The XP and even moreso the XM has so much of the weight out front that (IMO) there are benefits to having the rider back to help "balance" the chassis. One of the complaints of the xp and the xm is it wanting to go uphill when sidehilling. I feel that is from too much weight on the skis, so the skis are able to dig in, while the rear washes out. Here is a nice vid of a properly setup and ridden old school 08' xp, the worst handling, unrideable, unsidehillable sled of all time. Notice bar and rider position. If the bars were forward with a straight post, i don't think the rider could get back far enough to allow THIS chassis layout to work.
Not trying to say the bars forward is inferior, only that they require different riding style and sled setup....and once a rider "gets it", either can work fine to do all the sidehilly and technical dangly crap a guy wants to do. :beer;:beer;
Enjoy the new sled BCIL, I like mine more every ride!
http://m.youtube.com/watch?feature=relmfu&v=XrubPF9stY4
A sled wanting to go uphill from a side hill is generally from weight too far back, not too far forward, but paneling, and lack of secondary stability will also cause that. For example, to allow a sled to side slide down a steep slope, you need to be more forward than for a normal sidehill. I can see what you mean about the skis augering too much, but generally that would drop you out of your side hill, bringing the downhill ski down, unless you were over compensating hugely in your sled vs hill angle which could do that, but I do find that on the xp I tend to under side hill slightly more than on a cat for some reason (the cat I run lower to the hill, the doo I run slightly more perpendicular)
Sent from my A200 using Tapatalk 2