Polaris Slingshot Forum banner

1 - 20 of 46 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
210 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
What are you hoping for in the 2016 model year to improve over what the first gen?

My personal list ranked in importance

1. More color choices (only two is very limiting, and one of them requires a trim upgrade)
2. Current production engine
3. Optional auto
4. Wider, stickier, rear tire.
5. Tweaked rear end design (for both storage and it looks a little unfinished)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
132 Posts
Agreed
for #5 - maybe a small fender. I'm guessing that rear wheel will spit up a mess in that vast rear opening
#6 more windscreen options (tints and sizes)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
498 Posts
Here's my list:
1. Heater
2. More storage compartment
3. Rear view mirror that works.
4. Larger stereo screen.
5. Local able latch for hood.
6. Optional speaker mount for larger speakers.
7. Rear fender and front also.
8. Adjustable passenger seat (forward/back)
9. Optional dual side by side headlight like Canadian model.
10. Spare tire kit, space saver style.
11. Locking gas cap.
12. Airbag if possible.
13. Turn signals on mirrors.
14. Bottom frame skid plate.
Just a short list.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,125 Posts
I wondered why they didn't do FWD.
That would have been a deal breaker for me. Front wheel drive would have taken the fun factor from 10 to 5 in my opinion.

A 300hp all wheel drive model would be interesting though. Something to get into the 10 second quater mile.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
686 Posts
As much as I like that idea, Polaris wasn't even allowed to do front wheel drive because that makes it more of a "car" than a "bike".
It must be Polaris management, because FWD has nothing to do with the legal definition of car or bike.

The Trihawk of a few decades ago was FWD and licensed as a bike.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,291 Posts
It must be Polaris management, because FWD has nothing to do with the legal definition of car or bike.

The Trihawk of a few decades ago was FWD and licensed as a bike.
I explicitly remember that being a bone of contention for the classification. I wonder if things have changed since then? The vehicle had to be belt or chain driven and not driven at the crank.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
494 Posts
I explicitly remember that being a bone of contention for the classification. I wonder if things have changed since then? The vehicle had to be belt or chain driven and not driven at the crank.
That makes sense. With the SS blurring the lines between Car and MC, that could have been a defining attribute that was not negotiable.

Can you imagine what a 300 HP all wheel drive SS would drive like? It would add a couple hundred pounds, but would put your power to weight ratio in the 6.5 range. That's in the R8 and GTR range and right now the GTR is the baddest mother on the streets, bar none
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
210 Posts
Discussion Starter #14
an AWD SS with 300hp would slay pretty much anything without a super car badge....alright, which one of you is going to make the conversion kit?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
776 Posts
Even after the FWD SS smoked you off the line? :D:D:rolleyes:
Yes even then. I don't like the way a front wheel drive, drives. ( Steering Torque ) Thats why I prefer to drive my old 240 Volvo over my wifes Prius. Both are slow, but I think the RWD just drives better. Maybe its just me?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
686 Posts
I explicitly remember that being a bone of contention for the classification. I wonder if things have changed since then? The vehicle had to be belt or chain driven and not driven at the crank.
I'm surprised they care about which wheels are driven; is that all states or just your state?

Never heard of a crank driven vehicle except early bicycles; I guess you mean via shafts/gears like cars vs. chain/belt for motorcycles, which makes more sense as a differentiator between them.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,291 Posts
I'm surprised they care about which wheels are driven; is that all states or just your state?

Never heard of a crank driven vehicle except early bicycles; I guess you mean via shafts/gears like cars vs. chain/belt for motorcycles, which makes more sense as a differentiator between them.
As far as I can tell, that was a qualification for most states, so they conceded to that designation: a motorcycle that is belt-driven.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
291 Posts
What are you hoping for in the 2016 model year to improve over what the first gen?

My personal list ranked in importance

1. More color choices (only two is very limiting, and one of them requires a trim upgrade)
2. Current production engine
3. Optional auto
4. Wider, stickier, rear tire.
5. Tweaked rear end design (for both storage and it looks a little unfinished)
If by 'auto' you mean, automated heater, ok. But automatic transmission? That's criminal in a vehicle like this.

I would think:

1. More colors
2. Engine options - for example, an SC or Turbo version (vs. aftermarket). You get factory and warranty with a factory car delivered that way.
3. Some sort of composite floor mats. Can see how some shoes might slide.
4. Heater option (seats perhaps)
5. Side Mirror vertical adjustment. I'm 6'1" and felt the mirrors sit a bit low.
6. Possible rear view mirror option
7. Airbag (steering wheel) and passenger bag
8. Turn indicators on side mirrors

The good news is that most of these things can and will be done via the aftermarket.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
58 Posts
I spoke to Polaris Corporate Rep about some of the things listed in this thread I.e. Storage, spare tire, etc. He told me that Polaris will not be developing OEM changes without figuring out how to trim weight. They came in 5lbs under the max allowable for a motorcycle classification. 5lbs heavier, and they have to crash qualify as a car along with all the other car requirements. To quote Polaris...... "If you want yours to be different, you will need to rely on aftermarket parts"
 
1 - 20 of 46 Posts
Top