HERE'S WHAT I'D LIKE TO SEE... THE 2016 XTD.... Xtreme Terrain Dominator

mountainhorse · May 11, 2014

I'd like to see Polaris make a more specialized sled.

What I'd like to see

With the hardcore boondocking styles of Entz, Gardiner, Adams, Darcy, Phatty and Burandt etc ...and the evolution of a strong segment of the mountain riders into that style... I could see a new Boondocking specific machine emerging in addition to offering other more traditional "AXYS" mountain.

I'd call it the "Xtreme Terrain Dominator - RMK " [ XTD-RMK ] .... a radical departure from the norm.

This is what, I believe, would sell to this "New Xtreme Mountain Rider"

An XTD-RMK would NOT be very trail friendly... which is OK because of the other mountain offerings for those that prefer that style of riding.

This sled would be able to get on edge easily, stay there as long as you want, and be lighter from the narrower design... target 375lbs dry.

What I could see in an XTD-RMK ...

800 HO power-plant (narrower engine overall) that sits low in the chassis for a low CG and low Rotating mass.
New, shorter Primary clutch and recoil, to aid in keeping the engine "package" as narrow as possible.
12-13" wide, 163" track, with a crowned "rocker" 2.8" lug design [Center lug is taller than the outer lug... OR a continuous paddle from edge to edge in an arc shape)
Track with taller internal drive lugs for better driver engagement and less ratcheting ... to work with...
Single Combo Driver(extro/intro)... no more 3-driver system... and still keeps the rail tips close to the Driveshaft as Polaris engineers like it.
Rear suspension with narrow distance-between-rails (lighter and works with new track)
Lighter rails with a more cut-out "truss" design.
Hollow Rear axle with single nut for tightening.
Float shocks that allow rider to tailor the ride character quickly on the hill
Smooth aluminum drop brackets that don't collect ice (like an aluminum version of the Dragon bracket)
Coated parts to shed snow better.
Further-evolved QuickDrive ... extruded driveshaft without collar
Brake on Driveshaft
Narrow Tunnel, tank and seat allows more body "English" without hop-over for steep terrain control and less effort.
Lower seat.
New tank design that would allow more of the fuel mass to be carried fwd (like RUSH design)
Pressure cast Upper A-arm with a true ball-joint rather than rod end.
New narrower bodywork to keep from "Paneling out"
35" stance
Evolution of Gripper ski to hold sidehills better and not fold like current design.
Redesigned bulkhead to work with lower mounting position of engine and narrow tunnel/track
Foot pockets that will extend further fwd. and give the rider foot position options on steep terrain.
Overall taller chassis design with 2" longer spindles and 2" lower driveshaft, while keeping tank and saddle low as possible.
LED lighting
GPS MFD
Built in "glovebox" for warming goggles/gloves
Strong bumper standard to deal with Xtreme Terrain obstacles

Put the backcountry "Young-Guns" on this sled and watch all hell break loose!

.

live2beel · May 11, 2014

Brake on the drive shaft is long over due. It's a major safety problem when your belt on your belt drive breaks.

TRS · May 11, 2014

Eric,
Resurrecting the early '70s TX Playmate with modern day improvements, awesome.

I'd buy one.

06redrevx · May 11, 2014

Hmmm, does MH know something we don't?
Sounds really fun, almost a timbersled/conventional mountain sled hybrid!
I'd ride that!

diamonddave · May 11, 2014

AND.......Don't forget a modern electrical system with much more attention to fit and finish....

geo · May 11, 2014

Ya, what does MH know? Everytime you post this stuff MH, your connections make us all wonder want you a really saying lol. That's mean.

I'm a blue jeans and black t-shirt guy so I hope some of the bling is optional only. I have a built in GPS lol.

I'm afraid of a drive shaft brake in the conventional way (adds width at the footwell, works poorly unless sized BIG and vented special) but a 4 piston caliper, ceramic floating rotor maybe, ala CMX design could work for me lol.

I had a narrowed up 151" (13" track) Firecat in '04 as well as a 144"x16" Rev. I used the Rev most of the year 'cause it got around better in the deep. Next season with a '05 144 Rev and a 153 M7, the Rev was parked most of the year and the M7 gave me my grins.
That doesn't mean Poo couldn't put on a big fat single ski in front of the skinny track to pack abit-drag less and make something special.

Hmm MH. Thanx for confusing my summer dreams lol.

volcano buster · May 11, 2014

I'm thinking that track could cause some serious pucker factor when side-hilling icy conditions.

When I was working in Montana about 20 years ago, we had to stop into a sled shop for some quick parts. There was a sled there with a track like this one pictures minus the alternating single lug. It was specific for hill-climbing when sleds were first starting to race uphill and high-mark. After a discussion, it was determined that no one in their right might would run it on anything other than a hill climb racer. I'm wonder how this new one will perform any differently.

boondocker97 · May 11, 2014

If you want a sled that is that narrow, why not request a single ski chassis and a narrow v-twin two stroke DI engine? Offset the engine to the right and put the secondary clutch above the tunnel. Essentially a snowbike with more power and track speed.

mountainhorse · May 11, 2014

volcano buster said:
I'm wonder how this new one will perform any differently.

It's just a concept drawing from a patent filing.... nothing more than stuff to ponder.

A modern track compared to one with materials and construction from 20 years ago could be very different however.

The track you are talking about from back in the day, from what I recall, looked like "rubber angle iron" grafted to a conveyor belt.

On this new patent filing... With the tower "fingers' and the varied paddle thickness and a flap-like top/center of the paddle... it could very well be a game changer in the backcountry ... ya never know till they/you try it... IF it ever gets made.

.

.

Hawkster · May 11, 2014

volcano buster said:
I'm thinking that track could cause some serious pucker factor when side-hilling icy conditions.

The track needs to be designed with an option to hold screws , 3/8 and up , not to long so the track still flexes . This trencher preforms better with screws in conditions mentioned above , just using as a visual .

Jaynelson · May 12, 2014

Great ideas and points MH!

I think the evolution of the Pro will have to be (read: I want it to be) a fairly radical step. The others have scrambled together their current platforms enough to be competitive with the Pro, and I think the time is right for a huge step like this that really caters to the backcountry specific riders. IMO, it needs to be angled more toward a bridge between the modern sled and the increasingly popular snowbike.....rather than just another rendition of the traditional sled.

I also agree with MH that this probably needs to be an addition, as opposed to replacing the entire RMK line. Even the current Pro is too aggressive and mountain specific for many buyers.

Drifter · May 12, 2014

All good ideas except for the narrow track. Like Geo I road a F-cat with the narrow track and it had trouble getting around. Chain saw comes to mind.

mountainhorse · May 12, 2014

Drifter said:
All good ideas except for the narrow track. Like Geo I road a F-cat with the narrow track and it had trouble getting around. Chain saw comes to mind.

Yea... but that was a 1.5"-lug track on a sled that was wide, weighed about 125lbs more than 375lbs and an old school suspension..... I think a lot more to do with the "whole package".

I could see a tall lug track with superior suspension, weight, balance, power and width being the right recipe for the deep stuff.

.

swrev · May 13, 2014

Still have a Firecat w/ 151 2.25, dropped and rolled, CMX belt drive, Fabcraft tunnel. Narrow track is a not great for a "mountain" on a sled no matter how much $$$ you throw at it. It is a riot in spring snow, but trenches horrible in anything else. If you are on it all the time it does pretty well. Creek bottoms, finessing through trees are not its strong points. I could see some crossover sleds utilizing a narrow track. They allow for more track speed. The old Firecat was a pretty strong climber.

Hawkster · May 13, 2014

:lalala:That's because you have to scrap the design and start from the ground up . Get rid of the forks and replace it with one telescoping one .

Jaynelson · May 13, 2014

A lot of it is the suspension tho. Take an 07ish M8 or M1000 with a 162 and stock suspension. They get stuck sooooo easily compared to a Pro. Literally 1/2 the floatation/traction with the same sized track. So I think a lighter, lower drag Pro could get away with a narrower track.

I rode a LT Mountain Horse on a new KTM 500 for a bit....that's 137x12.5" track with 2" paddles. I was surprized at how well it chewed and it was deep as hell that day. I know that bike is about 250lbs dry...so adding the track kit, fuel, extra fuel, etc I wouldn't doubt you are 350lbs RTR or better.

So, in theory, a 13 or 14" wide 163 track, with 2.5" paddles, maybe 75lbs more, triple the HP, pro suspension, and CVT drive system....hmmm. I bet it would work great....it wouldn't be for everyone, or the big hillclimb guys. Maybe I'm wrong.

Solby · May 13, 2014

I think the influence of the snowbikes is really going to affect what our backcountry sleds of the future will be. The days of building the biggest, highest hp, best hillclimbing sled seem to be dwindling. Not that they won't always have their place in big country such as Canada, but the deep powder floatation and manueverability of the pro chassis has gotten more riders in trees and off some of the big hills.

I love the idea of losing weight, narrowing the plastics and track as long as it still floats. It won't be for everyone, but it will be for a lot of us. MH your wish list is right on.

phatty · May 13, 2014

160" x 14" for track option. Everything else would be awesome. I'd take that all day.

Narrow doesn't mean it trenches. Weight, power, angles, suspension set up play into trenching as well.

if you can design a 2 ski sled that holds side hills like the mtn horse timbersled kid that would be the xtreme terrain dominator for sure. this set up should be close... build it MH!!!:face-icon-small-coo

Scott · May 14, 2014

Sounds wicked.

4Z · May 18, 2014

boosted 600 cc single

HERE'S WHAT I'D LIKE TO SEE... THE 2016 XTD.... Xtreme Terrain Dominator

Well-known member

Well-known member

Life Member

Well-known member

Chilly’s Mentor

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

Scott Stiegler

Well-known member

Similar threads