I am having a hard time picking a track length. I am snow checking a 2013 pro rmk 800. Need some help from all of you out there that have had some experience with both track lengths. I am currently riding a 05 m7 162 and cant wait to get a new sled. I ride as much powder as I can fined in WA but our snow can get wet and setup. My weight is 160 no riding gear and I only ride trails to get off of them. I would put my riding skill level as advanced beginner out riding my current sled need more power. Thanks Nate
2013 pro 800 163 or 155
- Thread starter gosled
- Start date
Last year we bought two 155's
This year I bought a 163.
I prefer the 163. Stretching the girlfriends 155 to 163 also--after she rode the 163.
163 more forgiving in the trees and climbing. You can choose your lines better. Also more stable in steep sidehills with less tendency to wash out.
No less maneuverable BUT you do feel the 155 spool up the track faster. My thought is with a little power enhancement, the 163 will spool up just as quick or better and have the best of all worlds.
I am NOT a jumper. We like riding trees boondocking and technical climbs-- not a chute puller or air guy.
This year I bought a 163.
I prefer the 163. Stretching the girlfriends 155 to 163 also--after she rode the 163.
163 more forgiving in the trees and climbing. You can choose your lines better. Also more stable in steep sidehills with less tendency to wash out.
No less maneuverable BUT you do feel the 155 spool up the track faster. My thought is with a little power enhancement, the 163 will spool up just as quick or better and have the best of all worlds.
I am NOT a jumper. We like riding trees boondocking and technical climbs-- not a chute puller or air guy.
155. 
if the belt drive will make the 163 better, it'll make the 155 better too.
as track length questions always turn out, its up to the user and their riding style.
i've had 159, 162, 151, 156.. my pref is the 150-155 range.
if your in the deep deep, light pow more often than not, then maybe the 163 would be the better choice.
rider weight can also play factor into it.
if the belt drive will make the 163 better, it'll make the 155 better too.
as track length questions always turn out, its up to the user and their riding style.
i've had 159, 162, 151, 156.. my pref is the 150-155 range.
if your in the deep deep, light pow more often than not, then maybe the 163 would be the better choice.
rider weight can also play factor into it.
K
kobylka18
Member
Jumping ship to a pro. 155 vs 163?
After years of riding Doo I am 85% sure I am jumping ship and snow checking a Pro. What are your guys thoughts on 155 vs 163? I am hearing good things about the 155 and 163 and torn on which way to go now. I was almost positive on getting a 163 until a few people were saying 155 shines that much better in trees.
After years of riding Doo I am 85% sure I am jumping ship and snow checking a Pro. What are your guys thoughts on 155 vs 163? I am hearing good things about the 155 and 163 and torn on which way to go now. I was almost positive on getting a 163 until a few people were saying 155 shines that much better in trees.
I have a 155 and I love it. Climbs really well, loves to play, handles like a dream. I have not ridden the 163, but I would get the 155.
Good move!! I think you're really going to like it. As far as 155 vs. 163 I think it all depends on what kind of riding you do. If you boondock in big bottomless bowls of powder all season get the 163". If you like to trail or lake race your buddies to the high country, jump alot, ride stiff snow most the time like we do here in Nevada, get the 155". If I was going to snowcheck tomorrow it would be another 155". I've been outclimbing 163's all season long when I can get a run at the mountain and I weigh 225 ready to ride. I ride with a kid who's about 180 lbs. and rides a 2011 155", nobody's been able to run along side him all season.
more what track length threads?
155...done.
155...done.
I've had both lengths; 155 is my choice. 
T
theultrarider
Well-known member
Too me, it boils down to if you go huge in the air or not? Or like to wheelie everywhere you go. If you wanna to tail whips off of every sweet little cornice you see, go 155. If you like to boondock, the 163 is a no brainer. It's all in what you like to do most. You are lucky that at 160#'s, the 155 is far more forgiving in the depp than it is for those of us up around the 250 mark.
J
Jaynelson
Well-known member
Went from a 159x16 Doo to a 163 Pro and love it for whatever that's worth. I have ridden a 155 Pro and would not trade my 63 for it. They ride very similar....the 63 seems to float a little better and you can do the same lines with a little less speed. Really splitting hairs....can't go wrong either way.
The way I reasoned it out was the price difference when new. For the $200 more (or whatever it is).....you would spend WAY more than that with aftermarket crap attempting to increase deep snow performance. I've never had a time in the mountains where I wanted less track....but definetly the other way around. When riding with the 174" turbo guys my stock peashooter needs all the 63 and more lol.
The way I reasoned it out was the price difference when new. For the $200 more (or whatever it is).....you would spend WAY more than that with aftermarket crap attempting to increase deep snow performance. I've never had a time in the mountains where I wanted less track....but definetly the other way around. When riding with the 174" turbo guys my stock peashooter needs all the 63 and more lol.
Last edited:
T
theultrarider
Well-known member
Trees, 163 hands down. Same for climbing. If you are into big air and whipping off of lips, then a 155.
I thought about this same thing for a week straight when I went and bought a 2012 in late Feb.
I have been on a 162 for 6 years, and had also ridden a 163 pro a little bit. Still couldnt decide which way to go, In the end I went with the 155.
The next two weekends I rode with the 163 and my 155 went everywhere the 163 did and was easier to ride doing it.
The rider on the 163 is dead equall in the skill level department but maybe weighs 25-35 lbs more then me, I'm 185. In GOOD snow, I could outclimb him on the 163 on back to back runs, BUT if i got on the 163 i could match my climb i did on my 155.
Rider weight does make a difference and it doesnt have to be that much difference in weight.
From what I can gather, if your 200lbs or more get the 163. Under 200lbs goes 155. Eric
I have been on a 162 for 6 years, and had also ridden a 163 pro a little bit. Still couldnt decide which way to go, In the end I went with the 155.
The next two weekends I rode with the 163 and my 155 went everywhere the 163 did and was easier to ride doing it.
The rider on the 163 is dead equall in the skill level department but maybe weighs 25-35 lbs more then me, I'm 185. In GOOD snow, I could outclimb him on the 163 on back to back runs, BUT if i got on the 163 i could match my climb i did on my 155.
Rider weight does make a difference and it doesnt have to be that much difference in weight.
From what I can gather, if your 200lbs or more get the 163. Under 200lbs goes 155. Eric
SRXSRULE assessment I agree with. I have one of each.
2011 155" straight rail
2011 163" tipped rail
What did Polaris come up for 2013 as far as tipped and non tipped rails?
Didn't see this being brought up.
Similar threads
