2.6 vs 3 inch track- feed back

[gonriggen]

just looking to see what people thoughts are on 2.6 vs 3.
snowcking in couple of hrs ...going back and forth

 

[Wheel House Motorsports]

2.6.

If you descide you want more and upgrade to a 3" there are better options then the OEM unit and building off a beltdrive sled is lighter and works better overall.

 

[gonriggen]

thanks,

I also found the link with a bunch of info...
sticking to 2.6.
some people were right on in there assessments,

 

[Scott]

Last year, I snowchecked at 2.6" to get the quick drive and sold it to upgrade to a 3.2".

I have nothing against the 2.6. Some of my best have 2.6s. Lol.

But going with the 3.2 was a GREAT MOVE!!!

 

[SRXSRULE]

I still prefer the 3.0 over the 2.6, in the 163 length.
Ive had them with the chaincase and with the belt drive, I like the lower gearing of the chaincase and feel its a good combination with the 3" track for my style of riding.

 

[TRS]

The AXYS chassis doesn’t have enough tunnel/bulkhead clearance to effectively utilize a 3.2” track. The clearance issue is very parasitic. Most users I have talked to are having clutching and belt issues. The track balloons under power.
The AXYS has barely enough clearance to utilize a 3”. The track must be ran on the tight side or it scrubs the tunnel and bulkhead under load.
We have been cutting down the X3” for a few years now. Trimming them to 2.7-2.8”. This has been one of the best mods you can do. You’ll witness tunnel/bulkhead clearance, better snow evacuation, and definitely climbs better. A turbo AXYS sled benefits more than a NA sled from the trimmed track.
Tracks USA just saved us over $300 a track with the X2.7 over the X3 offering. Ordered 2 more this week.

 

[goridedoo]

The AXYS chassis doesn’t have enough tunnel/bulkhead clearance to effectively utilize a 3.2” track. The clearance issue is very parasitic. Most users I have talked to are having clutching and belt issues. The track balloons under power.
The AXYS has barely enough clearance to utilize a 3”. The track must be ran on the tight side or it scrubs the tunnel and bulkhead under load.
We have been cutting down the X3” for a few years now. Trimming them to 2.7-2.8”. This has been one of the best mods you can do. You’ll witness tunnel/bulkhead clearance, better snow evacuation, and definitely climbs better. A turbo AXYS sled benefits more than a NA sled from the trimmed track.
Tracks USA just saved us over $300 a track with the X2.7 over the X3 offering. Ordered 2 more this week.

Is the 2.7 actually an X3 that has physically been trimmed?

They are cheap. Probably gonna try one.

 

[TRS]

Is the 2.7 actually an X3 that has physically been trimmed?

They are cheap. Probably gonna try one.

Yes they are.
TracksUSA sold out of them in less than a week and just got a few more in stock.

 

[goridedoo]

Yes they are.
TracksUSA sold out of them in less than a week and just got a few more in stock.

In other words we pay way too much for tracks if they can charge $600 for a $900 track plus the labor to trim it. LOL, oh well atleast its a cheaper option

 

[TRS]

In other words we pay way too much for tracks if they can charge $600 for a $900 track plus the labor to trim it. LOL, oh well atleast its a cheaper option

Camso trimmed them.

 

[Mr. Redrock]

How does the 2.7 compare to the 2.6 Polaris track in Wyoming snow?

 

[madmax]

Never seen or run a camso 2.7, but it’s hard to beat the Polaris 2.6 track

 

[Jaynelson]

The AXYS chassis doesn’t have enough tunnel/bulkhead clearance to effectively utilize a 3.2” track. The clearance issue is very parasitic. Most users I have talked to are having clutching and belt issues. The track balloons under power.
The AXYS has barely enough clearance to utilize a 3”. The track must be ran on the tight side or it scrubs the tunnel and bulkhead under load.
We have been cutting down the X3” for a few years now. Trimming them to 2.7-2.8”. This has been one of the best mods you can do. You’ll witness tunnel/bulkhead clearance, better snow evacuation, and definitely climbs better. A turbo AXYS sled benefits more than a NA sled from the trimmed track.
Tracks USA just saved us over $300 a track with the X2.7 over the X3 offering. Ordered 2 more this week.

I would worry that cutting it down would make it stiffer...which is usually no-no for powder. Not an issue?

 

[TRS]

I would worry that cutting it down would make it stiffer...which is usually no-no for powder. Not an issue?

Hasn’t been an issue for 4 years, last year we had massive deep powder all season. Check my avatar.

 

[Mr. Redrock]

So I ordered a Khaos and stretching to 163
What would be the best option for cost and performance Wy snow no spring riding.
2.5 challenger X, no driver change. $650
2.7 changer X will need driver change. $600 +$260 $860
2.6 Po track $1150 ish
2.8 epic. $950ish drivers $260. $1210.

Thoughts?

 

[Chadly]

I'm stretching my 155 Pro as well. Don't forget the cost of the rails. I figured it was going to be around 1700 for Ice Age rails powder coated to match the sled and a new 163 2.6. Hopefully I can sell the 155 rails and track to recover a bit of the cost.

 

[Sage Crusher]

2.7 or the 3" power claw-

 

[kanedog]

So I ordered a Khaos and stretching to 163

What would be the best option for cost and performance Wy snow no spring riding.

2.5 challenger X, no driver change. $650

2.7 changer X will need driver change. $600 +$260 $860

2.6 Po track $1150 ish

2.8 epic. $950ish drivers $260. $1210.



Thoughts?

9104m saw tooth. The 5.9 Cummins of the track world.

Sent from my SM-G920W8 using Tapatalk

 

[TRS]

 

[madmax]

Anyone know why the 2.7 challenger is $300 cheaper than the 3” on the tracks USA website? Isn’t the 2.7” just a cut down 3”?