This is a comparison between apples and oranges but I got so tired of listening to the dealers, district reps, and my buddy who just traded in his ZRT 800 for a new 900 on how this new 900 could beat the triples. Well it didn't happen, I ride with a 00 T-Cat short track, my 00 T-Cat mtn cat and this 900.
We ran down the AK pipeline for about a mile and I dusted him by about 3 lengths. He had me for about the first couple hundred feet or so until I hooked up and then it was bye, bye ZR.
The ZR 900 will be a good sled but it's no big bore triple.
I bet he wishes he kept his 800.

I havent finished clutching yet I only have 120 miles. My clutch combination... when I am done might not work as well for him because I 136" long tracked mine and I have a 1.5 " lug track. So far all I have done is jet down one size and gear it 23/40 and it works really good. That Mach Z that I raced caught up to me in mid range but I top ended him.....even with the longer track......I know that the primary needs more wieght..like 76-78grams and the stock helix doesnt work maybe try a 62/50 or a 57/50 ......I cant tell you anymore because I dont know yet.....Good luck

Ahhh, I like to hear this. MIne should run really well after I get it set up. I ordered a set of V-forse reeds for it and a powerbreather. I will order my clutch kit in a couple weeks. I am putting 192 1.175 studs in my 1" track. Somebody will also have a quiet pipe out that will work well also. Kevin

Wow, you only beat him by 3 lenghths in a mile!! *Not bad for a sled that has one less cylinder and 100cc's less!

Get real........The 900 kills the 800 with ease and no tripple in a 1000 feet stands a chance........tell the guy to check the set up because mine is smoking fast out of the box but the other guy who bought the same 03 900 his didnt work as good as mine.......and for starters spend some money and change the track because the .95in lug doesnt hook up in any condition......just spins and spins because it has to much power in the bottom and the mid. so before you call down the 900 atleast try to level the playing field.

What is a good set-up for them?
He does have a 1.25 cross country track on, he doesn't have any problem spinning, I do.
He said he had good mid range and top end but soft on the bottom.
Were goiing to get it set-up this wknd.
Yea I was real suprised that he was still hanging around at the end, the other T-Cat was in the other area code but he doesn't really count.

I would say that is VERY impressive to hang with a t-cat on top end, especialy over that distance! http://www.snowmobileworld-s2.com/forums/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/wow.gif * I would have never though it would stand a chance against the t-cat on top end, and 3 sled lengths over a mile is amazingly good IMO. *I think that your report CONFIRMS the hype about that sled, not the other way around...
Once he gets that baby dialed in, it should be quit the moster killer.haha http://www.snowmobileworld-s2.com/forums/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif

quote-"Get real........The 900 kills the 800 with ease and no tripple in a 1000 feet stands a
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * chance........"

Are you kidding me? Anyone that would say anything like that is full of it himself. There is somebody always faster-be it triple or twin.

If anything is impressive, the heavy triple machine beating the lightweight twin should be impressive...yeah, it has 140 more cc's, but it also has 100 pounds more weight to get moveing and keep moveing.

As for the 900's being faster than a 1000, they will still be wrong about that. They tried saying that about the 800 when it came out-now they claim that with the 900?

Lets take a OLD 98 1000 box stock and race a NEW 03 zr900 box stock and lets see what happens. I know the outcome of that one.

I wont knock down the new twins-they are fast, but saying they are faster than a 1000 with 170 h.p. and more rpm's is just plain wrong. I dont consider anything under a quarter mile a real race either.

Say what you want hpzrt600 but Cat is claiming nothing.....I have the 03 900 in my garage and have already felt the power so I am not full of myself cat just has something to be proud of. As for 1000 foot races not being considered a race to you.....oh well thats what drag racing is I wasnt talking speed runs across the lake, just flat out drag racing. Tripples are a thing of the past and if you still have one of those dinasours you had better sell her now before people get a taste of the real high output twins........just kidding. But no word of a lie the 900 works good and tripple lovers should start to worry.

FYI, ZR900 have a 867cc motor...not 900cc exactly. So, if your buds 900 was only 3 lengths behind in your race, that's really not bad at all. It's not only motor, it's weight. Those T-cats are really heavy. I've ridden them, they are pretty bad on the flats; but, don't try to ditchbang one all afternoon. You will just kill yourself. With proper clutching, gearing and tuning, the 900(867) is about the best all-around sled out.

sled-head-Cat IS claiming that. 2 friends of mine went to the factory last month and they did say that the 900 is faster than a T-cat.

Like I said, the new twins are fast-no doubt about it. You can really load those motors down and they will pull alot of gearing and clutching.

I know they can beat triples, I also know that triples can still beat them as well.

There is no argument on how fast they are. In fact, between a 600 class machine up to a 900 class machine there isnt a whole lot of difference in top end and acceleration. I have seen 600 twins hang right with 800 twins. It's almost to the point of why buy anything bigger? The 700xc polaris is 2 tenths slower than it's 800xc big brother in 1000 ft. Not much at all and certainly not worth the extra money IMO.

I can see your point hpzrt600. I know that the T Cat is faster on top anyone who says different is lying. And if the factory is saying the 900 is faster they should atleast tell the whole truth. I am am just very happy with my sled because I have never had a winner out of the box before. This sled is a respectable replacement for the Tcat.......even though I heard the Polaris XC 800 is still faster. I have yet to line up with one but that is the polaris chirp anyway. I think that Cat did a good job on the 900 engine by making it strong but not strung out so the durability is going to be good. sorry if I sounded like an a$$.....I am just proud Cat owner.

OK, let's all meet out on a lake and we'll have a babe in a bikini wave her scarf and have a race, but I have to warn ya, my 1980 Pantera 5000 is tuned in pretty good now!!!!!

Don't doubt the 900....can't wait to ride one.

Way to lighten up an otherwise tense post Jim...LOL

It does prove something, my T-Cat is a Mountain Cat. I have 20-39 gears, 54 gram weights, red primary, yellow secondary, and a 2 inch paddle. The elevation we ran at was about 3,000 ft off of what the clutching was set for and if you know anything my set up is for mountain riding not top end. I was over reving by about 500 rpms. So when the day comes that a 900 twin is that far off it's power band and can still beat what is considered to be a faster sled then I will buy one.
Besides I didn't bother telling how bad the short track T-Cat beat us..........

Sled-head-nothing wrong with being a die hard. You are right, the xc800's run real good-even the ones without the powervalves.

Last year on the lake, a guy with a non-powervalved 800xc was kicking everyones a$$. I was impressed to say the least-it was stock besides clutching and gearing-that's it!

I had a chance to ride a 02 xc800 3 weeks ago and let me tell you, I was impressed with it alot. That sled is awesome and very comfortable and fast. I used to own a Polaris indy before I switched years ago to cat. It was a good sled and fast but wouldn't steer worth a crap. The xc was a million times better. So my impression of Polaris has changed again.

If in 1-2 years there are no triples, I will probably go with a Cat or Polaris twin. I't really all depends on how well the rx1 runs and how it lasts as well. If it does what they claim, I may go that route...hopefully cat will get their $hit straight and have a 4-stroker like Yamaha's that runs with or beats current 2 strokes...it would be nice not to smell like gas all the time!

BTW-this was just a little friendly argument-nothing personal http://www.snowmobileworld-s2.com/forums/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif *http://www.snowmobileworld-s2.com/forums/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/thumbs-up.gif

Black Magic Racing has some test data on their sit about the 900 Cat. To be honest it wasn't that awesome. 102 in 100ft. and with their kit they gained only 2mph on that to 104. My Mach Z 1997 stock except clutching turns 111mph in that distance. My 2001 Mxz600 did 100 mph also, which is only 2 mph less at Radar run 1 year ago, the first time out with nothing but jetting and being broke in, for $2000.00 less cha-ching. That 900 should be in the 110 range easy with it's less weight and 150 plus horse. I am sure it is a fun sled on the trails though. The F-7 should take this sled without tuning much, if the Black Magic results are indicative of most new ( hundreds. http://www.snowmobileworld-s2.com/forums/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/confused.gif

I assume you mean 1000 ft. right? http://www.snowmobileworld-s2.com/forums/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif *
Also, I would wait and see what D&D, PSI, and the other bigwigs come up with rather than going off of black magics info. *We all know their track record....

Okay lets just say the top speed is not as important as the ET. Who cares if the sled only does 104 in 1000 feet.....its how fast you get there.......If I am racing you and at the 660 foot mark I have 2 sled lengths on you do you know how much horsepower it takes to gain back those lengths and at the 1000 foot mark I maybe only going 102 or whatever and you might be going110mph but i still can still be ahead of you. Do you understand?? I have the black magic kit for my 800 and regardless of what they publish a stock 800 geared 23/40 croses the finish line first everytime......at a lower top speed....I know because all we did this winter was test the 2 800's against each other.

It was 1000 ft. sorry for the typo. *My 97 Mach Z is 104 mph in 660 ft. at 6.4 to 6.5 seconds on Brower systems, and PortaTree, I don't think the 9 will be ahead by 2 lengths. 0-60 ft. in 1.2 seconds. * *200ft mark to 660 ft mark in 3.5 seconds. Anyway this acceleration is a blast. http://www.snowmobileworld-s2.com/forums/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif

D and D gets one it will definitely be tuned better , then the Magic boys, for sure. They can clutch, chip, pipe, and mill more ponies than most out of a improver or a *so-called stocker. http://www.snowmobileworld-s2.com/forums/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/sleeping.gif

SLED HEAD. *

YOU CALLED A TRIPLE A DINOSOUR!!!!!

That disapointed me. http://www.snowmobileworld-s2.com/forums/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/mad.gif.

The Tcat and Mach engine were hardly touched in the last few years and the twins were constently getting make overs yet they didnt touch the triple stock for stock.

And when cat said that this 900 would be a good replacement for the T-cat they were wrong. *I dont care how fast these things go there all fast. Or you can make them faster. *I wanted a triple engine for all the other benifits. *And i am happy. *

You do sound very proud of you 900 and im happy for you. *But calling machines that can go faster then 200km dinosours crosses the line between being arrogent and a prowd owner.

Will the 900 twin beat a Mach Z or T-Cat in a 1/4 mile or top end. *I seriously dont think so. *For the simple fact that twins are not made to make the power up in the high rpms. *THey have a longer stroke and are only good for torque. *triple engines are like jet turbines. *There slow down low but once spooled up there is emmence power. *

As for your (do you know how much HP it takes to make up a few sled lengths.) *I dissagree with your answer. *All you need is to go a couple km faster and he will walk on buy. *

And sledhead telling us that your 900 is faster then other 900s and how the other 900s are faster then the dinosour triples really really makes me wonder if your trying to just justify your buy to us or if your just overhappy with your buy that your imagining what this sled can do. *

I saw a pic of your sled and it is one #### of a good looking sled but its long track. *You aint going to win top end with long tracks on good conditions. *They offer more resistance, friction, and rotating mass.

If you think im wrong about anything i said please try and correct me. *Please explain how an engine almost identical to the 800 only bored out to 863 and designed for snowcross racing can win against lake running triples that are designed to be opened up and reved to 8400rpm and make Huge HP numbers. *

Weight is importent for acceleration. *A lighter sled will accel faster. *But for a top speed battle normally the sled with more power and Better Areodynamics will win. *That is why the Mach somtimes wins the T-cat. *Its areo dynamics. * *THe Mach is one of the greatest Areodynamic machines if not the best (with the low riding front end and with hundreds of wind tunnel testing at high speeds.)

I was only kidding when I called tripples a diasour ....dinasour=extinct ......and I dont see them in Cats 03 line up. *I have never owned a tripple and have never had an intrest in one. For the amount of time I spend on a lake the twins have plenty of top end. Most of our riding is off trail in loose snow where the long track shines thats why i long tracked the ZR. the perfact sleds *for around hear are renigades and SKS's....short tracks dont cut it. The difference between the twins and tripples are night and day around here.....sure if we get on the lake for a speed run the triple triple will win but like I said its a 60 70 mile ride to get there and the heavier sleds have a hard time keeping up.......as for the ET and speed I read magazines all of the time and when they report on drags the guy with the top speed doesnt always win the race....It is the guy with the lowest ET that gets first place...correct. I have seen lots of guys with lower mph with faster et times....so whatever The mach Z that i beat on the weekend must have been a figment of my imagination....and the variables were in his favor acording to you....because I am the guy with the long track and the heavier of the two riders by atleast 50lbs and he was the one doing the talking in the hotel.......but I was the one in front at the other end of the river. *I have 3 days of solid riding coming up starting today *so see ya later and have a good weekend.

Thats why I said in good conditions. *If you guys are racing on a river with 1 foot of slush then the long track will certanly win. *

I like long track sleds but here at the ice drags or on a very hardpack lake a short track triple is the sled to beat (if all machines are stock.) *

Saying that you beat a mach Z in the conditions you mentioned is good but not somthing to brag about. *I wouldnt race a Summit up a mountain with a mach and probably wouldnt race a long track sled in loose snow. * I would still race but wouldnt expect to win. *

However when the 900s show up at the ice drags then i will belive it. *Grass drags to me are nothing. *Ice drags test out the suspention and engine. *Grass drags is pure engine. * Ice drags also eat up torque because of the slip of the line. *And once both engines are past the torque curve its pure HP and the triples will have the advantage.

when it comes to the triple from any make don't dissy them when machzzzz1 is around, you won't win. *http://www.snowmobileworld-s2.com/forums/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif

Machzzzz
When I raced that Mach it was on a river that had a decent base. The guy on the Mach got off his sled and kicked the ground to see how packed it was.....He looked at me and said not perfect but it will do in an smart a$$ way. so the guy new what he was getting into but his head was stronger than his sled that day. If we were racing in the field ...well it wouldnt be a race more like a slaughter he would have ingested snow *dust for any *distance I felt like.......So to me it is something to brag about.....and to the guy on the mach it was enough to have him come over to my sled and tell me how suprised he was and that he thought it was preaty quick.
* Off the subject cant an SRX give a mach and XCR a run for their money on a good day?? *Well my ZR800 is faster than the SRX in a short race (6-800 feet). Well the ZR800 could never touch the 900 even on its best day in any conditions. Doesnt that make for an interesting race between you and I??

last time i checked 3 was more than 2. Although i can tear up any triple in a 1000ft. The mach will eat the 900 in the distance. The mach has proven itself over the years against the t cat with 200 less cc.s . nuf said.

Sled Head the fact is that I raced one and it did not impress me at all. Yea I only beat it by three lengths but mine is a 136 geared low and it still couln't run pass me. Thats not that impressive to me, the guys old 800 ZRT could pull pass me on the top and it was bone stock.
Cat put these thoughts in these guys heads that there 800+ twin was going to out run these dinasours but my buddy sounds like a little kid. All he can utter as were working on his clutches is " Do you think I F-uped?" My reply yep!!!!!!!!!!

Whatever......each to his own....obviously I am not the only guy who is into twins...95% of the sleds sold are twins...and *the tripples are being phased out... so enjoy, because in a couple of years if you want to buy a new sled you will be forced to buy a twin or a four stroke.

This may be a little off subject but it seems all you guys have long deep lug tracks even if you aren't running out west. What im saying is don't any of you use studs? I have a 01 Fan Sno-Pro with the 1.375 sno cross track and 96 1.450 studs all down the middle. And whenever I get into a deep snow situation my lugs catch in and pull me though and in the fields my studs hook up and my track dont spin at all. My sled has so much traction in any situation that I dont have to worry about having a long track with 1.5 inch lugs for deep snow and traction on the flats. *http://www.snowmobileworld-s2.com/forums/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/baaa.gif * http://www.snowmobileworld-s2.com/forums/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/baaa.gif * http://www.snowmobileworld-s2.com/forums/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/baaa.gif

I was out on friday with kim the only guy I know with studs (probably the only guy in the province). I dont ride with him very much but he has a 02 Viper. The guy is pitching his track and buying a 1.5". *He thought the same way you did untill I let him have a go on my sled. The rule of snowmobiling is.......If you aint pushing snow you aint moving. I can see studs working on the trail but we dont use them here at all. I would like to have studs if I were a trail rider.

Machzzzz1
When you refer to the 900 as a boared out 800 you forgot to mention the new porting job. Maybe I am a idiot but these are my figures.....Machz 151 hp stock.........ZR900 151hpstock
* * * * * * * * * torque is close to the same as the 900
* * * * * * * * * MachZ 560 lbs dry...........ZR900 510lbs dry
*looking at this picture I would put my money on the ZR in a 1000 feet......maybe even 1320 feet. I know the 900 has 60 some more cc's but you have the xtra cylinder and 2 xtra pipes.

AKCAT
tell your friend to take his coupling blocks out it will transfer the wieght better.......better hook up he should have walked away from you with that set up in your Tcat.

It boils down to clutching, traction and actual efficiency of sled set up, and of course rider weight and areodynamics, windshields, crouching position, carb jetting. Then the differences in power on the bigger sleds can vary Alot from one to another. I have actually talked to a mach Z racer who did not get a Mach Z with 145 horse. But then there is a handful that actually put out 160. Most were in the 148-155 range on average. It should be a good race but factory clutching generally sucks ALOT. Good Luck tuning. It took me 5 and 1/2 years to understand and get my clutching to where it performs in all spectrums of racing. http://www.snowmobileworld-s2.com/forums/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif

most mach Z put out a good 155hp. *Some touch 160 and some will put out 145 but normally its because of the air temp and what its jetted for. *

A twin with equal hp and torque will still not beat a triple. The triple is much smoother and friendlier to the clutch and has a smaller pistons with less stroke so power is made in the right rpm for speed. *

Bigger pistons means more inertia which means slower. *No Arctic cat engine stock to date or even skidoo engine to date has the throttle responce of a stock mach z or formula. *It will be at 5 thousand before yours is even at 3. *It will also go the other way just as fast. *

Thats why triple guys are allways goosing the throttle. *But the reason they can do that is because of the smaller pistons and the number of them. *Faster spin up time wins races.

Thats why twins will never be better then the triples. *

The other reason is because in a 2 stroke smaller pistons have more compleat burns making the most hp out of every drop of fuel. *Larger pistons like the huge ones in the 800 and your 900 need more fuel just to make a hp diffrence from the 700s. *The 800 and 900 motors are not a efficent design. *Every engineer will tell you this. *

Are triples being cut down and pazed out. *Yes. * But 30 years from now when both twins and triples are gone and replaced but nuclear crap the triples will still be remembered as the #1 engine for sleding.

WHAT are U going to do WHEN an F7 rolls OVER U!!!!!!!LOL

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Thats why twins will never be better then the triples

That is the sillyest thing that I have ever read in this forum.

[/b][/quote]Are triples being cut down and pazed out. *Yes. * But 30 years from now when both twins and triples are gone and replaced but nuclear crap the triples will still be remembered as the #1 engine for sleding.

Maybe thats how you will remember them ....but to me and everyone that I know they will be remembered as the engines that were to heavy to be put into a decent chasie and could only be driven on trails that had no turns or bumps.

The Doo triples doo rev up faster than even the Cat triples, there is no comparison. Do a test yourself, on a stand, watch how Much less time it takes the doo&#39;s to rapppp. That is the main reason it is Very hard to not break a Doo loose (traction wise) on a starting line. I don&#39;t consider nuclear, LOL either. http://www.snowmobileworld-s2.com/forums/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/sleeping.gif

Sled head the triple engine and the chassie they are put in are two diffrent things. *

You saying that a triple cant do bumps and turns has nothing to do with the engine and all to do with the chassie. *

The fact is that up untill now triples have mostly been only put in race sleds that are only designed to go from one side of the lake to the next. *

The triples were more expencive to make and prices where high so many people bought the twins which were packaged in cheaper, lighter more afordable chassies. *

Well the fact now is that the manufactors are charging the same for the twin engined sleds and they just leave the triples where they are. *

But I bet if doo put the 809 triple (Mach Z engine) In a ZX with the X package it would be among the top sellers. *And i predict that you will see a combo such as this in the near future because there are rumors coming from bombardier now about that. *

So when your out there with your 900 twin and you meat up with someone in a machine that has the same aggressive riding chassie like yours but with a engine powerfull enough to get the space shuttle crawler *to do the 1/4 mile in under 10, you cant help but get a little uneasy and picture in your mind the beating you are about to get. *

Triples are old and proven, so are dinosaurs, Dodge challengers, and non catilytic vehicals and they will all eat you up... *

Take care. * http://www.snowmobileworld-s2.com/forums/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif

Who cares about the lake.....any knuckle head can sit an a strait flat surface and pull the trigger.....Fact is sledding has never been better since the induction of twins....I would love to watch the MachZ fall apart on the snocross track.....The difference is twins are more durable make more torque out of the hole and in *660 or 1000 you are not going to be able to lug all of that xtra iron past my snow flap untill after those marks. You forget that I have already raced a Mach Z so I know what I am talking about.....I am not talking out my a$$ I am giving you the facts. *Thats great that you love you tripple and you think that they are going to stuff it into a ZX.....not going to happen. and if they could its not going to make for a light sled. Why would they spend engineering dollars on something that makes them no money because sales are ZERO here. The rotax tripple (MachZ) is the last thing I would ever spend my money on.....I would rather have a ZRT or an XCR atleast they look good. The only changes that the Mach has had is new stickers.....Does it go better?? give twins a couple more years......like the Polaris 1000cc twin and twins will rule the lake. *FACT- XC800 beats the XCR800 in 1000 feet every time.......

Take a deep breath guys and count to 10. *This may be one of thousands of times to agree to dissagree. *Just take it down a notch is all. http://www.snowmobileworld-s2.com/forums/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif

SledHead. *

Somepeople like the trails and somepeople like the lakes. *If your going to want to go fast and ride lakes Triples are the only way to do it. *

A twin revs way to high to cross lakes at the speeds i would want to. *

Last weekend i did a 65km strait run across a lake. *Never even touched land. *I held a crusing speed of 140 at 6900 - 7200. *

My friend on his mxz could go 140 but would only go 110, 120 because his engine was doing 7800 at 120 at 140 its at 8000 and holding a engine at 8000 for 64 km is just a recipy for a bad day. *

Your twin is only good in a race from a dead stop. *Try pulling along side a Machz at 80km and gun it. *The Mach will just embarrise you to the point you will sell your sled.

The fact is that if i were racing snowcross i would not want a triple but here on the groomed trails and lakes that i run i wouldnt want anything else. *Even when i get to a section of rough i can still go over it as fast as anyone else. *

I can ride the Mach Z just as fast as a ZX or ZR in the corners because im used to it. *As for the look of the mach z, it may not be as smooth and as clean cut as your zr but its the most beautiful thing your ever going to see when it does a drive by at 200km +. *And its also the most areodynamic chassie on the market thanks to its many but small vents and wedge shape, and lowerd front end. *Its a machine designed for destroying and that it does. *The reason the dont change it is because theres no need to. *It still does the job better then anything else out there. *

The polaris XCR after constant make overs and engine changes still cant win 50% of the time.

Cats ZRT doesnt touch it and the Thundercat also has a 50% chance of getting a ego bashing. *Not to mention the mach z is normally faster out of the box then a T-cat by about 3 mph. *

Yamahas SRX may win at the organized grass drags but i still never seen a race or been in a race where the srx won. *

As for reliability its the only sled i would trust to be droped of in the middle of the south pole on. *(that and my 500 rotary valved mxz.) *

So to call the Mach Z old and outdated is just wrong. *A twin may one day build enough power to hang with a Mach but if they put that kind of effort into a triple you better hope that you got chatterboxes because that would be the only way to talk to the guy after you started running.

So untill the day that triples are totally gone i will be driving one. *I will drive one because i like the smoother power delivery it has, I like the smoother sound it makes, I like how its screams instead of whines, I like how I can get the same fuel econamy as a 600 twin. *And i like the fact that if we ever come to a straitaway be it a lake or runway that taking the lead is just a half throttle push away.

And sled head this is not personal so lets keep it that way. *But the reason cat dumped the T-cat is probably because there is a guy like you working high up at cat who is just to stubborn to realize that not everyone likes the same thing you do.

Alright I am being an a$$ and I am sorry.....How about we agree to disagree and you can rule the lakes and I will rule the stubble fields That way I never have to meet up with you and spank your sled..........JUST JOKES LOL.....I am sorry for cutting down you hardware.

Fair enough. *But you will one day learn the truth and maybe you and I will meet up at a dealer spring ordering a Mach Z *in Zx. *lol http://www.snowmobileworld-s2.com/forums/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif

Machzzzzz, are you overcompensating for something?http://www.snowmobileworld-s2.com/forums/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/confused.gif * http://www.snowmobileworld-s2.com/forums/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/baaa.gif

Guys, it&#39;s called volumetric effecientcy (but maybe it&#39;s not spelled like that). Engine designers will tell you that when it comes to making horsepower, all else being equal, the more cylinders the better. Three smaller cylinders simply fill easier than two cylinders of equal displacement (more port area).

Two cylinders are cheaper to build, that &#39;s the only logical reason the manufactures would like us to believe twins are the way to go. *

The weight and milage things are both bunk.

AL

Well said. *

Thats what i was trying to say. *The volumetric effecientcy. *According to this any piston over 350cc making it a 700cc is not effecient.

i absolutly believe that the thunder beats the new 900 twin. but the story where u beat a machz with a long track...lol i forgot one thing...... its supposed to start with once apon a time.......lol http://www.snowmobileworld-s2.com/forums/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/withstupid.gif *http://www.snowmobileworld-s2.com/forums/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/tounge.gif

Just do what im going to do, keep my 800 twin and buy a mach z so it has someone to talk to in the garage. Thats the only way to get the best of both worlds.

MachZ69
You might as well do all the chirping now while the ZR900 cant defend itself.......You will be sorry next year when they come into production. Like I said before the same hp more torque in the bottom and its not fat, its a respectable 507lbs.
And *the mach race is no lie so the joke is really on you.

Correct me if I&#39;m wrong, but doesn&#39;t the zr900 have the most torque of any production sled ever produced? *American snowmobiler had it at 110 ft/lbs on the dyno..and T-Cats and Mach Z&#39;s are between 100-105. *Torque is what I feel in the trails!

If you&#39;re going to get into the torque thing, let&#39;s build a 900 single. How&#39;d you like to feel that on a trail?

AL

torque is The best part of sledding . There is nothing like hitting the throttle over a drift and felling the pull. Just food for thought.....We went sledding on Good friday and My friends cat started leaking antifreeze so we left it and went back to get the truck. I was two upping my friend and my other friend with the viper rode back with us. It was a slow ride untill we started crossing the lakes. I was still two up and I *raced the viper and we slowed down and rolled on at 20mph and it was The ZR900 That pulled away instantly and kept pulling even with 450-500 pounds sitting on it *http://www.snowmobileworld-s2.com/forums/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif Thats torque *http://www.snowmobileworld-s2.com/forums/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif

hi again; im just trying to get u cat gauys going ....lol u seem to have a short fuse in here. but seriously the 900 should be a good sled.i dont think it will outrun a tcat. and if u compare it to the 800 twin. it should pull it but not by a lake and a half....lol. as far as the thunders i would run a thunder from bottum thru to top end with two up on my sled and for $$$. thats how shure i am of my sled. i have ran numerous thunders and thats buddies and stangers. where ever i go if a guy stops on a thunder i will automaticly line up beside him. i have never lost to a thunder. im shure that there are some out there but there is a lot of work to make them do this.as far as torque both the thunder and the mach are well over 100 closer to 110.in the radar runs ill run 118mph the thunders will all play around 111 and 113. the 800 zr 98-103mph. the 900 twin should be strong in the drags and no dought strong in the trails. anyhow its a nice sled and should do fine as far as beating its own kind(thunder) dont think so.

AT 20 mph and gunning the throttle, the passenger should have been off the back on a 900. You could never do that on a Mach Z and keep your rider.