Results 1 to 13 of 13

Thread: power vs. weight vs. $$$

  1. #1
    Member jockomontana's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    seward
    Posts
    336

    Cool power vs. weight vs. $$$

    So I'm in the used sled market with a $2500 budget...

    I'm looking at RMK's and Summits in the 500-700cc range.

    My primary use for the sled is to access backcountry skiing, so I need something with good climbing power but not necessarily for highmarking.
    Also, I need something light enough that I can throw around in the back of my pickup and wont be a total ***** to dig out when it gets stuck.

    My concerns are whether a 500 will be underpowered for climbing; and how much more weight do I gain with a 700?? and is the fuel economy noticeably different either way?

    A good 600 is the ideal machine. I'm not afraid of a little extra power, but I'd hate to pass up a good deal on a used 500 with low miles...

    thanks.

  2. #2
    Member bgreen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Kenai
    Posts
    344

    Default

    What do you weigh?
    The individual right to keep and bear arms shall not be denied or infringed by the State or a political subdivision of the State.

  3. #3
    Member jockomontana's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    seward
    Posts
    336

    Default

    ...I weigh about 160lbs...

  4. #4
    Member bgreen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Kenai
    Posts
    344

    Default

    IMO you should do just fine on a 500 with a 136x2x15" track if your not expecting to be doing any high marking. A 600 will be great too if your looking for a bit more grunt. If you want to ride a sled like the above, let me know. I'll have my wifes 500 136x2 ready this weekend and you can compare it to a more dedicated climbing sled too if you want. (900 with 150x2.5x16")
    The individual right to keep and bear arms shall not be denied or infringed by the State or a political subdivision of the State.

  5. #5
    Moderator AKmud's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Wasilla, Alaska, United States
    Posts
    3,185

    Default

    If you can find a 600 class with a 144" track I'd jump on it. There isn't much power difference between 6-700s, but a little lighter weight and better mileage will be good for what you are looking to do. Given your weight, the 600 will turn the 144" just fine.
    AKmud
    http://i78.photobucket.com/albums/j96/AKmud/213700RMK1-1.jpg


    The porcupine is a peacful animal yet God still thought it necessary to give him quills....

  6. #6
    Member bgreen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Kenai
    Posts
    344

    Default

    Good point. I always forget about the 144 and 141 machines.
    The individual right to keep and bear arms shall not be denied or infringed by the State or a political subdivision of the State.

  7. #7
    Member jockomontana's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    seward
    Posts
    336

    Default

    thanks for the advice, guys... and the offer to check out your sleds, BGreen. I really appreciate it and may take you up on it. I live in Seward so shopping around for a used sled limits my range and time to look around...

  8. #8
    Member Rod in Wasilla's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    um... Wasilla...
    Posts
    826

    Default

    I've been riding a '96 Summit 500 for the past few years. It's a 136 x 1.5 and it does just fine hauling my 240 pounds around. It gets better than 10 mpg. It's light, and dependable. Sounds like a similar sled would be well suited for what you want to do with it. Of course a 600 with a 141 or 144 track would be nice too, but may be more money.

    Good luck with your search.
    Quote Originally Posted by northwestalska
    ... you canít tell stories about the adventures you wished you had done!

  9. #9
    Member bgreen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Kenai
    Posts
    344

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jockomontana View Post
    thanks for the advice, guys... and the offer to check out your sleds, BGreen. I really appreciate it and may take you up on it. I live in Seward so shopping around for a used sled limits my range and time to look around...
    I hope to got to Turnagain this weekend (with the other 10000 people that have been dying to go riding) so if you want to try them out send me a PM. The two sleds I have should be able to show you the difference between scary and normal sleds. You'll see a night and day difference between the two so I think you will be able to get a good idea of what to expect from the two somewhat extreme ends of the spectrum.
    The individual right to keep and bear arms shall not be denied or infringed by the State or a political subdivision of the State.

  10. #10
    Member akprideinvegas's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Anchorage, Ak
    Posts
    579

    Default

    if you plan on riding in powder, i would not run under a 141-144 track for an unskilled rider. Also the more power you have the easier it is to get around. you have to work a smaller motor alot harderin the pow and have to be more skilled in my opinion. but like an 01 mountain max 700 is basically the price range your looking at. maybe 02 but probably not much more than that. vance

  11. #11
    Moderator hunt_ak's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Wasilla--Cantwell Transplant
    Posts
    4,600

    Default

    IMO a 144" track is the longest track that you would need. If you are climbing and riding in deep powder with a 136/144 and getting stuck all the time, you'll figure out what you're doing and improve your skills. Brother had an 02 700 summit 144 and that thing would just climb and climb and climb. Granted, we aren't doing Thunderstruck style climbing but if you know how to ride at all a 144 will do you just fine and even a 136 does fine. Granted, I'm definitely not as big as some guys on here, but rider skill has a lot to do with it. Case in point, out riding the other day, a group of guys with new summits, rmk's, and even a 245 horse turbo'd RX-1 got out rode by a guy on a much older sled and had to switchback 3-4 times before getting to the top, but he made her!! Besides, most of the time you are doing at least SOME trail riding to get to where you are climbing/boondocking so having the 153/155/162 inch tracks gets old especially when you're trying to keep up with the short track guys.

  12. #12

  13. #13
    Member jockomontana's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    seward
    Posts
    336

    Default

    thanks again... this website sure is helpful. lots to think about now... totally understand the whole rider skill factor... I managed to swamp a borrowed machine before so I know how much that sucks...

    I think it may all come down to the right price at the right time.

    cheers!

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •