Looking at an M7 153, most of my buddies ride 162. This sled is perfect and a great deal what do you think?
Do I really need a 162
- Thread starter idacat
- Start date
We sell more 153s than 162s, and when they use to make the 141s we sold more of those. I guess it all depends on where you will be riding, but I always tell my customers pay very close attention to what you riding partners are on..
My older sleds had 162" tracks. I was planning on buying another one when from out of left field I had several well respected people in the snowmobile business who know such things, tell me "what ever you do, make sure you get a 153". I was really torn but in the end I bought the 153".
The Powerclaw works very well and makes the 153" work more like a longer track but, there were still a couple days last winter where I kind of wished I had the 162". Yet, there were many more days that I appreciated the fun factor of the 153".
The 153"-155" track also seems to be the prefered length of the majority of snowmobile magazines I have ridden the year as well.
Either one will be great but, I sure like the way I can throw around the 153".
Good Luck
The Powerclaw works very well and makes the 153" work more like a longer track but, there were still a couple days last winter where I kind of wished I had the 162". Yet, there were many more days that I appreciated the fun factor of the 153".
The 153"-155" track also seems to be the prefered length of the majority of snowmobile magazines I have ridden the year as well.
Either one will be great but, I sure like the way I can throw around the 153".
Good Luck
Depends on your riding style and skill
The longer tracks seem to float better on bottomless days, but still get stuck
I feel the 153" is a good all around length, great boondocker, good hill climber.
If I had it to do over again, I would have probably done the 162, cause I'm fat and carry alot of chit
That said I have never ran out of track on my 153.
The differance is 9" putting only another 4 1/2 " on the ground. Face it thats only a hands width.
The longer tracks seem to float better on bottomless days, but still get stuck
I feel the 153" is a good all around length, great boondocker, good hill climber.
If I had it to do over again, I would have probably done the 162, cause I'm fat and carry alot of chit
That said I have never ran out of track on my 153.
The differance is 9" putting only another 4 1/2 " on the ground. Face it thats only a hands width.
track
had a 153,now have 162.Sure miss the 153.I rode my buds 53 after riding my 62.Felt like a short track.I think that there are only a few days where a 62 would do better.Just my 2 cents.
had a 153,now have 162.Sure miss the 153.I rode my buds 53 after riding my 62.Felt like a short track.I think that there are only a few days where a 62 would do better.Just my 2 cents.
What do you weigh?
IMO, if you weight over 200 lbs a 162 is probably really beneficial.
I personally like the 162. I haver never felt any negative characteristic to a longer track.
Also, on those deep days, any time I can ride more and not get stuck it is worth it. For boondocking, I think the 162 is a lot easier to get around with in the tight trees.
I thought about buying a 153 but stuck with the 162. That being said, if I was to get a killer deal on a 153, the 153 wouldn't be a deal breaker.
IMO, if you weight over 200 lbs a 162 is probably really beneficial.
I personally like the 162. I haver never felt any negative characteristic to a longer track.
Also, on those deep days, any time I can ride more and not get stuck it is worth it. For boondocking, I think the 162 is a lot easier to get around with in the tight trees.
I thought about buying a 153 but stuck with the 162. That being said, if I was to get a killer deal on a 153, the 153 wouldn't be a deal breaker.
I agree depends on how much you weigh, im about 140 and can go just about anywhere with my m7 153 that 800 162s go. M7 is a great sled if its a good deal id go for it.
Last edited:
Yep, bigger guy go 163. Or just put a turbo on the 153, that works too
T
tcpeterson
Member
I was dead set on ordering a 153 M1000 but when i rode the demo sleds i couldn't tell that much difference in the track lengths when throwing the sleds around so i went with the 162 for those powder days.
But i am a bigger guy as well so....
Question is, do you like the ride of the 162's your friends have? Try them out and see what you like best.
But i am a bigger guy as well so....
Question is, do you like the ride of the 162's your friends have? Try them out and see what you like best.
E
Evolution Powersports
Well-known member
Last year I had an M8 153 with a powerclaw. There were a couple of days that we could not ride because the snow was so deep. Those days I was wishing for a 162.
It also depends on where you ride. We ride the high elevations of CO where the snow is called "champagne powder". Here I have become a believer that more track is better.
This year I am on an M1000 162 powerclaw. I have not yet ridden it, but I know I went in the right direction for the type of riding we do.
It also depends on where you ride. We ride the high elevations of CO where the snow is called "champagne powder". Here I have become a believer that more track is better.
This year I am on an M1000 162 powerclaw. I have not yet ridden it, but I know I went in the right direction for the type of riding we do.
We have a 36,a 41, and a 53, I stopped at the 53 because the 62 won't fit in my 12' trailer with the fuel jug racks in the front as I thought fuel was more important. But in my honest opinion you can't beat a Pair Of 44 Double D--s >>>>.
I have an 07 M8 with 162, and a 2010 M8 with a 153. Im not a little guy, but I like the 153 better! In 07 two of my buddies had gotten 153 M8's. They were always out climbing me, getting around in the trees better, and having way more fun that I was. (We are all over 200 pounds). My 162 got a little better when I finally got the clutching right, but the 153's still got around better in the tight stuff.
Yesterday, in some bottomless fluff up No Tell Em Creek, One of the above mentioned guys and I were out on our new 2010 153's. Quite a few times we were both saying, while looking back down the hill- that if I would have been on the 162, we'd still be digging me out. Insted we were on the ridge top.
I'm more than impressed by the 153 than I ever was by any 162
Yesterday, in some bottomless fluff up No Tell Em Creek, One of the above mentioned guys and I were out on our new 2010 153's. Quite a few times we were both saying, while looking back down the hill- that if I would have been on the 162, we'd still be digging me out. Insted we were on the ridge top.
I'm more than impressed by the 153 than I ever was by any 162
perfect and a great deal...buy it.
Well..........if the 153 is a good deal go for it!! It will be a great sled........as for all of people that are making a BIG deal over the two lengths......it's only 4.5 inches difference on the snow........to me......it's a little tiny bit more floatation with the 162.........but honest......there isn't much difference in ridding the two of them. I have ridden both.......and I didn't think that one was more manuverable or flickable than the other. But hey........oppinions are like b...-holes.........everyone has one and they all stink 
Have a blast with whatever you pick up......new sled=great winter ahead!!!!
Dave
Have a blast with whatever you pick up......new sled=great winter ahead!!!!Dave
track
Take a close look at how much track is on the snow,its more like 40% so 40% of 9" is 3.6".
Take a close look at how much track is on the snow,its more like 40% so 40% of 9" is 3.6".
