3 inch track on Pro
- Thread starter PROJack66
- Start date
Not sure about the pricing down there, but i did the Avid chaincase/drivers. By the time I bought all the gears and track It was close to $3000.00. Maybe I got ripped off a little, but it is one of the best mods I have ever done to any sled. That 3" is incredible in the trees. If you are a highmarker, then dont waste your money. Robs alot of track speed.
Pros: Great deep snow performance
Cons: With that extreme lug height... you cannot rip down hardpack and expect the track track to hold together.... this is a DEEP snow track... not an "all around" track.
Exactly what Glassman said.. this track, with its excellent traction, will load the engine and clutches. It is a great track, though on a non-turbo sled... it will not be a speed demon up the hill.
You will need an Ice Age or Avid drop chaincase, 3" pitch drivers... and someone that can cut the track on a table saw (or similar) so that the 16" width track as it comes will fit into a 15" tunnel.
Once you cut the track, you void the warranty on the track.
Right now, they only come in 3" pitch (PRO RMK is 2.86" pitch), 16" wide and 162"/174" long.
The cost of the chaincase and gears.. about $1000 ... track at discount price about $900... Drivers $250.... You would be north of $2500 all said and done with this mod.
.
Cons: With that extreme lug height... you cannot rip down hardpack and expect the track track to hold together.... this is a DEEP snow track... not an "all around" track.
Exactly what Glassman said.. this track, with its excellent traction, will load the engine and clutches. It is a great track, though on a non-turbo sled... it will not be a speed demon up the hill.
You will need an Ice Age or Avid drop chaincase, 3" pitch drivers... and someone that can cut the track on a table saw (or similar) so that the 16" width track as it comes will fit into a 15" tunnel.
Once you cut the track, you void the warranty on the track.
Right now, they only come in 3" pitch (PRO RMK is 2.86" pitch), 16" wide and 162"/174" long.
The cost of the chaincase and gears.. about $1000 ... track at discount price about $900... Drivers $250.... You would be north of $2500 all said and done with this mod.
.
Last edited:
S
sledneck_03
Well-known member
If you go 174 the avid rail extensions are like 1.5inches too long. They fit but they almost rub the track and there is next to none looser adjustability. The tunnel extension is not very nessisary.
In all seriousness, is track speed really that big of a deal? Even if your track speed is 10mph (which it wont be) and you're still going forward or upward and everybody else is stuck and spinning then why does track speed matter? I've been running a 3" 174 on a stock 04 Escape and don't have 1 complaint. Also, I've ridden with a couple of pro's with 3" 174's both na and ana and man do they work well! Call Robbie at Avid products and he can set you up with a "Kit".
Going to have to dissagree with you on the highmarking. I ride with people with 3" tracks and if you do not have one you will not even be close to them on a hill unless you have alot more HP. I have a 12 pro 163 with a head that runs well. Rode a couple weekends ago with a stock 11 pro with a 174 3". I would say uphill speed on a hill we could both pull was maybe 2-4 mph in my favor and that is it. As far as for climbing he pulled some hills straight on that I had to side hill out of and he topped them at a faster speed than I did. He may have a little less track speed, but when I am scratching and clawing my way up digging in and slowing down he stays on top and carries more speed up the hill. I sure do miss the 174 sometimes. Stock hp for stock hp a 174 or 163 3" will out climb you every time hands down. Been there.
I agree. Same track speed results I have noticed.
One thing that I've pointed out to many that have PM'd me about this... that they were surprised with and it was a big factor in their decision.
Some will chime in a say that it was easy... others have ruined their new $900 track.
The 3" lug tracks are only available in 16" wide.
To fit a Polaris PRO/IQ... you have to use a tablesaw with a cutting fixture or similar setup to cut 1/2" off of each side (this includes 1/2" of a 3" tall paddle every other window).
Cutting the track voids ALL warranties.
I think it is a great mod for those that ride mostly deep snow and see very very little hardpack use.
There is a reason some people are willing to spend $2000+ for this mod... but best to ask questions before jumping in..
my 2 cents.
.
Some will chime in a say that it was easy... others have ruined their new $900 track.
The 3" lug tracks are only available in 16" wide.
To fit a Polaris PRO/IQ... you have to use a tablesaw with a cutting fixture or similar setup to cut 1/2" off of each side (this includes 1/2" of a 3" tall paddle every other window).
Cutting the track voids ALL warranties.
I think it is a great mod for those that ride mostly deep snow and see very very little hardpack use.
There is a reason some people are willing to spend $2000+ for this mod... but best to ask questions before jumping in..
my 2 cents.
.
T
theultrarider
Well-known member
Mountainhorse,
I have read a few places now that tracks usa is offering to cut them down before they ship them for $100. If that is true, that would be money well spent imo. I havent checked with them to verify this, but would be a great option for many who would rather not chance cutting their own track down.
I have read a few places now that tracks usa is offering to cut them down before they ship them for $100. If that is true, that would be money well spent imo. I havent checked with them to verify this, but would be a great option for many who would rather not chance cutting their own track down.
You are obviously refering to a stock 163 track compared to a 3" which I can agree on. The stock track is adequate at most for general riding, but really doesn't have the "grip" of the 3". If someone was to upgrade to a 2.5 CE I would expect you to see different results in climbing. My 163 x 3" is very impressive in the deep snow and for boondocking, but on a straight up hill climb, all mods other than track being the same, there is really not a whole lot of difference IMO. My buddies 155 x 2.5 CE will give me a good run in climbing but wont follow in the trees.
G
Going West
Well-known member
I know tracks Canada cuts these tracks before shipping. They still need a little clean up but the hard part is already done for you.
Doe you really need a drop and roll for these to fit or can you just go one size smaller on the drivers.
Doe you really need a drop and roll for these to fit or can you just go one size smaller on the drivers.
A
assault11
Well-known member
You can't use smaller drivers unless you do the ftx chain case mod. Without doing it the track will hit the chain case because of the way it protrudes into the tunnel
S
sledneck_03
Well-known member
A friend of mine has a 163 pro stock everything but a silber turbo. His dad runs a 174" x3" avid dnr and silver turbo. The stock turbo can go where ever he wants in the trees, he jumps on his dads 174"x3" and he says it's not even fair........night and day
Yes I was talking stock track in this instance. However when I had my doo with a 174 x 2.5 and friend had his doo with a 174 x 2.5 I could always edge him slightly on a hill. He then went 174 x 3 with no other mods and it was game over for me on the hill and in the trees. Not even close. I rode with others that went to 3" tracks also and all had same results
Yes I was talking stock track in this instance. However when I had my doo with a 174 x 2.5 and friend had his doo with a 174 x 2.5 I could always edge him slightly on a hill. He then went 174 x 3 with no other mods and it was game over for me on the hill and in the trees. Not even close. I rode with others that went to 3" tracks also and all had same results
Likely so, but once again the OP is wondering about the difference between a 163 x 3" and a 174 x 2.5". All other comparisins, although are noteable, need not reply.
I have not been around a 174 yet...but IMO, with about 4 or 5ish more inches track length on the snow, it gets you a couple more lugs of contact surface (remember, the track is 13" longer, but you still have to wrap that around the rear idlers and such, so that it comes out to less than 1/2" of the 13".)
The 174 will keep the skis down more...so less wheelie.
The 3" lug will OBVIOSLY produce more traction...than the 2.5".
The 3" lug will get a bit less track speed than the 2.5" lug...but with it being on a shorter track it MAY be a wash on track speed.
The 3" lug will have more cooling issues in sparse snow conditions and on the trail.
Personally, just as far as performance perspective (and NOT the $$ to get there) I would run a 163x3 before I would run the 174x2.5.
174" rails are also a lot eaiser to bend. One of the guys I ride with switched back to the 163 after I think two sets last season.
