I finally rode my F7 today. I'm never looking back, no polaris in my life any more. This thing is mean and it's bone stock. The only thing about this sled that has me thinking is why a narrow track? Maybe to go longer and not add as much rotating mass as the 15" equivalent? It seems a little tippy with the narrower track than I'm used to but overall I'm pleased. I can honestly say this is the first thing I own that I have no intentions on modding. I'm big into stand up freestyle jet skis. I build my own carbon fiber hulls, and have wasted over 30 k on a "stupid jet ski" as my wife would say (10mm stroker 1,000+ cc twins etc) I'm leaving this alone! Coming off a polaris 600 edge- i love it, tons of power!
What was cats thinking on the 13.5 track
1 - 6 of 6 Posts
Joined
·
8,442 Posts
less drag
Joined
·
2 Posts
do not want to lose any of that nice cat handling
Joined
·
523 Posts
Arctic Pride and SnowTech had a very intresting article about 10 years ago documenting the development of the Firecat from its earliest concept stages as well as several prototype stages. Basically, the whole Firecat concept was to eliminate what the engineers figured was unnecessary weight. Not only was the track narrowed, but all the suspension components, the tunnel, the seat, the front bulkhead, etc were all narrowed and that added up to significant weight savings over the ZR chassied machines. The extention of the track length from 121" to 128" was so the tracks footprint would be similar to a conventional 121x15" track so there wouldnt be much flotation sacrificed.
As you guys before mentioned, the track itself is lighter (not a crazy amount, I think the article said its about 2 or 3 pounds lighter then a conventional 121X15") but its rotational weight which makes a big difference.
The first machines in this chassis, the 2002 ZR 440 Sno Pro, were really radical and light and had some concepts that just didnt work out (like the driveshaft mounted brake), the production Firecats were set to be just about as light and as radical as the ZR 440, but in order to increase durability alot of "beefing up" was done to the early models (larger cooling system, chassis reinforcement, etc) so they were never quite as light as was once planned.
None the less, they are still rocketships!
As you guys before mentioned, the track itself is lighter (not a crazy amount, I think the article said its about 2 or 3 pounds lighter then a conventional 121X15") but its rotational weight which makes a big difference.
The first machines in this chassis, the 2002 ZR 440 Sno Pro, were really radical and light and had some concepts that just didnt work out (like the driveshaft mounted brake), the production Firecats were set to be just about as light and as radical as the ZR 440, but in order to increase durability alot of "beefing up" was done to the early models (larger cooling system, chassis reinforcement, etc) so they were never quite as light as was once planned.
None the less, they are still rocketships!
Ok, I'm going to de rail my own thread... I lied, I have 2 mods planned for this sled. Studs and a visor plug. There is a round hole in the dash for the visor plug. I can't find it in an oem parts lookup. Is this something the dealer should be able to find if I call? Or is there a part number or link anyone will share?
Joined
·
1,266 Posts
I don't know about all that,my 03 440/700 SP with 1 3/8" track is zero competition for my 10 CFR 8 with 1.5"x15" Ripsaw thru the woods, i'm talking trails that you can't get over 30-45 mph. Both machines have Fox Floats,the 440/700 has Pro Link and the CFR has Fett Bros. stage 2 upgrade, this is not a matter of the CFR's superior hp as you can't tap into it under these conditions. Bottom line is I find my CFR to be much more stable and quicker thru the woods.Cat happy
1 - 6 of 6 Posts
Join the discussion
Join now to ask and comment!