yea, but you could pull of the carbides and sell them on Craigslist.
Sneak Peak: 2016 Skidoo!
- Thread starter MikeMetzger
- Start date
yea, but you could pull of the carbides and sell them on Craigslist.
Please add a front fork set off a KTM
With this one small addition, you'll have a clear winner!!!
With this one small addition, you'll have a clear winner!!!
I am just getting into riding sleds went out a few times with my friends this year. I am going to check this 174 thingy I think.
I
Insaneboltrounder/sjohns
Well-known member
Not skin deep, around 3' of fresh snow(Idaho Mountains), don't weigh 37 pounds either, actually for snocross I am on the bigger side about 185. I just don't need the crutch of a long track to ride. I love hearing all the out of shape, talent lacking, Thunderstruck watching long track posers say you can't ride a short track in the mountains. Just because you can't do it, doesn't mean it can't be done.
M
mike_s
Well-known member
I had a friend who talked just like you. He is a fair rider, had a 440 proX with a 133x1.25 track and was always bitching that we were all pu****s because we rode longer tracks, he could go everywhere we could with our boat anchor big bores and long tracks bla bla bla. He did actually keep up most of the time. Right up to the point where we made him ride up front. That changed the whole dynamic. Without 3-4 guys out front breaking a trail for this little shorty, he was done for. Period. End of story. When youre pushing powder up to your headlight with a 144 and struggling to keep momentum, a shorter track simply isnt going to outperform a longer one, reguardless of rider skill. All that skill doesnt mean dick when your sled simply will not go.
Now, all that being said, i will not be riding a 174. That is just too much for me, and im afraid i will have a moment of idiocy and end up someplace i really shouldnt have gone. But...a 156x3 does sound very attractive to me.
I have a feeling that a 174 will be the new 163. As long as they are able to create an efficient geo for that track size, you could get all the benefits of a slightly longer track with none of the drawbacks.
The one thing I always find interesting is people compare others...instead compare how you would do on a 121 in 3 feet deep and a 174, I enjoy pinning it all day too and being able to think quick to make sure you don't make a mistake and get stuck, and using the terrain to get around more and other tracks to sling shot up the mtn, that is a blast but putting saying you wont have fun or that you will be bored or that it is not a challenge on the 174 is as ridiculous...as you going back to the cord cell phone in your car and a commador 64 computer and saying man the good old days were so much better...they were only better because they were better than the previous years! More riders having fun is all the point of why equipment these days far out shines 99% of the riders, that is awesome and we are lucky to live in this time, you may not need it but having it just adds to the fun and isn't that why we sled? for the FUN?
by the way that is me above in the orange!
Or you finally meet the guy talking crap about the long tracks, turbos and big bores and he is 140lbs! Take your 144" track wonder, put 100lbs of weight on the tunnel or your back and go rip the steep and deep. Me at 230lbs on a 174" is still under tracked compared to a 150lb guy on a 154". And I have learned to NEVER listen to opinions on the internet(or anywhere for that matter) that aren't based on EXPERIENCE. Nearly everyone talking smack about the 174 has not ridden one.
Saw it at the Baker Shootout, sled look really nice. I didn't bother riding it, but my buddy who is looking at snow checking one rode it and said he really like it and that it was an animal on the steep and deep, which we all expected, but thats from the horses mouth.
