Pitch question

[turbonium]

Does a 2.86 pitch work better than a 3.0 pitch in powder?
I'm looking at either the peak track or the new camo.
The peak comes in 2.86 but the ce is only 3.0 pitch.
I'm going to put it on a pro so I will have to switch drivers if I go to 3.0.
I will have to go from 8 tooth to 7 tooth drivers also.
I know this will give more clearance but it will also effectively gear me down.
Since the pro is belt drive this year I will not be able to change gears.
Will I be geared too low?
I ride in wyoming powder mainly when it snows. Mostly boon docking and hucking.
Thanks for the info.

 

[turbonium]

pitch

did some diggin and found this...
http://www.avid-products.com/sled.htm

 

[sled_guy]

Assuming the same lug design, I believe the 2.86 will be better. And I believe a 2.52 will be even better than the 2.86.

But that's my opinion, don't know if that helps you or not.

sled_guy

 

[volcano buster]

Assuming the same lug design, I believe the 2.86 will be better. And I believe a 2.52 will be even better than the 2.86.

But that's my opinion, don't know if that helps you or not.

sled_guy

Would the reduction in pitch distance not add weight to the track compared to the longer spacing?

A 153 x 3 would have 51 paddles and fiberglass rods
A 155 x 2.86 would have 54 paddles and fiberglass rods
a 156 x 2.52 would have 62 paddles and fiberglass rods

I would think that weight would show up somewhere. Or is it simply how many paddles are available to push the powder?

 

[glassman]

The CE is a direct replacement in both 2.86 and 3.0 pitch with the 2.5 paddle, unless you are talking about the 3" then yes, it is only 3.0 pitch. I believe the larger pitch is designed to use less paddles on the same length of track, thus it is lighter. Unless you have a turbo, or only ride heavy, wet snow, I would avoid the peak. The CE is a proven track, and works well in all conditions.

 

[turbonium]

Doesn't the track mostly spin when you are under power?
Like when you are hill climing

Does the spacing matter if the track is spinning?
What moves more snow
2.86 2.25
Or
3.0 2.5?

 

[diggerdown]

The smaller the pitch, the more track weight you have= slower track speed. Hardpack traction is probably better with more paddles, in soft snow fewer paddles with more distance between them works better. Same model track with 3.0 or 2.86 pitch...I doubt you could ever tell the difference in performance. You can tell a difference between a 2.52 and 3.0 in the pow

 

[sled_guy]

The larger the pitch the fewer paddles on the snow. That means its lighter, but you have fewer paddles to hook the snow.

I personally believe that the move to larger pitch is more about weight than traction. After all, the weight is easy to quantify, traction is not.

Put a 2005/2006 Polaris 2.52x159x2.4 track on any sled that has a 2.86 or 3.0 pitch track and you'll see more go in the fluffy, deep snow.

sled_guy

 

[turbonium]

how many paddles?

How many paddles would be on the snow for a 2.86 159?
How many paddles would be on the snow for a 3.0 153?
I am not sure so i am going to figure out how much snow these tracks move in one rotation.

The 2.4 poo track is actually 2.25 paddle length.
Trying to calculate how much snow is actually moved.
I get 70 rows of paddles on the track total for the 159.
It looks like 50 total paddles on the 153.
so 50 x 2.5equals 125.
70 x 2.25 equals 157.5
So the 2.52 pitch 2.25 inch paddle moves more snow.
But what about penetration? Does the longer paddle actually work better even though there are fewer?
What about paddle effeciency? Is the new camo more effecient at moving snow?
Just trying to figure it out.

 

[sled_guy]

No, the 2.4" Polaris track from 05/06 is not just 2.25" paddles.

2.86 doesn't come in 159... 2.52 does.

All good questions. I usually just figure the paddles on the snow as a change in percentage trying to stay as close to the same length as possible...
2.52 - 166
2.86 - 163
3.0 - 162

What was interesting was moving from the Polaris 163 back to the 159 2.52 was a dramatic increase in deep powder performance even with the shorter track.

I think you are on the right track with thinking about other things too like driver size and such. If you have to go to smaller drivers to put a bigger paddle under then you are going to affect the performance turning that track around the tighter radius of the drivers.

sled_guy