Skidoo 850t tunes

Aug 8, 2011
603
288
63
What all is on the market for tunes for the 850t so far?
1) Bikeman, from what I have seen they appear to run hard
2) Silber, haven’t seen much but the one video I watched it appears to run well
3) SLP with their can maybe?

I heard Boondocker was playing with them.
Anyone else?
And does anyone have any first hand ride info on any tuned 850t sleds?
 

Dynamo^Joe

Well-known member
Premium Member
Nov 26, 2007
1,044
875
113
Thunder Bay, ont
www.iBackshift.com
One of my 850 turbo test guys has a bm tune.

Flyweight is a mirror of engine torque. More torque, more flyweight to maintain "rated rpms". If the engine is rated at 7950 rpms and now you add 10 pounds of torque at 7950 rpms, then you have to add more flyweight to keep from overrevving past rated rpms.

Stock (with iBackshift clutch tune)
984 ramps
Flyweight @ 102 grams
Primary spring @ 100-340

After going to bm tune stage 3 non ethanol w/diamond-s can. (with iBackshift clutch tune)
984 ramps
Flyweight @ 108 grams
Primary spring @ 100-260

Had to add 6 grams of flyweight and take the primary spring end force and lower it 80 pounds to keep the engine from overrevving.

its kind of a rule of thumb that for every 1 gram of flyweight you have to add, there is an addition of about the equivalent of 5hp.
This is easily proved, since for every 1000 ft elevation increase, there is 5hp loss. Every 1000 ft increase, an estimated 1 gram must be removed to maintain rated rpms.

Therefore; IF 1 gram = 200 rpms and 1 gram for 1000 feet and 5 hp per 1000 feet, THEN for every 5hp added, you need to add 1 gram.

5hp loss for every 1000 feet, I got that out of a Rotax 503 fan aircraft shop manual, so they are not my words, they are Rotax's words.

Going from 102 to 108g then that's like there was an addition of 5hp x 6 grams = 30hp increase. Then there is a rule of thumb of for every 30 pounds primary spring end force change, there is a hp change to match it. The calculation is a little bit more complicated because you have to factor the track speed to know what forces are being used by the spring, at-that-track-speed.

I would put my neck on the chopping block and safely say there's a 30hp+ gain to pull off that amount of flyweight gram increase and not put forth how much more hp there is based on primary spring change.
 
Last edited:
Aug 8, 2011
603
288
63
Holy poo! I’d be willing to put my neck on the line that with that amount of additional weight plus the reduction in spring final rate that there can be absolutely no comparison in the two setups on the hill...that stage 3 is flat packin the performance
 

Dynamo^Joe

Well-known member
Premium Member
Nov 26, 2007
1,044
875
113
Thunder Bay, ont
www.iBackshift.com
Hm, there goes "your" throttle response, heh, not the throttle response on that sled. What sled/turbo are you talking about? You're equating aftermarket = brp/oem just because it has a turbo charger on it.

That sled has 2900-3000 engage and I bet it can be lower, and use a primary spring with even lower force, and we're gona test more this winter.
 

skank

Well-known member
Lifetime Membership
Feb 25, 2008
451
100
43
Mountain View, Wyoming 82939
I’ve tried a couple different tunes. Definitely makes more power but you start loosing the amazing linear power curve of the stock setup the more you turn it up. The extra power comes on very quickly (Ramps up) at the end of the curve. I don’t like it that much. You lose some controllability.
 

1709

Well-known member
Feb 14, 2010
88
46
18
I have been told by a guy that tried the stage 3 tune and said it was lazy compared to stock,
said stage 2 was the best, with just making a helix change.
 
Premium Features