154" or 165" Turbo

[Lemo]

I know this topic has been beaten to death, my last 2 sleds have been 165, but considering a 154 turbo expert spring order. I ride in Co and Utah. Just figured with the new hp and narrow design this thing would be equally capable to the gen 4 and more playful? Thoughts?

 

[Calvin42]

Can't go wrong ether way.154" would be super playful.

 

[Lemo]

I agree can't go wrong, it seems like we haven't been getting the insane snow anymore, so is a 165 really warranted?

 

[steenso]

Jumped ship from 165” to 154” Turbo in 2021 and haven’t been happier- combination of the turbo on the 154” flat out works. Lots of riders seem to be switching.

 

[Lemo]

Cool, this is the info i was looking for, thanks a bunch!

 

[Top]

165 for me - 250 lb rider

 

[SLEDDR.]

I currently ride two different Ski Doo G4 850 turbos both setup very similar with clutching and after market additions. 21 165 factory turbo with stage three tune, and a 22 146 Silber turbo running 7lbs of boost. My 165 stays on the sled deck most of the time. The 146” is so quick and nimble that it is the sled of choice on all but the deepest days.

Until you ride the two different sled lengths back to back multiple days in a row you don’t realize how much more energy the longer track requires. If I was forced into a 1 sled situation I think the 154” would give you the best of both worlds.

6’7” 250 lb rider. Riding Colorado Mtns and trees above 10k 90+ percent of the time.

 

[madmax]

Depends on your type of riding and how aggressive you are. I have been a 165 guy for years doing super technical tree riding. Got a 154 turbo this year because I couldn’t get a 165 as early in the year. I really like the 154. Granted it’s been a super crappy snow year and all my rides on it have been less than optional conditions. If we ever get any big dumps I’m pretty sure I’ll be wishing it was a 165. But hey, there is always next years new sled if I have regrets

 

[west dreams]

It seems like everyone was going longer the last couple of years and now this year it seems like quite a few are gravitating back towards the 154/5" length sleds? Just curious is it the technology? the shorter more tapered tunnels? turbos? or as a package have the new 15x" length sleds made a longer track less needed? I always have a hard time wrapping my head around the fact that another window and a half or so of track on the ground makes that much difference? Not saying it doesn't but my brain just cant put it together, lol. I have been on a 155" for about 11 years and this year I ordered a 165" kind of out of peer pressure, you know "come on everyone is doing it", In the back of my head I always though my 155" was fine why did I get a 165"? needles to say it didn't come in so I will be ordering this year again. What length am I getting? No idea! I know the 155" works for me and I enjoy it and it would be easy to make it a 165" if I wanted to go longer later. (I usually end up answering my own questions, if I would only listen to myself).

 

[Blk88GT]

154 is where it's at!

 

[McTwist700]

I currently have a 165 NA, but I am ordering a 154 turbo. I like the 165 for good powder days and I can throw it around when the snow is setup, but watching what a 22 154 turbo can get itself out has impressed me. They will trench for days and pop themselves out of the snow

 

[turboless terry]

154 are quicker and easier handling. If you want to go faster and combined with a little more playful and marginally out of control sometimes get the 154. A little less on getting there than how you get there. If you want to be more methodical combined with a little more forgiveness get the 165. Might be the difference between straight over and doing a hopover and sidehilling up. Size of person is also another factor.

 

[rulonjj]

Every time I ride a 165 I remember why I love the 154. Just all around less effort and funner to ride. I hate 165’s the more I ride them.

 

[Summit4949]

A buddy of mine went from 165 to a 154 road it once and went back to a 165

 

[live2beel]

On a deep day, the 165 is a huge difference. I also went 154 back to 165. Although this year with the crappy snow, I might go back to a 121.

 

[goridedoo]

I currently ride two different Ski Doo G4 850 turbos both setup very similar with clutching and after market additions. 21 165 factory turbo with stage three tune, and a 22 146 Silber turbo running 7lbs of boost. My 165 stays on the sled deck most of the time. The 146” is so quick and nimble that it is the sled of choice on all but the deepest days.

Until you ride the two different sled lengths back to back multiple days in a row you don’t realize how much more energy the longer track requires. If I was forced into a 1 sled situation I think the 154” would give you the best of both worlds.

6’7” 250 lb rider. Riding Colorado Mtns and trees above 10k 90+ percent of the time.

Kind of funny- I’ve found the longer track to require much less energy, they almost feel like cheating to me. I suppose it depends on what kind of riding you are doing.

I do prefer the 154/155s though, they are much rowdier, and need to be ridden faster, which I think is a hoot. If its super deep the longer sled really excels though, there’s no denying that.

 

[Devilmanak]

No input on turbo, but track length: Last two years I have had a 146 FR and a 165 Expert. Last year mileage was 901 on FR and 260 on 165. This year so far, mileage on FR is 850 and 165 50. Next year will be 146 FR and 154 Expert. I am not a fan of the 22 165 Expert, but have not gotten to use it where it is intended. Hence the 50 miles and our ****TYSHITTYSHITTY snow year. The one time I rode it, it handles strange in my opinion. But I have been used to a 146. Tater and I just got back from a 50 mile after school rip, was SUPER glad that we both had 2.5 146 sleds. Couldn't keep them cool. Would LOVE to have a deep day or two to actually see how mountain sleds are supposed to work. Instead of trail rides.

 

[PaulAnd]

Sorry You need 1 of each
165 expert NA or Turbo for the deep days

146/154 for Marginal snow
And that was most of this season

174/175 are lost on me.. they just take up space


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Tahoepow]

HI guys. Can a g5 154 turbo 3" go just as many places with a g5 165 3" N/A on deep pow days climbing hills , sidehilling, tree riding? Assuming both riders are stronger intermediate skill level. Ive heard about the quick limiter strap adjustment helping keep the skis down on the 154" plus it's got the turbo power. Riding zone 8-10k ft.

 

[DRIVEBYE]

I ride a G5 165 but I'm 6'3 225 before gear. The guy that got me into this and I ride with everytime switched to the G5 154. We have been on about 10 rides this year. Our last ride was the first time we saw a big advantage with the 165. We had to make a very difficult climb out of a zone. The start of the climb we were in a full side hill, with very few lines to choose from that were all very narrow. I made 2 climbs out of it and the second one was brutal. I had to side hill and gain elevation very gradually for about 100 yards than side hill back another 100 yards to find a window for some momentum to make a turn up and out. Than had to run over about 20 small trees to make it. That long slow side hill was where the 154 just wanted to stand straight up when my 165 made it easier. It was still a battle and I was a full pin, push, and wiggle.

The both have advantages it just depends on what you want. We have rode 200 miles this year and that was the only time it was an obvious difference.