Jump to content

2024 Arctic Cat Catalyst 'Chassis' details?


Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, stinkipinki said:

Turbo for the CTEC 600 II is complete...wonder what it makes...150HP? 160?

Screenshot_20230323-050040_Facebook.jpg

It's not even a thing, they have no kit to sell.  They want deposit money now to reserve a kit that currently does not exist.

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Crnr2Crnr said:

back of the napkin math... with variables and unknowns

if the new 600 makes 130hp and if the turbo kit adds 10% that's 143hp

at elevation if it gives you 130hp... that's still less than a stock 800 and in the same ballpark as a Polaris 650

humorous 

Why would you do the work, hassle, weight, and expense of a turbo kit to only add 10%?  Sperdwerx has a 6000 n/a kit that gives more than 10%.

Also you're discounting for elevation for the 600 but not the others.  Obviously there are no numbers, because who gaf, but everything I've heard from people riding say it feels as strong as a 650, stock.  One independent media guy said feels more like a 700 (f7).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, mnstang said:

Why would you do the work, hassle, weight, and expense of a turbo kit to only add 10%?  Sperdwerx has a 6000 n/a kit that gives more than 10%.

Also you're discounting for elevation for the 600 but not the others.  Obviously there are no numbers, because who gaf, but everything I've heard from people riding say it feels as strong as a 650, stock.  One independent media guy said feels more like a 700 (f7).

idk

lighter weight... and that new belt drive

F7 :roflcrying:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, cat even calls it a 125 class 600.  Other than dumstad who gives two shits what some "media guy" says his butt dyno was reading? 

Have more invested than the cost of an 850 to turbo a fucking 600 and then only have slightly more HP than a stock Poo 650?  I guess some idiots would be that fucking dumb. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, jdsky said:

Well, cat even calls it a 125 class 600.  Other than dumstad who gives two shits what some "media guy" says his butt dyno was reading? 

Have more invested than the cost of an 850 to turbo a fucking 600 and then only have slightly more HP than a stock Poo 650?  I guess some idiots would be that fucking dumb. 

Where does it say anywhere it would have slightly more HP than a 650.  PS dynos don't win races little fella 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, mnstang said:

Why would you do the work, hassle, weight, and expense of a turbo kit to only add 10%?  Sperdwerx has a 6000 n/a kit that gives more than 10%.

It's more of an elevation thing and not much to do with trail performance, although thats how it will end up. When Polaris released the Turbo Mountain sled, it wasn't really so much to add power, but to keep the HP numbers near 100% when riding at 2000, 4000, 6000 feet above sea level. At 4000 feet I believe you lose like 15% of your HP, something along those lines.

Then shortly after, they tweaked it for trail performance.
I think its a great fucking idea, it keeps the lighter 600 mill in there, which is critical for Mountain riding, adds some power and makes it so it don't lose power. Even if they only get 15-20 more HP, which is all your getting on a 900R or Boost, it will still make a big difference, especially at peak RPM.

With the CTEC II 600 having a strengthened 800 crank, I think its a perfect candidate for a small snail. A super light M600 Catalyst, normal and Alpha skid,  with a 140 HP Turbo 600 I think would be a good combo. 

Edit:

To add I would love to see cat have 3 if not 4 engine options.
Normal 600, Turbo 600, Normal 860, Turbo 860.
 

Edited by stinkipinki
Link to comment
Share on other sites

nA for flatlanders is the way to go for a 2S imo because speaking for myself I don't want any additional weight nor do I need more than 125hp for the trails I frequent.  850 Boost or 9R?  I'd take the 9R eight days a week.  so, how much lighter is the 600 than the 800 or 860?  the big weight difference theory has been debunked numerous times.   

@Not greg b was reading turbo 600 posts from the Catalyst FB page while we were driving to ERX a few weeks ago and they were f'ng hilarious.  there's some absolute imbeciles on there throwing out numbers that the current race sleds are barely touching while burning race fuel. 

$20k 600 turbo with 140ish HP on a good day... the world has gone mad.  :roflcrying:

Edited by Crnr2Crnr
Link to comment
Share on other sites

for amusement...

2024 XCR 128" 650 & 850 488lbs dry 

2024 MXZ X-RS 129" 850 494lbs dry 

2024 MXZ X-RS 129" 600 480lbs dry 

straight from their own spec sheets.  uncertain of the reason for the bigger variable with etecs but that's what they published.  Cat hasn't published Jack shit for weight for several years now.  if the Lyst is much lighter in it's production form and they don't brag about it, there's bigger morons running things than I thought.

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, stinkipinki said:

2016 Real World Wet Weights:

Arctic Cat XF 8000 Crosstrek 141 - 637 lbs
Polaris Switchback 800 Pro-X 137 - 592 lbs
Ski Doo MXZ X-RS 800 129 - 604 lbs 

that's a shitty comparison 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, Crnr2Crnr said:

$20k 600 turbo with 140ish HP on a good day... the world has gone mad.  :roflcrying:

This when a stock Poo 650 is already close to 140HP.  

As for power in the mountains.  Who the fuck is buying a 600 to aftermarket turbo when you can just buy a factory turbo 850?  Because you want less power on the mountains?  Just fucking stupid any way you look at it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Crnr2Crnr said:

back of the napkin math... with variables and unknowns

if the new 600 makes 130hp and if the turbo kit adds 10% that's 143hp

at elevation if it gives you 130hp... that's still less than a stock 800 and in the same ballpark as a Polaris 650

humorous 

And the stock shit won't be a time bomb.

53 minutes ago, stinkipinki said:

It's more of an elevation thing and not much to do with trail performance, although thats how it will end up. When Polaris released the Turbo Mountain sled, it wasn't really so much to add power, but to keep the HP numbers near 100% when riding at 2000, 4000, 6000 feet above sea level. At 4000 feet I believe you lose like 15% of your HP, something along those lines.

Or not at all an elevation thing.  The Boost is laying a bunch of smack down on all other 2s and even stock 4s.  And that is at any elevation including sea level.

53 minutes ago, stinkipinki said:

Then shortly after, they tweaked it for trail performance.
I think its a great fucking idea, it keeps the lighter 600 mill in there...

"Lighter".  Cat has no big bore.  Assuming the 600 will be lighter is interesting.  Note the Poo weights.  The 8 & 6 weigh exactly the same.  The biggest difference between the two is in air space in the combustion chamber and the amount of metal or weight is really not a big difference.  One should assume the Cat big bore will be similar and regardless IF it is heavier it will only be a couple pounds which is less than the addition of the turbo weight.

53 minutes ago, stinkipinki said:

With the CTEC II 600 having a strengthened 800 crank, I think its a perfect candidate for a small snail. A super light M600 Catalyst, normal and Alpha skid,  with a 140 HP Turbo 600 I think would be a good combo. 

Why not just turbo the big bore or just have the big bore and gain reliability over the turbo.  Your fascination with this artificial weight savings is amusing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, Crnr2Crnr said:

nA for flatlanders is the way to go for a 2S imo because speaking for myself I don't want any additional weight nor do I need more than 125hp for the trails I frequent.  850 Boost or 9R?  I'd take the 9R eight days a week.  so, how much lighter is the 600 than the 800 or 860?  the big weight difference theory has been debunked numerous times.   

@Not greg b was reading turbo 600 posts from the Catalyst FB page while we were driving to ERX a few weeks ago and they were f'ng hilarious.  there's some absolute imbeciles on there throwing out numbers that the current race sleds are barely touching while burning race fuel. 

$20k 600 turbo with 140ish HP on a good day... the world has gone mad.  :roflcrying:

There's really no weight difference between the two motorsport, I've seen they're like two pound different.  A turbo kit 6 would certainly be heavier than it's 8 counterpart (if it has one).  That said, there is no denying that a small engine feels lighter due to its nature and power delivery.  That said AGAIN, a turbo kit will probably work against that light weight feel because of it's delivery.  I'm not against them and you bring up a good point about maintaining power at any elevation.  For mountain riding I'd probably take the 8 over turbo 6 but no 8 ready this year and many people are rich AF and throwing 5k at a sled is a minor inconvenience at that.  I'll say it for the 800tg time, the m catalyst snowest podcast was so great and basically responsible for my sale but they talk quite a bit about the 600 catalyst and if they'd be ok with that power level and they all admitted that you probably have more fun and are a better rider for riding the 6 and can go anywhere with it.  And that's at elevation.  

17 minutes ago, Crnr2Crnr said:

for amusement...

2024 XCR 128" 650 & 850 488lbs dry 

2024 MXZ X-RS 129" 850 494lbs dry 

2024 MXZ X-RS 129" 600 480lbs dry 

straight from their own spec sheets.  uncertain of the reason for the bigger variable with etecs but that's what they published.  Cat hasn't published Jack shit for weight for several years now.  if the Lyst is much lighter in it's production form and they don't brag about it, there's bigger morons running things than I thought.

 

 

 

Maybe they don't have a final weight.

I certainly don't care about it.  You don't ride numbers.  Two machines can be identical weight and feel drastically different.  You could even have a heavier machine on the scale feel drastically lighter than a machine that's lighter on the scales.  Numbers are just for assholes on the internet to pointlessly bench race about. (Cough)

When you're out RIDING a machine you don't give a shit what a scale says.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Deephaven said:

 

Or not at all an elevation thing.  The Boost is laying a bunch of smack down on all other 2s and even stock 4s.  And that is at any elevation including sea level.

 

A motor that maxes out at 220HP isn't smacking down anything.
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, stinkipinki said:

A motor that maxes out at 220HP isn't smacking down anything.
 

Are you asleep?  What 2S isn't it destroying?  Have you ridden one?  Seen one?  They are great for what they are.  Personally I am afraid they won't hold up, but they run.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Deephaven said:

Are you asleep?  What 2S isn't it destroying?  Have you ridden one?  Seen one?  They are great for what they are.  Personally I am afraid they won't hold up, but they run.

I realize the Polaris and Ski-Doo owners think 185-220HP is alot.
The only thing I seen was a 220HP Boost race a 260HP Sidewinder and the Boost got waxed badly.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, stinkipinki said:

I realize the Polaris and Ski-Doo owners think 185-220HP is alot.
The only thing I seen was a 220HP Boost race a 260HP Sidewinder and the Boost got waxed badly.

 

If you could read you will notice I stated 2 strokes.  Racing ANY stock sled against a modded 4 stroke and claiming superiority of said 4s is a fucking joke.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, mnstang said:

That said, there is no denying that a small engine feels lighter due to its nature and power delivery.

Dare I say the Gyroscopic effect :lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The limiting factor on a turbo 600 is going to be the piss water pump fuel. The after market kits are making around 8-9 hp per psi. i doubt you are going to get much more than 35-40hp out of thing on pump piss and have it still be reliable. And that puts you in the category of having the most expensive and complicated 850 class sled you can buy. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, mnstang said:

 

Maybe they don't have a final weight.

I certainly don't care about it.  You don't ride numbers.  Two machines can be identical weight and feel drastically different.  You could even have a heavier machine on the scale feel drastically lighter than a machine that's lighter on the scales.  Numbers are just for assholes on the internet to pointlessly bench race about. (Cough)

When you're out RIDING a machine you don't give a shit what a scale says.

that's why I said production form... who knows what might change between today and then?

brought the numbers up for Stinki, to partially dispell the big bore is heavier internet malarkey

on the 500, I can tell a difference in handling and steering input pressure between a full, 3/4, 1/2 and 1/4 tank of fuel... and if I ate too much for lunch.  when you get to know a sled or any machine and it's nuanances well enough you can sense a difference.  

probably similar with bikes off road?  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Not greg b said:

The limiting factor on a turbo 600 is going to be the piss water pump fuel. The after market kits are making around 8-9 hp per psi. i doubt you are going to get much more than 35-40hp out of thing on pump piss and have it still be reliable. And that puts you in the category of having the most expensive and complicated 850 class sled you can buy. 

Mountain riders aren't relegated to random trail side pump fuel.  They can run good gas if they want.  Yes it'd be more complicated but if someone likes the cat chassis but wants more power and doesn't want to wait a year, I can see this being a solution.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Crnr2Crnr said:

that's why I said production form... who knows what might change between today and then?

brought the numbers up for Stinki, to partially dispell the big bore is heavier internet malarkey

on the 500, I can tell a difference in handling and steering input pressure between a full, 3/4, 1/2 and 1/4 tank of fuel... and if I ate too much for lunch.  when you get to know a sled or any machine and it's nuanances well enough you can sense a difference.  

probably similar with bikes off road?  

I could Pepsi challenge a one clicker difference on my bike 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Trying to pay the bills, lol

×
×
  • Create New...