3 Inch vs 2.6 Inch in the mountains

[Topogigo]

What to snow check??? does anyone own both or ride with a group where they compete regularly?? Please share your opinion.

 

[FatDogX]

I had a Pro 163 / X3 and snowchecked a 163 / 2.6

I liked the X3 but, really it's only advantage was on the super deep days, which for me was only two of my trips out west this year.

Personally, I think the 2.6 will be a great "all around" mountain track and will shine in variety of snow conditions.....or at least I hope!! ha ha.

 

[damx]

The 3" might work a bit better in fluffy snow, so hard to tell. But for sure the 3" trenches. The 2.6 rocks, not one person said they want a 3" over the 2.6" after they ride both.

 

[dude]

I have a snowchecked Axys 163" with 3" lug, and my wife has the in season Axys 163" with 2.6" lug both set up identical. I've got around 1,300 miles on the 3" lug, and her sled has about 400 miles. I've obviously ridden my 3" lug more then her 2.6, but if you didn't tell me which I was on I honestly couldn't tell you the difference. I would have to assume if the 2.6 just barely got stuck at the crest of a hill, the 3" would make it and I'd be glad I had the 3". Would the 3" barely pull away from the 2.6 on a deep day... yeah I guess, but again I really don't think anyone could tell the difference if they didn't know which one they were on in any given situation.

The other difference is the chain vs. belt drive? Again, I really can't tell the difference there either. Give both sleds to anyone to compare and don't tell them which one there on (belt or chain / 3" or 2.6") and I'd be willing to bet some $ most riders couldn't tell the difference with any thing other then luck. I'd love to see the equivalent to a blind taste test for both the 3" vs 2.6", and the chain vs belt on any given day. IMO most riders wouldn't guess right...

As far as trenching... same opinion as above. Give most riders a blind taste test and IMO they would not be able to come back and say with 100% certainty "yeah, that sled was without question the 3" cause it trenched more" etc... Again just my opinion...

 

[jegster]

Any comments on the cooling differences between the 2.6" and 3" tracks? A big difference? Small difference? No difference?

 

[dude]

Any comments on the cooling differences between the 2.6" and 3" tracks? A big difference? Small difference? No difference?

No notable difference. I think if they had the same snow flap there might be a difference if that makes sense. They both cool a lot better then the 2011 - 2015 Pros I've had.

 

[ullose272]

I will say when I first got my axys 155x2.6 I wanted the x3 back. but not that ive got 500 miles on it I really like the 2.6, ive just figured out it likes to be spinning fast, going slow doesn't work as well as it did with the x3.

 

[ReTodd]

I do like the lower gearing in the trees with the 3" but in most conditions you won't notice much difference climbing. Firmer pow the 2.6" goes a bit better, dry snow the 3" will do better.

I mostly ride trees and prefer the lower gearing.

 

[powwow]

Interested as well. I have rode a 163 2.6 and it ran great. The Le has the upgraded clickers, which I would add to the sled, and the other accessories for a good value. The only holdback I have is the 3" track. I want the sled to be snappy and not tractor like. Mixed reviews on the 3" make it a hard decision. Riding trees and on edge a lot, not a lot of big climbing. Worried that the 3" might not let the sled spin around as easily. I ride fall, winter and spring conditions in the BC Rockies. Have a 15 163 Pro right now. Opinions?

 

[Topogigo]

I don't think the snap will be a problem. I have a buddy with the 3 inch and chain case. I have a 2.6 163 with the upgraded shocks. side by side he is all over me even on the trail. The 3 inch is geared considerably lower.

 

[latenightjoneser]

3" is better in deep snow, hands down. No contest.

 

[M8Chris]

Love my 2.6! I haven't spent much time on a 3" but like said above I bet you can't tell a huge difference maybe in the deep snow.

 

[Timbre]

Any comments on the cooling differences between the 2.6" and 3" tracks? A big difference? Small difference? No difference?

Some experience here . . .
The 2.6 comes with the "regular" snowflap on back, and the 3" come with the new "scoop" snowflap. The theory is that the scoop will pull some of the snow back into the tunnel and help to keep it cooler. This does indeed work as designed. I, on the other hand, do note like the scoop flap as it is too long and gets run over when backing down the ramp. I did this on the second time out and promptly replaced the flap with the regular one. I took note of the temps with the scoop flap and the regular flap and there is very little difference at all. If you putter along on the trail, there will be a little rise in temps . ..maybe 10 - 20 degrees (F). If I keep moving, mine rarely gets over 129 degrees. Just always run the scratchers down on the trail, and there will not be any issues with cooling.

 

[Timbre]

Regarding the "performance"difference between 3" and 2.6 . . .

This was a no brainer for me as riding deep powder is my passion! Three reasons. . .

1) The 3" was $200 more than the 2.6 at snowcheck, and is indeed a little piece of better on the deeper powder days.

2) It is very expensive to go "up" to a 3" from the 2.6 (about $1500)

3) On the set up snow, there is virtually no verifiable difference between the two tracks.

As far as "trenching" goes, i dont buy the theories on this for one second! When you have either length of paddles at high track speeds churning away at powder snow, there WILL be snow moving out the back, and there WILL be a trench . . .period!!

I hope this help

 

[snojnke]

Yesterday made a believer out of me for 3" track. My piped axys was putting an embarrassment on my buddy's 16 skidoo with 174" until yesterday when we were in 20+ inches of powder. I got stuck and he just kept tractoring right on by. He was barely moving but he went over the top.

 

[Jaynelson]

Splitting hairs between the 2 performance wise...no real difference. I prefer the feel and no oil/maintenace of the belt drive sleds...but would probably opt for the 163 LE this year just because it's a better value.

 

[Scott]

In the trenching context, there is no way the 2.6 will get better traction than the 3".

 

[AndrettiDog]

I was in the same boat last year at this time...which to buy.

Ultimately, I wanted the belt drive and I didn't want heating issues if they were anything like the Doo T3's. I can't say anytime during the year did I feel like I should have gone with the 3". We had some big snow days in Colorado this year and this sled killed it! I'd like to try the 3" but I also decided to keep the weight down (between QDS and lighter track) and I'm glad I did.

I had a good talk with Chris Burandt on this topic. Obviously he has a fleet of sleds but I asked him if he only had one, which he would choose. He didn't even hesitate to say the 2.6" lug. We both agreed that Polaris had to offer a 3" so that they were not the only ones not doing so. The transfer is so much better on the Axys than the Doo's that I don't think the 3" does as much. Even w/o riding one, I've been around T3's and it seems I was still up on top of the snow better.

My $.02

 

[Dootimes2]

If the snow is firm and even deep, but set up enough that it is go anywhere snow you will not notice any difference. If it is deep and soft the 3" will be a noticeable difference. If do not believe me all of you with the 2.6 can take them off and put on a 2.25 ( roughly the same paddle difference ) and tell me if it makes a difference.it all depends on the snow conditions.

 

[Jaynelson]

Nah...Ive ridden them back to back on a deep day on the same pull and I disagree. The difference in performance is very small. There is a point of diminishing returns with everything...and the jump from 2.6" to 3 vs 2.2 to 2.6 is nowhere near the same thing.