Give me your opinions on track lengths

[Icedog]

believe it or not its true. i was riding a 51 and i couldn't crest this hill top and either could other 59s and 51s. some sledneck riders were climbing it like nothing on 36s

Wow!! I'm just going off what I've seen. At Mountain Mania in McBride last year we had a guy on an Assault that we must have pulled out 20 times in 6 hours. Bottomless pow day, and he was fawked on that thing, where as we could get around pretty good on our 162's. I just can't wait to get back in there........COME ON SNOW!!!!!!!

 

[440dart]

so what does that tell ya?

 

[2XM3]

It all just depends on the sled/rider combo...U need the shortest track that works foir u, be it a 174 3" or ` 151 2" lets say u have a 385 lb sled with 220 hp..now u have 2 tracks, 174 that u can turn at 50 mph ts of a 156 u can turn at 85 mph track speed...whats better?? depends on what u like.
IMHO for a light sled with a skilled rider with good hp (200+) the 159 or 162 is about a perfect compromise.

 

[turboless terry]

A few years ago a buddy and I raced up a steep hill in good powder. I had a 2006 rev 151. It has a cmx belt drive, mountain addiction rear skid, slp 163 horse performance kit, and the 2.25 track it came with. my buddy had a king cat with slp pipe. It was supposed to be around 170 horse. He put a 162 2.5 challenger on it. We started close to the base of the hill. When we took off he got me 2 sled lengths out of the hole. The steeper and deeper the hill got I started gaining on him. before we got to the top I passed him. This was all in deep untracked snow and yes his king cat ran good, so explain this. He weights 20 pounds more than I do but he had a longer track and deeper lugs. I think there is a fine line you cross with longer tracks and deeper lugs where you lose ground because you don't have the power to pull it. If a turbo is involved then there is no problem with track speed. I know I can get my sled in tighter spots in the trees. It is no different than trying to park a crew cab short box versus a crew cab long box. There is a difference. Nobody on a longer sled has ever waited for me. Topics like these are crazy any way because everyone thinks they have the perfect track length or they would change it so they did. All they do is start a pissin match. Ride what you want and who cares.

 

[440dart]

i can make my story just the opposite hooch on here had a 153 m8 with can and clutching my 700 163 dragon with can and clutching would beat it in a drag race flat ground up hill drag didnt matter but i understand everybody has there own opinons and exsperiences

 

[backcountryislife]

Wow!! I'm just going off what I've seen. At Mountain Mania in McBride last year we had a guy on an Assault that we must have pulled out 20 times in 6 hours. Bottomless pow day, and he was fawked on that thing, where as we could get around pretty good on our 162's. I just can't wait to get back in there........COME ON SNOW!!!!!!!

Keep in mind the track that comes on the assault is a POS & even a 162 of that track would suck in the deep.

I think 2xm3 said it best, you need the shortest track that works for you. If you're a sally of a rider & are lacking skills....better get a long track

If you can ride, well, stomp on those little biatches with a shorty & laugh at them for buying those obnoxious tracks that hardly fit on a trailer!!!!!

Simple answer, ride a few & see what you like.

 

[2XM3]

Yup it really is a endless debate....Ok lets talk pitch also...now if u run 2 tracks both 163, one is 3" 3 pitch the other 2" 2.52 well u have quite a bit more paddles on the 2.52 pitch as well as being able to run bigger drivers and more tunnel clearance for snow.....so......you need to take the total paddle area and the maximum track speed and actually figure out the volume of snow moved in 10 seconds or so then compare this number with the weight of the sled as well as the snows maximum density related to the current tempature vs. the torque produced and also at what rpm and ground speed integrated over paddle volume will maximum snow removal occure in relation to the snow density at the current altitude for a given angle of attack vs the phase of the moon and current tides at the nearest ocean, thenjust multiply this by how much bulls&*t you can actually listen to in proportion to how much beer u drank and BAM.....u have the "best" track....



Or you can forget all this and just go ride.........

 

[Funoutfitters.com]

153" if you can get it!!!

Josh Zieske

 

[duke1n]

136 with hp wtf my cousin had a 995psi with 136 nasty on hardpack get it in 1ft + snow and it sucked couldnt come close to touching my buddies stock 07m8 153

Obviously he couldn't ride. If you need more than a 136 then might I suggest Duke1n University. Many have attended and few have graduated. We're like the Marines. Flunkies end up washing my jock.

 

[440dart]

heres the end of this post start watching around 28secs into it yeah its pretty dang impressive wound to the nutz going absolutly nowhere



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g3Ui...168498B0&playnext=1&playnext_from=PL&index=31

 

[440dart]

let me guess its because there not skilled riders hes in a meadow on practicly flat ground




THE END

 

[duke1n]

That would be correct

 

[richboy202]

Tool Academy

Dont worry 440dart, duke1n sounds like he needs to join a tool academy, instead of trying to teach the world how to "properly ride a sled"

duke1n stick to what you know, " Being a short track tool"

 

[440dart]

x2^^^^

 

[73GOLIATH]

you guys are funny why not whip it out and have a measuring contest

 

[duke1n]

LMAO leave it to the no talent sofa pilots to start calling names. Stay near the parking you sloths. Would not want youto get in over your heads trying to follow the Duke1n U educated ones.

 

[440dart]

sofa pilots this now this is true, goliath its not a measureing contest these guys are stating that a 136 will perform just as well as a 174 in deep powder, by looking in the vid the polaris is mostlikely a 136 or 144 seems to me that it can barely get out of its own way on flat ground in a good amount of powder but i guess to sum it looks like its working good. if that vid isnt enough proof well i guess well i dont know

 

[73GOLIATH]

ok
so heres the deal who cares what you think is better the origanal post was asking what track you ride not a pissing contest so post what you have and how much you like it and how it works for you not my track is longer or shorter and is the best......

so once agian i ride a modded m9 with a 156 2.5 that works great on my sled with the mods i have done at or above 10,000 feet

so what do you ride and what track is on it and what elevation do you ride....

 

[440dart]

your right he wants to know what track your rideing for un tracked deep powder rideing, people think i say 174 because its the biggest badest track out there i agree alot of people that have alot of money will ride 174 custom turbo sled sure they cant ride "some" they just have it to say look what i have. and thats not the case obviously a 144s not going to go thru 4ft of powder like a 174 would. this guy wants best deep powder performing track 170+ tracks is what he said, and the origonal post never asked what track your rideing he wanted to hear from people rideing 170+ tracks, then you got the guys telling about there 136s on how well they perform in deep powder giveing him misleading info and there comepletely off topic i'd reply simply its not just us that are reading this theres others that read this because there on the fence as well, when they switch there 153" to a 136" and its worse in deep powder there going to be upset because they got misleading info

 

[2XM3]

Yup correct...I have 2 sleds i ride Apex with 174x16, lightweight custom polaris 162x15x2", and I ride 4000+mi a year all steep and deep.
I will also agree that if ur on a 136 there is NFW ur gunna follow me in the deep /steep early snow. ur sled better weigh 275 pounds and have 200 hp


nice car btw. I have a original 71