Jump to content
Check your account email address ×

2024 Arctic Cat Catalyst 'Chassis' details?


Recommended Posts

3 minutes ago, Not greg b said:

You wanted one with a 858 sticker that is 8 feet tall?

I was hoping it would be at least as big as the 90's "ZRT" logo

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, krom said:

 

Looks like someone was lying when they claimed their dealer is sold out after all...

image.png.d88de28cc82d3e9a6b26a5f5fbbe761c.png

 

image.thumb.png.b9535fc2d35da5ae916b2e9c59aa335c.png

 

 

The gouging on that. I paid 900 less with tax 

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Looks like the guys who can't ride a Z570 but HAVE to have a 800/858 RXC are going to get one in 2025.

They'll be able to ride around all weekend with the QS3R's at 1 and the speed at 35mph.

Edited by racinfarmer
  • Like 2
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Not greg b said:

The gouging on that. I paid 900 less with tax 

but, he has the best dealer?  :dunno:

23 minutes ago, racinfarmer said:

Looks like the guys who can't ride a Z570 but HAVE to have a 800/858 RXC are going to get one in 2025.

They'll be able to ride around all weekend with the QS3R's at 1 and the speed at 35mph.

don't let them catch you moving them to setting 2 or...:kneebash:

 

what are we thinking for a fully dressed 858 RXC here... $20K?

they're probably already sold out... :lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, Crnr2Crnr said:

but, he has the best dealer?  :dunno:

don't let them catch you moving them to setting 2 or...:kneebash:

 

what are we thinking for a fully dressed 858 RXC here... $20K?

they're probably already sold out... :lol:

20K  :dunno:.. Wondering if it will be cheaper then the new 4 smoke motor from cat in 2025?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, jonlafon1 said:

20K  :dunno:.. Wondering if it will be cheaper then the new 4 smoke motor from cat in 2025?

should cost more than the na version, and less than the turbo version

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, Crnr2Crnr said:

ok... torsions.

ZR 129 uses 0.359" 100 degree 12lb torsions

RXC uses 0.394" 90 degree 16.5lb torsions

for the 129" they made a heavy spring kit with a pair of torsions that are the same as the 24 RXC uses... 8639-544 which is $145 for the pair.  

so there's hope... :lol:

I'm glad you found the info and posted.  It's a bear trying to dial in and adjust these things without riding.

I had the RR sleds dialed in for my style over the years.  I figured it wouldn't hurt to use those numbers as a cross reference starting point.

First of all, I'll note that the new RXC isn't set up race ready like the old versions.  Personally I'm fine with that.  Rider weight becomes a factor and some of the super stiff setups make it hard to use full suspension travel except in big hits.

Ski shock springs on the new RXC are same specs as the RR.

The new RXC FTS spring is the same setup I used on the old RR sleds.  They came with a stock initial rate that was too light and it slammed through the travel.  I always swapped out the spring for the one now on the RXC.  I'll see how valving works out, but it feels dang close to the RR.

The RXC rear springs spec the same as the RR sleds on paper.  It is the same spec description used on quite a few previous sleds.  With the the skid changes, it acts much stiffer.  Spring part numbers are different, so I'm wondering if there is something I'm missing.

Either way, the Catalyst RXC is incredibly compliant except on the rear arm.  I've done a lot of floor setups over the years and it's notable.  We'll see how it breaks in.  Right now, it gets lock up stiff when the front arm couples.  I'm already opening up coupling to use the rear arm more effectively.

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

14 minutes ago, favoritos said:

I'm glad you found the info and posted.  It's a bear trying to dial in and adjust these things without riding.

I had the RR sleds dialed in for my style over the years.  I figured it wouldn't hurt to use those numbers as a cross reference starting point.

First of all, I'll note that the new RXC isn't set up race ready like the old versions.  Personally I'm fine with that.  Rider weight becomes a factor and some of the super stiff setups make it hard to use full suspension travel except in big hits.

Ski shock springs on the new RXC are same specs as the RR.

The new RXC FTS spring is the same setup I used on the old RR sleds.  They came with a stock initial rate that was too light and it slammed through the travel.  I always swapped out the spring for the one now on the RXC.  I'll see how valving works out, but it feels dang close to the RR.

The RXC rear springs spec the same as the RR sleds on paper.  It is the same spec description used on quite a few previous sleds.  With the the skid changes, it acts much stiffer.  Spring part numbers are different, so I'm wondering if there is something I'm missing.

Either way, the Catalyst RXC is incredibly compliant except on the rear arm.  I've done a lot of floor setups over the years and it's notable.  We'll see how it breaks in.  Right now, it gets lock up stiff when the front arm couples.  I'm already opening up coupling to use the rear arm more effectively.

no problem, just trying to get Greg to be the guinea pig.  :)

I believe Zach said they're sprung a bit lighter than the Procross because the sleds are lighter and the rider further forward but... 

for $300 and an hour of my time if I had a base ZR, I'd try it just to see what works and what doesn't if you don't get the RXC.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, favoritos said:

I'm already opening up coupling to use the rear arm more effectively.

What did you adjust?  Pull coupler blocks?      Nice post, thanks for info

Edited by jonlafon1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, Crnr2Crnr said:

Alex came up and we finished the testing 2 weeks ago. It turned out better than expected. Here is the 5th gen prototype. The finished product is amazing but I can’t share those pictures yet. 

IMG_3336.jpeg

IMG_3335.jpeg

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, favoritos said:

I'm glad you found the info and posted.  It's a bear trying to dial in and adjust these things without riding.

I had the RR sleds dialed in for my style over the years.  I figured it wouldn't hurt to use those numbers as a cross reference starting point.

First of all, I'll note that the new RXC isn't set up race ready like the old versions.  Personally I'm fine with that.  Rider weight becomes a factor and some of the super stiff setups make it hard to use full suspension travel except in big hits.

Ski shock springs on the new RXC are same specs as the RR.

The new RXC FTS spring is the same setup I used on the old RR sleds.  They came with a stock initial rate that was too light and it slammed through the travel.  I always swapped out the spring for the one now on the RXC.  I'll see how valving works out, but it feels dang close to the RR.

The RXC rear springs spec the same as the RR sleds on paper.  It is the same spec description used on quite a few previous sleds.  With the the skid changes, it acts much stiffer.  Spring part numbers are different, so I'm wondering if there is something I'm missing.

Either way, the Catalyst RXC is incredibly compliant except on the rear arm.  I've done a lot of floor setups over the years and it's notable.  We'll see how it breaks in.  Right now, it gets lock up stiff when the front arm couples.  I'm already opening up coupling to use the rear arm more effectively.

Are you running/able to run your racewerx coupling arm in this one? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Not greg b said:

Alex came up and we finished the testing 2 weeks ago. It turned out better than expected. Here is the 5th gen prototype. The finished product is amazing but I can’t share those pictures yet. 

IMG_3336.jpeg

IMG_3335.jpeg

good thing you had enough material for the shocks left.  

did you order the M snow flap yet?  @mnstang won't need his and might make you a good deal... or trade for some JAG parts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Crnr2Crnr said:

good thing you had enough material for the shocks left.  

did you order the M snow flap yet?  @mnstang won't need his and might make you a good deal... or trade for some JAG parts.

The snow flap was self removed when I backed it out my truck and ran it over 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Not greg b said:

The snow flap was self removed when I backed it out my truck and ran it over 

did the video offend the brain surgeons on Facebook?  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, jonlafon1 said:

What did you adjust?  Pull coupler blocks?      Nice post, thanks for info

I have an old dial adjust that has one side ground down to 1/8" over the shaft.  I've ground one side of the stockers in the past, but I figured I'd do some testing with this thing first.

The coupling is pretty harsh on these with the skid changes.  It's hard to collapse the rear arm with tight coupling.  That's great if you want to ride flat all day. It tends to spin out easier on launch and across bigger hits.  I prefer a little more transfer. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

57 minutes ago, Not greg b said:

Alex came up and we finished the testing 2 weeks ago. It turned out better than expected. Here is the 5th gen prototype. The finished product is amazing but I can’t share those pictures yet. 

IMG_3336.jpeg

IMG_3335.jpeg

Think that infringes on Doos pyramidal chassis patents.  Get back to the drawing board.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, favoritos said:

I have an old dial adjust that has one side ground down to 1/8" over the shaft.  I've ground one side of the stockers in the past, but I figured I'd do some testing with this thing first.

The coupling is pretty harsh on these with the skid changes.  It's hard to collapse the rear arm with tight coupling.  That's great if you want to ride flat all day. It tends to spin out easier on launch and across bigger hits.  I prefer a little more transfer. 

 I find the 137 to have very little transfer in stock form.. I used to run heater hose on the bare metal bar for some cushion (metal on metal contact) , but now just pull the blocks and run bar bare metal.. Definitely helps drop er and dig better. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, krom said:

 

Looks like someone was lying when they claimed their dealer is sold out after all...

image.png.d88de28cc82d3e9a6b26a5f5fbbe761c.png

 

image.thumb.png.b9535fc2d35da5ae916b2e9c59aa335c.png

 

 

Every sled had a name on it when I picked mine up last Saturday. 

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...