'97 Mach 1 vs. '96 Mach Z

'97 Mach 1 vs. '96 Mach Z

Post by Ryan Da » Sat, 16 Nov 1996 04:00:00


At their local Ski-Doo tour, the Ski-Doo representative said that the '97
Mach 1 would beat the '96 Mach Z. That's why they didn't release it in '96.
Is this true?

--
Ryan Damm
Northland Chapter Professional Car Society!
www.Ski-Dooers.com (coming soon!!)
--
"Macintosh -- Taking you where you want to go, Today."

 
 
 

'97 Mach 1 vs. '96 Mach Z

Post by Dennis Barbi » Tue, 19 Nov 1996 04:00:00

Quote:

>At their local Ski-Doo tour, the Ski-Doo representative said that the '97
>Mach 1 would beat the '96 Mach Z. That's why they didn't release it in '96.
>Is this true?

ARe you kidding? Doesnt that sound a little out to lunch?

How much faster is this years machz? Obviously it must be a
substantial amount because not only must it be AS fast as the 700 cc
mach1 but a considerable amount faster.

Anyways to get to the point I highly doubt it.

 
 
 

'97 Mach 1 vs. '96 Mach Z

Post by Bob Rone » Tue, 19 Nov 1996 04:00:00

Quote:


> >At their local Ski-Doo tour, the Ski-Doo representative said that the '97
> >Mach 1 would beat the '96 Mach Z. That's why they didn't release it in '96.
> >Is this true?

> ARe you kidding? Doesnt that sound a little out to lunch?

> How much faster is this years machz? Obviously it must be a
> substantial amount because not only must it be AS fast as the 700 cc
> mach1 but a considerable amount faster.

> Anyways to get to the point I highly doubt it.

If you had two sleds that were the same, setup the same, weigh about the
same + - 5#, one a 700cc triple 140hp and the other a 800cc triple 160hp
which one do you think would be faster?

Bob

 
 
 

'97 Mach 1 vs. '96 Mach Z

Post by Carn » Wed, 27 Nov 1996 04:00:00

Quote:



>> >At their local Ski-Doo tour, the Ski-Doo representative said that the '97
>> >Mach 1 would beat the '96 Mach Z. That's why they didn't release it in '96.
>> >Is this true?

>> ARe you kidding? Doesnt that sound a little out to lunch?

>> How much faster is this years machz? Obviously it must be a
>> substantial amount because not only must it be AS fast as the 700 cc
>> mach1 but a considerable amount faster.

>> Anyways to get to the point I highly doubt it.

>If you had two sleds that were the same, setup the same, weigh about the
>same + - 5#, one a 700cc triple 140hp and the other a 800cc triple 160hp
>which one do you think would be faster?

>Bob

 >>>>>>> Well said Bob. Just one more thing to remember,
 It takes  a serious increase in HP to gain relatively small
 amounts  in speed,once you`re up in the 100 MPH +
  range. So although the Mach Z  will definately beat the
 Mach 1, it won`t be by as much as a couple sleds with
 a 20HP difference in say the 35 to 55 HP range.
    Does that sound right ??
                              Kevin Muskoka Ont.
 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>