|
|
||
|
Swedish Exciter 03-06-2002, 08:09 AM Hejsan DSA frontsuspension? Rear suspension? Horsepower? Tell me everything about them, are they fast? Micke from Sweden astro 03-06-2002, 01:54 PM the 1993 was the quickest, but the moter wouldnt hold up, the bearings on the crankshaft where to small. the 94 was set up poorly, had mechanical breaks,(cable operated) 95 was slightly better, had straight handle bars, hydralic breaks. 1996 this was the fastest, the best setup. this was the best machz ever built! *they all came with the c-7 rear skid. the 96 was the only one with small idler wheels on the rear axle. they all came with dsa front suspension. like i said the 96 had the best suspension, the best calibration. this is the best rotax triple! *the 780 is quicker and faster than the 809 series engines. i hope this helps! astro 03-06-2002, 01:56 PM one more thing, the 1996 780 had 154 horse power, the earlier ones had less. Mighty RX-1 03-06-2002, 02:52 PM I must have had a slow 96 because my 97 was faster. robert gleason 03-06-2002, 09:49 PM I don't mean to stir the pot, but the 1997 mach z was the fastest of all mach z's. (first year of the 809 motor.) I't made the most horsepower of them all. The newer 809's in the ck chassis were detuned somewhat for better trail manners; horsepower is down in exchange for a stronger midrange and longer motor life. Swedish Exciter 03-07-2002, 07:37 AM OK i am going to buy one, i will search for 95-97 Swedish Exciter 03-08-2002, 08:29 AM Hej Is Mach1 -97 a better choise then Machz -95 ?? is the Mach Z faster? Mach Z 95 148hp Mach 1 97 144hp ////SWEDE Mighty RX-1 03-08-2002, 11:08 AM I would buy the 97 mach1 over the 95 machZ. ACM 03-08-2002, 04:36 PM the 97 mach 1 has a better rear suspenion over the 95 mach z way better on the trails. *i like my 97 mach 1 a lot. *With a good clutch kit they move really good Swedish Exciter 03-08-2002, 05:19 PM OK, but i want something really fast so i think i will buy the machz, its not as expensive neither (the 95) Are there big diffrence in 0-60mph(0-100kmh) between the mach1 97 and machz -93-96 are there big diffrence in the top speed? //Swede ( I know, my english sucks=) dino 03-08-2002, 07:01 PM Swedish Exciter: The 93-96 Mach Z is a lot faster than the Mach1, But they doo lack the SC10 rear skid, and your english is far better than my Swedish. Dino http://www.snowmobileworld-s2.com/forums/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif Swedish Exciter 03-09-2002, 10:14 PM Are the mach z -93 -94 bad snowmobiles, i dont know if i can afford a 95, how are the 93-94 No1Hookman 03-10-2002, 12:07 AM </span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (robert gleason @ Mar. 06, 2002, 7:49pm)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I don't mean to stir the pot, but the 1997 mach z was the fastest of all mach z's. (first year of the 809 motor.) I't made the most horsepower of them all. The newer 809's in the ck chassis were detuned somewhat for better trail manners; horsepower is down in exchange for a stronger midrange and longer motor life.[/b][/quote] After having owned each and every model year Mach Z, I'm going to tell you that the '97 was not the fastest Z. *the CK3s (except the '98) with the the narrower hood and better aeros will flat out spank the F-2000s, including the '97. Recent year dyno reports are showing 150+ HP. Pretty much on par with the XCR. Just the facts man, just the facts. http://www.snowmobileworld-s2.com/forums/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/thumbs-up.gif Swedish Exciter 03-10-2002, 01:20 PM OK, I will search for a machz 95 or 96 next season, in Sweden the 95 costs about 33000 SKR, thats about 3300 US dollar, pretty expensive Bigmac 03-11-2002, 12:12 AM Man your telling me that's a lot of $$$ .... 3300 us for a 96 Mach-z .... I'll sell you mine for 3500 Can , that's like 1700 us . You get lots of snow there to .... You don't want to get a Mach stuck !!! *Well good luck Swedish Exciter 03-11-2002, 12:25 PM The snowmobiles in Sweden are alot more expensive then in America. What is the difference between Mach Z and Formula III?? Wich year came Formula III Micke From Malmberget Swedish Exciter 03-11-2002, 12:29 PM I have always driven Yamaha but i dont like the TSS frontsuspension som i am going to buy a Ski-Doo, i like the Rotax engine, F3 128hp, thats alot on a 600cc, but i think i will go for the MachZ with 148=) /// Tippsta dino 03-11-2002, 03:21 PM Swedish exciter: The F111 came out in 95, the main difference was in h.p. Dino. 670HO 03-11-2002, 08:21 PM Hey, I don't blame you on that T.S.S suspension, that is way old school. Rocketman 03-11-2002, 08:30 PM Hey Swede....why not look into a Bombardier Lynx? Thos look pretty cool.. http://www.snowmobileworld-s2.com/forums/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/confused.gif Swedish Exciter 03-13-2002, 07:01 PM Lynx snowmobiles are good, but they doesnt have anything 95-96 with the horsepower i want (atleast 128-f3) The 97 Bigpipe X 670 is nice but alot more expensive then machz end f3 95-96 | ||