Torque and HP isn't measured in RPM. I am talking about engine HP. Transferring the engines capability the drive system as efficent as possible is the key. Torque is best at the low end of an engines rpm. HP is best at a higher RPM. The early sleds that were 4 stroke were shit, later on when turbos were applied they were awesome.
With the CVT system the energy lost transferring power from the engine to the clutch is the issue, drive,driven,belt is where the loss is.
Back in the day i had a ZRT 600 which i rode on trails and grass dragged in the spring. Tuning the clutch was the key to harnessing the engines maximum performance

my dealer told me he was at a dealers meeting and all the big names were complaining about big hp always breaking parts and not being reliable he said that is why cfm did not up there hp like the big names i ask the same queation you are and that is the answer i got i figured there would be more hp also.

Torque and HP isn't measured in RPM. I am talking about engine HP. Transferring the engines capability the drive system as efficent as possible is the key. Torque is best at the low end of an engines rpm. HP is best at a higher RPM. The early sleds that were 4 stroke were shit, later on when turbos were applied they were awesome.
With the CVT system the energy lost transferring power from the engine to the clutch is the issue, drive,driven,belt is where the loss is.
Back in the day i had a ZRT 600 which i rode on trails and grass dragged in the spring. Tuning the clutch was the key to harnessing the engines maximum performance

Torque and horsepower are measured at RPM's So I don't really know what you mean by your first comment. Torque peaks at a lower RPM than Horsepower typically, but it really doesn't matter where it peaks within reason. The new 4 strokes are putting out a lot more horsepower then these without turbo's. I think the 900 Polaris snowmobile without a turbo was putting out just under 100hp and 85lbft torque, That is a TON more than these with just 100cc larger. The loss through the drivetrain has nothing to do with what I am talking about because I am talking about the power production at the crank, not at the wheels, or the track.
I can see breaking the axles and junk because they use mostly the same parts as ATV's which aren't meant to hold up to 1500lbs but I don't buy the reliability on the engines part. Time to revamp with new technology and stronger parts!

I don't see why you think there is a big difference. As i said at the start, you get what you pay for. The new Polaris RZR here in Australia is 168hp and 114ftp of torque. That is ALOT of power in a 500kg vehicle.

They can use an engine with that much power, because the rest of the parts are designed to handle it without breaking.

Its pretty simple.

I don't see why you think there is a big difference. As i said at the start, you get what you pay for. The new Polaris RZR here in Australia is 168hp and 114ftp of torque. That is ALOT of power in a 500kg vehicle.

They can use an engine with that much power, because the rest of the parts are designed to handle it without breaking.

Its pretty simple.

Is that a 1000 turbo? I hadn't looked up any of the turbo models I wasn't trying to compare those. That's close to what the turbo sleds are doing I think those are getting 193HP.
I think my Z1000 engine would do awesome in my zforce but would need stronger parts lol.

Yes, thats the Turbo Model. The non turbo isnt made anymore in a 1000, but off memory im pretty sure it was around 110hp.

and the turbo motor would be incredible amounts of fun, but your right. need stronger parts. It would blow your current drive train apart haha.