2024 Arctic Cat Catalyst 'Chassis' details?

[Cat45]

1 minute ago, ZR6000RR said:

? Fuck! 

That's the most intelligent thing you've ever posted 

[racinfarmer]

3 minutes ago, ZR6000RR said:

? Fuck! 

What?

Lets say you take 3 mountain bikes, all the same except wheel size.  26", 27.5", and 29".

Which one is the fastest?

Which one has the smoothest ride?

Which one handles the best?

[ZR6000RR]

Just now, racinfarmer said:

What?

Lets say you take 3 mountain bikes, all the same except wheel size.  26", 27.5", and 29".

Which one is the fastest?

Which one has the smoothest ride?

Which one handles the best?

It's a mountain bike. Who cares?

[mnstang]

1 minute ago, racinfarmer said:

What?

Lets say you take 3 mountain bikes, all the same except wheel size.  26", 27.5", and 29".

Which one is the fastest?

Which one has the smoothest ride?

Which one handles the best?

That's only 3" difference which is one inch less than 4".

[racinfarmer]

2 minutes ago, ZR6000RR said:

It's a mountain bike. Who cares?

Road bikes more your speed?  The Spandex crowd?

You have 3 identical road bikes, except 1 frame is aluminum, 1 is steel, and 1 is carbon fiber.

Which one rides the smoothest?

Which one rides the harshest?

Which one is the most efficient?  

[racinfarmer]

3 minutes ago, mnstang said:

That's only 3" difference which is one inch less than 4".

Good call.

I prefer the one that will roll the fastest, allowing my to hit shit faster and crash harder.

[ZR6000RR]

12 minutes ago, racinfarmer said:

Good call.

I prefer the one that will roll the fastest, allowing my to hit shit faster and crash harder.

Sled worthy?

[Not greg b]

The grips on the sled are trash. I wore them slick. Better put the odi grips I got out of the arctic cat catalog 

[Deephaven]

 

10 hours ago, krom said:

Spoken like the clueless moron you are.
If that was true, the manufactures wouldn't build different length sleds.

But reality is that there is a big difference in the handling from a 129, to 137, and again to 141.  You would be able to tell, if you didn't ride like old people fuck

Old people fuck faster

Edited March 16 by Deephaven

[Crnr2Crnr]

9 hours ago, krom said:

Any map changes have to be certified before they can be put into any vehicle

if they have someone capable of doing it... 

9 hours ago, mnstang said:

I believe the official word is the racers preferred it for ice racing.  However, Cat didn't offer a consumer 129 in those years and cat's claim was the 137 does everything better and the 129 is not needed.. so it's entirely possible they were told to say it's for ice racing because that is not what customers do at all.  If racers said it also works better on snow then people would complain and say "see that's why we want a 129".  And Cat didn't want to produce extra models 

nice try using logic with him

9 hours ago, ZR6000RR said:

Not a question. You can't tell a difference on 4" of track on the ground. Well 99% can't. 

from 2018-2024 all RXCs (minus one year) were 129's 

why do you think that was when they had 137s and a 136 SX sled?  as RF pointed out the Procross 137 RXC wasn't well received.

8 hours ago, ZR6000RR said:

Dave Brown  is a Cat Racer and Engineer. They tested. 137 won. 

too bad there wasn't ditch races this year to see if they made the right decision.  in fairness the Poo is a 136 and the Doo a 137

8 hours ago, racinfarmer said:

They tested the 137 in 2019. 

Why did the 2021, 2022, and 2023 race sleds not have the 137?

also, why was the RS a 129 instead of a 137 ?   

Roger knew...

 

[Cat45]

1 minute ago, Crnr2Crnr said:

if they have someone capable of doing it... 

nice try using logic with him

from 2018-2024 all RXCs (minus one year) were 129's 

why do you think that was when they had 137s and a 136 SX sled?  as RF pointed out the Procross 137 RXC wasn't well received.

too bad there wasn't ditch races this year to see if they made the right decision.  in fairness the Poo is a 136 and the Doo a 137

also, why was the RS a 129 instead of a 137 ?   

Roger knew...

 

Roger knows all kinds of cool stuff, I'm betting jimbo runs his mouth more than he listens around him (assuming him knowing roger isn't bullshit like the rest of what he says)

[Crnr2Crnr]

idk how many times the 128/129 vs 136/137 debate has been hashed out here (or the Internet) but my take is the couple extra lugs/studs help in acceleration and braking with higher HP sleds... and that's it.  bridging bumps... pure fantasy.  128/129 will rotate easier and top end better.  the Catalyst's ran/tested at ER the GD Soo and Mira races were 128's and they still weren't fast enough to run with the Polaris sleds.  

which in theory would be quicker through a smooth, groomed twisting and windy trail... a sled with a 121, 128 or 136 track with the same exact 600cc engine? 

@mnstang will likely have an opinion on this. 

 

[krom]

120/121 would be quicker/faster

Edited March 16 by krom

[Cat45]

Old school 121 would be the quickest in that case. Imo 128 is the best trail setup, 144 for a cross over. 137 is a slug, like running a bus down the trail. I hated my 137 rr even after many hrs/ miles of setup. 

[Deephaven]

136/7 for me.  Road approach traction alone makes that a decision.  Same track on a 128 and it's spin city in comparison.  144 is even better for that, but comes with some other side effects I don't like.  

But Jim can't feel the difference, lol.  Way slower than old people fucking 

[Crnr2Crnr]

8 minutes ago, Deephaven said:

136/7 for me.  Road approach traction alone makes that a decision.  Same track on a 128 and it's spin city in comparison.  144 is even better for that, but comes with some other side effects I don't like.  

But Jim can't feel the difference, lol.  Way slower than old people fucking 

121 and 129 have the same number of bar/lugs

128 and 137 have the same number of bars/lugs

136 and 144(?) have the same number of bars/lugs

so, for a big bore a 136 would be the sweet spot for a traction/braking advantage imo but the conversation was about 600cc Cross Country sleds

SX sleds are 136... more paddles per sq in = more diggage  

As stated previously, if/when I pick up a 600 Catalyst I'd get a 129, then convert it to a 128 and re-gear it for the trails i enjoy.  If I were to go with a big bore it'd get a 136. 

Polaris XCRs come in 128 or 136, their CC race sled is a tipped rail 136.  All their other trail sleds are 129/137

 

[Crnr2Crnr]

then there's the rotating mass variable... 2.86P track weighs less than 2.52P... especially when you start throwing studs in them.  

[Crnr2Crnr]

new Ice Arrowhead 130 track... Cat should make these factory optional

https://camso.co/en/powersports/snowmobile/products/ice-arrowhead-130/?pr=PS64

 

[mnstang]

1 hour ago, Crnr2Crnr said:

idk how many times the 128/129 vs 136/137 debate has been hashed out here (or the Internet) but my take is the couple extra lugs/studs help in acceleration and braking with higher HP sleds... and that's it.  bridging bumps... pure fantasy.  128/129 will rotate easier and top end better.  the Catalyst's ran/tested at ER the GD Soo and Mira races were 128's and they still weren't fast enough to run with the Polaris sleds.  

which in theory would be quicker through a smooth, groomed twisting and windy trail... a sled with a 121, 128 or 136 track with the same exact 600cc engine? 

@mnstang will likely have an opinion on this. 

 

There's trade off to everything.  It comes down to the rider and what they prefer.  Some riders might not experience the shortcomings of a track because they ride in a way that those shortcomings are not exposed, or their snow conditions or the trails they ride do not expose them.  But it's simple physics that a longer length won't have the ability to pivot in a turn as free or fast, given everything else being the same.

[Crnr2Crnr]

8 minutes ago, mnstang said:

There's trade off to everything.  It comes down to the rider and what they prefer.  Some riders might not experience the shortcomings of a track because they ride in a way that those shortcomings are not exposed, or their snow conditions or the trails they ride do not expose them.  But it's simple physics that a longer length won't have the ability to pivot in a turn as free or fast, given everything else being the same.

 

not that I've spent time on one but people who had Polaris Rush shorties seemed to love them.  2020 was the last year for those and to my knowledge the last factory full sized short track.

https://www.polaris.com/en-us/snowmobiles/2020/

far as I'm concerned the 128/129 seems to be the happy medium for trail riding and fits nicely between a true shorty 120/121 and a 136/137... mountain sled track length. 

 

 

[Crnr2Crnr]

 

[Cat45]

1 hour ago, Crnr2Crnr said:

121 and 129 have the same number of bar/lugs

128 and 137 have the same number of bars/lugs

136 and 144(?) have the same number of bars/lugs

so, for a big bore a 136 would be the sweet spot for a traction/braking advantage imo but the conversation was about 600cc Cross Country sleds

SX sleds are 136... more paddles per sq in = more diggage  

As stated previously, if/when I pick up a 600 Catalyst I'd get a 129, then convert it to a 128 and re-gear it for the trails i enjoy.  If I were to go with a big bore it'd get a 136. 

Polaris XCRs come in 128 or 136, their CC race sled is a tipped rail 136.  All their other trail sleds are 129/137

 

I think the tipped rails is where the speed comes from on the polaris. The rail profile is more efficient than the cats. My buddies assault you can push the sled with 1 foot on the bumper and it rolls. My 137 cat wouldn't roll more than a few inches. I had everything aligned/squared up and all bearings in good shape too. The guy on the assault is just gas and ride, no setup at all

[Crnr2Crnr]

2 minutes ago, Cat45 said:

I think the tipped rails is where the speed comes from on the polaris. The rail profile is more efficient than the cats. My buddies assault you can push the sled with 1 foot on the bumper and it rolls. My 137 cat wouldn't roll more than a few inches. I had everything aligned/squared up and all bearings in good shape too. The guy on the assault is just gas and ride, no setup at all

in theory on a hard surface the rear two lugs aren't touching the ground... which makes it a 128 

their Enduro sleds are 128's and they haul ass

[mnstang]

26 minutes ago, Crnr2Crnr said:

 

not that I've spent time on one but people who had Polaris Rush shorties seemed to love them.  2020 was the last year for those and to my knowledge the last factory full sized short track.

https://www.polaris.com/en-us/snowmobiles/2020/

far as I'm concerned the 128/129 seems to be the happy medium for trail riding and fits nicely between a true shorty 120/121 and a 136/137... mountain sled track length. 

 

 

And it won the freakin iron dog!

[Cat45]

31 minutes ago, Crnr2Crnr said:

in theory on a hard surface the rear two lugs aren't touching the ground... which makes it a 128 

their Enduro sleds are 128's and they haul ass

There's more too it than just 2 less lugs on the ground. I think the way the track wraps around the rear wheels with the angle in the rear and probably a different angle on the front rails makes it more efficient and faster.