Arctic Cat Forum banner

1 - 20 of 27 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
287 Posts
Track length: ZR has a 121" track while the EXT I believe had either a 128" or 136" track. The EXT was better if you went into powder snow, whereas the ZR is great for ditchbanging and trails. (Although wife takes her's into some fairly deep snow).
 

Attachments

·
Registered
Joined
·
118 Posts
What year are we talking about?

The only difference between these two sleds is the decals and the shocks. ZR came with rebuildable Fox shocks, EXT came with non-rebuildable RydeFX shocks. I've heard that the engine placement in the ZR is a tad lower to improve handling but I'm not 100% sure. The ZR was more expensive only because it had better shocks. That was a big deal in the mid-90's.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
118 Posts
In 1993 both sleds had Mikuni VM38 carbs. 94, 95 and 96 580's moved up to VM 40's & different exhaust porting. In 95 and 96 came the EFI option as well. In 1997, the ZR turned lime-green, got more rear suspension travel (ETT) and was only available in EFI. EXT stayed subtle and got EFI and ETT.

Love these old sleds! Brings back memories.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
21,410 Posts
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (krank600 @ Nov 11 2009, 10:23 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div>
In 1993 both sleds had Mikuni VM38 carbs. 94, 95 and 96 580's moved up to VM 40's & different exhaust porting. In 95 and 96 came the EFI option as well. In 1997, the ZR turned lime-green, got more rear suspension travel (ETT) and was only available in EFI. EXT stayed subtle and got EFI and ETT.

Love these old sleds! Brings back memories.
[/b]
I love mine!
[attachment=138981:IMG_1031.JPG][attachment=138982:IMG_1030.JPG]
 

Attachments

·
Registered
Joined
·
271 Posts
Discussion Starter #9
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (krank600 @ Nov 11 2009, 07:57 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div>
What year are we talking about?

The only difference between these two sleds is the decals and the shocks. ZR came with rebuildable Fox shocks, EXT came with non-rebuildable RydeFX shocks. I've heard that the engine placement in the ZR is a tad lower to improve handling but I'm not 100% sure. The ZR was more expensive only because it had better shocks. That was a big deal in the mid-90's.[/b]

im looking at a 1994 ext580 and a 1995 zr580
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
118 Posts
Oh yeah. You're right, FreezerBurnt. I personally liked the single port exhaust and smaller carbs better that was in my dad's 93 580Z. Almost as much power and a lot less tempermental.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,960 Posts
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (72 arctic cat @ Nov 12 2009, 05:08 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div>
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (krank600 @ Nov 11 2009, 07:57 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
What year are we talking about?

The only difference between these two sleds is the decals and the shocks. ZR came with rebuildable Fox shocks, EXT came with non-rebuildable RydeFX shocks. I've heard that the engine placement in the ZR is a tad lower to improve handling but I'm not 100% sure. The ZR was more expensive only because it had better shocks. That was a big deal in the mid-90's.[/b]

im looking at a 1994 ext580 and a 1995 zr580
[/b][/quote]

In 94 the EXT was on a different chassis than the ZR. Like others have mentioned the cylinders and carbs were different and the other primary difference is the Fox Shox and stiffer suspension set up on the ZR.

94 EXT chassis:

94 ZR chassis:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
126 Posts
In my opinon the 93 type ZR chassis in that 94 ext is better. But the worst part of the 93 EXT is it does not have Wilwood hydraulic brake...so buy the ZR or update chaincase on the EXT and add the good brakes. The 94 ZR has best brakes I have ever had on a sled..they wimped them out after that thinking it was to grabby.. well for real riders it was not too grabby..it was two finger lock your picks perfect.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,340 Posts
I wouldnt say the tripple port you had to tinker more then the single. I had a 95 EXT that thing was the best running sled I ever had. I had ZERO problems with it It flat out smoked a lot of ZR's I think it was cause of the shocks where softer it would transfer weight better it was a rocket to 90 mph after that it didnt have anything. There was about 5 people I knew that had 94 ZR's my 95 EXT would smoke all them bad I would jump them out of the hole about 4 sled lengths and I would pull on them in mid about 3 more. I could even play catch up too them. Only real problem was the clutch was JUNK!!!! on them from the get go. Comet built the clutches for Arctic them years they where a handgrande ready to go off. I bet I rebuilt my clutch about every 500 miles the bushings would be shot. I had a clutch kit in mine It was Stock weights 51 gram knotched weights orange/white blackmagic spring BM18 helix and the stock yellow spring. You would rev it up to 4800 and then nail it sit forward on the seat right on the tank it would come straight up about 12 inches off the ground and just go. The tach would hit 8500 then about 60 mph it would shift down to 8350 and pull back up slowly to 8500 when you hit about 90mph. I had about 144 picks in also seem to hook just about right spin just enuff to keep your R's
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
451 Posts
For the same or a little more money take the ZR hands down.

1. re-buildable shocks - The ext would likely need new shocks anyway the ZR fox shocks will ride better and can be valved for your weight and riding style

2. ZR chassis will handle better on the trails. Neither sled is a big bump sled but the ZR was/is a point and shoot slot racer set up right. I had a 94 EXT and a 96 580 zr and their was a noticeable difference in the chassis/shocks

3. If you end up selling it or parting it out the ZR will net you more money for all the same reasons ZR's usually sell for more than a EXT or ZL

4. The tripple exhaust port motor might be a little more tempermental but make sure the crank is good, put in new pistons and you should be golden.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,960 Posts
A Tempa-Flow is great way to deal with tuning, and keeping it tuned as conditions change. I think it is the bigger carbs of the ZR that make temperamental, or more effected by changing conditions, more than the triple exhaust ports. No matter what the exhaust ports are, if the fuel delivery is properly tuned the engine will function and perform properly. This is where I've found the Tempa-Flow is such a fantastic device. This engine, ZR 580, is a pig on fuel and can be downright atrocious when the jetting is off.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
118 Posts
I agree with 94ZR580 about the VM40 carbs being too big for that motor. Looking at that engine it seems the carbs are almost as big as the cylinders! The bigger carbs gave it better top end and a bit more horsepower but I believe the low end running quality suffered. That 93 580Z I had had the VM38's and it was more 'snappy' on the bottom end. Low end on the triple port 580's was never a strong point. I loved that93 EXT 580Z. It was fast, light and easy to handle....albeit a bit tippy....and the tiger-striped seat was also hard as a rock, but it was reliable, good looking and FUN. Gotta find me another one.
 
1 - 20 of 27 Posts
Top