Are you for it, Pro vs M8-PC, should cat make the changes

knifedge · Feb 11, 2012

--Install a fixed lightweight steering post about 2" lower. People could add a riser and/or offset mounting plate to their preference. --easy fix

--38" a-arms--easy fix

--narrow body as possible

--Better skis

--At least within 20 lbs of the Pro --MINIMUM--, so shoot for 15--This is a big item here- Analyse every item on the sled and shave weight every way possible

--Better turning radius--easy fix--no brainer--

--2 3/4 x 15 x 153 x 162 Camo Extreme (new style)

--Seat similar to 2013 Pro--easy fix

C'mon Arctic Cat, work this out and make us Cat riders proud!

tdbaugha · Feb 11, 2012

I wasn't implying that no one rides in the "real" terrain like I do or stating anything about anyone's abilities.

On a big open hill at nearly any angle I will agree the PC is easier to sidehill than the Pro.

I will say that from my personal experience, the Pro holds sidehills on slopes steeper than the PC does. That is my experience. When riding the PC on a very steep slope, the middle portion of sidepanel starts to contact the snow. When the slope becomes steeper the snow pushes in on this panel. Obviously youre still pulling the handle bars into the hill at this time and the sidepanel acts as a fulcrum point forcing the skis away from the hill. Then they slide out forcing the sled downhill.

On the same hill, the Pro acts just like the PC except the sidepanels are out of the way. The thing that throws me downhill on extreme sidehills on the Pro are rider error. Rider error being not far enough forward and over the top of the bars.

This is my experience of the effect of the OP's parts to be changed on the PC.

samiams2 · Feb 11, 2012

Kruchy said:
Quit comparing it to a Poo; go buy the damn thing already. Really doesn't matter what people vote for because it is not going to change. If it did change guys would complain. You will not make everyone happy. Oh and if you do spend some time on this sled it will do what you want it to.

Accidental red....sorry

Fat fingered the phone.

samiams2 · Feb 11, 2012

knifedge said:
--Install a fixed lightweight steering post about 2" lower. People could add a riser and/or offset mounting plate to their preference. --easy fix

--38" a-arms--easy fix

--narrow body as possible

--Better skis

--At least within 20 lbs of the Pro --MINIMUM--, so shoot for 15--This is a big item here- Analyse every item on the sled and shave weight every way possible

--Better turning radius--easy fix--no brainer--

--1 3/4 x 15 x 153 x 162 Camo Extreme (new style)

--Seat similar to 2013 Pro--easy fix

C'mon Arctic Cat, work this out and make us Cat riders proud!

1 3/4"????? Why would that be your prefferance over the 2.5?

WaBackcountry · Feb 11, 2012

knifedge · Feb 11, 2012

--Correction--

2 3/4 x 15 x 153 x162 Camo Extreme (new style)

m8magicandmystery · Feb 11, 2012

WaBackcountry said:
As i stated on other thread that wyobitch100 has littered on the ProClimb section!

Cat has crapped in its own litter box..

White Rad · Feb 11, 2012

WyoBoy1000 said:
Really, I might need crayons

The width that matters has nothing to do with width of body up higher. If you take a straight edge from the track to the boards and measure the angle, I don't know what it is, lets say the pro is 65* and the body tappers out and gets wider up a little higher. So in theory it could sidehill a 65* slope.
Now the cat is more like 50* and if you try and go to 65* it lifts the track out of the snow and you wash out, then in turn your stuck.
I can still sidehill the steeper stuff but you have to be moving faster and you have less control.

I will hack it up, and if it looks like chit what are you going to do when that chitty looking sled does more than yours. (its not going to look like chit) the can was a test and has since been cleaned up. dam whinners who cares what it looks like.

Im still not getting it. are we talking about sidehilling 65deg slopes in hardpack conditions? Because in deep pow pow my running boards just dip into the snow... how does the small surface area of the bottom side outside edge of your running board lift the track out of the snow? and we have denser snow out here and i still dont have that problem the edge of the running boards just sink into the snow! The track washing out effect is not from the running boards when this happens to me its the track sliding on a firmer surface at the bottom of the new snow section. And "paneling out" that is a joke also if the panels are further out on the PC then tell me why the clutch ate through my panel and never touched it on the M? Crank and clutch are the same yah i know the PC panels flex but it seems to me they are actually narrower and closer to the clutch! All this about the boards being too wide and you havent even measured the only thing that matters, so until i see angles from the edge of the track to the edge of the running board on a pro and PC I will just keep ignorantly sidehilling anything i want on my PC!

Dam Dave · Feb 11, 2012

m8magicandmystery said:
Cat has crapped in its own litter box..

isn't that what Cats are supposed to do.................

m8magicandmystery · Feb 11, 2012

WaBackcountry said:
As i stated on other thread that wyobitch100 has littered on the ProClimb section....I am collecting donations to buy him a Pro so we don't have to listen to this "extreme backcountry" rider toot his horn and tell us nothing of substance.

Let the Pro owners have this tool!

why the personal attack...if you think the issues people identify are without substance you should be able to enlighten with a technical statement..??..

example...CAT is the worst 800 on the snow this year....ahhh...that was easy....raise money for me for that 2012 or 2013 polaris...

WaBackcountry · Feb 11, 2012

Very technical.

tdbaugha · Feb 11, 2012

I think "paneling out" is a very real phenomena. My M sidepanels are absolutely trashed on both exhaust and clutch side. I think "panelling out" is more common to occure in the areas above the clutches when on very steep terrain. Obviously the primary isnt allowed to move a whole lot and still maintain a balanced sled so that area on the sidepanel is fixed. However, in all directions around the primary I think the plastics should gradually sweep inwards why still clearing the exhaust and secondary by the minimum amount necessary.

It is my opinion that this would be quite beneficial to the sled.

Oh and the running boards do make a difference. Why was the 09 M style tunnel better than the old style? Yeah it's kind of an extreme example but the principle still applies. Going from the old style to a super narrow van-amburg style rear tunel half made a HUGE difference in steep terrain performance.

Again, just my findings.

White Rad said:
Im still not getting it. are we talking about sidehilling 65deg slopes in hardpack conditions? Because in deep pow pow my running boards just dip into the snow... how does the small surface area of the bottom side outside edge of your running board lift the track out of the snow? and we have denser snow out here and i still dont have that problem the edge of the running boards just sink into the snow! The track washing out effect is not from the running boards when this happens to me its the track sliding on a firmer surface at the bottom of the new snow section. And "paneling out" that is a joke also if the panels are further out on the PC then tell me why the clutch ate through my panel and never touched it on the M? Crank and clutch are the same yah i know the PC panels flex but it seems to me they are actually narrower and closer to the clutch! All this about the boards being too wide and you havent even measured the only thing that matters, so until i see angles from the edge of the track to the edge of the running board on a pro and PC I will just keep ignorantly sidehilling anything i want on my PC!

High Velocity · Feb 11, 2012

Dam Dave said:
you are the minority on board width, I can see where narrow would help but all my Pro riding buddies that have ridden my PC get off wishing they had wider boards, just a fact :ranger:

Hmmm, strange. I ride a Pro as well as four friends and none of us feel the need for wider boards.

White Rad · Feb 12, 2012

tdbaugha said:
I think "paneling out" is a very real phenomena. My M sidepanels are absolutely trashed on both exhaust and clutch side. I think "panelling out" is more common to occure in the areas above the clutches when on very steep terrain. Obviously the primary isnt allowed to move a whole lot and still maintain a balanced sled so that area on the sidepanel is fixed. However, in all directions around the primary I think the plastics should gradually sweep inwards why still clearing the exhaust and secondary by the minimum amount necessary.

It is my opinion that this would be quite beneficial to the sled.

yep i have rub marks and melt marks galore on my M's also but not the full on rub through that i see on the PC. Think about what we are saying by observing trashed panels....the panels are flexing in until they either hit the clutch or the can. Therefore its not really the panels that are the limiting factor because they are conforming to the snow and moving in until they bottom out on the clutch or can. I also have wear marks on my PC panel from the secondary bolt. I see pretty minimal clearance already on these panels and they do taper in everywhere around the clutches. You can only make a sled so narrow...but i hear that snohawks dont panel out:face-icon-small-sho

WyoBoy1000 · Feb 12, 2012

m8magicandmystery said:
why the personal attack...if you think the issues people identify are without substance you should be able to enlighten with a technical statement..??..

example...CAT is the worst 800 on the snow this year....ahhh...that was easy....raise money for me for that 2012 or 2013 polaris...

He brings absolutely nothing to the table. Proves who's who. I offer money to prove me wrong and yet they run there mouth.

White rad, don't try and tell me I have not measured, that goes for all of you, here is the debate, a thread I started
http://www.snowestonline.com/forum/showthread.php?t=289450&highlight=pro+pc+xp
Read the thread before you tell me I'm wrong, theres even pics

AC builds a HCR, and apparently some pretty bad azz trail sleds, why not a backcountry sled, I'm just asking a few questions. A BC sled would be far more desired than a HCR so why not hit the market when its hot.

GoBigParts · Feb 12, 2012

I hate it when brand biasness gets in the way of a good thread.

I think all new MTN sleds should go with Skinz airframe style running boards. So that would be first thing they should change.

Wider skis (that work)
better fit and finish
Narrower perhaps

All in all I like the look of the sled I guess time well tell how solid they become.

samiams2 · Feb 12, 2012

after all this time....

WyoBoy1000 said:
He brings absolutely nothing to the table. Proves who's who. I offer money to prove me wrong and yet they run there mouth.

White rad, don't try and tell me I have not measured, that goes for all of you, here is the debate, a thread I started
http://www.snowestonline.com/forum/showthread.php?t=289450&highlight=pro+pc+xp
Read the thread before you tell me I'm wrong, theres even pics

AC builds a HCR, and apparently some pretty bad azz trail sleds, why not a backcountry sled, I'm just asking a few questions. A BC sled would be far more desired than a HCR so why not hit the market when its hot.

I think I am finally picking up what you are putting down....

a Backcountry specific sled.....that's a good idea Wyoboy...best I've heard so far. Narrow the heck out of it, big ol wide ski's, some extra carbon fiber, an easily accessible spot for shovel under the seat, camo xtreme 2.5, minimalist snowflap, minimalist can.....

Charge $15k, plaster Brett's face all over the ad campaign....and they would sell like hot cakes. Why do I get the feeling this will never happen.....?

WyoBoy1000 said:
I will be taking mine down to 29" then dropping the rails from more height and letting it really lean over without drag.

Wyoboy.....how are you gonna get to 29"" and still keep the panel from hitting the clutches? If you take it in 2" on each side and it is ALREADY hitting clutches in some scenarios.....stiffen the panel?

There was a pic of someone who did that, made a bracket to keeep the panel from coming in......where was that?

hd4rob · Feb 12, 2012

I agree with the fact that cat could build a so called backcountry edition sled. They have machines that fit other special areas like the hcr. They could take and change just a few things and make a very capable machine a whole new weapon. They have a hillclimb team that all get their sleds and rip them apart to start improving them, ask them what works. All Polaris really did with the new pro is looked at what most people are doing to their mountain machines to make them a little better from the aftermarket and thought why don't we just produce those things and put the money in our pocket. People will buy convenience of not having to do all of the things that they added, plus you get the benefit of not voiding your warranty by adding aftermarket products. What do you think skinz thinks of Polaris right now? They might be able to sell a few bumpers for the 13, but that's about it.
I just hope that cat was rushed to get the 12 released for their big 50th and haven't showed everything they have going for this new platform.

samiams2 · Feb 12, 2012

hd4rob said:
I just hope that cat was rushed to get the 12 released for their big 50th and haven't showed everything they have going for this new platform.

HERE! HERE!:beer;

camocat1000 · Feb 12, 2012

Great Post Guys !! Let's be honest all the PC needs is a smaller filler neck for the gas..thinner ski's and a poo motor and it will be the total package

resent:

Oh and add a few pounds so it's not so tipsy

sorry ...I couldn't help myself

Are you for it, Pro vs M8-PC, should cat make the changes

would you like to see the changes listed.

Yes, I would like to see the changes made or at least an option

No, I like it how it is

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Similar threads