163 or 154?

[Ethan S]

I have found two '09 Summit 800s, each with about 2000 miles. The only difference in the two is that one has a 163" track and one has a 154". Anyone have any words of wisdom on choosing between the two? Currently I'm partial to the sled with the 154 but only because it has the white and blue plastics. I think that looks pretty sharp. Any feedback would be appreciated!

 

[mil81]

if you do a search you will see a LOT of threads on this subject. But if you want answers in this thread you will have to tell everyone where you ride, and what kinda riding you do

 

[Briscoe]

Deep powder you want a 163, I think they handle great. If you do a lot of jumps and drops, shorter is better. Hard pack- shorter is better. I like my 163, also I don't like riding on hard pack that much, and I suck at jumping.

 

[Red-eye]

I ride with all 163s. The only thing they shine in over my 154, is the very deep or on a powdery hill when I can't get a little run. I have surprised them in a few places too. I think I have more fun though.
Either choice will be the right one!

 

[Matte Murder]

What is you weight and height? Flatlander or mountains or both. If both which is more important.

 

[Ethan S]

I'm moving out to Wyoming or Montana for the winter so I'll be riding in West Yellowstone and the Beartooths in Wyo so not much flatland stuff. I'm 6'1" 180. I'm planning on selling the sled at the end of the season. I don't know if track length has much effect on the resale.

 

[Matte Murder]

Awesome you are moving to snowmobile heaven. I asked Dan Adams this same question last spring when I was snowchecking sleds. He was adamant about the 163 for mountain riding. I really like the longer track in the steep and deep. I can ride a little slower and have more time to figure things out. Now Burandt will tell you 154 so... Either way you are going to be happy but my advice, for what it's worth, would be 163.