Converting 155 to 163/174, some questions

[littleredstroker]

I have a 2011 standard RMK. It has a 155 track now with a can and some clutch work. I am a big dude, probably 280#-290# riding weight. I am looking to improve deep snow performance w/o trenching all the time. Typical riding day is spent 1/3 on trail getting around, 1/3 in the trees, and 1/3 climbing hills. As it is now I have absoloutely no issue turning it, rarely have to have both feet on one board. The biggest issue when climbing is it leaves a 3ft trench when I go up even a slight hill in deep snow.

I have swapped WE shocks all around, and have Installed raptors tripple rate springs 250#+ but havent ridden it since the spring install. before as it sat it would have probaby 3 inches of sag empty, and another 3 when I would get on stock shock/spring. Im not sure if that would effect performance/trenching vs just ride quality.

apart from the suspension and/or losing 50 # im guessing the only other thing that would make its climbing/ deep snow performance improve is a longer track.

163- What all is needed for the conversion? from what I can tel just rails and a track? I saw a thread there the guy had riveted his snow flap to his bumper , and said the 163 worked fine with the 155 tunnel this way. Is the gain with the 163 worth the work of swapping it out?

174- Same as 163, im sure rails, track and tunel extensions would be a must, what else? Would the stock motor have enough power to spin this track ?

Few questions on tracks, whats the "pitch" refering to with the tracks?
What are the stock tracks pitch/ lug length , what would a good all around track be?

Looking at rails specificaly ice age, are they all the same? or is one brand better than the others.

Thanks

 

[Robbie]

I'd buy a 163 and change out all your upgrades. Then you can sell your 155. It will be harder to sell a converted 155. You'll lose all your conversion money.

 

[littleredstroker]

Im not really interested in selling this one. Its paid off and with the ol price of oil in the pooper and a ton of sleds going up for sale I dont really want to spend 8-9k on another sled, then be sitting on mine for months till it sells... vs spendin a few hundred on a track and rails. Resale value is not something that concerens me... i understand you dont get money back out of mods.

 

[BILTIT]

The pitch is the distance between the drive windows, the drivers have to match in pitch aswell.

If going 174 you are stuck with 3" pitch only if I recall correctly. Need new drivers and track.

If 163 you can get both 2.86 and 3" pitch track/drivers.

You might want to look into a coupled suspension, helps keep the front down when climbing.

You can buy complete skids or just a coupling block from zbroz.

Stock motor has plenty of power for the 174, the 3" drivers are an effective gear ratio change that helps out.

 

[sledneck_03]

I have a 2011 standard RMK. It has a 155 track now with a can and some clutch work. I am a big dude, probably 280#-290# riding weight. I am looking to improve deep snow performance w/o trenching all the time. Typical riding day is spent 1/3 on trail getting around, 1/3 in the trees, and 1/3 climbing hills. As it is now I have absoloutely no issue turning it, rarely have to have both feet on one board. The biggest issue when climbing is it leaves a 3ft trench when I go up even a slight hill in deep snow.

I have swapped WE shocks all around, and have Installed raptors tripple rate springs 250#+ but havent ridden it since the spring install. before as it sat it would have probaby 3 inches of sag empty, and another 3 when I would get on stock shock/spring. Im not sure if that would effect performance/trenching vs just ride quality.

apart from the suspension and/or losing 50 # im guessing the only other thing that would make its climbing/ deep snow performance improve is a longer track.

163- What all is needed for the conversion? from what I can tel just rails and a track? I saw a thread there the guy had riveted his snow flap to his bumper , and said the 163 worked fine with the 155 tunnel this way. Is the gain with the 163 worth the work of swapping it out?

174- Same as 163, im sure rails, track and tunel extensions would be a must, what else? Would the stock motor have enough power to spin this track ?

Few questions on tracks, whats the "pitch" refering to with the tracks?
What are the stock tracks pitch/ lug length , what would a good all around track be?

Looking at rails specificaly ice age, are they all the same? or is one brand better than the others.

Thanks

im up there in weight too. I ride a 163. It gets me around ok, seems like i have to clutch lighter than the book suggests thoe.....at least at 9000 ft

one problem your going to have 174" a 155 is cooling, you will have to put a extra cooler in the back, a couple companies make them.

the stock motor has no issues turning a 174 3", the 7 tooth drivers gear the sled down, you can gear down a bit more if you want. with your 2011 you will need to get the chain case cut and re welded for a 3"

if you want a good all around track i would say a 2.5" camo extreme 163 or 174 get some ice age rails, if you like to jump i would say bombers....i havent bent any rails yet but im sure it will happen with my weight. the 3" track is great for pow but not a great all around like the 2.5 from what ive read.

163 x 2.5" - track and rails or rail extensions. 2.86 pitch, stock drivers
174 x 2.5" - track, rails, cooler, tunnel ext, new drivers 3" pitch

163 x 3" - track, rails, cooler, drivers, chain case mod, 3" pitch
174 X 3" - track, rails, cooler, drivers, tunnel ext, chain case mod, 3" pitch

 

[littleredstroker]

163 x 15 x 2.5 Challenger Extreme, Center Port, 2.86" Pitch, Single ply, Fully Clipped

163 x 16 x 2.5 Challenger Extreme, 2.86" Pitch, Single ply, Fully Clipped

Looking at tracks, one track has the center port, which im assuming is the extra strip in the middle thats cut out? what are the benifits of this?

the Lugs I see come in 2 styles, one has notches on the end or little "fingers", the other is smooth.. what are the benifits of each of these?

Also, what is "fully clipped"



I was under the impression the rmk had a extra cooler vs the rmk pro, is another addition cooler needed on the std RMK?

 

[littleredstroker]

bueler....

 

[tdorval]

You probably realize this but the 16" wide track won't fit with out cutting the track down...

 

[littleredstroker]

Yep. I understand that.

 

[littleredstroker]

163 x 15 x 2.5 Challenger Extreme, Center Port, 2.86" Pitch, Single ply, Fully Clipped

163 x 16 x 2.5 Challenger Extreme, 2.86" Pitch, Single ply, Fully Clipped

Looking at tracks, one track has the center port, which im assuming is the extra strip in the middle thats cut out? what are the benifits of this?

the Lugs I see come in 2 styles, one has notches on the end or little "fingers", the other is smooth.. what are the benifits of each of these?

Also, what is "fully clipped"



I was under the impression the rmk had a extra cooler vs the rmk pro, is another addition cooler needed on the std RMK?

Bump.

 

[s1d3w1nd3r1480]

Bump.

The center punch serves two purposes. One is it helps shave weight from the track and evacuate snow and was a common mod for a while and then everyone got away from it. It also reduces the ability to water skip as these extra holes in the track end up sucking water in and creating an anchor essentially. This is not likely relevant to you but worth consideration if you ever water skip if needed. I personally wont even consider it with my track on my Pro. Not worth the risk and almost never a need to try and skip.

Now for the second and most important purpose. The Pro RMKs and come stock with a center punched track because of their driver system. Where most sleds drive with internal drivers on the internal cogs of the track most mountain and some trail model sleds implement external drivers as well which hook in to the track windows to eliminate ratcheting of the track or also know as slipping of the track drivers when track is too lose or looses tension in suspension cycle. Pros are different, they have internal drivers and one set of external drivers all in one centered on the drive shaft using those center punched windows to avoid ratcheting.

If you get a track that is not center punched you will also need to switch track drivers accordingly.

As for fully clipped it refers to the clips on the track windows. A fully clipped track has the metal clips on every window and reduces wear of the track where the hifax runs against it and protects track when using extrovert drivers on these windows. Some tracks are only clipped every other window or every third window to save weight at the expense of more potential wear of hifax and track windows.

As for the lug characteristics, it will affect the traction characteristics based on snow type however I do not have and knowledge on the what the benefits of the different types will have.

I hope this puts you in the right direction.