Conquer 280 reviews
- Thread starter damx
- Start date
So you like the 3"? I haven't rode mine yet
Love mine!
Easy there Spanky.
Let me point out..
The OP asked about reviews of the Conquer. Your review is based on a track you have never ridden or seen but what you heard from a mystery man. I don't care who your mystery man is because it won't make any difference to his opinion. I would be basing my decision on somebody that can give us some real world personal experience. Heres my INTIAL and I say initial because I'm 2 rides in and still early in the season. I took a chance on this track because I liked what I heard. MY impression of
the Conquer 280 174 3.0 compared to what I had last year 174 X3. My first impression was that the Conquer doesn't trench like the X3. Also its lighter so less rotating mass. On a 174 this is a good thing, feels like I can change direction with less effort. Side hilling it feels a little calmer than the X3. Does it bite and pull the nose like the X3 definitely not. There claim about it being 15% easier to pull on its side? Not sure how you measure that but I do feel it easier to lay over than the X3. My time on a 2.6 last year was limited to 4-5 days on a 155 so not a fair comparison. In saying that the 155 2.6 was a ton of fun and worked real well. In conclusion. In a 174 I feel I made a good choice. If I was riding a 163 it might a different track and different again in a 155. So to say the Conquer is a yes or no? I like it, time will tell if I love it or hate it. Oh yea I don't know if my Moms hairdresser rides. Never asked BRO....
Last edited:
Thanks for your review, Sparky. That's actually how I expected the reviews to go when this track first came out. I've been excited to hear about them. I want to compare my 156" X3.
The two guys that took their tracks back off are people that I do know personally (though I haven't spoken to myself), so it's not like I'm hearing a story from a friend of a friend.
How bout I call them and get it right from the horse's mouth?
Last edited:
Yep! put 1100 miles on my 3" last year. Tried the 2.6 this year and after 2 rides want to go back to the 3". Also gearing down my 17 to match the factory gearing with the 3" and chain case. Eric
I here you. In a 155ish length if you want big bite to lift the nose at will, the Conquer is probably not the track of choice. In 174 length more tame and makes a 174 feel smaller over the 3inch thats what i was looking for. I want flotation and less trenching.The less rotating mass was a big part of my decision. I think we will agree its a personal choice based on riding style and terrain. I run a Turbo and having big power and a track that really bites is not always the best combo unless you are strictly hill shooting.
T
TheJett29
Well-known member
All 163 Axys with 6psi of boost.
Snow, that is a crap shoot, some is really dry, some a little heavier but all of it had no bottom. Going between 2 different sleds at a time.
T
TheJett29
Well-known member
Usually pretty dry fluffy snow. Not dry like Colorado dry though.
Damn it! I got a deal on a snow check 17' 2.6 so I sold my 16' snow check 3.0 that I absolutely loved. First ride is tomorrow and I know I am going to miss the lower geared 3".
I did the exact same thing. Wishing I had my 16 back. So far my 16 ran better too, but I'm not fully out of break in yet on the 17. Eric
Why did you sold your 16 sled that you loved and bought new one that you already know you don't like
??
My concern with the 3.5 pitch is in spring time riding with the heavier snow.
I'm looking to upgrade my track. The conqueror 280 has been out a few years now. What is everyone's opinion on it? Thanks in advance!
Pro:
Side hill engagement takes much less rider input.
Holding a side hill, the sled didn’t wash out as often with early season low snow conditions.
Riding in Sicamous and Revelstoke I subjected this track to the steepest technical riding I’ve ever ridden and it flat out performed.
Cons:
When you go straight down a hill the stopping power definitely lacks. I typically don’t get straight down any hills so it hasn’t been a big issue for me.
If there is over 3’ of fresh snow it doesn’t have as much forward propulsion. Spends a lot more time trenching looking for a base to hook up in. The catch to this con though is I have a 156” so by design the 163” would do better in that snow conditions.
Having Avid extroverts definitely helps on the durability as well. Another thing I noticed is the track is clipped on the paddle window which is a plus.
Currently over 1k miles on this track and it's very soft now compared to when it was brand new. There is definitely a break in time period.
Side hill engagement takes much less rider input.
Holding a side hill, the sled didn’t wash out as often with early season low snow conditions.
Riding in Sicamous and Revelstoke I subjected this track to the steepest technical riding I’ve ever ridden and it flat out performed.
Cons:
When you go straight down a hill the stopping power definitely lacks. I typically don’t get straight down any hills so it hasn’t been a big issue for me.
If there is over 3’ of fresh snow it doesn’t have as much forward propulsion. Spends a lot more time trenching looking for a base to hook up in. The catch to this con though is I have a 156” so by design the 163” would do better in that snow conditions.
Having Avid extroverts definitely helps on the durability as well. Another thing I noticed is the track is clipped on the paddle window which is a plus.
Currently over 1k miles on this track and it's very soft now compared to when it was brand new. There is definitely a break in time period.
