Coil Over VS Torsion
- Thread starter tdblakes
- Start date
weight is the obvious thing, but they have a better ride, I have ridden with a holz suspension and its a great ride
M
another huge benifit is you can set it not to wheelie as bad and keep the front end down.
It is way better on the trail too and much more adjustable, and it gets the snow out of the skid better too.
food for thought.....Have you ever seen an aftermarket company make a torsions spring suspension???
It is way better on the trail too and much more adjustable, and it gets the snow out of the skid better too.
food for thought.....Have you ever seen an aftermarket company make a torsions spring suspension???
I
Then why oh why didn't polaris put it on the 144 switchback? I off trail ride in the u.p. of michigan. Also do trail riding. The 155 is just a little to long for me. But luv to have the best polaris has to offer. Does anyone know if rmk have the tipped up rails?
B
i have heard the rmk rails are straight the only tipped up rails are on the switchbacks
X2.... you would think that as an assault, being an "Ultra" package or whatever it would have the best of the best... like the new spindles, jackshaft, brake, and coil over rear skid...... and its kinda hard to justify getting the switchback because it costs more than the RMK Pro 155.... and has older heavier parts... seems backwards to me.
So I just wondered if there is an advantage of torsion spring over coil spring suspension... good info brought up so far, but do torsion spring suspensions take more of a beating than coil over? if not, why wouldn't snowcross racers use coil over since its so highly adjustable??
S
the reason is being that the switchback assault is just a name.....look at a pic of it beside the rmk assault....the nose is alot higher on the rmk being that the suspension is stiffer on the rmk assault over the switchback assault, im guessing they are the same front shocks as on the pro-r. Its not as beefy as the old assault its just a damn name to sell it. They should have called it a PRO-S or PRO-SKS.
if you dont think so i had a stock 08 rmk nose to nose with my 08 rmk with 09 walker evans on it and in the trailer my bumper was almost 4 inches higher than the stock one. the shocks are the same length just the W/Es are stiffer.
The other reason that snow cross sleds have torsions is probably cause they have coupled rear suspension...the only non 121 to date is the m-10 and m-12
Last edited:
S
All M-10 are coupled. Gerard Karpik invented the coupled rear skid!
C
this is true....except that the 163 has tipped up rails...
And i REALY hope this rear skid is as good as it is said to be because i am selling my ez-ryde and a few other parts just to get the down payment for my assault so....i hope it works better than the stock RMK stuff did on my 09!
If the sled jumps good and is reliable (and makes okish power) i will be happy. I dont care for hill scratch'n or racing in strait lines.I just want a fun sled!
Actually I would argue the torsion spring suspension is more adjustable. It can also easily be made to handle a wider range of rider weights (spring tensions). The torsion spring suspension can also be more durable with cheaper parts. The 2 torsion springs are considerably 'lower' tech than the single coil over setup.
Weight is the primary advantage for the coil over. Cost is the advantage for torsion.
sled_guy
Weight is the primary advantage for the coil over. Cost is the advantage for torsion.
sled_guy
A
Coil over skids are good for bending parts. Too much force directed at a small diameter shaft that is spanning a distance of +12".
P
i agree b/c that is length i wanted but as said before i think it is just a name, more for sales purposes than anything. talking with jack at carl's he said the switchback has the shorty front end geometry, which is significantly different than the rmk. which will cause less than ideal handling for a mountain sled. not sure why, just repeating what i was told. i'm sure smarter people than me can provide explicit detail as to why this is. although if you really want a 144/146 length sled with the coil over, when i talk to him, jack did say he found the necessary parts (rails mostly) to put it under either the pro rmk or assault rmk with the 146 5.1 track. of course it will cost you a little extra and you will have 4.5 inches of extra tunnel. i decided to just go with the 155. i'll just have to manage to suffer through with the stock setup...
But what is so different about the Assult RMK geometry and the Assault Switchback geometry up front? Same length A-arms? Same length shocks? different skis (easily changed), '10 Dragon spindles (oh well)... is there anything seriously different that cannot be changed? Same bulk head? The only reason that I don't want a 155 is that I don't NEED it. I spend the majority of my time boondocking in the UP where I think a 155 is overkill. The UP is a pretty tree intensive area so I like to not feel like I'm driving a huge sled that cant manuver around trees. Also a couple trips out to the snowies each year but I just feel like the switchback would hold up better in the lesser snow of the UP compared to WY and just keep the riding I do challenging and fun rather than too easy. Plus I have some spare parts (a-arms and spindles) from my '09 Assault that might fit the switchback... But would it be worth getting the RMK and shortening it up?
P
i honestly do not know the exact differences between the two, i just repeating what jack and others have told me. they did say something about a noticeable difference in steering effort between the two. if it can be changed, i don't know? but i think you would be better off getting a shortened 155. if you don't want more than a 2" track, just cut the stock 5.1 down, which i would probably recommend anyway. really you could get a lot more detail calling carl's directly than talking to me, mainly b/c i'm just about out of info. good luck. let us know if you make a decision.
pv
pv
S
Get the Assault 144 if you ride in the UP. If the weight is a problem, maybe year 2 grab a Holz 146", slap that in. The front end is the same as the '10 Assault...spindles are a bit different to make better/more manageable steering. Also, the seat is WAY better for trail riding and hammering through the rough. I have a 144" ProX (old school, I know...its that $$ thing ya know) and it is PERFECT in the UP and out west. Run the Cobra track unless you are rollin' west.
thought? wonder if Polaris did some sort of deal with Holz and it was only good for the 155" not the shorter one. Interesting that Holz came out with a 146" just in time for Polaris to drop their 146"? Hmmm
thought? wonder if Polaris did some sort of deal with Holz and it was only good for the 155" not the shorter one. Interesting that Holz came out with a 146" just in time for Polaris to drop their 146"? Hmmm
I
I'm still undecided on the pro-rmk or switchback. pro-rmk 11,500 switchback 12,000. Pro-rmk have new rear suspension all lightweight parts. switchback same rear skid since 2002 edge...heavy! Plz help me choose! I ride in the u.p. and trail ride 50% time.
A
And you never see a m-10 in snowcross racing, its a falling rate skid. Thats why it needs a 1000psi bottom out spring. And you'll still break your back on the right hit where a torsion will not.
Its easier to make rising rate skids out of torsion springs
I'm in the same boat as you. Plus I ride the lower a little when the snow is good.
Cons:
Pro RMK
-Longer than is needed
-2.4 track is way over kill.
Switchback Assault
- Wide Front End
-"Hybrid" running boards
-Standard Ski's
-No coil over rear skid
Pros:
Pro RMK
-Lightest
-RMK Boards ROCK!
Switchback Assault
-Right length
-2" lug height is perfect
I am so on the fence about this. The things that are wrong with the Pro RMK can not be fixed easily. No tracks available in that length with a shorter lug and I really don't want to cut the stock one down. The Switchback will require new a-arms and shocks, gripper ski's and something done to the running boards.
I've been banging my head over this for weeks. I know many on here who live in mountain towns don't believe flatlanders can ride deep snow but parts of the U.P. see over 200 inches of snow every winter. We travel when the snow flies and I have used my 2" x 144 track on my RMK to it's fullest many times.
Just don't know......
I agree. I'm leaning towards the switchback though. I want all the goodies on the RMK like running boards and stuff, but I'd be willing to bet that someone (betterboards) will come up with a fix for the switchback boards. Also if the torsion suspension is the biggest hold-up they already make a coil over style suspension for the 144" skid in there right now that you can upgrade to. Skis are also an easy fix. I'm slowly convincing myself that the switchback is the way to go!