Talk:Snowmobile

Alpina snowmobile was nominated for deletion. The discussion was closed on 22 November 2012 with a consensus to merge. Its contents were merged into Snowmobile. The original page is now a redirect to this page. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected article, please see its history; for its talk page, see here.

Engines

In the world of snowmobiles where almost every machine is a two-stroke, it may seem that the four-strokes are going to make them quieter, but this may not be the case. With off-road motorcycles, the "thumpers" (four-strokes) have a reputation for being extremely loud. In a factory condition the four-strokes are generally quieter but if you put a high performance exhaust on both a two and a four stroke, the four will be much louder. Painfully in fact. It will be interesting to see how this plays out with snowmobiles and jet skis. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.50.255.10 (talk) 12:36, 7 January 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Two-Stroke Technologies like Direct-Inject Need to be addressed — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bukwas (talk • contribs) 05:24, 9 March 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Many "thumpers" are using aftermarket exhaust to take full advantage of the motor's potential power. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.53.197.182 (talk) 02:58, 2 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The "thumpers" are single cylinder engine's. The four stroke's in snowmobiles are 2 to 4 cylinders. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.163.213.19 (talk) 18:27, 13 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thiokol

If anyone knows anything about Thiokol's business in the snowmobile field (it was, I've read, a huge player for a time in the '70s) then I'd appreciate an addition to that article. Thanks. -- John Fader (talk | contribs) 19:02, 15 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Thiokol never made snowmobiles. They made snowcats (or snow cats), which are now usually called "groomers" because most of them are now used to groom the snow on ski slopes or trails or snowmobile trails. Snowmobiles are small one or two person machines with no cockpit, no cabin, and a single track in the back and two skis in the front. Snowcats (or groomers) are big machines with enclosed cabs, driven by two or even four tracks. Do a Web image search with the terms "Thiokol Imp" and another one with "Thiokol Spryte" to see what these tracked vehicles are like. Bombardier also made several models of groomers and multi purpose snowcats (which are now produced by Camoplast, industrial division), along with several other US companies like Tucker, and Swedish companies like Hagglunds. There is plenty of info on them all on the Web once you know under what words to search. Some of these machines are also called logging skidders or just "skidders". We don't have any article yet on snow groomers or multi purpose snowcats yet. Feel like starting one? --AlainV 01:33, 16 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Thanks. Frankly, I didn't know the difference between a snowmobile and a snowcat until right now (so I wouldn't be much good about writing said article). The reason I ask is that I just finished writing the Thiokol article, and it's rather unsatisfactory. They started as a chemical company, and later a maker of solid rockets using the chemical. I can't figure out how (or when) they got into the snow equipment business (and equally the skilift business), and I'd love to have the minutes of the boardmeeting when someone said "We've won the contract to build the space shuttle boosters; let's sell the skilift division". :) -- John Fader (talk | contribs) 01:42, 16 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Kegresse tracks?

Try as I might, I can't find any evidence that snowmobile tracks are called "Kegresse tracks" in english. I understand, from Ericd's edit to Caterpillar track, the purported difference between the two types - but I can't find anyone calling snowmobile tracks Kegresse. Consequently I move that the english phrase "Kegresse tracks" pertains only to those half-tracks made by Adolphe Kegresse and, regardless of usage in other languages, "caterpillar track" is the expression in currency for both types of track. If someone can cite english langage sources that do use Kegresse in the more general sense, I'm more than willing to read 'em. -- John Fader (talk | contribs) 01:48, 23 Mar 2005 (UTC)

I have no idea, that's why I unpiped the link. -Willmcw 01:56, Mar 23, 2005 (UTC)

I read a lot over the years on Joseph-Armand Bombardier's patents for snowmobile components and the track system in particular and remember no reference to Kegresse. I checked again on the Bombardier museum site (available in French as well as in English http://www.fjab.qc.ca/entrance.htm) and there was no mention of Kegresse. --AlainV 04:37, 24 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Let's pull it then. Is caterpillar track correct? That's what was there before. Maybe we should just say they run on a "rubber track" and leave it at that. -Willmcw 04:43, Mar 24, 2005 (UTC)

Here's this citation that I found which buttreses the use of the term. http://www.rememuseum.org.uk/vehicles/trrv/vehhalf.htm

American half tracks used a development of the French designed Kegresse tracks which were like large rubber bands. The vehicles also had driven front axles. Most of these produced, initially by the White Company and later by others, were armoured. During World War 2 many were supplied to Britain.

That reference obviously dates the invention to some time before 1940, and the photo shows something that is similar in concept to a snowmowbile track. In light of this, I suggest we leave it. The red link may encourage someone to write an article on the mysterious Kegresse tracks. (Perhaps the French Wikipedia already has one). However, I'll move the link down. Cheers, -Willmcw 06:42, Mar 24, 2005 (UTC)

Yamaha snowmobile lineup

Just wanted to inform the person that keeps editing the text under "Enviromental Impact" that NOT all of Yamaha's sleds are 4-strokes. Yamaha is still producing the SXVenom, SXVenom ER, SXViper Mountain, and the Venture 600. Yamaha hasn't updated these models the last few years, but they're still part of the official lineup for 2006.

Check it out for yourself.

http://www.yamaha-motor.com/sport/products/lifestylehome/home.aspx — Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.53.197.182 (talk) 03:08, 2 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Also, under the history section, it states "The snowmobile market is now divided up between the four large North American makers (Ski Doo, Arctic Cat, Yamaha, and Polaris)" - Is Yamaha classed as a North American maker? I'm struggling to find any reference to Yamaha being majority-owned by any North American corporation(s).--Kurisutofaa Pouru 13:11, 21 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The parent company may be japaneese but the Yamaha snowmobiles are made by the subsidiary Yamaha Motor Corporation based in Cypress, California ([History]). I don't know how you would qualify the ownership but the manufacturing is North-American. Pierre cb 14:09, 21 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hate to disagree but the majority (possibly all) of Yamaha snowmobiles are manufactured in the Shizouka prefecture of Japan, I believe it's in Iwata. When they're shipped to Canada the crates are all marked with the region of manufacture. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.59.231.96 (talk) 01:31, 19 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Snowtrucks

Should the military snowtrucks also be mentioned under other vehicles? I'm not sure if there's an article about them only already, so that's why I'm asking. See these pictures if you dont know what I mean (they're from the Finnish Defence Forces, so the pics may be used for free as long as the source is mentioned):

Unbiased?

Anyone getting a feel that this is a BIASED article? with the enviormental impact about the same size of the ENTIRE ARTICLE, somthing is wrong. Remember, this is a enyclopedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 152.163.100.9 (talk) 20:40, 4 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The entire article is over 1100 words. The environmental impact section has 268 words. Aside from that, it appears in appropriate in context. Most of the political and legal debate over snowmobiles is based on their environmental impact. -Will Beback 22:16, 4 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I concur, it doesn't seem disproportionate. -Cyberprog 22:33, 4 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I am not sure why environmental impact is even mentioned. When you take into account the number of acres taken up by industry, homes, and highways. The amount of fuel used in industry, other forms of transportation and in homes and producing food. Clearly snowmobiling plays only a miniscule part in any perceived environmental problem. If you banned snowmobiling from the planet, you would see no change in the environment. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.164.248.124 (talk) 18:47, 11 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I feel that there's an inherent bias against 2-stroke engines presented in the article. The citations are few and far between. I think that the seperate article for 2-stroke and 4-stroke engines could be referenced and leave the pertinent facts in those sections. Emmissions between the 2 is a rapidly changing subject, with design ramifications beyond the scope of this article. Probably easier to divert to the main engine type and fuel delivery mechanisms than it is to keep this article up to date. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.59.231.96 (talk) 01:42, 19 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Unbiased? NO! SNOWMOBILES CAN BE BIG POLLUTERS

A form of pollution, direct pollution into fresh water, can be caused by the emission of the unburned fuel from 2-stroke motors in snowmobiles, which goes directly into the water. The average person is familiar with snowmobiles that zoom over freshwater lakes during the winter. They know that they emit a generally high-ranking form of noise pollution and there is also air pollution that we see and smell. We often see that acrid grey-blue smoke that haze that lingers long after the snow machine has passed. BUT air-borne pollution from snow machines has another environmental factor, more alarming, because it is unseen and unknown to the general public. Much of the fuel especially from older models is left unburned and emitted out the tail pipe. The air pollution lands and becomes part of the snowpack. This has further serious negative consequences for fresh water lakes during the spring thaw.

Due to the increase in snowmobile activity in the last decades, the environment has been heavily compromised. The ‘Ontario Snowmobiling by the Numbers Report, September 3rd, 2006’ claims that there are now approximately 165,000 family members of the Ontario Federation of Snowmobilers alone. What they don’t report but the Environmental Protection Agency does is that snowmobiles emit a number of pollutants, including aldehydes, 1, 3-butadiene, benzene, toluene and xylene and other polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs).

These pollutants can be carcinogenic and negatively affect the nervous system. According to estimates from the Native Forest Organization about 20 tons of hydrocarbons and 54 tons of Carbon Monoxide may be emitted on an average day during a peak weekend (700 snowmobiles) One hour on a typical snowmobile produces more pollution than driving a modern car for a year. Based on the poor design of the 2-stroke motor and its fuel-burning inefficiency, it is estimated that 25-40 percent of the gasoline and oil are dumped directly out the tail pipe. Many environmentalists believe that there are severe ramifications from the 2-stroke engine that the average person, perhaps even the drivers of these machines themselves, don’t realize. This could explain why they are not yet banned. Where are the studies that examine emissions from snowmobiles? There have been few, notably those done in Yellowstone National Park in Wyoming in recent years after the 2004-2005 Winter Season. This research is due in part to the controversy over the Bush administration reversal of a hard-fought ban by environmentalist over many years, on snowmobiles in the park. The air had since become so toxic to park gate attendants that they insisted on gas masks as part of staff uniform requirements.

However, much more recently there has been an interesting study conducted by Reimann, S, R Kallenborn and N Schmidbauer in the Arctic and published by Environmental Health News, June 24th, 2009. It informs us that peak levels of aromatic hydrocarbons in Longyearbyen (Svalbard) a remote community, are so high during snowmobile season that they are close to levels of the same pollutants in Zurich, Switzerland – a major city with close to 400,000 people. “As there are only 540 snowmobiles with 2-stroke engines registered in Longyearbyen, it is clear that a small number of snowmobiles can have a big impact on the amount of airborne pollutants.” It is worth pointing out that people fail to appreciate the disaster this ‘dump’ of toxic waste creates annually. It is hard to see. It is therefore difficult to attach blame to the machines which exact this intolerable pollution.

This is call for alarm, more importantly in North America due to vast geographical expanse of fresh water ecosystems. There is a potential for these pollutants to affect nearby surface waters during snowmelt and spring runoff. Scientists like Peter Landrum, of the Great Lakes Research laboratory, believe that fuel deposited by snowmobiles over the winter months become locked into the snowpack. Especially on the temporary man-made lake trails, that are customarily created all over our northern communities, the toxic affects of the accumulated pollutants magnify during the first few days of spring when they are released during snowmelt. There is a condition called phototoxicity, where tiny organisms absorb chemicals, from the ejected unburned fuel, making them sensitive to light. Simple daylight can easily kill the organisms. This annual disaster, that has gone unchecked for decades, during the time of spawning of most aquatic life which feed on these organisms, can be potentially felt all the way up the food chain.

To date Canada, one of the leading manufacturers of snowmobiles, has yet to ban 2-stroke engines. Due to the alleged ‘big-spending’ impact these machines bring to tourism, unfortunately the industry’s attempts to divert meaningful discussion on the subject have thus far succeeded. Granted there are economic benefits but this reminds anyone, over 30 years of age, about the same arguments the tobacco industry used to baffle the public for 20-odd years before they became aware of the unhealthy side of smoking.

On a positive note, as a result of lobbying, environmentalists have put pressure on all four major manufacturers of the snowmobile industry to make machines with four-stroke engines. They have also pushed for machines that have cleaner options such as installation of proper jets that can be adjusted at different altitudes to improve engine performance. Organizations such as the Montana Department of Environmental Quality have a number of suggestions like adjusting the snowmobiles for local conditions, the use of oxygenated fuels and the use of low emission lube oils. Low impact; biodegradable lubricant gasohol can be used instead of petroleum-based products for all motorized recreational vehicles especially snowmobiles. We can create policies to reduce our carbon footprint as well as our carbon snowprint. We must alleviate this form of water pollution in our very own backyards. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Goodwitchnorth (talk • contribs) 20:27, 19 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

While all this is great dialogue and discussion, it really has no place in the talk page or in the article, per WP:FORUM and WP:NPOV. Please keep this kind of material to a minimum and off WP - put it in online discussion forums where they belong. Srobak (talk) 21:08, 19 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

NPOV?

From the subculture section: "They are very passionate about their sport and are very offended when ingnorant people refer to snowmobiling as nothing more than " just sitting there pushing a throttle." The kind of riding these enthusiests do requires an immense amount of strength and effort (it is a huge amount of work throwing around a 500 pound machine, as most can imagine)."

I smell a bit of vendetta, there, with the classification of people under a certain school of thought (regardless of how misconceived) as being "ingnorant [sic]." However, I'm not quite sure of how to clean it up and make it neutral without disposing of a big chunk of the section, since it seems to be such a response to an unspoken argument. So, if some other kind soul out there with a little more finesse than me could take care of it, that'd rock. --Matt S. 04:33, 6 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It's been over a month, so I decided to just go ahead and take care of it myself. I hope the changes are acceptable. --Matt S. 23:25, 20 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Timing of Grass Drags....

Wikipedia has..."Grass drags are held every spring, with the largest event being Hay Days in Lino Lakes, Minnesota. Hay Days has always been the first weekend following the Labor Day Holiday. The World Championship Watercross or Snowmobile skipping races are held in Grantsburg, Wisconsin in July."

It used to say "summer" but was edited by a "vandal" to spring but then I checked up before I planned to revert and the article also says that Hay Days is the first weekend after Labour Day and Wikipedia has Labor day as first Monday in September. To me thats late summer - practically autumn (fall) and not really summer (and certainly not spring). Checked a few web sites and it seems to be Fall (otherwise known as Autumn to the rest of the known universe/world) Ttiotsw 23:19, 9 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

SDI and DI technologies

What are the SDI and DI technologies mentioned in the line: "...the park awarded them for their advanced research into SDI and DI technologies."? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 65.23.245.27 (talk) 22:35, 18 December 2006 (UTC).[reply]

SDI and DI refer to Semi-Direct Injection and Direct Injection, respectively. These are more effiecient fuel delivery systems that replace carbs. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.49.146.24 (talk) 21:22, 9 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"Old style" two strokes draw fuel and air into the crankcase and the downward push of the piston forces the charge up through transfer ports into the cylinder to perform the exhaust scavenging and into the pipe. Pressure waves in the pipe force the charge back into the cylinder before the piston closes the exhaust port. Because this process relies on gas dynamics and not any mechanical valving, the process is not complete and some of the gas/air charge escapes as unburned hydrocoarbons. Direct injection is injecting the fuel after pressure waves in the pipe has packed the cylinder with air and after the exhaust port has closed. This reduces unburned hydrocarbons substantially. Semi-direct injection is similar to direct but the fuel is injected in the tranfer ports and requires movement of air in the transfer port and is done before the exhaust port closes. It is timed so fuel does not reach the exhaust port before it closes. There are advantages to both. Semi direct injection allows the fuel air mixture more time to vaporize for better combustion. Engineers had to be quite clever to figure out how to atomize fuel in a direct injection set up because there is not much time for the fuel to atomize from the time the exhaust port closes to the time a piston is at TDC. Total piston movement is not much more than an inch and at 8000 rpm, there is not much time. Direct injection technology from two strokes has made its way back to 4 strokes to improve aspects of those engines. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.164.248.124 (talk) 18:39, 11 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sentence in History Section needs rewording

Under History, the 3rd para has the following sentence:

"He was lead in 1954 by Brothers Edgar and Allen Hetteen and a friend, David Johnson of Roseau, Minnesota."

Could someone reword that to be more intelligible?

Tony 20:57, 2 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Section cleaned up somewhat, but claims of hundreds of companies making snowmobiles has not been validated.Silverchemist 15:16, 11 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know whether this really belongs in history or individual snowmachines, but the current page reads like an advertizement for Bombardier....Maybe someone with better editing skills than me could add some history and pictures from Carl Eliason's site....seems to me he is the father of the modern snowmobile as we know it today. You can check out his motor toboggin at www.eliason-snowmobiles.com —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.115.134.97 (talk) 15:05, 11 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Performance Section/Cleanup

I’ve added a new performance section as modifications to enhance performance are common.

Some general article cleanup is in order! — Preceding unsigned comment added by SyntheticDNA (talk • contribs) 10:20, 4 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I removed this from the subculture section: “In recent years, Andrew Horn of Anchorage, AK has been lighting up the area with his own version of freestyle snowmachining.”

I live in the area and nobody knows who this guy is and I can’t find anything in Google on him. — Preceding unsigned comment added by SyntheticDNA (talk • contribs) 10:37, 4 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Just a question, can i get references for this section? Need the original source to reference for a project. A reply asap would be really helpful. Cheers.

Robbie 123.255.41.162 (talk) 12:08, 30 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

References are listed at the bottom of the article. Srobak (talk) 16:13, 30 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Reasoning for Deleting Certain Links

1st Link - Yellow Stone National Park
Reasoning: This link should go on the Wikipedia article Yellow Stone National Park NOT the article on Snowmobiling

2nd Link Bombardier
Reasoning: This link should go under the Wikipedia article Bombardier.

Please make sure that your link is appropriate before adding it to an article.

Eric 00:54, 6 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Is This Even True?

"And try not to fall off cause if your do consider yourself hurt. And dont over run your snowmobile its engine will blow up."

Even if this sentence is true the wording and spelling is horrible, someone find some references or something to these incidents and please reword this into modern-day English. Thank you.

Stegosaurus 21:31, 12 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's true. If you fall from it, you turn in the air in such speed your giong to break somthing. If you broke a hand or leg, your lucky. It's also true about the run-over. Just like a car by the way. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.178.1.184 (talk) 18:44, 29 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This sentance is irrelevant to a page about snowmobiles. I have fell off my sled numerous times and never once have I come out with so much as a scratch. Sure if you are going at a high rate of speed that is different. I also don't understand the last sentance. Your engine will blow up? Please. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mystery dragon (talk • contribs) 05:36, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Help needed

Hello. I'm a fan of the sport, even though i live in Israel (we have a problem. No snow). At vications i go to mountaines in the USA (Wyoming), or even more fun Siberia at winter (diffrent types of roads, tracks, mountained areas). I have also been at the Alphs and you really have fun there!!!

Anyway, i started reading a lot of bocks, and i found that the first snowmobile was the Aerosan by Sikorsky. and it was ignored in the article.

I entered this information, dont worry, what i ask is somthing else: Where can i try this device? Are there people in the English speaking world who could give advices?

I know it's pretty much an off-topic, but i think it's the best place to ask.

P.S. Is their translation to the word Aerosan? Aero i understend, but the finishing i dont. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.178.1.184 (talk) 18:44, 29 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Aerosan appears to be from the Russian for "aero-sled". "Sled" means something used to travel across snow or ice (I apologize if you know this, but I want to make this easy because English is not your first language). I think Aerosans are mostly used in Russia. Meanwhile, if you seek snowmobiling trips, try the US state of New Hampshire between November and February. It's inexpensive to travel in New Hampshire (no sales tax) and there are special, long trails for snowmobiles in many places. It is also several thousand miles closer to Israel than Wyoming, being on the east coast, —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.64.219.3 (talk) 20:30, 3 April 2008 (UTC) Edit by the same person: I am an American, and I visited Israel several years ago. You, too, have a beautiful country to enjoy.69.64.219.3 (talk) 20:34, 3 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Aerosan

I would like that the anonymous user insisting in calling the Aerosan a snowmobile would produce a reference. To me this machine is not a snowmobile as it does not use a track as propulsion. The same way one cannot call an Hovercraft a boat. Pierre cb (talk) 15:55, 1 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Son, i'm 57 years old. I worked for Lynx a few years (there a Finish company), and before that in Bombardier. I know whar i'm talking about. What you said is the same thing as KIA's cars are KIA's and are not cars. The Aerosan is a snowmobile, and Sikorsky, who lived in the USA many years, to called it that way. So why is it named Aerosan? Because Aero- it uses a preopeller. San- are the slides. Anyway, their aint much difference beetwen that thing and todays Snowmobile. Ray H. Muscott of Waters to haven't called his device Snowmobile. In Russian any snowmobile is named Aerosan. P.S. Officaly Aerosan is regestered as a Snowmobile, and it's refered to as a type of Snowmobile.

Web sites who do that, for example:

[1] (quote: "Not only are snowmobiles popular in the United States and Canada, Ussr has their very own version of the snowmobile, which can be seen in the aerosan. Aerosan, when interpreted, intends "aero sleigh." The Russians usage this propeller-powered snowmobile for delivering the mail, patrolling the metes, as well as for recreational intents.")

[2] (quote: "An aerosan (Russian: aerosani, literally `aerosled`) is a type of propeller-powered snowmobile, running on skis, used for communications, mail deliveries, medical aid, emergency recovery and border patrolling in northern Russia, as well as for recreation. Aerosans were used by the Soviet Red Army during the Winter War and the Second World War.")

[3] (here they tell you to go to Snowmobile when you search for Aerosan)

As you can see, Aerosan is a type of a Snowmobile. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.181.160.114 (talk) 16:26, 1 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Good research that you must put properly as reference IN the text. By the way, I'm not your son and furthermore I'm almost as old as you. Finally, half-tracks developped in Russia at the same time are used on snow too and are not considered as snowmobile. Pierre cb (talk) 16:34, 1 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

First, sorry for calling you son. It wasnt ment to insult you. The thing is that almost all the Wikipedians here are in their 20s and i didnt know you werent. I didn't mean anything bad. Second, i dont know how to reference in the text. Third, your 100% right that a Half-Track is not a snowmobile, but therefore it aint registered as one and i havent seen one place where it's called a Snowmobile. It uses wheels for example. It's a car system combining other elements. The Aerosan and the snowmobile are generally speaking based on the same system, and not surprising since, as already said, Aerosan is a type of Snowmobile.

And again, sorry for calling you son it wasn't of any bad intention. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.181.160.114 (talk) 17:46, 1 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've integrated the references in the text and made it neutral on the subject. Pierre cb (talk) 18:19, 1 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! Exellent. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.181.160.114 (talk) 18:45, 1 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

motor toboggan

so does anyone have any information on the US Armys motor toboggan, Eliason model C. ? Brian in denver (talk) 23:38, 17 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

this site says he invented the snowmobile: Sayner, Wisconsin Brian in denver (talk) 23:45, 17 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

so it seems that MR eliason has the first pattent, http://www.google.com/patents?id=F9s_AAAAEBAJ&dq=1,650,334 amazing what 5 min, surfing the web can turn up. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Brian in denver (talk • contribs) 21:53, 19 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Accident section

Has one source for all that material? Maybe we could find more sources or tag as needed? --Tom 18:55, 26 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The section as it currently stands is bordering upon incoherent. The absolute leading cause of deaths in snowmobiling worldwide is collision, followed by drowning (which is the reverse of what it was 20 years ago, thanks to better education and legislation, but hindered by faster snowmobiles). The way the section is organized, we do not see this...instead, there are various references to outdated statistics in specific areas.

In Canada, while alcohol plays a factor in accidents (and is provincially enforced and federally legislated to carry the same penalties as impaired driving), it also carries the same statistics (roughly 50% average). Visibility (especially at night or during heavy snowfall) is not even mentioned, yet is the primary reason for most collisions.

In Ontario and Quebec, several fatal collisions occur every year on open lakes due to low visibility and unreasonable speed...collisions with ice fishers and thier huts, collisions with parked snowmobiles and other vehicles, collisions with animals or pedestrians, and even collisions with pressure cracks (with the sun at your back, you can easily drive directly into a wall of ice without ever seeing it). Equally dangerous is trail riding, with the addition of fencing, trees, wildlife and obstructions such as hills which limit visibility. All of these are due to unforseen obstructions, carelessness, speeding (ie: outrunning the headlights) and unpreparedness, and most are exacerbated by temperature drops, sudden snowstorms and failure to realize the many dangers of night driving...especially the extreme night temperature (incresed by "windchill" on an exposed rider), limited visibility and inability to hear the surrounding environment through headgear and engine noise.

Again, in Ontario and Quebec, there are at least a few deaths every year, where a snowmobiler drowns...despite warnings that are broadcast and published regionally whenever ice depths are at unsafe depths (see Environment Canada).

Avalanches are a threat in some areas, but most these places have regulatory bodies that provide warnings in those areas (also Environment Canada, in conjuntion with the Canadian Ski Patrol in British Columbia, Alberta, and Yukon or such as http://www.avalanche.org/ in other areas).

Most of the other "accidents" referred to in the article are the result of illegal activities (ie: rail riding) or extreme sport (ie: high marking) which are not so much accidental as they are the result of deliberate reckless behavior.

One point in the section (under "Alaska" but clearly not unique to the state) that is VERY important towards drowning incidents is the fact that PSI of a modern snowmobile (and rider) is considerably lower than PSI of a human...it is quite common in all areas where snowmobilers travel across frozen water, to break through the ice when dismounting a parked snowmobile.

The section needs to be rewritten, using current data, and organized to make it more condensed concise and readable, or needs to be placed in a separate page which can detail all the various possible causes for accidents. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.235.189.48 (talk) 06:22, 19 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Lead sentence and alternate names

Sorry that the discussion about this took place on my talk page. I am trying to tweak the lead in regards to the alternate naming conventions for this entry. Can others please chime in. Thank you, --Tom 15:03, 1 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Skimobile Citation

From OED 2nd ed. (1989)

Skimobile
N. Amer.

1. A car or chain of cars used to carry skiers up a mountain; a ski-lift. 1946 Richmond (Va.) News Leader 9 Jan. 4/2 A ski~mobile ascends Mount Cranmore, near North Conway, N.H., taking skiers to the top of a 2,052 foot rundown. 1979 United States 1980/81 (Penguin Travel Guides) 483 Its oddball skimobile is one of the oldest lifts in New England.

2. A small vehicle for travelling over snow, with caterpillar tracks at the back and steerable skis in front. Cf. SNOWMOBILE. (Now the usual sense.)

1955 Kingston (Ont.) Whig-Standard 6 Apr. 25/3 With the advent of snowmobiles and skimobiles, most dog teams are now used for dog races. 1969 ‘R. STARK’ Blackbird (1970) xx. 127 There were a couple of skimobiles down there, little open scooters with skis in front and treads in back. 1974 R. B. PARKER God save Child ii. 8 Shopping centers, a fish market, a skimobile shop.

Some jerk on the Internet (talk) 19:28, 18 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

These examples date from 1979 and earlier. No recent use of this term is mentionned so this is an old usage at best, never heard anymore. On top of that, this link shows what a skimobile is and this has nothing to do with a snowmobile. It is a skilift disguised as a vehicle. Pierre cb (talk) 03:08, 19 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Check a print copy of the new Oxford American Dictionary, 2005, and the entry for "skimobile" says simply "n. A snowmobile." The definition for "snowmobile" reads "a motor vehicle, esp. one with runners in the front and a track in the rear, for traveling over snow." The chair-lift usage isn't mentioned at all. The 1989 OED is the current OED, which is the definitive dictionary of the English language, and it concludes that the "snowmobile" definition of "skimobile" is the current usual sense of the word. Perhaps the 3rd edition will change that, but until then...

for non-scholarly usage, I submit:

The Strawberyy Shortcake Snowflake Skimobile. Currently for sale in Australia: http://www.dealsdirect.com.au/p/strawberry-shortcake-snowflake-skimobile-scented-doll-pupcake/

The GI Joe Polar Battle Bear Skimobile, for sale from 1983-1995: http://www.yojoe.com/vehicles/83/polarbear/

Can I get a guided skimobile tour of Yosemite National Park? Posted 2 months ago. http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20090115002203AAaKGxe

House for Sale: White Mountains on SkiMobile Trail. Listed Feb. 2009. http://newhampshire.kijiji.com/c-Housing-Homes-for-sale-White-Mountains-on-SkiMobile-Trail-Lovely-Large-home-and-barn-W0QQAdIdZ84744830

Alpine Sport Adventure Skimobile suite for sale in Canada. Listed Feb. 2009. http://saintjohn.kijiji.ca/c-buy-and-sell-clothing-kids-youth-Alpine-Sport-Adventure-3-pc-Skimobile-Snow-Suit-EXCELLENT-SHAP-W0QQAdIdZ109517696

Stock photo of Sport training of Ski Mobile rider. Uploaded 5 Jun. 2008. http://albumo.com/photo/608169/Flying-of-ski-mobile-rider.html

I'm not saying it's the common or even the proper name for the tracked vehicle with skis, but I submit it's accepted, current usage, sufficiently so to stand on its own, based on the evidence above. Some jerk on the Internet (talk) 13:45, 19 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I did not take it out, just commented on its usage. Skidoo (mentionned in the Yosemite National Park link) is much more prevalent and should be reintroduced but I'm not starting an reedition with the person who took it out previously. Pierre cb (talk) 16:19, 19 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Terms: "Sled"

This term is widely known and accepted as being used in context as a valid substitute for "snowmobile". There have been repeated, destructive edits to remove this term indicating that it is too generic, and it needs to stop. It is no more generic than "snow machine" - which is also used to identify a machine which artificially manufactures snow, and in the upper midwest - is even used to identify a weather system which feeds moisture in the Great Lakes which becomes stagnant and generates large amounts of snowfall in the region. It is no different in context than the word "computer" or "PC" - both of which are horribly ambiguous, but are commonly understood to mean a desktop or laptop personal computer.

This section is to serve as discussion by the maintainers of the article regarding the term "sled" and it's appropriateness within the article. Any further edits to this effect prior to discussion and consensus will be considered destructive, edit-warring, and possibly vandalism, and will generate appropriate response to the offending users talk pages, and escalation for blocking. This is where the discussion happens, not in the edit logs. Srobak (talk) 15:47, 25 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

First, be like any serious contributor, reference your entry in the article before you threaten others of administrative punitive action. The term sled might be use for snowmobiles but you haven't proved it.
Secondly, the primary sense of sled is : a pulled vehicle with runners for sliding instead of wheels for rolling. A snowmobile is not pulled as far as I know.
Thirdly, as far as I am concerned, all local names SHOULD be eliminated as we are not to list all the names in the sticks. You should have seen the huge list there was sometimes ago!

If you want to list all the possible names for this device, create a separate section where you can elaborate the names, their sources and the regions where they are used. Pierre cb (talk) 19:08, 25 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The primary sense of a "snow machine" is to generate man-made snow in locations such as ski-hills, etc - but you aren't picking apart that one - so stay consistent, or don't worry about it. "Sled" as defined and used in the context of the article is a commonly known and used term in that sense, and is hardly a "local name". If you dispute this - look both in this talk page, and elsewhere in the article itself, not to mention any trade rag. Having to "prove it to you" makes about as much sense as me having to prove the use of the word "and" to join two statements together. Your being fickle about it serves no purpose to the article or the community. An advisement was posted both in the edit history for the article as well as the discussion page to discuss and arrive at consensus regarding the application of this term PRIOR to destructive edits. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Srobak (talk • contribs) 20:02, 25 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

As I said, ALL local names should be put in a separate section or eliminated. As for the "it is evident that sled is used", it is not in my neck of the wood. So reference is needed as someone else has referenced skimobile. Pierre cb (talk) 20:11, 25 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No, all commonly known names for snowmobiles or anything else should not be put in their own separate sections or eliminated. That is just silly. Look at any article in WP and you see other commonly known names for them. I am sorry you disagree as to its usage, but it does not entitle you to re-define the spirit of WP. Yes, it is referenced as such there, and references have now been cited. I will dig out even older references for your pleasure to replace those with shortly. Enough. Srobak (talk) 20:29, 25 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Finally you act like a responsable editor instead of issuing threats. Now I would like to know how long the list of local used terms would you like to see in that single phrase ? Pierre cb (talk) 23:25, 25 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No threats were issued. You conducted a destructive edit of valid information prior to discussion on the talk page and reaching a consensual agreement, per WP guidelines. As a result of this you also engaged into an edit & reversion war with multiple users regarding said information. This is not acceptable and you were warned against it, again per WP guidelines. If you have a problem with this, then conduct yourself in a more appropriate fashion in the future and do not engage in edit wars. A responsible contributor would be someone who understands that WP is a collection of information and resource material, and also knows that any destructive edits to otherwise valid information - especially prior to discussion - is not in the best interest of the community or in the spirit of WP. As for how long the list is - I don't really care. If there are other, well known - or not so well known - terms for anything from a snowmobile to a diaper - then WP as a resource of information is the place for it. My only goal was to make sure that an internationally known and utilized term was not continually dismissed by someone who has a superiority complex just because they don't think it pertains. End of line. Srobak (talk) 14:21, 26 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

(outdent) Just chimming in folks. I was here awhile ago and this is still on my watchlist. I had an issue with the usage of "Skidoo" in the lead, I believe it was, and that was resolved amlicabley through give and take. I see that it isn't even mentioned in the lead anymore? Not sure if that was due to me being a tight ass (my wife's words). Anyways, I would prefer to see NONE of the "alternative" names in the FIRST sentence. Or if we had to, maybe ONE alternative. Maybe in the 2nd sentence or as part of the lead add the rest, knock yourself out, as long as they are rock solid and there is wide agreement. As far as "sled" goes, I would definatley leave that out of the LEAD sentence, especially since it is the established name of a totally different product. Anyways, --Tom (talk) 14:55, 26 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

First off, I have to say I'm sorry that I contributed in any way to reigniting an old, resolved edit dispute by adding "skimobile" to the first sentence, and then sticking to it so doggedly. That said, I think that on its own merits, the addition was warranted and resulted in a reasonable opening sentence; "An X, also known as a Y or Z.... If any more synonyms, especially if they're going to be more generic or obscure, are going to start being added, I think it would be entirely reasonable to move them to a new, one- or two-sentence paragraph at the end of the introduction. I don't think an entirely new section is warranted, unless the list gets long than what the average person could count on the fingers of one hand. I think if there's a need for solid citations on any one particular synonym, there's a need for it on all of them.

As far as specific individual synonyms raised so far are concerned:

-I personally feel "sled" is a little too generic to qualify. In my understanding, it's used more as a nickname once it's established that "snowmobile" is what's being talked about, rather than as a primary term, e.g., "I took a ride on Larry's new snowmobile. It's a real wicked sled," vs. "we all got on our sleds and headed out to the cable line," or "FOR SALE: One sled helmet in good condition. Worn once."

-I've never referred to a snowmobile as a "snowmachine" personally, but I heard someone call it that on NPR the other day. An online slang dictionary produced as a project of the introductory lingusitics classes at U of OR. is a little thin to me, but it's a start. I can try to find some other examples, to back it up, or if someone else wants to take up that cause, be my guest.

-I've heard "skidoo" used, and as Pierre points out, one of the informal citations 'I' quoted uses it. With proper citing, I think it's acceptable as long as the issue of genericized trademarks is covered.

-All this strictly nothing more than my $.02 Some jerk on the Internet (talk) 18:26, 30 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Here is Minnesota, where they are manufactured by Arctic Cat and Polaris, the subject of this article is advertised and sold as a "snowmobile". However, just as stated in the thread above, "sled" is a valid slang term for a snowmobile in Minnesota, Wisconsin, and the Dakotas, when the context already is known. In a Men's Journal upcoming article, Iron Dog winner Todd Palin, husband of Sarah Palin, referred to visiting the Arctic Cat "snowmachine" factory. Snowmachine is a common slang term used in Alaska to describe snowmobiles, and residents of the 49th state have corrected media people on television travelogues that it is not a snowmobile, but a snowmachine. Regardless, the Iron Dog race referes to them as snowmobiles. Group29 (talk) 14:38, 2 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Use & Applications of Snowmobiles

This encyclopedia article could use a section explaining the use of these machines. For some, they are toys or sport vehicles. In the northern latitudes of North America, they are used to transport personnel and materiel - people and their possessions. In rural Alaska (equivalent to fully half the size of the lower 48 contiguous states), they are the primary means of winter transportation. They are a hunter's tool, increasing the hunter's range and easing the job of bringing food home where there are no local butcher shops. People use them to travel to nearby villages -- "commuting" dozens or hundreds of miles via established trails or on frozen waterways.

Residents of the few cities of Alaska -- the weekend warriors -- use them for recreation, including rural tourism. The article emphasizes the presumption that snow mobiles (traditionally called "snow machines" in my part of Alaska) are only recreational vehicles. That's not true. On the other hand, most residents of rural Alaska (and presumably Canada) don't use computer keyboards nor do they have broadband access or the time or interest in the 'net or Wikipedia.

My experience with the machines is limited, but I have managed village corporations and tribal governments here. This article overlooks important facts needed to make a good encyclopedia article. //Don K. (talk) 00:53, 16 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'd appreciate it if someone could upload this historical photo to the introductory section of the article to contrast with the conemporary one showing a group of sport riders: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Polaris_snowmobile_1965.JPG

Thanks! //Don K. (talk) 02:13, 16 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

police ~

Maybe this image depicting a snowmobile from Feldberg police station (Baden-Württemberg, Germany) could be a nice addition to the illustration. -- Gohnarch^░ 17:30, 27 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

but it the photograph is too dark ... --Scriberius (talk) 23:11, 27 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed so, my other screen seems to be brighter than an appropriate average. I just tried to fix the photograph, but the blue cast is quite intense. Too bad, I guess police snowmobiles are relatively rare. -- Gohnarch^░ 12:08, 6 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Since there's nothing unusual about a State Trooper or Fish and Game riding an official snow machine in Alaska, I suppose it's fair to call them commonplace - unremarkable. Just like our law enforcement folks in boats, big and small.//Don K. (talk) 00:29, 21 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

They are about as "commonplace" to the general public as a palm tree is to an Alaskan resident. That being said - there are plenty of Canadians, Alaskans and northern lower-48 residents in other snowmobile prevalent states that go their entire lifetimes without seeing a LEO sled. Srobak (talk) 01:01, 21 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sub-article

I know nothing about this subject, but I imagine that a dedicated article on snowmobile racing would be helpful. SFB/talk 12:36, 12 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Honda

I see Honda is mentioned in the snowmobile manufacturers list at the bottom of the page. I thougth Honda only made a small number of machines in the 70s and ended up crushing most of them befor they could even get them to dealers.

also John Deere produced Snowmobiles for a while. and I think Suzuki did as well. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.235.92.237 (talk) 17:46, 11 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed. A lot of other manufacturers have come and gone over the years that were far more significant (in terms of production numbers and/or innovation) than Honda. Ten years ago Honda did some investigation into re-entering the market, which led to a bit of hype within the snowmobile enthusiast world, but outside a couple patents and unconfirmed leaked concept images never went further than that. If we're going to list every "also ran", the list would be hundreds long. Not to mention the small manufacturers still operating outside of North America. BigDXLT (talk) 05:27, 7 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. To that effect however - should it be determined to form a list, it would be better kept as a separate article entirely, linked from the Snowmobile parent. Kind of like how List of Strategic Air Command Bases is linked from Strategic Air Command. Srobak (talk) 01:56, 8 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

On land and sea

Can it be mentioned that snowmobiles can be modified so that they are usable on both land and sea; see Howe and Howe Tech's Personal Assault Lander (dsc.discovery.com/videos/howe-and-howe-tech-assault-lander/ , http://dsc.discovery.com/videos/howe-and-howe-tech-meet-the-assault-lander.html), and the Fast Track Amphibian (see http://www.gizmag.com/go/6906/ ) 91.182.248.98 (talk) 18:46, 8 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

EthenRoberts.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 15:07, 22 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]