Jump to content

New Polaris Pro R


Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, NIKAL said:

BTW the Unlimited UTV class will not be starting behind the Turbo & N/A UTV classes after another race or two. 

That will not happen until it becomes the premier UTV class.  When other manufactures have models that can compete with the Pro R that is when it will happen. 

By the way nothing is stopping RG from racing in the unlimited class right now.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, CampfiresNbrews said:

Sounds like this “inclusive” movement has infiltrated into the racing world of off roading. First we have to tolerate transgender men destroying womens sports, now this??!! Damn you Polaris!!!! Wait does this make Polaris a transgender trying to identify as a 999cc UTV? 🤔🤪

when a SXS finishes ahead of all TT in any race that's the definition of game changer.

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Name of the game. Competition brings out the oneupsmanship. Hell, my “1/2 ton truck” has 2,000lbs of payload. KOH used to be stick axles and recognizable rigs. I used to race in a class where aftermarket aero wasn’t allowed, and every new car comes with diffusers and flat bottoms. Baja used to be Manxs. 

This happens everywhere, I’m not complaining. 

Edited by Rockwood
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Sand Shark said:

It is no longer a UTV when the government comes in and says enough is enough. 

Why do you care how they classify it?  Polaris is making it and for now it is considered a UTV by Polaris and apparently the states that require you to register them.  You can point to ROVA stuff all you want it does not change the fact people are getting them registered as UTVs.   

Let's face it ROVA was created at a time when Yamaha was getting sued and the manufactures wanted to try to create something before the Gov. came in and really regulated stuff.  

The difference between Alumicraft, Jackal and the others are they are not a production car that you can go to a dealer and buy anywhere across the county or world.  Do you think a RPI in awd class one car or the guys racing the Jackal are going to really enter the UTV class?  The answer is no.  

I think the desert racing organization would put the stop to UTVs entering in the trophy truck/class one if they attempted to do so in every race.  I think what Mitch and the other racer did was an anomaly and done because the Silver State 300 is a race they could compete and not be a complete danger to the class they entered. 

 

Exactly, and we don’t need the government making those calls. So why give them a reason?

As far as why do I care how the classify them? I already told you that. I was around and riding 3 wheelers when the government ban them. If this vehicle or if a new Can Am or bigger Speed came out and caused an issue or problem where lawsuits, the States or the Government feels the need to get involved, The one bad Apple wrongly defined as a UTV kills the whole industry. But if these vehicles were correctly classified as mass produced high performance recreation vehicle or buggy. This would protect and leave the UTV alone if this experiment was to fail.

As you know an Organization named ROVHA was created by the manufactures. Laws were instituted to protect and control the industry. It’s proven to work as the first year of the RZR was 2007 and we are still here.  Prior to that with the Rhino this segment was heading the direction of the 3 wheeler, and even legislators were looking to draft bills banning the sale of UTV for recreation use. 

But that ended when the industry agreed to have industry standards. The Product Safety Commission set standards and requirements like rollover protection standards, which they used ROPS, it’s stupid but it worked. As you know they have to meet J turn standards, sensors were required on seatbelts to put the vehicle in a sort of limp mode if not buckled. Later in 2012 ? The manufactures wanted even more protection from lawsuits and went back to created even more standards like engine displacement max, seating locations, banning the modification of adding rear seats. And most importantly adding the helmet laws. Also the 1000cc standard set EPA/CARB standards for UTV’s. 
 

All it’s going to take is for a few accidents, and few ambulance chasing class action attorneys to get involved and see how these are being labeled as a UTV, and try to stop the sale of UTV’s.  Or they figure out they don’t meet the standards set into law in multiple states and with the Safety Commission. What happens if the government does start snooping around and finds out these over 1000cc vehicles are being misrepresented and wrongly classified by the manufactures, as they don’t meet the specs set?

We also have stupid people in this sport and your going to have the guy who does not want to wear a helmet in his 2000cc vehicle, and when he gets a helmet ticket or mouths off and gets arrested. He’s going to lawyer up and bring it to the courts attention that it does not meet the specs of a UTV and this could open up that door to it being found out the industry is trying to pass this as a UTV. 
 

Another thing to think about. We are still in a battle to keep our open riding areas. There are more independent groups like milk weed lovers, the tree huggers, the other environmental groups and even development groups that would love to shut down all OHV areas. The biggest support we currently have is from the UTV manufactures. The buggy builders don’t do crap to help protect our OHV areas. If we lose the UTV and those manufactures go away from producing the off road recreational vehicle, then we are sure to lose our land. If you don’t think it could happen? We already lost land in Plaster City for wind & solar in a back door deal, which has done more damage to PC then OHV have. Now Nevada is losing State Line and Jean to development. Many years ago the environmentalist lobbied and convinced the state to change the boundaries of Ocotillo Wells and made some areas only accessible buy street legal vehicles, eliminating areas in the OHV park where OHV Green sticker vehicles could go. Yet that State park was created for OHV use. Look how they have opened and closed areas in the Imperial Sand Dunes. 
 

Again I’m not against the Pro R or anything over a 1000cc. I think it cool. But just classify it for what it is. It does not change the performance or desire to have one.
 BTW does anyone remember when Robby first announced the Speed UTV, and he did not have engine figured out. But he was looking at a 1300cc platform and some were excited thinking no helmets. Some were saying it’s not going to be a UTV, and I know several racers that had their panties in a wad saying he can’t race it, it’s not legal and not fair! It’s not a UTV and Robby better not try to get the rules changed. These guys were freaking out over a concept vehicle  and even contacted BITD and Score. Now two of those racers are ok with the 2000cc car. Hmmm? I guess when your sponsored and it favors you it’s ok! 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
5 hours ago, Sand Shark said:

That will not happen until it becomes the premier UTV class.  When other manufactures have models that can compete with the Pro R that is when it will happen. 

By the way nothing is stopping RG from racing in the unlimited class right now.  

Not sure how BITD is still setting it’s starting line up. They used to set by finishings.  Score still sets it based on finishing speeds. If Matlocks beats all the UTV’s at the 500, I’m pretty confident they will get moved, especially if Matlocks or anther unlimited team request it. 
 

Your right no one is stopping any UTV team from entering in an unlimited UTV class, or Class1. Again I have no issue with that. Race class 1! Several years ago a guy entered his class 10 in class1 at the Baja 1000 due to his engine tag issue. This was when class 1 still had 20 cars in it. Can’t remember where he finished, but he did and I think because of starting position he beat all the 10 cars. Ken Kroaker used to race his v10 class 8 Dodge in TT at the 500 & 1000 due to starting position and to prove a point. 

Edited by NIKAL
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
8 hours ago, NIKAL said:

Exactly, and we don’t need the government making those calls. So why give them a reason?

As far as why do I care how the classify them? I already told you that. I was around and riding 3 wheelers when the government ban them. If this vehicle or if a new Can Am or bigger Speed came out and caused an issue or problem where lawsuits, the States or the Government feels the need to get involved, The one bad Apple wrongly defined as a UTV kills the whole industry. But if these vehicles were correctly classified as mass produced high performance recreation vehicle or buggy. This would protect and leave the UTV alone if this experiment was to fail.

As you know an Organization named ROVHA was created by the manufactures. Laws were instituted to protect and control the industry. It’s proven to work as the first year of the RZR was 2007 and we are still here.  Prior to that with the Rhino this segment was heading the direction of the 3 wheeler, and even legislators were looking to draft bills banning the sale of UTV for recreation use. 

But that ended when the industry agreed to have industry standards. The Product Safety Commission set standards and requirements like rollover protection standards, which they used ROPS, it’s stupid but it worked. As you know they have to meet J turn standards, sensors were required on seatbelts to put the vehicle in a sort of limp mode if not buckled. Later in 2012 ? The manufactures wanted even more protection from lawsuits and went back to created even more standards like engine displacement max, seating locations, banning the modification of adding rear seats. And most importantly adding the helmet laws. Also the 1000cc standard set EPA/CARB standards for UTV’s. 
 

All it’s going to take is for a few accidents, and few ambulance chasing class action attorneys to get involved and see how these are being labeled as a UTV, and try to stop the sale of UTV’s.  Or they figure out they don’t meet the standards set into law in multiple states and with the Safety Commission. What happens if the government does start snooping around and finds out these over 1000cc vehicles are being misrepresented and wrongly classified by the manufactures, as they don’t meet the specs set?

We also have stupid people in this sport and your going to have the guy who does not want to wear a helmet in his 2000cc vehicle, and when he gets a helmet ticket or mouths off and gets arrested. He’s going to lawyer up and bring it to the courts attention that it does not meet the specs of a UTV and this could open up that door to it being found out the industry is trying to pass this as a UTV. 
 

Another thing to think about. We are still in a battle to keep our open riding areas. There are more independent groups like milk weed lovers, the tree huggers, the other environmental groups and even development groups that would love to shut down all OHV areas. The biggest support we currently have is from the UTV manufactures. The buggy builders don’t do crap to help protect our OHV areas. If we lose the UTV and those manufactures go away from producing the off road recreational vehicle, then we are sure to lose our land. If you don’t think it could happen? We already lost land in Plaster City for wind & solar in a back door deal, which has done more damage to PC then OHV have. Now Nevada is losing State Line and Jean to development. Many years ago the environmentalist lobbied and convinced the state to change the boundaries of Ocotillo Wells and made some areas only accessible buy street legal vehicles, eliminating areas in the OHV park where OHV Green sticker vehicles could go. Yet that State park was created for OHV use. Look how they have opened and closed areas in the Imperial Sand Dunes. 
 

Again I’m not against the Pro R or anything over a 1000cc. I think it cool. But just classify it for what it is. It does not change the performance or desire to have one.
 BTW does anyone remember when Robby first announced the Speed UTV, and he did not have engine figured out. But he was looking at a 1300cc platform and some were excited thinking no helmets. Some were saying it’s not going to be a UTV, and I know several racers that had their panties in a wad saying he can’t race it, it’s not legal and not fair! It’s not a UTV and Robby better not try to get the rules changed. These guys were freaking out over a concept vehicle  and even contacted BITD and Score. Now two of those racers are ok with the 2000cc car. Hmmm? I guess when your sponsored and it favors you it’s ok! 

I too was around in the 3 wheeler days.   If gov. wanted to kill off the UTV it would of already been done when Yamaha was getting sued left and right.  

Polaris still followed all the safety guidelines outlined by ROHVA.  They just put in a bigger engine.   I look at the sport utv market heading in the direction of the watercraft as far as engines and hp.   They dazzle you with numbers and then put in speed limiters to keep people somewhat in check. 

Racers are a funny bunch.  They are against something until it benefits their race. program.  

The size of a motor is not what is going to draw the attention of environmentalist, it is the behavior of the users.  Land use is a never ending battle and we are fortunate to have groups that help fight against the land closures.  Amazing how they can take land away due to "alleged abuse" and then slap developments or other things that permanently change the landscape.   

Speaking of green sticker - the dirt bike industry let the red sticker program go away without much of fight for the 2022 models.  Now if you do not have a green sticker complaint dirt bike you can not even register the bike.  They are considered track bikes only.   

Edited by Sand Shark
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Sand Shark said:

I too was around in the 3 wheeler days.   If gov. wanted to kill off the UTV it would of already been done when Yamaha was getting sued left and right.  

Polaris still followed all the safety guidelines outlined by ROHVA.  They just put in a bigger engine.   I look at the sport utv market heading in the direction of the watercraft as far as engines and hp.   They dazzle you with numbers and then put in speed limiters to keep people somewhat in check. 

 

The reason the Gov did not kill the UTV for recreation use is the fact the manufactures created ROVHA which worked the Product Safety Commission, who was looking into the 400 lawsuits against Yamaha. They created regulations the industry needed to follow. Without that the UTV would be dead. Yamaha paid out tens of millions of dollars. 

I don’t know what legislation there is for watercraft, but clearly engine displacement was not the primary definition of what a watercraft is and why they have been able to increase the size. 

Remember the legislation defined what a UTV is, and the primary spec is the engine displacement. All other specs & laws are based on the primary engine rule. Without the displacement rule, seat location, and helmet requirement goes away. Even things like roll cage requirements, speed limiters, j turns all change when you change or font follow the primary spec of the definition. 
 

This was from Todd Romano awhile back. He said the main reason they did not build a greater then 1000cc engine, which would have been easy to do. Was it was going to change how the vehicle was identified. This also included emissions. UTV’s have standard they need to meet and that’s way different then a greater then 1000cc or street registered vehicle. He was not sure they would be able get it registered. Plus he said safety standards would possibly different as it would have be classified under a different mass produced vehicle, other then a UTV. Speed was going into the UTV market and had to follow the standards set to be in that category.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Sand Shark said:

I too was around in the 3 wheeler days.   If gov. wanted to kill off the UTV it would of already been done when Yamaha was getting sued left and right.  

Polaris still followed all the safety guidelines outlined by ROHVA.  They just put in a bigger engine.   I look at the sport utv market heading in the direction of the watercraft as far as engines and hp.   They dazzle you with numbers and then put in speed limiters to keep people somewhat in check. 

Racers are a funny bunch.  They are against something until it benefits their race. program.  

The size of a motor is not what is going to draw the attention of environmentalist, it is the behavior of the users.  Land use is a never ending battle and we are fortunate to have groups that help fight against the land closures.  Amazing how they can take land away due to "alleged abuse" and then slap developments or other things that permanently change the landscape.   

Speaking of green sticker - the dirt bike industry let the red sticker program go away without much of fight for the 2022 models.  Now if you do not have a green sticker complaint dirt bike you can not even register the bike.  They are considered track bikes only.   

Prior to 2022 models are now "Green" sticker vehicles.  Can't get registration on any red sticker vehicles from out of state or that weren't previously registered.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, NIKAL said:

The reason the Gov did not kill the UTV for recreation use is the fact the manufactures created ROVHA which worked the Product Safety Commission, who was looking into the 400 lawsuits against Yamaha. They created regulations the industry needed to follow. Without that the UTV would be dead. Yamaha paid out tens of millions of dollars. 

I don’t know what legislation there is for watercraft, but clearly engine displacement was not the primary definition of what a watercraft is and why they have been able to increase the size. 

Remember the legislation defined what a UTV is, and the primary spec is the engine displacement. All other specs & laws are based on the primary engine rule. Without the displacement rule, seat location, and helmet requirement goes away. Even things like roll cage requirements, speed limiters, j turns all change when you change or font follow the primary spec of the definition. 
 

This was from Todd Romano awhile back. He said the main reason they did not build a greater then 1000cc engine, which would have been easy to do. Was it was going to change how the vehicle was identified. This also included emissions. UTV’s have standard they need to meet and that’s way different then a greater then 1000cc or street registered vehicle. He was not sure they would be able get it registered. Plus he said safety standards would possibly different as it would have be classified under a different mass produced vehicle, other then a UTV. Speed was going into the UTV market and had to follow the standards set to be in that category.

Todd and RG do not have the pull Polaris has with the government.  Nor could they afford to stray from what is for sure deemed a UTV.  Polaris can afford to take chances.  

Again I do not think Polaris going to a bigger engine takes away from the fact it is a UTV.  We can go in circles on this all day long.  As of now no government agency has said the Pro R is not a UTV.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Rockwood said:

Prior to 2022 models are now "Green" sticker vehicles.  Can't get registration on any red sticker vehicles from out of state or that weren't previously registered.

My kids new dirt bike could not be registered and no sticker.  Fortunately he only uses it at the track so not a huge deal. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Sand Shark said:

My kids new dirt bike could not be registered and no sticker.  Fortunately he only uses it at the track so not a huge deal. 

Yep.  New registration: screwed.  Whether it's a brand new bike, or one you brought from out of state, or the PO lost the title, you're screwed.  Wife's red-stickered Blaster got a green sticker.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Rockwood said:

Yep.  New registration: screwed.  Whether it's a brand new bike, or one you brought from out of state, or the PO lost the title, you're screwed.  Wife's red-stickered Blaster got a green sticker.

So stupid of the state to give up the red sticker fees.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Sand Shark said:

So stupid of the state to give up the red sticker fees.  

Environment, supposedly.  They're killing small potatoes though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So it looks like the lower shock clevis mount was not an issue for any of the racers at the Norra 1000.  Wayne and his wife raced their pre-runner Pro Rs and I think Wayne finished 4th overall against all the vehicle racing.  His wife had an overall on one of the stages.  The Matlock's pre-runners have the stock suspension.  

The Anderson brothers were racing their Pro R as well.  

Looks like a really fun race.   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/2/2022 at 1:27 PM, Sand Shark said:

So stupid of the state to give up the red sticker fees.  

I agree and thought the same thing.  Without them being registered, how do you prove ownership?  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

Shock Therapy does a suspension cycle test on the Pro R. There is some good, some bad & some ugly! One part they started to touch on and either got side tracked or did not want to detail was the positive camber the front suspension see’s at full droop. My thought was Polaris did it as they did not want to sacrifice wheel travel #’s and giving it positive camber was the only way the CV angle will live. I mentioned this to someone in the know, and they agreed that’s is what’s going on. It’s not ideal or really fixable without major changes. 

Watch the Shock Therapy video to learn more about the Pro R geometry. I think you will be surprised at the track width change a Pro R has. 

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=oHAogVOqI0w 
 

 

Edited by NIKAL
Fix positive camber
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, NIKAL said:

Shock Therapy does a suspension cycle test on the Pro R. There is some good, some bad & some ugly! One part they started to touch on and either got side tracked or did not want to detail was the negative camber the front suspension see’s at full droop. My thought was Polaris did it as they did not want to sacrifice wheel travel #’s and giving it negative camber was the only way the CV angle will live. I mentioned this to someone in the know, and they agreed that’s is what’s going on. It’s not ideal or really fixable without major changes. 

Watch the Shock Therapy video to learn more about the Pro R geometry. I think you will be surprised at the track width change a Pro R has. 

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=oHAogVOqI0w 
 

 

So far the PRO R has done well in the Score & BITD races! Cannot wait to see the Speed UTV join in the racing fun. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Site Sponsor
6 hours ago, NIKAL said:

Shock Therapy does a suspension cycle test on the Pro R. There is some good, some bad & some ugly! One part they started to touch on and either got side tracked or did not want to detail was the negative camber the front suspension see’s at full droop. My thought was Polaris did it as they did not want to sacrifice wheel travel #’s and giving it negative camber was the only way the CV angle will live. I mentioned this to someone in the know, and they agreed that’s is what’s going on. It’s not ideal or really fixable without major changes. 

Watch the Shock Therapy video to learn more about the Pro R geometry. I think you will be surprised at the track width change a Pro R has. 

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=oHAogVOqI0w 
 

 

Positive camber would save the cvs.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Kraut_n_Rice said:

Positive camber would save the cvs.

Correct, I don’t know why I said Negative. When I should have said positive camber. 
 

4B55AD00-1762-4BF1-9C54-0A528A2D3051.thumb.jpeg.48b814e4c061f8d20e2eee5bb26572d3.jpeg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Vikter said:

What was it like 12 & 13 inches of track change? 

Everyone that has one or ridden in one has said the car handles great. But then I hear Justin say 13 inches of track scrub change and thought that should get real squirrelly  when hitting the whoops and and at high speeds?? :classic_blink:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, CampfiresNbrews said:

Everyone that has one or ridden in one has said the car handles great. But then I hear Justin say 13 inches of track scrub change and thought that should get real squirrelly  when hitting the whoops and and at high speeds?? :classic_blink:

Hitting straight whoops at speed shouldn't be the main issue as long as the geometry is somewhat good, the main issue is cornering and getting unloaded. All conventional UTVs have this issue because of the radius rod setup. This causes your track width to narrow and its super easy to catch an edge.

You want a car to settle when cornering, radius rods don't do that. You rely on the 4wd to get you through and to make up for the shortcomings in the rear.

Furthermore you simply cannot throw a radius rod UTV into a corner like a buggy or a truck because you will snap radius rods or heims or whatever else down the line from side loading.

Ask me how I know, here is myself and another guy, we were the leaders at this race and both broke the same side of the car getting after it within an 1/8 of a mile of each other. (Well other guy broke both sides but you get the point.)

Screenshot_20220622-232701_Photos.jpg

Screenshot_20220622-232725_Photos.jpg

Edited by DTA
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, DTA said:

Hitting straight whoops at speed shouldn't be the main issue as long as the geometry is somewhat good, the main issue is cornering and getting unloaded. All conventional UTVs have this issue because of the radius rod setup. This causes your track width to narrow and its super easy to catch an edge.

You want a car to settle when cornering, radius rods don't do that. You rely on the 4wd to get you through and to make up for the shortcomings in the rear.

Furthermore you simply cannot throw a radius rod UTV into a corner like a buggy or a truck because you will snap radius rods or heims or whatever else down the line from side loading.

Ask me how I know, here is myself and another guy, we were the leaders at this race and both broke the same side of the car getting after it within an 1/8 of a mile of each other. (Well other guy broke both sides but you get the point.)

Screenshot_20220622-232701_Photos.jpg

Screenshot_20220622-232725_Photos.jpg

Exactly!! Had radius rods on my old rail and wasn’t a fan of it. They were equal length which made it horrible to drive at high speeds but it did love to drift into the corners due to the loss of traction. 
 

On the other hand looks like Kawasaki KRX 1000 got the geometry correct even with radius rods. Though I’ll never own a car with radius rods (just something else that’ll break)I really like the Kawasaki. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

Shout Box

Shout Box

You don't have permission to chat.
    ×
    ×
    • Create New...

    Important Information

    Terms of Use Privacy Policy