Poo. I have had two E-tec 800s now and they have used considerably less per ride day than the CFI 800 I had before. ..... and I ride harder now....

Tomorrow I will be picking up my -15 RMK and I am fully aware of that I will probably need to start packing fuel again this winter. Never had the need for extra fuel with the Doo and the Lynx.
 

Timbre

Well-known member
Premium Member
Nov 1, 2008
2,812
2,504
113
Southwestern Idaho
In a group of 7 riders, 2 XMs and the rest Pros, all riding together on the same day, same snow conditions, nearly the same miles . . . BOTH XMs were out of fuel by early afternoon and ALL of the Pros had 1/4 or more fuel left. This "hype" of the Doos getting better fuel mileage is just not true. . . . based on actual experience and direct comparison.

Maybe the Doos will do better in trail riding situations, but i haven't compared that. I'm not a huge fan of riding trails, so that probably won't happen =)

Cheers!
 

glassman

Well-known member
Lifetime Membership
Feb 12, 2003
622
424
63
Hinton, Alberta
I once got into a heated debate with a couple of guys over the whole fuel consumption on the E-TEC. These guys told me they never pack gas, and never run out of fuel. I told them they ride like little girls then, cause all the guys I ride with can burn just as much as my pro. They didnt like that comment, Weird.
 

TUFFPOLARIS

Member
Lifetime Membership
Dec 9, 2011
50
24
8
31
Alberta
I was riding with an XM and a couple other Pros last year. I had to give my extra gas to the XM so that he could make it out back to the trucks. He hadn't packed any extra gas. The XM used more gas then any of the Pros.
 

mountainhorse

Well-known member
Lifetime Membership
Premium Member
Dec 12, 2005
18,606
11,814
113
West Coast
www.laketahoeconcours.com
Fuel economy is related to more than just engine efficiency.
Clutching, drive-train, track, chassis design, weight, type of snow, elevation, etc etc will affect the overall economy.

The true measure would be similar track length sleds... ridden in a group on the same day in the same conditions by riders that are taking on the same terrain... breaking same fresh tracks etc.... hard to evaluate. One guy in the group my have less WOT use, or take on less fresh snow or not the big climbs...Really hard to evaluate, but possible.






.
 
Last edited:
Premium Features