• Don't miss out on all the fun! Register on our forums to post and have added features! Membership levels include a FREE membership tier.

Engine changes

cateye5312

Well-known member
Premium Member
Mar 28, 2009
975
646
93
Grand Junction CO
Your comment is infuriating. Every year, every brand, there's this die hard contingent of so-called mountain riders wringing their hands over trail handling. IT'S A MOUNTAIN SLED. Bitching about the lack of trail manners on a mountain sled is like complaining that you can't haul sheets of plywood in the back of your Corvette. Given that the current state of technology renders superior trail performance essentially impossible on a machine PURPOSE BUILT for superior off-trail, deep snow performance, it's an absolutely nonsensical argument.

If you have 15 miles of trail to run on your way the mountains? Put scratchers on and run that trail as fast as you feel you can go. If that amount of fast isn't as fast as you could go on a trail sled, and that's important to you? Then turn your back to the hills, get yourself a sled that corners like a motherf***er, and go bang ditches.

I ride a mountain sled. Because it's a mountain sled it's set up to perform in deep snow. Period. Deep snow handling--that's my priority. Now, with the long track and suspension set up to excel where it was designed to, it's a death trap at high speed in the twisties. Know what I do? I slow down in all but the widest, smoothest turns.

Because it's a mountain sled.

And trail handling isn't even on my list of concerns.

/end rant

Ya know, what is so freakin" hard to understand about this? Good grief! NO ONE expects their lifted big mud tire 4X4 to be able to drive worth a sh*t on the pavement yet we all drive our purpose built mountain TRUCKS on pavement every day and we don't bat an eye when we have to drive a hundred miles to get to the offroad. Give a guy a mountain sled and he starts whining immediately that it doesn't drive worth a sh*t on the trail!!

It's an off trail machine for God's sake! Treat it like one! If you want a machine that handles like a car go buy one. They make 'em - and some pretty darn good ones too.

This, by the way, is the first discussion I have with flatlanders who come out to ride with me. And I use the 4X4 / car comparison. We've had more than one flatlander come out here, jump on a rental sled, hammer it and get killed on the trail. THEY ARE NOT TRAIL SLEDS!!!
 
M
Nov 27, 2007
847
281
63
manitoba, Canada
Ya know, what is so freakin" hard to understand about this? Good grief! NO ONE expects their lifted big mud tire 4X4 to be able to drive worth a sh*t on the pavement yet we all drive our purpose built mountain TRUCKS on pavement every day and we don't bat an eye when we have to drive a hundred miles to get to the offroad. Give a guy a mountain sled and he starts whining immediately that it doesn't drive worth a sh*t on the trail!!

It's an off trail machine for God's sake! Treat it like one! If you want a machine that handles like a car go buy one. They make 'em - and some pretty darn good ones too.

This, by the way, is the first discussion I have with flatlanders who come out to ride with me. And I use the 4X4 / car comparison. We've had more than one flatlander come out here, jump on a rental sled, hammer it and get killed on the trail. THEY ARE NOT TRAIL SLEDS!!!

I see what you are saying and so agree with you. But i would appreciate if people in General on this site could stop lumping all us flatlandees into one group of dumb asses.

As per the trail handling debate, it is what the sled is. I can keep up no problem to the purpose built trail sleds with my pro. On the trail. Sure it more effort but I didn't buy my sled to trail ride. The fact that people bitch about it just shows their true riding capability, and lack of brains. I can make a Ferrari into an off road machine. Just have to understand that's not what it was purpose built for and it's going to have draw backs
 

Scott

Scott Stiegler
Staff member
Lifetime Membership
Nov 1, 1998
69,618
11,737
113
51
W Mont
I can't speak about durability of the 800HO in the RMK. That remains to be seen.
I can't speak about the AXYS RUSH. Never been on one. And so I've never raced an AXYS RUSH against a Pro RUSH or Pro RMK.


I rode the AXYS RMK. It has WAY more throttle response than the ProRMK. WAY MORE.

Lake racing? Who cares.

In the trees, snap the throttle to hook around a tree or launch through a creek bed? OH YEAH!!!!!!!!!
And it's NOT the 9pounds dropped off the chassis that make the big difference. Not hardly at all. That just made the balance point adjustments.

You guys wait, trust us, you'll see.
 
Last edited:
S

Skeld

Well-known member
Mar 6, 2011
373
49
28
Bangor, Maine
I see what you are saying and so agree with you. But i would appreciate if people in General on this site could stop lumping all us flatlandees into one group of dumb asses.

As per the trail handling debate, it is what the sled is. I can keep up no problem to the purpose built trail sleds with my pro. On the trail. Sure it more effort but I didn't buy my sled to trail ride. The fact that people bitch about it just shows their true riding capability, and lack of brains. I can make a Ferrari into an off road machine. Just have to understand that's not what it was purpose built for and it's going to have draw backs

I'm also a flatlander who agrees about the handling. And I ride mine a long ways on the "trail" (or at least old tracks, not really "groomed trail") and it does fine. Just have to point and shoot because when you touch the throttle the skis don't do much and that's fine with me.
 

Reg2view

Well-known member
Lifetime Membership
Feb 1, 2010
2,392
1,600
113
How much of the snap is from clutching, gearing and track?

Someone get an honest answer from Adams or someone with mod pros that also have ridden the Axys RMK alot. Honest, not the marketecture.
 

Murph

Polaris Moderator/ Polaris Ambassador/ Klim Amb.
Staff member
Lifetime Membership
How much of the snap is from clutching, gearing and track?

Someone get an honest answer from Adams or someone with mod pros that also have ridden the Axys RMK alot. Honest, not the marketecture.

"Marketecture"-- awesome!

Clutching, gearing, and track all have an effect for sure....

But....

The rate of crankshaft acceleration-- they way it builds revs when it is hooked up and going forward (as opposed to when a 5.1 spins tractionless on an ice patch) is what is impressive.

During the pre ride presentation I was just as skeptical of what I was hearing as anyone.

Ride one and the skepticism disappears. But, as I have warned many, don't ride it unless you are ready to buy one.

I know I sound like the biggest Poo cheerleader ever-- but when you ride it you will understand. And hopefully,I'll regain some credibility....
 

RobertTrivanovic

Well-known member
Lifetime Membership
Nov 8, 2012
1,199
243
63
Abbotsford BC
So what made the old engine so unreliable exactly? Ive heard stuff about piston slop before but ive never spent to much time looking into it? And what exactly is done in the engine to fix the issues they had.
 
G

geo

Well-known member
Dec 1, 2007
2,170
2,336
113
68
Kamloops B.C.
So what made the old engine so unreliable exactly? Ive heard stuff about piston slop before but ive never spent to much time looking into it? And what exactly is done in the engine to fix the issues they had.


Someone could write a "best-seller" for the snowmobile section about this subject.

Trouble for the book store owner is "Do I put this in the fiction or non-fiction shelf?"
 

rmk727

Well-known member
Lifetime Membership
Oct 3, 2008
568
154
43
71
SO.DAK
I am ever so sorry to have brought up a question about handling to you stuck up so called mountain riders, got news for I love riding the mountains and the deep chit but as I came to conclude years ago you ash's are so stuck on yourselves heck I bet every self called mountain rider voted for Obama.
Again so sorry
 

sledheader

Well-known member
Lifetime Membership
Feb 18, 2013
1,529
748
113
Between a Rock and a Hard Place
So what made the old engine so unreliable exactly? Ive heard stuff about piston slop before but ive never spent to much time looking into it? And what exactly is done in the engine to fix the issues they had.

Mostly a piston skirt issue. Polaris has put new pistons in that have grooves which hold more oil. Also an electronic oil pump that can regulate oil input and increase consumption. Several guys on HCS that have quite a few miles on the new polaris motor with no issues
 

cateye5312

Well-known member
Premium Member
Mar 28, 2009
975
646
93
Grand Junction CO
Mostly a piston skirt issue. Polaris has put new pistons in that have grooves which hold more oil. Also an electronic oil pump that can regulate oil input and increase consumption. Several guys on HCS that have quite a few miles on the new polaris motor with no issues

AND a thermostat bypass that allows the engine to heat up quicker.

I've seen a couple seizes and they were from cold motors and guys getting too anxious to get up the trail. Oops - darn, there's that word trail again - gotta learn not to use it, it seems to keep pissing people off around here!!
 

Stroker Customs

Well-known member
Lifetime Membership
Jan 17, 2002
488
94
28
CO
Correct me if I am wrong but aren't they using the same stroke, the same piston diameter and length, and same cylinder length? So if that is the case I don't see how they are changing rod angle that everyone says is the issue on the CFI2. Seems like an awful lot of long rod motors were advertised as the cure so why would Polaris only add grooves in the piston to mask the real problem? Not sure the oil grooves are the cure for broken skirts but who knows. Honestly I haven't seen much issues with the CFI2 motors besides giving up HP to the other brands. Proven fact that the other brands make more HP all the way from stock to full mod. I will probably be hated on for this but seems like they copied everyone else idea motor wise. Electric power valves and oil pump, lightweight crank is something the competition has been doing for years. Was hoping that Polaris would leap frog the competition but seems like all they did was catch up on time motor wise.
 

The Fourth Wolf

Well-known member
Lifetime Membership
Jan 8, 2008
973
1,092
93
58
Anchorage, AK
I am ever so sorry to have brought up a question about handling to you stuck up so called mountain riders, got news for I love riding the mountains and the deep chit but as I came to conclude years ago you ash's are so stuck on yourselves heck I bet every self called mountain rider voted for Obama.
Again so sorry

What?

This thread is about changes/improvements to the 800 HO that will be in the Axys RMK and you went straight to asking about trail manners.

And now you're back-peddling and butthurt, and we're all Obama fans because you made a dumbass post?? That's redonkulous, but whatever...

In the immortal words of Lincoln Osiris...never go full retard.

(my apologies to the group for the derail)
 

Kraven

Well-known member
Lifetime Membership
Apr 11, 2009
1,462
555
113
MIDWEST
Correct me if I am wrong but aren't they using the same stroke, the same piston diameter and length, and same cylinder length? So if that is the case I don't see how they are changing rod angle that everyone says is the issue on the CFI2. Seems like an awful lot of long rod motors were advertised as the cure so why would Polaris only add grooves in the piston to mask the real problem? Not sure the oil grooves are the cure for broken skirts but who knows. Honestly I haven't seen much issues with the CFI2 motors besides giving up HP to the other brands. Proven fact that the other brands make more HP all the way from stock to full mod. I will probably be hated on for this but seems like they copied everyone else idea motor wise. Electric power valves and oil pump, lightweight crank is something the competition has been doing for years. Was hoping that Polaris would leap frog the competition but seems like all they did was catch up on time motor wise.

Copied ??

Polaris had computer controlled exhaust valves waaaaaaay back in 1997 on their PRO 785 jet Ski.

And please tell us which manufacturer they copied a STOCK out of the crate 408 pound 160 + hp with belt drive sled from ?
 
Last edited:

Stroker Customs

Well-known member
Lifetime Membership
Jan 17, 2002
488
94
28
CO
Copied ??

Polaris had computer controlled exhaust valves waaaaaaay back in 1997 on their PRO 785 jet Ski.

And please tell us which manufacturer they copied a STOCK out of the crate 408 pound 160 + hp with belt drive sled from ?

Really?

Ok man you are right! I didn't realize this was a axys chassis thread. My mistake thought it was about MOTOR CHANGES my bad. Carry on I am done.
 

Reg2view

Well-known member
Lifetime Membership
Feb 1, 2010
2,392
1,600
113
Back to motor changes...

Has anyone who owns or has rode the 2015 Axys 800 ("Rush") also rode the Axys RMK's, same/similar elevation? In Alpine would be even better. I'm sure the Axys 800 will be stronger, but really how much stronger? I ask because:

1. The peeps who rode the Axys RMK in Alpine have consistently said how much better it is compared to the Pro RMK 800 CFI2. The 2015 Axys Rush 800 riders have reported better, but that much better? Not consistently. Dyno reports are, well, dyno reports, and don't consider hand tuning and clutching.

2. The OEMs do know how to hand pick and tune ringers, motors and clutching. It's been done before by all of the OEMs ;)

3. There are not 50 or 100 Axys RMK demo units to compare a hard ridden, essentially production line built Axys RMK to your personal Pro, same day, same conditions. That's how you ferret out the hand builts and tuned ringers. We'll find out how much better next season with production sleds, but not before.
 

Super 8

Well-known member
Lifetime Membership
Feb 2, 2012
395
497
63
In addition to^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

New style V-Force reeds from the factory

Exhaust valves are (3) stage

Crank shaft is 2 1/2 pounds lighter

Electric oil pump controlled by E.C.U. pushes additional oil during break-in for first 10 +/- hours of run time

AND...........a real 160+ H.P. AFTER break-in on DYNOTECH Jim's dyno

(the same dyno that dyno'd the previous 800's in the mid 140's
)
The same 160 hp sled that was dyno'd at Dynotech earlier has just been redyno'd yesterday with 1200 miles on the speedo and with it's factory ecu, not the broken in ecu that was supplied by Polaris earlier. Your going to be a bit disappointed.
 
Last edited:
G

geo

Well-known member
Dec 1, 2007
2,170
2,336
113
68
Kamloops B.C.
IMO if you are buying a new Axys for the straight up power increase you are in for a bit of a disappointment.
If you are looking for an big increase in responsiveness as a package you're golden. Even the slightly biased test riders reported this fact. In the end how much time is really spent at full throttle compared to the rest of the day. Set-up is more important than HP at full throttle.

Historically a new OEM motor is never as strong as an "old" version that has been "finished" mod wise.
The Cat HO in '10 compared to '09 was about the same power difference same method of increasing response as claimed between the Axys and present Poo 800. If you had a '09 Cat dialed with just a SLP pipe and some clutching you would out trackspeed a stock '10 all day long. By next season things started to balance out in set-ups and the new HP was showing up abit more
Less that 10% HP at the crank is even less at the track.

I have little worry that a stock AXYS will "out motor" my "old" Pro. I also have little doubt that stock for stock the new motor will be noticeably stronger than the old one.
 
Premium Features