I really want a sled, what's out there for a decent price?

hight3chredneck

I has a mullet
I havent looked at sleds in the last 5 yrs, the last month Ive been getting ready for this year and couldnt believe what new sleds cost these days. There is no way in hell Id spend $9k+ for a toy to use for just a few months. But people must be buying them otherwise the price wouldnt be that high.

When most powersports (sleds, bikes, boats) reach a value of $1000-$1500, they stay there for years. A bump in a couple hundo now I think is due to the excellent snow fall last year and anticipation for another good year.

Troy, low ball on these older sleds, most sellers will take it. I looked at 6 sleds priced in the $1500 range and I didnt want to budge from my $1k budget, every one would take $1100. Also, dont get totally hung up on mileage. Regular maintenance and storage play a huge role in the condition of an older sled than just the odo. You are going to want it looked over before snow flies too. Good luck in your search!
Also, some people unhook the speedo or get a new one with less miles to keep the mileage low.:suspicious:
 

hight3chredneck

I has a mullet
The 670 Ski Doo's rip pretty good. I had a 98 Formula Z 670 that my dad bought brand new then handed down to me when he got a new sled on 02. I only weighed 140 at the time but the 670 makes a good trail motor, torque everywhere, unlike a triple.
wtf do you mean torque everywhere unlike a triple? Lawler
 

Troy S

Regional Leader
also need to cosider its not justthe engine either, suspension rebuild? Old crappy metal skis too on the last one. Troy needs to be on atleast a 100 hp sled too IMO
Yes I do, I'm a fat ass!!! Dan your sled is a front runner, I just need to put money together now, when I have 1700 more coming in dec. But I'm trying to see what I can do.
I havent looked at sleds in the last 5 yrs, the last month Ive been getting ready for this year and couldnt believe what new sleds cost these days. There is no way in hell Id spend $9k+ for a toy to use for just a few months. But people must be buying them otherwise the price wouldnt be that high.

When most powersports (sleds, bikes, boats) reach a value of $1000-$1500, they stay there for years. A bump in a couple hundo now I think is due to the excellent snow fall last year and anticipation for another good year.

Troy, low ball on these older sleds, most sellers will take it. I looked at 6 sleds priced in the $1500 range and I didnt want to budge from my $1k budget, every one would take $1100. Also, dont get totally hung up on mileage. Regular maintenance and storage play a huge role in the condition of an older sled than just the odo. You are going to want it looked over before snow flies too. Good luck in your search!
Yeah that's what I was thinking. Thanks.
 

One Eyed Jim

My Liver is Divorcing Me
wtf do you mean torque everywhere unlike a triple? Lawler
I mean the twin cylinder sleds generally have a wider powerband than there 2 stroke, triple cylinder counterparts. Yes peak horsepower is lower and they typically rev quicker but on tight technical trails a twin is usually less fatiguing to the ride.


Its simple physics, think of the mass of the rotating assemblies.
 

hight3chredneck

I has a mullet
I mean the twin cylinder sleds generally have a wider powerband than there 2 stroke, triple cylinder counterparts. Yes peak horsepower is lower and they typically rev quicker but on tight technical trails a twin is usually less fatiguing to the ride.


Its simple physics, think of the mass of the rotating assemblies.
maybe, just maybe, because it doesn't have as much low end torque?

It's common sense.
 

Junkie

President of RKC
I know right?

These people think sleds are worth their weight in gold.

I would be interested in that sled for $1500 I might just have to call.
Just like motorcycles. You picked the wrong time of a year to start shopping for a sled. Wait until summer and get one cheap
 

Troy S

Regional Leader
Just like motorcycles. You picked the wrong time of a year to start shopping for a sled. Wait until summer and get one cheap
I know I should have opted for a sled months ago, but I was blowing money on other shit.

Now I have some money to spare, and a little more next month and I'd rather not miss another season.

If I buy right, I can still list mine next fall/winter and break even, then upgrade to something even nicer.
 

One Eyed Jim

My Liver is Divorcing Me
maybe, just maybe, because it doesn't have as much low end torque?

It's common sense.
I'm sorry that simple physics is lost on you. Have you ridden similar CC and chassis sleds back to back?

It is inherent by design as there is more mass rotating at one given time on a twin cylinder of similar CC.

Also, more fatiguing to ride in a comparable chassis sled due to the heavier weight and the most usable power being made at a higher rpm.

I realize my statement may have sounded like a blanket statement but sit down and compare apples to apples, we are looking at older sleds here. Say, a 1999 Mach 1 700 triple vs a 1999 MXZ 670HO. Go ride both back to back to back on trails and see which one you prefer.
 

Fotoboy

Well-Known Member
It really dep on whats important to you. triples seem to top end better accross lakes etc.... but most of what I like to do is ditch bang, drifts and corners. Instant 2 piston tq is way funner and lighter as stated imo
 

hight3chredneck

I has a mullet
I'm sorry that simple physics is lost on you. Have you ridden similar CC and chassis sleds back to back?

It is inherent by design as there is more mass rotating at one given time on a twin cylinder of similar CC.

Also, more fatiguing to ride in a comparable chassis sled due to the heavier weight and the most usable power being made at a higher rpm.

I realize my statement may have sounded like a blanket statement but sit down and compare apples to apples, we are looking at older sleds here. Say, a 1999 Mach 1 700 triple vs a 1999 MXZ 670HO. Go ride both back to back to back on trails and see which one you prefer.
The triple is heavier, that is the only real downfall I see of a triple. it will be faster (not sure about skidoos). I still don't see how rotating mass has anything to do with the torque?

I am talking about sleds older than 2001, as are you. I personally like the triple, because the sound is amazing. the twin would be lighter, easier to ride. I still like the triple because of the torque out of the corners. I am comparing a 1999 500 ZL to a 1999 600 ZRT. ZL 500 not exactly the same but close enough to get an idea, where a ZR 600 would be at. clutched slightly different, slightly faster, but the ZRT still takes the cake.

Also had a 1999 700 SRX last winter, and compared to a twin, out of the corners on a trail, i like the pull much better. Not the, "here we go, come on come on" after you make the turn..

Lots of torque on the triple, when you have the right snow and track combination to put it to the ground, will wax a twin.
 

One Eyed Jim

My Liver is Divorcing Me
Triples rev higher because the rotating assembly has smaller components than a twin of similar CC. Well one reason anyway. The powerband is peakier in a triple, yes the triple will make more peak torque and horsepower but both will be moved much higher in the rpm range and come in quick where the twin will be smoother. Since the twin has more mass rotating there is more work being done at lower rpm levels, but conversely will not rev as fast as a triple.

In full out drag race yes triples are faster, I never said they weren't. In fact I said twins make more comfortable trail sleds for the above reasons, it is inherent in design.

See now?
 

Blownsvt

Original RKC MN Member
I ave had triples and twins. I honestly loved my old triple 1999 zrt 600. It not much heavier than the zr 600 twin and i would walk them on the top end and get out of the hole just the same. I raced my buddies zr's over and over and had the same result every time.
 

Fotoboy

Well-Known Member
I ave had triples and twins. I honestly loved my old triple 1999 zrt 600. It not much heavier than the zr 600 twin and i would walk them on the top end and get out of the hole just the same. I raced my buddies zr's over and over and had the same result every time.

triples have that top end pull like a sportbike. Ive rode 3 zrt's one was a race prepped one and that was def fast everwhere.
 

One Eyed Jim

My Liver is Divorcing Me
triples have that top end pull like a sportbike. Ive rode 3 zrt's one was a race prepped one and that was def fast everwhere.
This is what I have been trying to say, just not quite as simply. They are just different beasts inherently.
 

One Eyed Jim

My Liver is Divorcing Me
I'm saying from experience my triple beat the 600 twin in all areas. :thumbsup: granted it wasn't completely stock.
I said above they are faster and rev/ hit harder. I never said twins were faster.

I said twins have a smoother powerband that comes in typically lower in the rpm range. Maybe I am just really bad at explaining things. :lol:
 

Blownsvt

Original RKC MN Member
I said above they are faster and rev/ hit harder. I never said twins were faster.

I said twins have a smoother powerband that comes in typically lower in the rpm range. Maybe I am just really bad at explaining things. :lol:
I thought you were saying the twin had more tq down low meaning it would get out of the hole and accelerate faster but the triple has more top end. Guess I misunderstood.
 

One Eyed Jim

My Liver is Divorcing Me
I thought you were saying the twin had more tq down low meaning it would get out of the hole and accelerate faster but the triple has more top end. Guess I misunderstood.
My wording was bad, way down low with equal CC size in a similar sled they might make more for the simple fact by design they don't rev as high as a triple. I was just making a suggestion that he may like a twin better than a triple for trails due to the fact they are usually a smoother power delivery.

:thumbsup:
 
Top