[BUTCH800]

( I like that )

O.K.,I don't mean to wear this subject out. But, a local dealer has a new 2000 Mach Z. I'm just looking for opinions from folks who've had both or have ridden both the Mach and the MXZ 8. I have the MXZ 8 so I pretty much know how it handles in the trails. But I've never ridden a Mach. Is there really that much difference? I ride with a guy who run's a ZRT 800 in the trail and has no problems with the heavy triple. I'm not looking to start a fight between the twins and triples, just opinions on both......gas milage, dependability (I know the twins have had their problems)what problems to be aware of on the triple 809 (preferably the 2000). Thanks a bunch guy's.  

 

[Rocketman]

Buy the Mach...then you know you have the fastest stock sled in the world!

 

 

[folgers]

the zx is better in the bumps so they say! the ck3 is nice in the flats plus the mid range should blow your wig off! theres no replacement for displacemaent! tripple all the way! the zx handles  but the cks can handle too

 

[Machzzzz1]

The 809 is Solid.  All of the problems of the old triples have been fixed.  It is very reliable and starts first or second pull everytime.  When its warm its just half a pull which you can easily do when sitting on the sled.  

The 809 gets the same fuel eco as a 600 twin.  In some cases it will tie a 500 twin depending on how both machines are being drivin.  I was once riding a rail line doing 100km and so was the 500.  When we went to fill up i used less then him.   It also uses less oil.  

Once the suspention is adjusted properly it handles great.  It can take anything the trail can throw at it but you cant go of and hit a jump because it will come down hard.  

One thing that you must do when getting a Mach is buy Persision skis for it.  They totally change the handling and performance of the sled.  I can out drive or hold with everyone of my friends on a ZX.  Mostly because the weight on the front of the Mach keeps the skis planted and theres almost no skilift.  

And this last point may be view by diffrent people diffrent but after a long trip on the ck3 or even S chassie i feel great.  No sholder pain what so ever.  But on a long ride on a zx i get of and my sholders and neck hurt.  It has nothing to do with suspention but has all to do with the way you sit.  The high handlebars and upright sitting position really annoys me and my back.  

Go for the MachZ.  The power is unreal and top end is phenominal but it also scores big when your just out for a cruise.  The smoothness, Fuel eco, Reliabliity, handling, Comfort are second to none.  And most importent of all THE SOUND.

One other tip.  Any sled from bombardier past 700cc will have the Engine temps climb on you if your driving under 40km.  Get your self a bottle of Water Wetter from REDLINE OILS for it and add some to the coolent.  From what i hear it cures the problem and you can go as slow and fast as you want.  But normally doing 50 with good conditions the temp gauge stays right where it should.

 

[astro]

I have a 2001 with 3500 miles on it the only problem ive had with it is the recoil skips(plastic) the machz has had its share of problems too. stater plates for, crank bearings on the 98's. skidoo has been building the 809 for six years and its predecessor the 780 for 4 years now,(thats ten years of tinkering) i think they worked the bugs out. The problems with the mxz 800 have been minimal! the piston recall, that was blown out of porportion, skidoo didnt keep good enough records, so they didnt know which sleds got the bad pistons. i agree the factory setup on the mxz 800 was poor! especially this year. they didnt align the clutchs at the factory. last year, all i had to doo to get my sled to preform, was adjusting the preload on the secondary & finding the correct belt. Ive owned machz's mach 1's 670ho's 700x's and 800x's my 800 in corrected stock form will out accellerate a stock mach z. the only benefits the stock mach z has over the mxz are top speed and smoothness of the engine.

 

[Machzzzz1]

As for the Mach Z 800.  Look at my post. I said all of the problems with the old triples have been fixed.  I was only talking 2000 and up because thats what the original post asked.

 

[Mighty RX-1]

I loved my 99 machZ on the lakes and long winding trails.  But when it got rough, Oh My god!  Nothing at all compared to my buddies 2002 mxzx800.  On hard pack I would kill that 800 twin.  If the conditions weren't perfect, he'd get the jump everytime.  The ck-3 I found is more temperamental on snow conditions.  Put the 800 triple in the zx platform and you'll be really happy.

 

[machz69]

hi there : i have a 2000 machzr and a buddy of mine has the 2001 mxz8 now that beeing said: the zx just feels a little small for me. probably just the handle bars. if your ditch banging i would say mabe the mx. but if your trail riding. it would be hands down the mighty mach.way better on gas. way easier on the body (vibration in hands on the twin).it pretty much has a bullet proof engine. it realy is a blast to ride.its almost like riding a dirt bike in that when u hit it its there.u could ride trails all day and still do very well in a local drag or radar run. take the chiken out for a ride it will make your minde up for u.........lol

 

[slarson]

Lake tops and Railbeds.....MachZ, Tight twisties, and bump abilities MXZ. The suspension settings and layout of the MXZ are superior for handling and bumps. Yes the Mach will handle, but the MXZ wont make you tired like the Mach will. Pick for how you will ride.....the best all around Doo could make would be the 809 in the ZX chassis, but it did not happen.

 

[Rocketman]

Calm down guys...astro..Machzzz1..relax. lay off the personal attacks. You will notice I edited your posts. I won't put up with name calling and the like. If you know something you would like Butch to know, then tell him. Don't get sidetracked and bicker amongst yourselves. :!!:

 

[headgasket]

i've had both sleds, 98 Mach and 2001 MXZX800.both excellent sleds but i give the nod to the Mach,it is by far a more complete sled.good on the lake,good on the trails and more reliability.i got to the point where i didn't want to go any long distances on the mxz by myself for fear of the long walk home.no disrespect intended to 800 twin owners,i just think ski-doo did not do enough R and D.

 

[Mighty RX-1]

If what your saying is true headgasket, doesn't it make you wonder about the REV?

 

[dooman]

the REV is not just new this year just because its the first time you saw it,it has been in development for several years.machzzzz1 I will say this about you getting better mileage than the 500 on a rail trail,you were just cruising and he was holding the gas open more just to keep up with the triple.I like the triples butch, but the trails I get to ride most of the time are pretty rough so my zx out shines the heavier triple,but if I got to see groomed trails more  often than do I would be riding the triple.this is why i might have to have 2 sleds

 

[headgasket]

yeah sure ,just like the mxz 800 was years in development.mighty RX-1,YOU,RE RIGHT IT DOES MAKE ME WONDER?I PLAN ON LOOKING FOR A 2001 -2002 MACH Z OVER THE SUMMER.LOOKS LIKE BY YOUR MONNIKER YOU,RE HEADING TO YAMAHA COUNTRY.I DON'T LIKE THE IDEA OF BEING A $12000 GUINEA PIG FOR THE REV WITH NO HO ENGINE.

 

[Machzzzz1]

Acually i think that the rev 800 engine has been in development ever since the first 800 failed.  The Rev Chassie is probably good.  I have yet to see skidoo bring out a bad chassie.  And the engine is a new block so obvousily skidoo has been correcting stuff.  

Rotax doesnt make many mistakes.  If they made a mistake once it probably wont happen twice.

 

[mike800z]

we have both sleds too and my pick is the mach z. the 800 mxz has tons of power and goes good to but on a very rough trail the mxz rides better but i`d still stick with the ck3, it doesnt ride that bad at all either. i hate the rer secondary clutch on the mxz, way to much agressive backshift for the way we ride, take your thumb of the gas and just like a jake brake comming on.

 

[astro]

i would sure like to know what all of these problems where, other than guys expecting machz performance out of a twin! maybe mach zzzz could fill us in with all of these problems! nothing of what you said about the mxz 800 is truthful or fact. sure skidoo is improving the engines, didnt they improve the mighty mach z moter a little bit every year. it seems the 93  780 triple wouldnt hold together, the 94/95 wouldnt perform, 1996 was awsome. 97 was a pooch 98 had tons of problems including the bad exhaust system. 99 was better, stil had problems with burned out stator plates. 2000 and 2001 and 2002 a little better. the mxz 800 has only been out two years, why dont you give them a chance, after all we gave them a chance with the mach z. i know you guys are bitter with skidoo for not building you a chariot to compete against the mighty thundercat! they cannot build a machine if it is not going to be profitable. i am betting you diehard triple guys makeup less than one half of a one percent of all the snowmobilers. my facts may be off on this, but one thing for sure, the manufacturers know the facts! i am not trying to bash hear but i am sick of hearing these ck3 guys bash the mxz 800 & skidoo. the mxz 800 is a great sled! ive owned both, the mach z wouldnt keep up to the twins in the trails! so one more time, since you avoided the question, what are these serious problems with the mxz 800

?? i know the 2000 mxz 700 had a serious problem with the oil pump adjustment. if you didnt catch it, you would lose the crank. thats the only known serious problem with the series 3 moters, other than the hand full of bad pistons in 2001, that could happen to any one! the only problem is factory setup! not flaws in the engine! the twins are hear to stay. as for butch, the machz's push real bad in the corners, they have real bad shock fade in extended hammering of rough trails, you have to heard them around the corners especially in the rough stuff. the positive side, the smoothness of the rotax triple, it is problebly the smoothest triple on the planet. it only gets 9 miles per gallon if hammering on it. on groomed trails or corridors, its awesome. but in the rough stuff or off trail riding its not the machine to have. the 200 & newer machz's are veryreliable. please dont edit my post, i am only trying to give a honest/unbiased opinion here. the only problems ive seen with the 800 twin is the expectations, and factory setup. i wasnt happy with mine(mxz800x) when i got it, but it didnt cost me alot money to get it to perform. a couple of belts and a secondary preload adjustment.  i am betting skidoo will surprise us with some thing new next year, after all they will have lots of money after they sell the revs!

 

[Rocketman]

OK...astro...the Mach is quicker than the T-Cat out of the box.

All bragging aside...Machzzz1 and astro --- As a moderator, I have already slapped your wrists for fighting in this topic, and then you come back with a post like that? C'mon astro...let it go. We all know you hate the Mach and married the mxz 800. Machzzz1...you don't have to keep defending yourself with the same arguements. You have both already posted this information, and it has nothing to do with what BUTCH800 asked. Re-read his question....then re-read your posts...you decide if they should be edited or not.

 

[Machzzzz1]

Sorry Rocketman.  I deleated my last post and modified the first 2.  Sorry if i offended anyone.  

Im sure butch is smart enough to make a good desision based on the information that is on this sight anyway.

 

[ballsout1]

Maybe the real question is the mx700 vs the mach, I`ve owned both, for my area,I`ll take the 7, but the mach is awesome.