Well, so much for research... (series RRs)

[Grimly]

... spent the day trying to find other series reg/recs and found out about the Seadoo, and the Can-Am, both of which use SH-775 after about 2008-ish. Actually, Can-Am put the same part number on an FET non-series type, too. Unfortunately, the dealer prices for new ones are at least twice what Polaris dealers charge and as a result, the used prices are on a par with what you can buy a new Polaris part for.
When I say at least twice, you don't want to know what UK and European dealers are asking - it would make you blink.
Still, at least it's nice to know there's no real shortage of them, there are thousands out there. I've no doubt the Polaris dealers were wondering why their reg-recs were flying off the shelves at that price, and I hope they don't start putting the price up, as I want to buy another one. I don't think I'll get as lucky with a used one as the first time around.

[OldVet66]

Just goes to show you how slowly new tech is adopted sometimes. In this case I think think it is more economic and a lot of the manufacturers want to keep the old money pit, cheep for them to buy and expensive for us to replace or at least a steady projected income.

[Grimly]

Oh yes, automotive accountancy is a fine art and I've no doubt several bean counters came to the conclusion that Part X, with its greater failure rate, but cheaper to buy in, wouldn't fail enough to put buyers off, and they're only interested in the first buyers.
When Part X fails two, three or more years in service, and in the possession of Owner 2 or 3, the makers rub their hands at likely revenue, as there are a surprisingly large number of people who don't diy and cough up the rip-off spares prices.
Perhaps Part Y, with its lower failure rate is fitted to off-road and water-borne craft to avoid safety concerns and legal backlash and if the selling price of the vehicle is high enough, the cost can be absorbed.
Since the SH-775 has been getting fitted to some things for getting on for 6 years now, I can't find much evidence of failure in that timespan, so maybe it's a good one after all. Of course, every stator design is different, useage patterns differ and owner habits differ, but failure seems low so far.

[posplayr]

Oh yes, automotive accountancy is a fine art and I've no doubt several bean counters came to the conclusion that Part X, with its greater failure rate, but cheaper to buy in, wouldn't fail enough to put buyers off, and they're only interested in the first buyers.
When Part X fails two, three or more years in service, and in the possession of Owner 2 or 3, the makers rub their hands at likely revenue, as there are a surprisingly large number of people who don't diy and cough up the rip-off spares prices.
Perhaps Part Y, with its lower failure rate is fitted to off-road and water-borne craft to avoid safety concerns and legal backlash and if the selling price of the vehicle is high enough, the cost can be absorbed.
Since the SH-775 has been getting fitted to some things for getting on for 6 years now, I can't find much evidence of failure in that timespan, so maybe it's a good one after all. Of course, every stator design is different, useage patterns differ and owner habits differ, but failure seems low so far.

I think this is a case where statistical evidence may leave you wanting, whereas a theoretical treatment leaves one immediately satisfied.