153 or 162?

[Chris Parker]

I did some searching back through the forums and was surprised when I didn't find much information.

I'm an intermediate-to-advanced rider and I just sold my sled and looking to upgrade. I don't have access to these sleds so I can't just go out and try them. I'm 6' and about 230lb fully geared. I'm not super aggressive, just like to get out and explore the mountains. The sled would remain mostly stock.

Which of the two track lengths would work best for me?

 

[mgdjeepster]

Ive got an 07 M1000 162" absolutely love it, my buddy with the 153 track gets a lil mad when I can outclimb him just about 4 sled lenghts. I'm 6 foot and only 175 in gear, sleds a bit big for me but gettin better and better each time I go out........... My vote is 162

 

[sledhead ut]

This topic always gets hammered to death. So many variables with riding styles and terrain. A lot of personal preference involved. Here is a site that was recently posted.
http://www.snowest.com/forum/showthread.php?t=81005&highlight=track+length

 

[AkHockey10]

That depends on where your gonna ride?

mountain exploring i understand but, i can do the same on a Panther 570.. see what im getting at?

i vote: 153.

 

[JHG]

I vote 162, I'm 6' and about 160 w/o gear, I've never regreted having a 162 but have several friends that often regret not having one. Its up to you, there's really no wrong answer.

 

[89sandman]

the 153 is for trail riding real men run a 162!!! some how i got one if you love the deep pow like i do there is no choice...

 

[Killerk]

If you ride very deep, dry snow often, then you will need to be a very good agressive rider at times on a 153.
However if your riding style is better suited for a 153 (jumping/boondocking/tight manuvers) and you are a good rider, the 153 may be a better choice.
It all depends on you.
I rode a 144x2.25x13.5 F-7 in the mountains for more than 3 years with no issues.
I had to keep it pinned in the deep, had to be careful where I parked, and turned out of quite a few hills at times to poach my own or another track to get to the top.
It was a lot of work, but a lot of fun.
A 153 is by no means a shortrack and will go very good if you are a good rider.
The 162 will alow you to boondock slower, start easier, and at times get a higher mark on the hill.
But once the snow sets up, that 153 may be a better choice as the extra length will hurt more than help.

 

[Chris Parker]

I must not have been pushing the right buttons when I was doing a search or I would have seen that thread. Thanks guys... looks like I have enough information now!

 

[Rixster]

162 !!!

 

[powderman800]

153 or 162

the bigger the better. Your sled will go higher stock and as the saying goes "Its better to have it and not need it than need it and not have it". Plus you look more BA in the parking lot. And you will get stuck less exploring.

 

[pernikm]

I have a big friend that rode an 800 rmk with a shorter track and just struggled. Then he got his 900 cat with a 162 and now he runs with everyone. The set ups of both sleds probably produced similar horse power. The difference was the floatation. I also don't think big guys would have a problem with a longer track boon docking either.

I vote 162

Karl

 

[squarehead55]

162! Size does matter! Or so my old lady says! I'm not quite up to par

 

[Darre]

162

I have a 153 m8 and my buddy has the 162. Last winter I was wishing for the 162 pretty often, that said you will not be unable to get where the 162's go but you will work harder to get there. Highmarking ,he's got me, but we ride our fair share of trees and i know mine turns faster and with less effort(rode them back to back) I'm getting the power claw so will see if that even's things up. Like what was stated before the 153 is no short track, get what you will have most fun on,not what will just "get you the highest" there is a difference(somtimes).

 

[Chris Parker]

My gut keeps telling me to go with the 153... but then I'm affraid I'd regret not getting the 162 if I find that I develop into a more aggressive rider.

 

[Robbie]

153 or 162

For deep powder you guys are missing the boat by not going to a 174. We ride nothing but tight trees. The bigger track accelerates better than the shorter tracks in soft snow. Turning is no problem if you have the right skis.

 

[powderman800]

153 options

If you really want a 153" but want the better floation of a 162 then I would consider trying to squeeze a 16 wide track underneath. Figuring that roughly half the track is on the ground then a 153x15 would have 1147.5 square inches of track on the ground. A 162x15 has 1215 square inches. A 153x16 has 1224 square inches on the ground. So with a 16 inch wide track you have the better turning ability of the 153 and more floation than a 162. The best of both worlds. I can't tell you the difference of 153x16 vs. 162x15 since I have never seen them duke it out on the same year and sled. I would still go with the 162 though sine I highly doubt that the 16 inch wide track will fit.

 

[mtn mike on boost]

depends on the type of snow you ride and what its like MOST of the season.hear in wa. i like a shorter track. sure early in the season when its bottomless, the longer track will get around better, but when things settle down, id rather trade alittle floatation for manuverability.and i dont like jumping w/ the longer track.i run a tm7 and just put a 156 2.5.i feel its the best all around for my ridding style.face it either choice is gonna give you alittle more in one department and youll give up something on the other end..

 

[powderman800]

Mtn Mike

Hey Mtn Mike were in Washington do you ride? I agree with you for most of the places around here in WA later than Feb.

 

[mtn mike on boost]

Baker S. Side 90% Of The Time

 

[TBWdracula2003]

if you could find one go with a 174, i know im going to sooner or later but i first have to get a good enough sled cause im 6'4'' and about 325 with gear.