Page 1 of 2

The back 80...

PostPosted: Sun Jan 26, 2014 8:54 pm
by jehler
A little long and kinda boring, but if ya watch to the end there is bonus footage of jr getting stuck and me getting irritated

Re: The back 80...

PostPosted: Sun Jan 26, 2014 9:02 pm
by capt1972
Was waiting for the "Sunofabitch" at about 11:47

Re: The back 80...

PostPosted: Sun Jan 26, 2014 9:07 pm
by NuffDaddy
:lol::lol:
"Don't gun it!!"

Re: The back 80...

PostPosted: Sun Jan 26, 2014 9:07 pm
by assateague
That just looks fucking cold.

Re: The back 80...

PostPosted: Sun Jan 26, 2014 9:09 pm
by NuffDaddy
That powder is giving me a boner

Re: The back 80...

PostPosted: Sun Jan 26, 2014 9:18 pm
by jehler
assateague wrote:That just looks fucking cold.

Not bad
ImageUploadedByTapatalk1390789107.788936.jpg

Re: The back 80...

PostPosted: Sun Jan 26, 2014 9:19 pm
by NuffDaddy
Never stops snowing up there does it.

Re: The back 80...

PostPosted: Sun Jan 26, 2014 9:22 pm
by jehler
Not this winter, not here anyway. You go 10 miles north to nrew's house and there is half that much, lake effect seems to hit us heavy a lot

Re: The back 80...

PostPosted: Sun Jan 26, 2014 9:22 pm
by jehler
Not this winter, not here anyway. You go 10 miles north to nrew's house and there is half that much, lake effect seems to hit us heavy a lot

Re: The back 80...

PostPosted: Sun Jan 26, 2014 9:23 pm
by DeadEye_Dan
We got another foot this weekend too

Re: The back 80...

PostPosted: Sun Jan 26, 2014 10:55 pm
by RonE
Getting stuck looks like it sucks a big one. Fuck snow!

Re: The back 80...

PostPosted: Sun Jan 26, 2014 11:06 pm
by NuffDaddy
We have probably a foot on the ground here. Probably 18" at the cabin. The little warm up took about a foot.

Re: The back 80...

PostPosted: Sun Jan 26, 2014 11:54 pm
by bill herian
We've probably got 20 inches on the ground but nothing has melted since November, just packs down a little before the next snowfall.

Re: The back 80...

PostPosted: Sun Jan 26, 2014 11:54 pm
by rebelp74
Way too much snow.

Re: The back 80...

PostPosted: Sun Jan 26, 2014 11:59 pm
by Goldfish
What year were your sleds did you say? Also, going up those hills along the power lines (6 minute mark), was that all the beans it had? I ask because from the sounds of it, those ride like my dads 87 jag 440. It's a night and day difference to my 96 indy's. Wish I could make it to Michigan to go sledding this winter

Re: The back 80...

PostPosted: Mon Jan 27, 2014 7:24 am
by aunt betty
Goldfish wrote:What year were your sleds did you say? Also, going up those hills along the power lines (6 minute mark), was that all the beans it had? I ask because from the sounds of it, those ride like my dads 87 jag 440. It's a night and day difference to my 96 indy's. Wish I could make it to Michigan to go sledding this winter

One upper.

Re: The back 80...

PostPosted: Mon Jan 27, 2014 8:05 am
by Woody
looks like a blast.

Re: The back 80...

PostPosted: Mon Jan 27, 2014 10:13 am
by BrewGUN
John, you should have rode my old sled, that thing was a rocket! Part of the reason I sold it too!

Re: The back 80...

PostPosted: Mon Jan 27, 2014 10:42 am
by jehler
Goldfish wrote:What year were your sleds did you say? Also, going up those hills along the power lines (6 minute mark), was that all the beans it had? I ask because from the sounds of it, those ride like my dads 87 jag 440. It's a night and day difference to my 96 indy's. Wish I could make it to Michigan to go sledding this winter
jr is on a 1984 polaris, I'm on a 92 jag, both 440's. Flat gunned up that hill, there is not much base, just powdered sugar kinda snow, 2-4' deep, all those little guys can do to stay on top, would be nice iy have a little more aggressive track, these have touring tracks and it's getting to be a little much for them. Jr and I both want new ski doo's but they a little pricey

Re: The back 80...

PostPosted: Mon Jan 27, 2014 10:47 am
by Woody
jehler wrote:
Goldfish wrote:What year were your sleds did you say? Also, going up those hills along the power lines (6 minute mark), was that all the beans it had? I ask because from the sounds of it, those ride like my dads 87 jag 440. It's a night and day difference to my 96 indy's. Wish I could make it to Michigan to go sledding this winter
jr is on a 1984 polaris, I'm on a 92 jag, both 440's. Flat gunned up that hill, there is not much base, just powdered sugar kinda snow, 2-4' deep, all those little guys can do to stay on top, would be nice iy have a little more aggressive track, these have touring tracks and it's getting to be a little much for them. Jr and I both want new ski doo's but they a little pricey


I have a 2001 MXZ 700 and bunch a friends have the newer Ski-Doos and it isn't worth the extra $10,000... get a 2001-2004 700-900cc and she will do the trick.

Re: The back 80...

PostPosted: Mon Jan 27, 2014 11:04 am
by jehler
I want a etec600 in the rev-xs frame and r-motion suspension.

Problem is if I bought one it would never snow in Michigan again

Re: The back 80...

PostPosted: Mon Jan 27, 2014 11:10 am
by BrewGUN
jehler wrote:I want a etec600 in the rev-xs frame and r-motion suspension.

Problem is if I bought one it would never snow in Michigan again

Unless I was out in the mountains, I would never get a sled bigger than a 600, too much weight and not enough power gain. I'd shoot for a early to mid 2000 500-600, the 550's are a mean sled for all around.

Re: The back 80...

PostPosted: Mon Jan 27, 2014 11:10 am
by rebelp74
jehler wrote:I want a etec600 in the rev-xs frame and r-motion suspension.

Problem is if I bought one it would never snow in Michigan again

Sounds like either way you still win

Re: The back 80...

PostPosted: Mon Jan 27, 2014 11:12 am
by jehler
The only thing I don't like about snow is plowing

Re: The back 80...

PostPosted: Mon Jan 27, 2014 11:26 am
by Woody
BrewGUN wrote:
jehler wrote:I want a etec600 in the rev-xs frame and r-motion suspension.

Problem is if I bought one it would never snow in Michigan again

Unless I was out in the mountains, I would never get a sled bigger than a 600, too much weight and not enough power gain. I'd shoot for a early to mid 2000 500-600, the 550's are a mean sled for all around.


My 700 with the right track would crush a 550.

Re: The back 80...

PostPosted: Mon Jan 27, 2014 12:06 pm
by NuffDaddy
jehler wrote:
Goldfish wrote:What year were your sleds did you say? Also, going up those hills along the power lines (6 minute mark), was that all the beans it had? I ask because from the sounds of it, those ride like my dads 87 jag 440. It's a night and day difference to my 96 indy's. Wish I could make it to Michigan to go sledding this winter
jr is on a 1984 polaris, I'm on a 92 jag, both 440's. Flat gunned up that hill, there is not much base, just powdered sugar kinda snow, 2-4' deep, all those little guys can do to stay on top, would be nice iy have a little more aggressive track, these have touring tracks and it's getting to be a little much for them. Jr and I both want new ski doo's but they a little pricey

Keep your eyes out for a older used one. I have a late 90 MXZ670. Just under 4K miles. Needed a couple new bogey wheels, but got it for $800. Put $200 into it and haven't had a problem yet. Awesome little sled. Lots of zip and power.

Re: The back 80...

PostPosted: Mon Jan 27, 2014 11:19 pm
by Bulldog0156
Woody wrote:
BrewGUN wrote:
jehler wrote:I want a etec600 in the rev-xs frame and r-motion suspension.

Problem is if I bought one it would never snow in Michigan again

Unless I was out in the mountains, I would never get a sled bigger than a 600, too much weight and not enough power gain. I'd shoot for a early to mid 2000 500-600, the 550's are a mean sled for all around.


My 700 with the right track would crush a 550.

Sounds cool man :roll:

Re: The back 80...

PostPosted: Tue Jan 28, 2014 6:58 am
by BrewGUN
NuffDaddy wrote:
jehler wrote:
Goldfish wrote:What year were your sleds did you say? Also, going up those hills along the power lines (6 minute mark), was that all the beans it had? I ask because from the sounds of it, those ride like my dads 87 jag 440. It's a night and day difference to my 96 indy's. Wish I could make it to Michigan to go sledding this winter
jr is on a 1984 polaris, I'm on a 92 jag, both 440's. Flat gunned up that hill, there is not much base, just powdered sugar kinda snow, 2-4' deep, all those little guys can do to stay on top, would be nice iy have a little more aggressive track, these have touring tracks and it's getting to be a little much for them. Jr and I both want new ski doo's but they a little pricey

Keep your eyes out for a older used one. I have a late 90 MXZ670. Just under 4K miles. Needed a couple new bogey wheels, but got it for $800. Put $200 into it and haven't had a problem yet. Awesome little sled. Lots of zip and power.

Thats what I had, 97 MXZ 670, fast! too fast!

Re: The back 80...

PostPosted: Tue Jan 28, 2014 7:03 am
by BrewGUN
Woody wrote:
BrewGUN wrote:
jehler wrote:I want a etec600 in the rev-xs frame and r-motion suspension.

Problem is if I bought one it would never snow in Michigan again

Unless I was out in the mountains, I would never get a sled bigger than a 600, too much weight and not enough power gain. I'd shoot for a early to mid 2000 500-600, the 550's are a mean sled for all around.


My 700 with the right track would crush a 550.

Oh we're racing now? In that case, im getting an 800. Im talking for all around sled that will ice fishing, climbing, ditch banging, powder puff, the light 550s will do more than that 700 will. Not to mention you weigh what, 130? Jehler is pushing 210+. (sorry john, rough guess)

Re: The back 80...

PostPosted: Tue Jan 28, 2014 8:34 am
by jehler
Hey! I'm down to an even 200, the "+" really stung crut