I don't think law suits have anything to do with it at all; I think it's simply logistics and engineering- It has to do with practical application, it has to do with cost & vs performance vs reliability... pre 2005, you'd be lucky to find an atv with over 35 hp... less then 5 years later we were seeing atv's with more than double that. Same with water sports.


you can kill yourself on a 90hp atv just as easily as you can on a 150 hp atv.

I guarantee you'll see atv's with 110+ factory hp over the next couple years.

 

PWC have always used the same high powered motors found in Snowmobiles since PWC were invented.
They never made a PWC motor from the ground up like they do with ATVs.
They just put existing sled motors in them.
My friend just bought a used 2002 Sea-Doo and it has the exact same 110hp 670 Rotax Ski-doo motor used back then their sleds for years.

If they put a ATV motor in a PWC a guy in a 12ft aluminum boat with a 20 outboard would give it a run for its money across a lake.

Why the wait , they have had 4 stroke motors that made that or more for quite some time now.

Here are two entry level (4 stroke twins) that have been around for 7 years or more..
Yamaha 500cc 65hp
Polaris 750cc 80hp http://www.powersportsnetwork.com/en...e2=50801&go=Go
Those are Raw hp numbers (No Turbo Tricks).

Why they are not in a ATV is beyond me.
Those are beginner sleds but those motors would be considered power houses in ATVs.

 

Or take the Rotax Recreational Aircraft engine (turbo) & transplant it.

 

And are you guys ready for our Sportsmans to be the most expensive on the market? They would be if these high hp engines found their way into them.

 

Thats what eventually killed the Muscle car. High HP & fuel cpnsumption/emissions & EPA.

 

100% disagree (surprised?)
I've owned more boats & jet ski's than I've had quads- I had a 13' checkmate boat with a 50hp 4 stroke on it and it would go from 0-60 in seconds- could only imagine what my outlanders 87hp rotax would've felt like- guarantee I would've far passed that 12' aluminum boat with a 20.


like I mentioned earlier- evolution takes time, that applies with organics and machines; application, engineering and cost vs performance analysis.
the cost to add 20 hp to an atv increases the built quote exponentially- you can't just bolt a bigger more powerful engine into a chassis and be done with it- it doesn't work that way. You have to consider every aspect of the build from the springs to the bars and every component in between.

why do you keep comparing sleds to atvs? have you ever considered just the lone aspect of cooling? a sled engine sheds its heat 10x faster than an atv! have you ever compared the area in sq. inches a sled radiator uses (that is covered by snow as the track kicks it up to aid in cooling) to the area of a radiator in an atv, that's being run for hundreds of miles on a 99* summer day? How much time do you think the research & design teams spend considering the % of a sled radiator getting covered in mud? none. because sleds don't go mudding on an 85* day. ATV radiators have to be designed to allow at least 15-25% of the radiator being covered in mud- and it still needs to shed heat on an 85* day. Have you ever considered the area contacting the ground between an atv & sled? an atv has maybe 120 sq inches on the ground... compared to a sled at easily over 600 sq inches (including the skis up front) touching the ground.

same with a boat with an open cooling system- the lake is the radiators reservoir- the engine has a constant supply of cool water at its disposal to remove heat from the engine.

If you think about the logistics of adding HP- you'll answer your own question regarding why you currently don't see atv's with mega hp sled engines. As the technology and cooling system efficiency increases, so will atv HP (among other mechanical aspects being improved) Has everyone forgotten that we're less then a decade into the "super 4x4 atv's"? This industry has exploded over the last 8 years- Do you think anyone would've considered spending $13,000 on an atv 12 years ago? nope. It has NOTHING to do with law suits, and everything to do with application. you really need to stop comparing atv engines to sled engines to boat engines- it's a moot comparison

 

that's exactly one of the points I've been trying to get across to tlc everytime he starts comparing sled engines to atv engines.

increasing the hp in an atv means bigger axles and stronger drivetrain components. who's going to pay an extra $3000 on top of an already $11-$15,000 atv just to gain another 20-30 hp on a 1000cc engine? no one. they won't sell- from the factory anyway.

 

Its all about the hp to lbs ratio. Seems like most stock high performance quads are about 1 hp for every 11lbs, across the boards.

 

That's the weird part the new sled motors in both 2 stroke and 4 stroke have great fuel mileage and emissions now.
My 800 e-tec gets better gas mileage and uses less oil then my old 50hp fan cooled 500 Rotax did.

A 2 stroke 600 or 800 E-tec make 120hp and 165hp and gets 18 mpg, it would get even more on a lower drag ATV.

ATVs roll on packed dirt and do not slug through soft snow.
I can kick my atv across the garage floor in neutral , I can barley budge a parked snowmobile.
Snowmobiles do not coast much when you let of the throttle like a ATV.

A 600 e-tec would get 25mpg in a rolling ATV on a dirt trail.
It would get 18mpg while doing 120 mph down a road in a ATV as long as the balloon tires and drive train could hold up.


Their 4 strokes are even better.
Put a primary on it and stuff it in a ATV with a larger sized motorcycle rad and let the good times roll.

 

Just imagine the monster cooling package it would need too!