Pages: 1
Posted by: BigBlack
I remember in the early days of dirt bikes we had
50's
60's
70's
80's
90's
100's
110's
125's
And back then the bike size was close to the actual displacement.
Posted by: maddog56
You are getting way too technical and picky...
The quads are labeled like they are because that is the class of atv that it belongs to. When comparing atvs that are similar in size and engine you want to be able to look at one number and know whether it compares to the others. You wouldnt want to have to find all of the quads with engine sizes 300-400 to compare 350 or 400 class quads would you? And when the manufacturer changes engines in a machine or increases the engine size you dont want to have to remember a new atv name either.
With polaris they already have a 700 class atv with almost exactly the same specifications as the 800. So calling it a 750 wouldnt be a significant change over the existing model. With Kawasaki the 700 and 750 quads are totally different machines, so the small class number differentiation is fine. Notice the brute force 650 and Prairie 700. they are also twins with just a different engine size and plastic. The bf is a 633, but the quad belongs in the 650 class with the rincon, grizzly and ac and not its own 633 class.
Granted there are exxagerations with the system but in the end it all works towards a simpler way to compare and relate to the different machines.
On monitors you are using a 17" piece of glass, so its a 17" monitor. Some have 16.1" viewable, others 15.9". Each has different levels of adjustment and in lcd monitors you have all sorts of different brightness and contrast ratios to remember. Often these specs are completely out of touch with the actual performance of the monitor. An lcd monitor is approximately 100% viewable so a 15" is actually 15" viewable since the entire section of the screen is open. You also have to worry about widescreen vs 4:3 sizing, especially when comparing monitor sizes. A 15" widescreen looks a lot different than a 15" 4:3.
Posted by: maddog56
Polaris has some machines with engine sizes bigger than thier class size name, and they have the opposite too.
Posted by: Scootergptx
It's kind of like asking a woman how old she is. I think there is a scientific formula of actual age, stated age and looks like age, but I don't know the exact calculations.
Posted by: Glenlivet
One reply suggested engine makers would have to spend money retooling because they may make a motor out of a head from this, a barrel from that..
Maybe many years ago, but these days when the major players are the sze they are, I seriously doubt it. The makers of a motor are designing it for its given application right off the jump. They decide on a bore and stroke and thus the displacement is known right away. Why then do the designers, knowing that they are making say, a 300cc motor chooose a displacement of 280? It doesn't cost them anything more to make the displacement accurate or close to it, after all. If the bore needs to be 4 mm larger in order to be a true 300, why not make it so?
It's a question I have puzzled over and never had an answer for. Only the companies directorship knows for sure.
My best guess is that the buying public are percieved as naive enough to just read the label on the brochure and buy it regardless how close the motor is to the stated size. It probably has not been an issue of any moment so they don't care. Not enough customers have raised Cain over their money being spent on a trumped up product, and most never know anyway.
Their attitude is probably, "Ah just make it any old real displacement, those idiots with the chequebooks never know the difference anyway".
Posted by: Doctorturbo
Quote
What the hell is that sh_t? Then why isn't it a 16" monitor, a__holes! What good is another friggin inch if I can't even view it!
Probably the same Richard Heads that cut the 2X4 down to what it is now days!!!! Ever try to retro a house with old lumber? BR>I agree with the person that says we should have a 5cc rule. + or - 5cc's, fine, anything more than that and your scamming people.
Posted by: Cheapass
And, as for adjusting things to fit an exact 350, or whatever, you are looking at cost. If the jug from a previous tooling, plus the head from a third gives the displacement 337cc, would you pay $500 more per unit to have them re-tool to fit your expectations?
I wouldn't.
Posted by: Cheapass
Quote
Originally posted by: GrnXnham
Quote
Originally posted by: Cheapass
And, as for adjusting things to fit an exact 350, or whatever, you are looking at cost. If the jug from a previous tooling, plus the head from a third gives the displacement 337cc, would you pay $500 more per unit to have them re-tool to fit your expectations?
I wouldn't.
This is what I'm asking. It depends on what this additional cost would be.
Would I pay $500 to go from a 337 to a 350? No
Would I pay $200 to go from a 229 to a 250? Yes
I guess the quad makers figure that this cost must be higher than what most people are willing to pay. Perhaps the cost is closer to your $500?
If it takes re-tooling, it costs as much to go up 1cc as it does to go up 50cc.
Posted by: GrnXnham
We are really new to ATV's, so this is probably a stupid question but here goes:
Why do ALL of the ATV makers lie about engine size?
Why call a 229 a 250? (Honda and Kawasaki)
Why call a 376 a 400? (Suzuki)
Why call a 421 a 450? (Yamaha)
Why call a 760 a 800? (Polaris. I think this one is the worst at 40cc's off!)
Granted, some of them are close but many are like the ones above. I would say that I wouldn't complain a bit if they were within 5 cc's of the real thing. e.g. calling a 495 a 500 or calling a 753 a 750. I understand that the quad makers want to give each quad a nice round number in the name. 250 just sounds better than 246!
So here is my next question:
Is it really so hard for the engine designers to simply MAKE THE ENGINE WHAT THEY WANT TO CALL IT??
I mean, say they set out to make a 250. Is it really so hard for an engine designer to stay within 5 cc's of this? Why? Are they saving money somehow by putting a 229 in a quad instead of a TRUE 250? How much more would each engine cost a company if they put a 250 in instead of a 229? I think most quad buyers would be willing to pay a few bucks more for a 250 than a 229 anyway, so why not make it a 250?
This ATV engine size thing kind of reminds me of monitor sizes for computers.
Example ad for computer monitor for sale:
"17 inch monitor (16" viewable)"
What the hell is that sh_t? Then why isn't it a 16" monitor, a__holes! What good is another friggin inch if I can't even view it!
Back to quads...
Is it that some quad buyers are so stupid that they don't even read the fine print that says that the 800cc machine that they just spent $8599 on is really just a 760? Knowing this, the quad makers figure they can "trick" some people into buying THEIR quad by lying about engine size? Naaahhh... this can't be it! Can it?
Posted by: GrnXnham
Quote
Originally posted by: Cheapass
And, as for adjusting things to fit an exact 350, or whatever, you are looking at cost. If the jug from a previous tooling, plus the head from a third gives the displacement 337cc, would you pay $500 more per unit to have them re-tool to fit your expectations?
I wouldn't.
This is what I'm asking. It depends on what this additional cost would be.
Would I pay $500 to go from a 337 to a 350? No
Would I pay $200 to go from a 229 to a 250? Yes
I guess the quad makers figure that this cost must be higher than what most people are willing to pay. Perhaps the cost is closer to your $500?
Posted by: GrnXnham
Quote
Originally posted by: maddog56
You are getting way too technical and picky...
Perhaps this is getting picky but this is really just a small rant for me. I wasn't going to protest with a sign in front of the Suzuki dealer or anything.
I guess I really didn't look at it as being the "250 class" machine or the "400 class" machine. If you look at it that way, then it's fine how they name their quads. Like I said, I am new to quads, and when I 1st started shopping for one, I thought that when I saw 250 in the name, it meant that the engine was really close to a 250.
I thought it strange that if they were rounding things off to 250 or 350, why was the actual engine size always lower than the 250 or 350? None of the 250's are like a 255 or 260. They are all LESS than 250. Hmmm.....Shouldn't the 250 class machines be a range of machines from 230 to 270? Oops! My mistake. A 270 would be called a 300!
Posted by: GrnXnham
Quote
Originally posted by: maddog56
Polaris has some machines with engine sizes bigger than thier class size name, and they have the opposite too.
You are correct! I didn't see that before. Polaris has one quad with a bigger engine size than their class name. The Polaris 4X4 Sportsman 400 has a 425 in it! I do have to give Polaris credit for that one. There are a few, but not many, other quads where the cc's are less than 5 cc's over the class size name.
Posted by: Backinthesaddleagain
A small block Chevy can only bored/stroked to a max somewhere around 427cubic inches......and that requires a seriously expensive stroker crank and machining. The point is there are limitations. But you can also get a 350 block to 383 cubic inches by swapping in the standard 400 small block crank......for a whole lot less $$$ than the 427.
I think some of the displacement numbers in these machines also come from engine configuration limitations. I can't say this for fact for any of the engines because I'm not the designer and am not privy to such info.......but it wouldn't surprise me if it is the case for certain engines.
For example........the Polaris Sportsman "800" is only a true 760cc. That same basic engine is also configured to smaller displacement Sportsman "600" and Sprotsman "700" machines. I'm guessing that they only went to 760cc because they're up at about the max of what they can do for bore and stroke with that particular engine block. At the same time Polaris has obviously decided to go with the 100cc increments (Sportsman 400/500/600/700/800) in recent years from at marketing standpoint.
Another example........the Polaris Sportsman "400" is actually 425cc. That is the same basic engine as the Sportsman "500" H.O. engine. They came out with the "400" afterwards by using a smaller bore/shorter stroke version of the "500". They probably went this way because they determined it was a better way for them to get into the "400" than going the other way with a smaller displacement engine (probably didn't have a smaller engine capable of being bored/stroked enough to achive there goals). The question is..... when reducing the displacement of the "500" downward......why did they stop at 425cc if the goal is "400"??? Is it possible that the engine designers didn't want to go any smaller with the bore and/or stroke for some reason???.......I don't know but it wouldn't surprise me if that were the case considering it was originally designed for the larger displacement. (also makes me wonder how far it can safely be bored and stroked to on the upper end)
Another aspect is that sometimes they can swap out certain "standard" or "shelf" parts such as crank/connecting rod/piston and achive a displacement that is right in the ball park of what they want very cheaply and easily. Actually, when I think about it.......this is probably why they got to 425cc.
When it comes to the actual displacement sizes for some engines I think these technical criteria/parameters/limitations are the reason they end up at the displacement they do.
Again......I have no specific knowledge on any of these ATV engines.......but I know this has been common practice with auto engines for decades. The Chevy small block is probably the best example of many different displacements just by switching standard/shelf parts around. (Another example.....Chevy got the late 60's 302 trans-am racing engine configuration from a 327 block and a 283 crank)
The marketing people sure as ship don't want deal with any of this stuff at all........and that's why you end up with the 400/500/600/700/800.
Bob
Posted by: nosliw
350 CI = 5.735471 L
289 CI = 4.73586034 L
302 CI = 4.94889212 L
just for reference
Posted by: VelociRaptor350
Auto mfng's do the same thing. The new corvette is called a 5.7 L v8, when its actually 5.6 and some change, the 5.0 mustang was a 4.9 etc.
