ZR 500 and 600 dyno nos.

ZR 500 and 600 dyno nos.

Post by Mach1 » Sun, 12 Oct 1997 04:00:00


A buddy of mine picked up a (white) zr 600 EFI.  He put it on a Land and
Sea dyno which regestered 109 hp with over 105 from 7900 through 8300
rpm. This sled has won 3 classes at one grass drag and 2 at another.  At
the last in the 600-triple final he wiped out an F-III and 2 ZRT's.

Another guy I know of dynoed a zr 500 at 86hp.  After he talked to some
factory guys at TRF, he found that the squish was increased on them to
accomodate the new mandated oxygenated fuels.  The original prototypes
were around the 95-97hp range, but prone to burning down.

Just food for thought for you green guys.

 
 
 

ZR 500 and 600 dyno nos.

Post by Dlchoo » Mon, 13 Oct 1997 04:00:00

Take a look at the 98' MXZ 500 Dyno results in the November 1997, American
 Snowmobilier (www.amsnow.com)

Quote:
>A buddy of mine picked up a (white) zr 600 EFI.  He put it on a Land and
>Sea dyno which regestered 109 hp with over 105 from 7900 through 8300
>rpm. This sled has won 3 classes at one grass drag and 2 at another.  At
>the last in the 600-triple final he wiped out an F-III and 2 ZRT's.

>Another guy I know of dynoed a zr 500 at 86hp.  After he talked to some
>factory guys at TRF, he found that the squish was increased on them to
>accomodate the new mandated oxygenated fuels.  The original prototypes
>were around the 95-97hp range, but prone to burning down.

Did the Doo F-III and the 2 ZRT's red light.?   From the appearance that Arctic
 Cat made at the Frankenmuth, Michigan Grass Drags I would have to believe that
 is the case.  In the finals on Sunday it was all Ski-Doo.  The SRX700 Yamaha
 even got smoked.  I can't wait to see the results of the Hastings, Michigan
 Grass drags.

That is sad if that ZR600 only dynoed out at 105.  They took a brand new just
 out of the crate  98' MXZ 500.  It hit 94.5 CBHP (Corrected Brake Horsepower)

 from the 96' Formula SLS that Dynoed at 89 CBHP, isn't it.

 Sorry the ZR's are nice looking machines but I will take the Ski-Doo.

Don
Michigan
Ski-Doo F-III and MXZ 440

 
 
 

ZR 500 and 600 dyno nos.

Post by Jim Turcot » Mon, 13 Oct 1997 04:00:00

Quote:
> That is sad if that ZR600 only dynoed out at 105.  They took a brand new just
>  out of the crate  98' MXZ 500.  It hit 94.5 CBHP (Corrected Brake Horsepower)

>  from the 96' Formula SLS that Dynoed at 89 CBHP  -

   Why is 105 hp sad? I would call it average. It is not that the 600
twins are getting worse, it is that the 500 twins are getting much more
powerful.
        Jim

--
remove -nospam- to reply via email
http://www.angelfire.com/me/sledder
         " Winter Rules"          

 
 
 

ZR 500 and 600 dyno nos.

Post by Doug Mill » Mon, 13 Oct 1997 04:00:00


Quote:
> results of the 98' ZR 600.

>98'MXZ 500

>Your right, now that I think about it. That isn't bad but why spend more money
> on a 600 when you can get the same amount of performance out of a 500.  

Ummm, they're not the same. The 600 has 10 more horsepower, according
to your numbers. That's like 10 percent different.
-Doug Miller
 
 
 

ZR 500 and 600 dyno nos.

Post by Flui » Mon, 13 Oct 1997 04:00:00

Quote:

>  why spend more money on a 600 when you can get the same amount
>  of performance out of a 500.  

In the case of the AC 500 and 600 dyno results, check the horsepower
curves and torque curves...the 600 has wider curves which will make it
easier to clutch and gear.  A wider power band is always easier to drive
and often gives better 'real world' performance.  No one rides dynos -
don't be lulled into total dependance on them to extrapolate sled
performance.  Useful tools, yes - the last word, no.

Jay
'96 SLS

 
 
 

ZR 500 and 600 dyno nos.

Post by Dlchoo » Tue, 14 Oct 1997 04:00:00

Jim,

I just looked at the Dyno figures in a past issue of Amsnow and here are the
 results of the 98' ZR 600.


65.0 foot pounds of torque.

98'MXZ 500

65.3 foot pounds of torque.

Your right, now that I think about it. That isn't bad but why spend more money
 on a 600 when you can get the same amount of performance out of a 500.  

Don
Michigan

Quote:
>  Why is 105 hp sad? I would call it average. It is not that the 600
>twins are getting worse, it is that the 500 twins are getting much more
>powerful.

 
 
 

ZR 500 and 600 dyno nos.

Post by trev0 » Tue, 14 Oct 1997 04:00:00

        Hey, let's keep the arguing to ZED vs ZEE....

        Chris



Quote:
> Jim,

> I just looked at the Dyno figures in a past issue of Amsnow and here are
the
>  results of the 98' ZR 600.


> 65.0 foot pounds of torque.

> 98'MXZ 500

> 65.3 foot pounds of torque.

> Your right, now that I think about it. That isn't bad but why spend more
money
>  on a 600 when you can get the same amount of performance out of a 500.  

> Don
> Michigan

> >  Why is 105 hp sad? I would call it average. It is not that the 600
> >twins are getting worse, it is that the 500 twins are getting much more
> >powerful.

 
 
 

ZR 500 and 600 dyno nos.

Post by Markus10 » Tue, 14 Oct 1997 04:00:00

We could go on and on comparing the ZR600/MXZ500 , like where are the Fox
 Shocks?  Multi rate springs?  Real plastic skis?  Available EFI?  Lightweight?
  Available clicker shocks?  Handlebar adjustable ski
 pressure?................................

But, D+D has taken a stock ZR600, bumped up to the multipipe class, and won.
 They have turned a 6.04, 500' in competition, can an MXZ500 do that? Others
 have placed top 3 in the multipipe class also.  Please let me know when the
 Ski-doo 500  has done that, o.k.?  Kinda  stupid for you to comapre a ZR600 to
 a MX500, no?

Now, ZR500/MXZ500, different story.

Markus.

Quote:
>Subject: Re: ZR 500 and 600 dyno nos.

>Date: Sun, Oct 12, 1997 22:34 EDT

>Jim,

>I just looked at the Dyno figures in a past issue of Amsnow and here are the
> results of the 98' ZR 600.


>65.0 foot pounds of torque.

>98'MXZ 500

>65.3 foot pounds of torque.

>Your right, now that I think about it. That isn't bad but why spend more
>money
> on a 600 when you can get the same amount of performance out of a 500.  

>Don
>Michigan

>>  Why is 105 hp sad? I would call it average. It is not that the 600
>>twins are getting worse, it is that the 500 twins are getting much more
>>powerful.

 
 
 

ZR 500 and 600 dyno nos.

Post by Mountain Do » Tue, 14 Oct 1997 04:00:00

If I remember right,  wasn't the 105.1hp run after they had yarded off
the airbox?  I thought the ZR600 made 101 stock.

 
 
 

ZR 500 and 600 dyno nos.

Post by Bruce Hawrylu » Tue, 14 Oct 1997 04:00:00

Quote:

> > That is sad if that ZR600 only dynoed out at 105.  They took a brand new just
> >  out of the crate  98' MXZ 500.  It hit 94.5 CBHP (Corrected Brake Horsepower)

> >  from the 96' Formula SLS that Dynoed at 89 CBHP  -

>    Why is 105 hp sad? I would call it average. It is not that the 600
> twins are getting worse, it is that the 500 twins are getting much more
> powerful.
>         Jim

> --
> remove -nospam- to reply via email
> http://www.angelfire.com/me/sledder
>          " Winter Rules"

I would call it a shit load.  My Z 440 only has 55 or something.
However I think my Powder Special has about that.  Of cours it is 80
cc's bigger....Hmmmmmmmmmm.
 
 
 

ZR 500 and 600 dyno nos.

Post by ZRid » Thu, 16 Oct 1997 04:00:00


Quote:

>    Hey, let's keep the arguing to ZED vs ZEE....

Ok, for starters, which has more HP, a ZeeR 600 or a ZedR 600?

ZRider
---------------------
ZR 580 EFI
DR 650SE
XL 1200C
---------------------
http://www.comwares.net/cuson/
-------------------------------
DALnet: #Dual_Sport_Riders
        #Strange_Brew
-------------------------------
To reply by E-mail :   Delete the ".NoSpam" at the end of my address

 
 
 

ZR 500 and 600 dyno nos.

Post by buff » Thu, 16 Oct 1997 04:00:00


says...

Quote:
>Point them up a hill or put some real load on the engine and you will see

why you want more ccs.
Quote:
>Take a look at the 98' MXZ 500 Dyno results in the November 1997, American
> Snowmobilier (www.amsnow.com)

>>A buddy of mine picked up a (white) zr 600 EFI.  He put it on a Land and
>>Sea dyno which regestered 109 hp with over 105 from 7900 through 8300
>>rpm. This sled has won 3 classes at one grass drag and 2 at another.  At
>>the last in the 600-triple final he wiped out an F-III and 2 ZRT's.

>>Another guy I know of dynoed a zr 500 at 86hp.  After he talked to some
>>factory guys at TRF, he found that the squish was increased on them to
>>accomodate the new mandated oxygenated fuels.  The original prototypes
>>were around the 95-97hp range, but prone to burning down.

>Did the Doo F-III and the 2 ZRT's red light.?   From the appearance that
Arctic
> Cat made at the Frankenmuth, Michigan Grass Drags I would have to believe
that
> is the case.  In the finals on Sunday it was all Ski-Doo.  The SRX700
Yamaha
> even got smoked.  I can't wait to see the results of the Hastings, Michigan
> Grass drags.

>That is sad if that ZR600 only dynoed out at 105.  They took a brand new
just
> out of the crate  98' MXZ 500.  It hit 94.5 CBHP (Corrected Brake
Horsepower)

> from the 96' Formula SLS that Dynoed at 89 CBHP, isn't it.

> Sorry the ZR's are nice looking machines but I will take the Ski-Doo.

>Don
>Michigan
>Ski-Doo F-III and MXZ 440

 
 
 

ZR 500 and 600 dyno nos.

Post by Michael Har » Thu, 16 Oct 1997 04:00:00


Quote:

> >  why spend more money on a 600 when you can get the same amount
> >  of performance out of a 500.  

> In the case of the AC 500 and 600 dyno results, check the horsepower
> curves and torque curves...the 600 has wider curves which will make it
> easier to clutch and gear.  A wider power band is always easier to drive
> and often gives better 'real world' performance.  No one rides dynos -
> don't be lulled into total dependance on them to extrapolate sled
> performance.  Useful tools, yes - the last word, no.

> Jay
> '96 SLS

Just curious here.. How much of each sleds peak HP is there at say 6500
rpm? That's where all my sleds seem to spend most of the time (when not at
max rpm). Doesn't take much clutching from 6500 on up...

Michael

 
 
 

ZR 500 and 600 dyno nos.

Post by Flui » Thu, 16 Oct 1997 04:00:00

Quote:

> Ok, for starters, which has more HP, a ZeeR 600 or a ZedR 600?

Well, it depends on whether it is an Alaskan ZeeR or a Minnesotan ZeeR.
The greater coriolis force distribution seen in the more northern
latitudes improves fuel atomization, hense more HP. With the higher
forces generated in Alaska ( closer to the pole, different relative
earth rotational velocity ), the Alaskan ZeeR would produce more power
than one from Wisconsin. The ZedRs are handicapped too of course, unless
they are ridden in the high Canadian arctic ( Mayo, Baffin Island, etc
).

Jay
'96 SLS

 
 
 

ZR 500 and 600 dyno nos.

Post by Flui » Fri, 17 Oct 1997 04:00:00

Quote:

> Just curious here.. How much of each sleds peak HP is there at say 6500
> rpm? That's where all my sleds seem to spend most of the time (when not at
> max rpm). Doesn't take much clutching from 6500 on up...

Torque is what matters with clutching, and the 600 has nearly 20% more.
Ask any performance 440 rider.....and BTW don't you ever get a
backshift?  Or do you just ride around WOT in a straight line? %^)

Jay
'96 SLS