3"vs 2.6" on axys

[Jaynelson]

I disagree...a pro 163 near stock power levels with the stock track is the least likely sled to wheelie or trench out of any newer sled out there. But people who like wheelies more than gnarly sidehills whined that it wasn't playfull enough with lack of wheelies...so axys pick up the front end more than the pros did. So they are trying to give people what they asked for.

 

[Scott]

I am by no means a master of suspension set up...but I've spent a lot of time in my last 16 years learning the science of the rear skid.
I've learned a lot of things by trial and error. I have made mistakes and found success...so my post here is "data driven".

Set up, Set up, Set up.

Weight transfer and trenching (or not) are relational.

It's all in the shocks and springs. Shock spring preload, clicker setting, etc.

The old rule of thumb is softer suspension (but not melted butter soft of course) in the powder and firmer (not HARD) suspension in the spring.

The first place you should look if there is too much trenching (aside from different performance of different tracks) is due to too firm of rear end combined with too soft of front track shock.

May be a bit off topic about the Polaris but it seems that the last few mountain models they have put out like to trench and lift the front end. I have a 2012 Rmk 163x3 with a turbo and it needed some cheap McIver mods to the skid to keep the front end down and avoid those deep trenches. Without the mods a person could disappear in the trenches and the sled was not much better than stock as it would just stand up and dig in the deep. Not to mention wanting to coming over backwards in the steep.

Adding more power to the sleds, with the new motors, may just amplify this issue, the manufacturer may want to address this before we can compare the tracks. I may be wrong but my two bits.

It all appears to be lack of talent with the rider


In the few times I have jumped from the 2.6 to the 3.0 my only noticeable comment was the lower gearing of the 3.0 at least the result of what I believe is the lower gearing. The sled carried slightly more ground speed in some situations where I found I had to correct myself and not override the sled compared to the 2.6 where I felt more confidence. Shock setup difference between the sleds would have also played a role. But the initial snappiness from the 2.6 wasn't there with the 3.0. Not a huge difference but just felt a little better on the 2.6

I also still run stock gearing on my '14, though going to a 2.25 I find is a happy medium on the pre '16 sleds, but I live with the stock setup. I would like to try a 3.0 geared a little taller for comparison.

They may not move forward on edge as flat as the Pro but I didn't mind the rest of it.

Interesting on both of these.

Compared to the doos, the Polaris Pro has a strong reputation of keeping the skis down on the ground out of the box and not being a wheelie monster.

The Axis is lighter up front and does get the skis up a little more, but there is a point of diminishing return on ski lift on powder and climbing.

Too much ski lift in powder may cause trenching.

But in a deep powder day, don't we all leave a trench? Especially with the early season of this year when there was no base and then suddenly FEET of snow. I see a LOT of posts, and experienced it myself this year...5 feet of powder, but can still feel the stumps and bumps under the snow. No base....and deep powder. Your rear skid set-up will help you out a little more than you think on these days.

 

[RMK935VA]

Well, gearing up cost me track speed. I went back to stock gearing in my TKI belt drive but I also firmed up the preload of the rear skid shock. That made a huge difference. I rode it back to back up a steep hill in soft snow with a friends 2.6, same track length, same SLP pipe. The skis on his sled were much higher and his sled had some trenching that mine didn't. He tightened his spring up and hit it again and he said there was a noticeable improvement. I think the 3" track grabs better traction and cause a faster and more slightly forceful transfer and thus requires more spring in the rear skid shock to keep the sled flat on the snow when climbing. Mine stays flat now although I probably have tightened the spring beyond what is efficient for it. It is not at all harsh on the trail, in fact still feels a bit soft. I weigh 196 in street clothes. I bought a #230 spring from Carl's that I am going to install tomorrow. It is halfway between the stock spring and the next heavier spring that Polaris offers. This sled is extremely amazing as far as what it will do in deep snow.......never would have believed it had I not ridden one.

I am running the 230 spring from Carl's on m y Axys 163 by 2.6". I also had all 4 shocks revalved by Carl's. The rear was spot on as set up. I had to add 3 turns of preload on the front shocks and it is dialed in very good. I don't trench and I get the amount of ski lift that I desire, nothing more and nothing less. I am also running a Diamond S Quiet muffler so my front end is about 15.5 pounds lighter than stock. I have the KMOD 37" front end A-Arms on it too. It is an unbelievable sled. Great power, great handling and light weight. I love it!

 

[winter brew]

I disagree...a pro 163 near stock power levels with the stock track is the least likely sled to wheelie or trench out of any newer sled out there. But people who like wheelies more than gnarly sidehills whined that it wasn't playfull enough with lack of wheelies...so axys pick up the front end more than the pros did. So they are trying to give people what they asked for.

That sounds familiar! Reading through these comments, many are identical to Doo comments after the 2010+ changes to suspension geometry...carries the skis more, tends to trench a little more, rear drops out on sidehills...all the same issues. The '08-'09 Doo's were far from playful.
Riding the Axys I have to say it felt much more like a doo than the Pro did, so these comments don't surprise me. The consensus seems to be they gave up a little in the deep to gain a more playful and better riding sled. ??

 

[geo]

I am by no means a master of suspension set up...but I've spent a lot of time in my last 16 years learning the science of the rear skid.
I've learned a lot of things by trial and error. I have made mistakes and found success...so my post here is "data driven".

Set up, Set up, Set up.

Weight transfer and trenching (or not) are relational.

It's all in the shocks and springs. Shock spring preload, clicker setting, etc.

The old rule of thumb is softer suspension (but not melted butter soft of course) in the powder and firmer (not HARD) suspension in the spring.

The first place you should look if there is too much trenching (aside from different performance of different tracks) is due to too firm of rear end combined with too soft of front track shock.






Interesting on both of these.

Compared to the doos, the Polaris Pro has a strong reputation of keeping the skis down on the ground out of the box and not being a wheelie monster.

The Axis is lighter up front and does get the skis up a little more, but there is a point of diminishing return on ski lift on powder and climbing.

Too much ski lift in powder may cause trenching.

But in a deep powder day, don't we all leave a trench? Especially with the early season of this year when there was no base and then suddenly FEET of snow. I see a LOT of posts, and experienced it myself this year...5 feet of powder, but can still feel the stumps and bumps under the snow. No base....and deep powder. Your rear skid set-up will help you out a little more than you think on these days.

Good post Scott with good info. The Holz skid has always trenched with the rear set too stiff relative to the front.
It's not hard to picture a 11' long sled sliding down hill if the back end is always the lowest point digging.

Remember way back with the 2011 Pro how amazing it was that one turn on the rear shock made such a difference in ski lift.
I can only imagine a lifted lighter Pro would make this more dramatic.

Hopefully y'all get a TS rear arm kit stock next year. Then you can play with the "knob" instead of going completely opposite of how Mr. Holz intended for this skid to work.

 

[Zanne81]

Has anyone tried series 5.1 in Axys? I think new 2.6" has too stiff paddles and hooks up too much

 

[turboless terry]

Why would you? You would be going backwards.

 

[Spaarky]

Has anyone tried series 5.1 in Axys? I think new 2.6" has too stiff paddles and hooks up too much

I know some people that's exactly what they want to do. The 2.4 in bottomless dry powder still gets up on top of the snow better.

That being said the 2.6 needs some break in time. Need to see it in same conditions at 500-1000 miles.

 

[ak]

Why couldnt Polaris make the 5.1 in a 2.6 or 3.0 length?

 

[Scott]

Why couldnt Polaris make the 5.1 in a 2.6 or 3.0 length?

I'm thinking if it was identical, but with longer lugs, it would be too soft.

 

[owenb2]

My experience. .. 16 axys 155 3" slp full pipe 240# ready to ride, 9000-11000 ft


At first I hated the 3" almost bought a 2.6, it trenched more, always wanted to climb up on side hills, i found this was back to back line for line with me on my buddies 2.6, he experienced the same..

Today I spent an hour hitting a tree'd hill and adjusting my suspension and my riding riding position. Also I have almost 500 miles... so track break in (softening ) might be a factor. .... the 3 killed it today.. I stopped worrying about trenching in bad spots, kept it pinned and it clawed and got on top. I adjusted my riding , a little more forward & a leg on each side unless it was super steep side hill.. stopped it from nosing up.

So I don't know could be snow conditions, setup, or rider.. but my 3" was the ticket today.

 

[GoHiSK1]

I know some people that's exactly what they want to do. The 2.4 in bottomless dry powder still gets up on top of the snow better.

That being said the 2.6 needs some break in time. Need to see it in same conditions at 500-1000 miles.

I have 3 new takeoff 163 x 2.4 tracks that I would love to sell to any body that wants to go BACKWARDS with track selection.
Have owned a lot of PROS and now on an Axis and would not ever want to change back to a 2.4' track regardless of conditions. I ride with lots of Pros and T3 doo's and from my experience is the 3" tracks are the way to go
The 2.6" Axis in our group is wanting to switch his track to a 3".
Just saying.
This stuff can be debate until Hell freezes over and there will not be definitive answer to the "Best Track" debate .
that is why there is so many different styles of tracks to choose from.
PS I am using a 3.2 x 163 on my Axis . To me bigger is Better.

 

[powdermuncher]

Thats what happens when you are used to drive tractors and combines

Really like the earlier comment Axys feels more like a Doo at least they got something right

 

[Timbre]

Thats what happens when you are used to drive tractors and combines

Really like the earlier comment Axys feels more like a Doo at least they got something right

Why in the heck would ANYONE want the Axys to feel more like a Doo???? I have ridden both. The feel of the doo is definitely NOT for me. The teeter totter skid is just too wobbly and unpredictable on a side hill. It does tip good on the showroom floor though

 

[powdermuncher]

Why in the heck would ANYONE want the Axys to feel more like a Doo???? I have ridden both. The feel of the doo is definitely NOT for me. The teeter totter skid is just too wobbly and unpredictable on a side hill. It does tip good on the showroom floor though

Ride one set up properly -- might change your outlook.

Had the same doubts before I got one T3 skid brackets and a set of good shocks made my SP the easiest and predictable sled to sidehill. So my point is Poo and Doo are both shooting at the same goal from different angels. I just had to have the Eteck motor -- at the end of the day that was the deciding factor for me. Bought 2 after a Season and a half with 0 problems I am

 

[wonderxc600]

any more back to back riding experience on these two in the powder and how much of a difference. I now the 3in is better, but is it by a significant amount. Basically is it worth the money. thanks

 

[Uncle Bob]

i would love to hear more comparisons from guys who have put and aftermarket belt drive on a 3". When turboed does the performance gap increase between the two tracks

 

[Teth-Air]

any more back to back riding experience on these two in the powder and how much of a difference. I now the 3in is better, but is it by a significant amount. Basically is it worth the money. thanks

The 3 inch does have better traction, slightly but the weight penalty is not worth it in my opinion. Also the difference in feel may be more to do with gearing than traction and weight of the steel drive shaft and chain case. There is much more than a different track between the 2.6" and 3".

 

[papafinger1]

I have 3 new takeoff 163 x 2.4 tracks that I would love to sell to any body that wants to go BACKWARDS with track selection.

Have owned a lot of PROS and now on an Axis and would not ever want to change back to a 2.4' track regardless of conditions. I ride with lots of Pros and T3 doo's and from my experience is the 3" tracks are the way to go

The 2.6" Axis in our group is wanting to switch his track to a 3".

Just saying.

This stuff can be debate until Hell freezes over and there will not be definitive answer to the "Best Track" debate .

that is why there is so many different styles of tracks to choose from.

PS I am using a 3.2 x 163 on my Axis . To me bigger is Better.

How much difference is there between Polaris 3" and the camo 3.2 track. Just picked up a 163 axys with the 3.2 and tki belt drive. Headed to Cooke this coming week to log my first miles in the saddle. Would love to hear your review


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[JJ_0909]

Under boost I'd argue its nada. Back to back comparison of a buddies boosted 155 3" was very comparable to my lesser boosted 163 2.6". The sleds rode different for sure but suspension setup, clutching and track length matters a lot more than the 0.4" (that's what she said). Personally, I'd rather have the chaincase which is why I'd prefer the 3" model but if they offered the 2.6" in chaincase I'd go that route.

Remember its a lug that is about 13% larger at the expense of more weight and a larger pitch.

In some snow conditions the 3" will be marginally better. In others the 2.6" will be marginally better.