Whatever they do, I hope the next chassis is as light as the '08 XP.....429lbs for a 154.
2017 new release.....
- Thread starter Renegade-XP
- Start date
Yes 08 was lite.
I
I imagine Doo will listen and make the next best thing.
D
Not sure if I'm going with a 163 T3 or the new Polaris in 163 3", but the poo is 426 lbs with the 3"
R
Riding a 15 XM 154 X and I love this sled.
With all the hype about the 2016's, even though I like to hold out a year or two before buying any new design, I was expecting to see a major change and was wondering if I made a mistake with a new 15. The only thing that caught my eye is the new all black color with gray stickers. I am planning to hang on to the 15 for at least another 2 years.
That's why I still have mine. Big bore all up dates 400lbs with 1/4 tank of gas the new isn't that much better imo.
F
We aren't getting anything until 2018, maybe 880 next year if they can get the emissions dialled in a little better. Doo is starting to lose touch with the mountain segment. I don't care what their sponsored riders have to say. They are more worried about snowboarders than innovation. Wow 3" track and they fixed the front end finally.
D
doo is arrogant they think there the bomb cause they sold lots of xm's and they don't think they need to do anything else look how lazy they have been! the etech is selling the sleds not the sled. xm is fine for older guys that wanna tour around and have good reliability. start jumping it and there goes your reliability tmotion brackets rip apart tunnel mounts crack and break. e an s mods fold and the new fancy t3 spindles too. Doo can't add anymore gimmicks the t motion was to get the 16" track to feel like a 15" the 35"-37" stance was to make up for the extremely low centre of gravity and its overly planted feel. the t3 finally raised the centre of gravity so maybe there starting to see the xp dna sucks its a stretched trail sled. doo took some weight out of the front of the sled making it even weaker, what they should have done was take the weight out of the back of the sled. that way there less weight behind the front end and it will suffer less damage on an impact foo did this backwards and thats also why they have such and extreme ridder forward position in an attempt to make the chassi handle ok the skid is a boat anchor and its weak the rails bend the tmotion rips off. if you want to jump it get ready to spend 3k on suspension and spare rails. all the loyal doo guys that bleed yellow are like " its fine its not broken don't fix it" sorry but for 15k i don't want fine i want amazing. doo better hope polaris hasn't figured out how to build an engine yet because if they have they are going to dominate all over again. too be honest id buy the new cat before a new doo. the cat is heavy but its also tough and reliable not just heavy reliable and weak. wake up doo or your gonna get owned.
S
funny all of the people that cant throw around a 400# xp must have pencil arms or never stand up.LOL
Billydrunk
I
Pencil Billy arms hammered on moon shine.
D
hey moon shine is good! yes snowmobiler i can throw around an xp just fine i can even ride a yamaha but i don't because its easier and more fun to ride and xp. and all the guys like yourself that keep saying real men ride sleds that take more effort keep buying these new easy to ride sleds like the xm's and all of the sudden all the tough guy talk disappears. its not that I'm not tough enough to ride a snowmobile i don't think anyone has that much trouble ridding a snow mobile. people are not getting there new xm and saying " gee i liked the heavier feel of my old xp it made me feel more like a man with big arms" noone is gonna complain if the 2017 xm weighs 415 lbs.
I think if they dropped the weight than the current s and e moduals would be fine. its all about kinetic energy, if you reduce the mass then you reduce the force. reduce force and then the components that take the brunt of the impact have less energy to dissipate. hence my thoughts that doo pulled the weight out of the wrong parts. they have super light spindle, a arm, s and e mods taking the hit and then they have super heavy skid coming in behind with all the inertia crushing those lighter components.
lets do a quick comparison for a typical impact on an average hit comparing the doo to the poo
lets say boondocking at 15 mph you hit at a tree with your ski and for easy math will use weights of 460 lbs for the doo and 410 lbs for the poo and will assume at this point they have same fuel of say 40 lbs convert lbs to kg as all formulas are in kg's
500lbs = 227kg
450lbs = 205kg
15mph = 6.7 m/s
kinetic energy = 1/2 (mass kg) x(velocity m/s squared)
227 x (6.7x6.7)/.5 = 5095 joules
205 x (6.7x6.7)/.5 = 4601 joules
difference of 494 joules
the doo carries nearly 11% more kinetic energy into an impact than the poo meaning that the doo needs to be 12.3 % stronger in order to fair the same impact as the poo.
basically doo designed the bulkhead to light for the xp then they added weight and made the issue worse. the sled has design flaws theres no getting around that. gimmicks won't fix it.
I think if they dropped the weight than the current s and e moduals would be fine. its all about kinetic energy, if you reduce the mass then you reduce the force. reduce force and then the components that take the brunt of the impact have less energy to dissipate. hence my thoughts that doo pulled the weight out of the wrong parts. they have super light spindle, a arm, s and e mods taking the hit and then they have super heavy skid coming in behind with all the inertia crushing those lighter components.
lets do a quick comparison for a typical impact on an average hit comparing the doo to the poo
lets say boondocking at 15 mph you hit at a tree with your ski and for easy math will use weights of 460 lbs for the doo and 410 lbs for the poo and will assume at this point they have same fuel of say 40 lbs convert lbs to kg as all formulas are in kg's
500lbs = 227kg
450lbs = 205kg
15mph = 6.7 m/s
kinetic energy = 1/2 (mass kg) x(velocity m/s squared)
227 x (6.7x6.7)/.5 = 5095 joules
205 x (6.7x6.7)/.5 = 4601 joules
difference of 494 joules
the doo carries nearly 11% more kinetic energy into an impact than the poo meaning that the doo needs to be 12.3 % stronger in order to fair the same impact as the poo.
basically doo designed the bulkhead to light for the xp then they added weight and made the issue worse. the sled has design flaws theres no getting around that. gimmicks won't fix it.
C
I doubt you won't disagree that more power in the T3 would increase the size of the smile on Your face. Lol
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
db...
That's great logic and math........but in the end of the day, both those hits are going to exceed any bumper/bulkhead's crumple zone....and if we had good bumpers to withstand the impacts.....doubtful anyone would buy them...as they'd be pretty long in the nose....LOL!
OTM
That's great logic and math........but in the end of the day, both those hits are going to exceed any bumper/bulkhead's crumple zone....and if we had good bumpers to withstand the impacts.....doubtful anyone would buy them...as they'd be pretty long in the nose....LOL!
OTM
S
I have a 2015 T3 163, only mods is a slp can and a skid plate. I was at Rabbit Ears Pass 3 weeks ago and hit a hidden tree stump (5 inches wide) going 35 mph through deep snow. stopped my sled in its tracks, went straight over the handle bars about 15 feet. i weigh about 250 lbs. when i turned back to look at my sled i thought it was totaled. stump hit right under front left side on skid plate, ended up being zero damage to the sled, nothing bent. I've been riding sleds for about 25 years and still can't believe there was zero damage. I can't speak for other sleds but that doo held up pretty damn good.
just my $.02
just my $.02
M
and yet, when to expect reliable information on the new lineup?
is the revolution?
is the revolution?
Haha, thats hilarious. Sales don't lie, but I guess all the guys buying them are old.
Its not that big of a deal or difference but the wet weight difference between the xm and the poo is only like 30 lbs.
I cannot dispute any of your numbers, hell I admit I don't fully understand all of it.
But I do understand that these numbers are misleading because it assumes zero rider weight.
I am always disappointed in the power to weight comparisons for the same reason because in the real world you will add approximately 50% of the sleds dry weight in fuel, rider & gear. This added weight changes the % numbers tremendously, but are never included in anyone's example because it diminishes their findings (agenda).
Last edited:
Similar threads
