Anyone dropped from 162 to a 153? Regrets?

[truckman]

Just curious. Currently riding a M7 162 and looking at the 2010 M8 153. With the better track, more hp, better track speed on the pulls I wonder if I would have regrets for not going with a 162. Anyone made a transition such as this? Pros, cons, regrets? Thanks.

 

[sledbasher M7]

153

Rode a M7 153 last year.Loved it,BUT needed more power.So got a cutler 1000 M7 162.I do notice the extra track.I believe it has its proz and conz.To be honest I have not got a chance to ride it the DEEP powder.I have rode in some soft snow and the length is lot less noticeable. After rideing my buds 153 after riding mine.It feels likes a short track.Short story long my next sled will be a 153.

 

[polaris660rmk]

i currently have a 162 m7 i love it. rode my buddys 09 hcr 153 at that will be my next sled the 153 felt easier to throw around in the trees and it keeps rite up with my 162 on the hill. i think it is the riding u do if its pow all the time 162 if its hard pack with so pwder then 153. just my .02

 

[tcpeterson]

Just my opinion, a buddy of mine and i both bought 09 M1000's, mine is a 162 his is a 153. Some could be rider ability but i get him every time we are climbing. Who knows maybe this spring in harder conditions he'll get better track speed and get me. And to be honest when boondocking i don't notice the extra length. Both our sleds are stock. Just my .02 cents.

 

[truckman]

Thanks for the feedback. Hard to call here in Central Wa. Spend most of our time boondocking but at least a few times a winter we get the deeeep fluff. Last Friday you wanted a lot of track due to snow depth but we did have one XP 154 that was going everywhere without any noticable problem. Guess I have a little time to mull it over, probably won't snow check but rather pick one up around mid season when they start cutting prices.

 

[tcpeterson]

Thanks for the feedback. Hard to call here in Central Wa. Spend most of our time boondocking but at least a few times a winter we get the deeeep fluff. Last Friday you wanted a lot of track due to snow depth but we did have one XP 154 that was going everywhere without any noticable problem. Guess I have a little time to mull it over, probably won't snow check but rather pick one up around mid season when they start cutting prices.

One thing to keep in mind is that the XP track is a 16" wide track so for surface area the 154 is pretty close to a 15" wide 162. I think or at least close.

 

[mtn_extreme]

Remember the 154" was 16" wide, people tend to forget that.

I have had the 153 then 162, now 174 and I won't go back. I run the gen 2 simmons ski's that are 10" wide and my sled sitting in the deep powder next to my buddies 162 stocker, sits a good 3" higher on top that he does. My boondocking ability is better because of the float value and I don't get stuck near as much. The only time I notice the extra length is on the trail in a turn, there is a little push. I climb higher, boondock better, get stuck less, and float over the speedbumps better for a smoother ride on the rough trails.

I would regret going back.

 

[Snow Junkie]

153 all the way. Why ???? well look at what Burandt has as rentals for example, all but 2 are 153's in the shop. Rider skill is 90+% of who climbs higher in ANY given conditions. We had the throttle jockies with us that had to have the biggest and baddest. After Chris rode my M7 141" for the day and Sahen was on an M6, just to "SCHOOL" everyone. They all ended up riding the 153's or my 141" M7. We had some epic powder ,chest deep while riding north of the ears too. Once again rider skill , the shorter tracks were always easier and more forgiving to ride, in the trees or climbing some sic faces. Its not an uphill drag race and just because one floats better than the other doesn't mean it will get you to more places or higher on the Mountain.

 

[mtn_extreme]

153 all the way. Why ???? well look at what Burandt has as rentals for example, all but 2 are 153's in the shop. Rider skill is 90+% of who climbs higher in ANY given conditions. We had the throttle jockies with us that had to have the biggest and baddest. After Chris rode my M7 141" for the day and Sahen was on an M6, just to "SCHOOL" everyone. They all ended up riding the 153's or my 141" M7. We had some epic powder ,chest deep while riding north of the ears too. Once again rider skill , the shorter tracks were always easier and more forgiving to ride, in the trees or climbing some sic faces. Its not an uphill drag race and just because one floats better than the other doesn't mean it will get you to more places or higher on the Mountain.

Interesting???

So your saying that in "every" situation that Chris could get a sled into, he absolutely COULD NOT be better off with a 162"? I would like to hear his take on that AND if there are places where "he" would prefer the 162".


You might be suprised,:beer;

MX

P.S. - looking forward to post #4

 

[mmsports]

Burant

Chris hates 162 sled he think only sissy ride them. He look at it as more of a challenge to out high mark a 162 on a 153. I thought I would never have a 153 but I love them now and understand why he only rides 153.

I Have a friend that had a 153 M8 and he was always trenching bad but he is 6.2 and 260 Lb. So this year we updates his sled to a 09 162 bumper and power claw and its a lot better for him it floats his big B** a lot better.

So it is a weight issue so if you are 185 or less ride a 153 and if you are bigger than 240 ride a 162.

Interesting???

So your saying that in "every" situation that Chris could get a sled into, he absolutely COULD NOT be better off with a 162"? I would like to hear his take on that AND if there are places where "he" would prefer the 162".


You might be suprised,:beer;

MX

P.S. - looking forward to post #4

 

[Griff]

Lots of rider preference here so having had a 153 and now a 162 I'll throw in my $.02. The M chasis is so responsive the additional traction is more often a benefit than a penalty. You will have to ride a 162 more aggressively because your forward bite will be greater. The fun factor of my loose handling M7 153 was hard to give up, but the added capability of my 162 impresses me more with each ride. Good Sleddin!

 

[truckman]

MMSports, awful big gap between 185 and 240. Going 220# in my Birthday suit, figure with all my gear I am well over 240, maybe close to 250 with all I carry in my pack. Maybe I better stick with the 162" even though I hope to loose about 10 lbs this summer. Thanks for the feedback, wasn't looking to start an arguement though.

 

[1Mike900]

I would S can the two and have a 156 x 2.375 Power Claw! Kill two birds with one stone. If you lighten it all the better. The track clips should not be every other one, But everyone clipped with aluminum. Then, the aftermarket would supply your longer/shorter tracks. Maybe we could get out on the snow for a little cheaper with a new sled?

Mike

 

[Snow Junkie]

Sorry , about that Mr. extreme. Wasn't pointing anything at you specifically. I guess I should have inserted the "JMO" to cover my butt. As I can NOT speak for CB , in fact. I can only pass on what we seen or "learned" thru first hand experience . My 162's were refered to as the "limo" version of a sled. And after a few days , I can completely agree. But this is only because I rode 141's . 153's, and 162's. Turboed , stock or highly modified, all in the same week throughout the day.. In my opinion the 162 would NEVER out climb a 153, it would never be easier to turn or have more fun with. I could do twice as many miles , tricks and or jumps n climbs with a 53 than a 62 before I was spent. If I rode 5' + feet of fresh everyday, then I might want a longer track and a turbo. I will stick to my previous statement " 90%+ is rider skill". Our largest rider was pushin 3 bill's geared up and did not want to get back on his own 62 versus a shorter track. Maybe in BC or different areas the longer tracks are more suited for the really deep stuff.

 

[570MC]

110 lbs. and no problem throwing a 162" around. Get the 162"

 

[mtn_extreme]

Snow Junkie,

No offense taken. But as Kevin points out, I weigh 280 ready to ride and I have yet to see where I cannot do what a 153" track sled can do (other than jumping which I don't do). I have went places where a 153" couldn't get with the rider that was on it. As for your statement about a 162" NEVER outclimbing a 153", you still have some learning to do. The same rider on both sleds is going to go higher on the 162", it's just physics. And keep in mind, not everyone can or will have the skills that Chris has.

And after 20 miles of nothing but whoops on the trail out, I am betting you would definitly see the advantage of my 174" over the 153", I just glide over the tops to the point that others get pizzed because I have a couple beers down by the time they get to the truck. A 55 year old man ain't supposed to go that fast is all I hear

 

[CrazyCanadianCat]

On the purchase of a new M8 I was debating the same question, 153 or 162. Fortunately the 2010 M8 limited only comes in a 153, so it made the decision simple. Question is, ever wonder why the M8 limited was not offered in a 162?

 

[spook222]

I came off a 162 when i bought my 153, got a good deal on it so I thought it would be a 153 just till I got the chance to longtrack it. I ended up having so much fun on it I'm probably going to leave it the way it is, maybe just upgrade to a powerclaw. our eastern washington snow is probably generaly not going to be more than a 153 can handle anyways, just my two cents

 

[Skinner]

I weigh 220 pounds with out gear and i bought the 153 and wish i would have got the 162. The bigger guys need the extra flotaion. JMO

 

[summ8rmk]

My last 2 sleds were 159's (Doo and Poo)and I loved them and thought I would never go shorter. I wanted the 09 LE so bad that I accepted the 153. I havent rode the 162 Cat, but my 153 out performs both my old 159's and I couldn't be happier with it. I weigh a buck 75.