Turbo for sea level to 2500ft and long term reliability

[live to ride]

For those that have used the g5 turbo at low elevation is it worth it over the NA? Deep snow but more set up not a lot of powder 50% of the time, a lot more moisture here in the east. Would a fair comparison to say going from the 800 to the 850? Also thoughts on long term 4000 plus mile reliability? Thanks

 

[turboless terry]

I don't ride that low but for me it wouldn't be. Sea level power is pretty equal and you have a lighter na sled with a better bottom end. Now polaris claims 10% more at sea level. I don't know g5 claim. Then when you add your riding conditions in i say no. We run turbos because deep snow and elevation are horsepower killers. Even at 2500 feet, that is like 7.5%. Call that 12 or 13 more hp with turbo. Is that worth it to you? Can you tell a big difference between your na, at sea level, vs 2500. If you do then it might be worth it. If not then it's probably not.

 

[Driver]

Well I have been riding gen4 turbo for 3 seasons now between 0-1600m and mostly around 200-600m. Its totally different animal than n.a.

On our local dyno we could see that peak power is about the same. But there is a lot more torque trough whole power band and also a lot more hp on low and mid range.

If there's deep snow, you will see and feel the difference.

 

[NHRoadking]

At sea level I would rather have a n/a big bore.

 

[live to ride]

I don't ride that low but for me it wouldn't be. Sea level power is pretty equal and you have a lighter na sled with a better bottom end. Now polaris claims 10% more at sea level. I don't know g5 claim. Then when you add your riding conditions in i say no. We run turbos because deep snow and elevation are horsepower killers. Even at 2500 feet, that is like 7.5%. Call that 12 or 13 more hp with turbo. Is that worth it to you? Can you tell a big difference between your na, at sea level, vs 2500. If you do then it might be worth it. If not then it's probably not.

Good information here , thanks, my understanding the g5 turbo has 180 hp sea level to around 8000’ the g4 turbo was 165hp at sea level same as the NA 850, I guess what I am really asking here is the extra 15 hp on the turbo over NA at sea level as noticeable as the roughly 15 hp increase from the 800 to the 850 ?

 

[turboless terry]

Good information here , thanks, my understanding the g5 turbo has 180 hp sea level to around 8000’ the g4 turbo was 165hp at sea level same as the NA 850, I guess what I am really asking here is the extra 15 hp on the turbo over NA at sea level as noticeable as the roughly 15 hp increase from the 800 to the 850 ?

The last 800 i rode was cat so that is apples to oranges. The last polaris 800 i rode was boosted so it falls in that same category. If you thought it was a big difference then 15 hp is 15 horsepower.

 

[revrider07]

The low end and midrange with 3 165 at 1800 ft with 20 inches of snow is arm straighting.

 

[live to ride]

The low end and midrange with 3 165 at 1800 ft with 20 inches of snow is arm straighting.

On the turbo?

 

[revrider07]

Yes turbo it’s amazing with traction

 

[mn.nytronut]

Did the n/a get a hp. boost to 180 at sea level, or was this gain only in the turbos?

 

[live to ride]

Did the n/a get a hp. boost to 180 at sea level, or was this gain only in the turbos?

Only in the turbo