S
Why ?
Weight of a T3...
- Thread starter Ace Freely
- Start date
Why ?
Last edited:
Dave, we see the Doo's getting 5-10% better each day. That is not much but $3 to $4 bucks at the pump adds up over time.
I will say though we have had days where the Doo's use more oil. They do leave dirty patches n the snow from the exhaust when pinning the flipper out of a hole. We have our oil pumps turned up on the Pro' too.
I guess power takes fuel and oil and if you're into the power all day you need to burn it.
Just arrived in Boise and it is dumping! Quit hoggin all the pow Idaho!!
Nah, just burandt everything else. Tunnel bags, shovels, clothes, winshields, tampons, portable chit tickets, etc...
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Hey....the guy is making a living by sledding and pushing his wares. Can't blame him, how many of us would like to do the same? That said, I'm not one to have other names plastered all over my sled. That said, I'm the worst sports fan ever - can't even remember the last time I watched a full length sled vid.
Last edited:
G
The finicky fashionable trends of the snowmobile world.
Remember when we got sleds where we thought it was worth the 100 bucks a lb to drop weight for some reason.
Then the Pro came out and for a bit it was "underpowered, undependable tincan" but it proved to have some "hidden" abilities and benefits.
Then, as the rest couldn't quite catch up in time and because of the name on the side, the sleddin' world is divided into "weight don't matter as much anymore" and "ya, it still does".
Whatever the 2015 T3 weights, thank the 2011 model intro by Poo and Doo's efforts to catch up even if it is partly track length increase and not just weight.
In 2020 whatever that doo model weights, thank the 2016 model intro by Poo and Doo's efforts to catch up.
It may be my age but I still remember and my back says thank-you every ride.
Shame on you all for not showing more respect to the Rocky Mountain King.
Remember when we got sleds where we thought it was worth the 100 bucks a lb to drop weight for some reason.
Then the Pro came out and for a bit it was "underpowered, undependable tincan" but it proved to have some "hidden" abilities and benefits.
Then, as the rest couldn't quite catch up in time and because of the name on the side, the sleddin' world is divided into "weight don't matter as much anymore" and "ya, it still does".
Whatever the 2015 T3 weights, thank the 2011 model intro by Poo and Doo's efforts to catch up even if it is partly track length increase and not just weight.
In 2020 whatever that doo model weights, thank the 2016 model intro by Poo and Doo's efforts to catch up.
It may be my age but I still remember and my back says thank-you every ride.
Shame on you all for not showing more respect to the Rocky Mountain King.
Glad to answer the "Why?"
Super Q is much easier to remove, allows installation of a cooker and easier belt adjustment.
C3 Belt Drive reduces the rotating mass in the drive train and allow the track to spin up faster.
:face-icon-small-win
Last edited:
C
Taking a lb out of the chain case will really make a noticeable difference in spinning up that 60 lb track which is pushing a further 50 lbs of snow.....lol
I'd like to do the numbers but the overall difference in efficiency is more than likely way less than 1% due to rotating weight. But I love the way the marketing guys spin the benefits.
Not knocking you but reality vs perception on belt drives is worse than the whole weight issue.
and to date not one scientific comparison with data showing if the belt drive actual is more effiecent
C
There is a lot of data and testing out there but not necessarily on sled systems. Any drive systems engineer should be able to figure the math out and couple that with the practical aspects to figure out which is better in a specific application.
That said in this case I don't see any major advantages that puts one ahead of the other in this case. A belt will have lower static weight and rotational inertia but it's overall contribution to system efficiency in a snowmobile is very small relative to the track, clutches spinning at 8000 rpm and engine rotating inertia that includes a crankshaft.
I suspect if anyone is feeling anything its a reduction in vibration and noise which gives the impression of efficiency.
Actually if you hook a fish scale to the track up on a stand you can see the BD spins easier. How to convert to HP can be subjective , when you think about 40-50% of HP is lost from motor to the track than is easily understandable that there are gains. One track dyno showed 3 hp gain at the track, It was not circulated due to the backlash from others.
C
I'd like to see the fish scale test under as identical situations as possible. A slight difference in track tension would wipe out any difference.
A 3hp difference would be significant but again when measured via a dyno the errors in the dyno itself can easily be greater than the difference that is being measured. If claims like this are to be believable than they need to be done via independent review with a known process that accounts for other errors.
Reminds me when we were testing a boiler for leaks by putting 5lbs of air on each tube. The boiler makers couldn't find the leak and we discovered why when we saw the gauge they were using - 1000lbs. .....
A 3hp difference would be significant but again when measured via a dyno the errors in the dyno itself can easily be greater than the difference that is being measured. If claims like this are to be believable than they need to be done via independent review with a known process that accounts for other errors.
Reminds me when we were testing a boiler for leaks by putting 5lbs of air on each tube. The boiler makers couldn't find the leak and we discovered why when we saw the gauge they were using - 1000lbs. .....
W
Please throat punch me if you ever hear me complaing about the fuel economy of my $13k snowmobile that I drive hundreds of miles to ride and have been bouncing off trees and rocks since the day I started riding it.
S
LOL.yeah mpg is funny.
Maybe we should argue whose Tow Rig gets better MPG's
Any reduction in either vibration or noise is a gain in efficiency! As both are needless forms of energy and are robbing energy that could have been put to a better use.
You helped make his point for him, nice job!
C
Taking your logic your sled is most efficient when it's not running. Lol
And for the mpg guys efficiency isn't just about getting better mileage. Most guys claiming an improvement talk about the sled feeling 'snappier'. I know trying to bring logic to a thread like this is near impossible but there's always hope. ... ; )
And for the mpg guys efficiency isn't just about getting better mileage. Most guys claiming an improvement talk about the sled feeling 'snappier'. I know trying to bring logic to a thread like this is near impossible but there's always hope. ... ; )
Similar threads
