A few questions for my pro rmk I am workin on.

[machinest660]

Just picked up a low mile 2011 pro rmk 155 with the full timberlsed suspension front and back. It has 1400 miles on it. I am gonna pull the motor and do the rk tec piston kit and possibly the c3 belt drive. I am interested in running a different track than the polaris. Would the 153 powder claw or the new 3'' camo be a better choice? Or even the 2.5 camo? I kinda was thinking the powerclaw to keep the rolling resistance to a minimum. Keep in mind I am a smaller rider. Would the C3 belt drive be worth the $'s or just keep the stock chain case?? I am coming of a 2013 pro 163 and dont want to do any less that that sled did stock. Thanks for any info

 

[RockyMtn.Kris]

Powerclaw works well but Im going to run the X3 this year. Of course you will have to mod the chaincase if you leave it in it. I think you let your budget decide. Powerclaw and 7 tooth 3.0 drivers and you are riding, but if money isnt an issue, go x3/c3

 

[whoisthatguy]

Assuming that the track efficiency is proportional to the sum of the (lug width) squared, times (lug height), times (number of lugs in contact with snow), the Challenger extreme 155 x 2.5 pencils out as 39% more efficient than the Polaris 5.1.

I know that the 3 lug wide Challenger 151 x 2" gave a huge kick from a start, when compared to the stock Polaris 151 x 2" on my edge 02. And that Challenger track penciled out as 70% more efficient.

The reason why I squared the lug width in estimating track efficiency, is because the snow can escape both ways around the sides of the lug. This compares to the lug height, where the snow must compress the snow below the lug, in order to escape in one direction only. Big difference. The width is more important than the height. The Challenger extreme is 3 lugs across resulting in 5" wide lugs. The Polaris 5.1 like the Polaris Series 4, is 4 lugs across resulting in 3.75" wide lugs. The 2 lug across tracks just are not that flexible and are not comfortable to ride.

2.86" lug spacing
4 rows
Challenger Extreme
5" x 5" x 2.5" x 6 lugs = 375 sq. inches

Polaris 5.1
4 rows
3.75" x 3.75" x 2.4" x 8 lugs = 270 sq. inches

375/270 = 1.39 1.39 = 39% more efficient than stock

 

[machinest660]

Does anyone know the weights of the pc 2.6 and the camo X3?? I did a search and come up with nothing. Also how are the X3's holding out on the trail? we have a 20 mile ride in to some of our best areas? i know you cant be doing 70mph but do the hold up to normal trail riding habbits???