Results are in... - Snowmobile Forum: Your #1 Snowmobile Forum

Cdndairyman · 12-11-2006, 07:25 AM

Hey guys if you don't remember, a couple of weeks ago I posted a thread about a 4 way drag race with a 2003 XC SP 600(studded), 1999 XC 600, 2001 MXZ 700 and a 2000 SX-R 700(studded). Well the results were interesting depending on the snow conditions. We had a LOT of snow here and in the deep stuff the results were pretty clear.

1. MXZ
2. SX-R (2 sled lenths behind)
3. XC SP 60 - 70 feet behind
4. XC about 100 feet behind
this was done in a field about a half mile long.

We went and found a different field where most of the snow had blown off it and there was a lot more traction. This made quite a bit of difference. We raced over a dozen times with the results being different with almost every race. The MXZ would win pretty much every time with a couple of times having the SX-R being right beside it at the end of the field making it hard to judge who won or who let off the throttle at the end of the field first. A couple of times the XC-SP would be right at the MXZ's heels and once the XC was doing the same. So traction plays a huge role. When it was good they were all pretty close.

So final results...

First place.... MXZ
Second place... SX-R
Third place.... XC SP
Fourth place... XC

I guess like they say, there is no replacement for displacement!

upersleder · 12-11-2006, 07:49 AM

thanks for the follow-up with real results.

and BTW TOLD YA SO

mmrosshere · 12-11-2006, 08:01 AM

Now my question is which one would be better in tight single lane trails. In your opinions

**RJ Gleason** · 12-11-2006, 08:50 AM

Here's the true test,It eliminates the driver factor. Have each person take every sled through a set course and time them each. Next take an average of their times and you will have the results.

upersleder · 12-11-2006, 11:45 AM

that would be more of a rider/set-up deal. each sled would be different. and again may be different for snow condition changes. so you would have a toss-up.

BUT all things being top notch, set-up properly, all sleds steering/handling good, i think you would have a close deal between the sleds, i would have to say the MXZ with the coupled suspension and more pull out of the corners would be a front runner again tho.

Cdndairyman · 12-11-2006, 12:13 PM

I have ridden all four sleds now, not in tight trails or anything but from my experience I would have to agree with upersleder that the MXZ would handle the best I would likely order them as follows

MXZ
XC SP
XC
SX-R

The Yammie is just too heavy for getting through the tight stuff. However out on the lake I think it will be all the MXZ can handle.

the WADE · 12-11-2006, 12:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cdndairyman

The Yammie is just too heavy for getting through the tight stuff. However out on the lake I think it will be all the MXZ can handle.

I know..that whole 10 lbs difference is killer!

Cdndairyman · 12-11-2006, 01:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by the WADE

I know..that whole 10 lbs difference is killer!

Pretty sure it is a bit more then 10lbs heavier then the MXZ. It lists at 472 dry and there is no way they Yammie is less then 500lbs. My old XLT felt lighter then it and it was over 500lbs

**smallengineguy** · 12-11-2006, 02:10 PM

Ski Doo, baby!!!!

**RJ Gleason** · 12-11-2006, 02:29 PM

Yeah, but it make for a fun afternoon with each person taking their turn on each sled and the rest standing by with a stopwatch to verify the results and placing side bets too.

the WADE · 12-11-2006, 05:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cdndairyman

Pretty sure it is a bit more then 10lbs heavier then the MXZ. It lists at 472 dry and there is no way they Yammie is less then 500lbs. My old XLT felt lighter then it and it was over 500lbs

No way hey....Actually it weighs in at 489 lbs dry.

upersleder · 12-11-2006, 05:19 PM

weight is an issue when its in the wrong spot. a well balanced sled will always handle better than one with too much nose weight ect. even if its a bit heavier. that 10 or 15 pounds may not seem like much, but if its in the wrong spot its HUGE.

TUGHILLYAMMI · 12-11-2006, 11:31 PM

WOW i was certain that srx would whoop him. Did his throttle thumb get hung up on his tampon string lol??? lol

80JD440 · 12-11-2006, 11:45 PM

I'd kill to ride a 700. Never been on anything bigger than an XLT. But alas, the old JD 440 has plenty on the trails.

Cdndairyman · 12-12-2006, 08:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TUGHILLYAMMI

WOW i was certain that srx would whoop him. Did his throttle thumb get hung up on his tampon string lol??? lol

well the sled isn't the SRX it is the SX-R. 700 triple with a single pipe exhaust. I am sure if there was an SRX triple triple there it wouldn't have been much of a race!

Cdndairyman · 12-12-2006, 08:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by the WADE

No way hey....Actually it weighs in at 489 lbs dry.

Wow really? That extra 17lbs must all be right on the front ski's then cause it feels pretty damned heavy compared to the MXZ. Like upersleder said, it all depends on the position of the weight.

the WADE · 12-12-2006, 09:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cdndairyman

Wow really? That extra 17lbs must all be right on the front ski's then cause it feels pretty damned heavy compared to the MXZ. Like upersleder said, it all depends on the position of the weight.

That is the main issue with it. Just proper distribution. I had a 97, played with the suspension a bit and got it feeling alot lighter.

Cdndairyman · 12-12-2006, 03:14 PM

Hey WADE I was just wondering where you found the info for the weight of a 2000 SX-R. Just curious so I can see for myself. I am still having a hard time believing it is only 489 lbs!

TUGHILLYAMMI · 12-12-2006, 10:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cdndairyman

well the sled isn't the SRX it is the SX-R. 700 triple with a single pipe exhaust. I am sure if there was an SRX triple triple there it wouldn't have been much of a race!

OK wow im a dumby. I totally was reading that like i road the short bus. Good race anyhow. I was gunna say from what i know about the SRX it would of been NUMERO UNO.