Strange 166 track we purchased

[Rider1958]

I recently purchased a used 166" track for my '05 900 RMK 166.
Old track, missing a lotta lugs, is 166"x15x2.4 with 2.52 pitch.
The track I just purchased online is a 166x15x2.4 with 3.0 pitch.

The old track is part# 5412444, the replacement I just got is part# 5412935.

No one I've called seems to know what nor how that is - there shouldn't be a 3.0" pitch track in that size.

Anyone out there have any ideas?
Or want a 166" 3.0 pitch track?
Thanks,
Ron

 

[Z-Man]

are you sure it is 166?

 

[Rider1958]

You know -we have not physically measured it.
We will tonight.

We ordered it identified as a 166" with 2.4 lugs, got it and set it next to the old one. Seems to be exactly the same length, width, and lug height but the pitch is larger.

A call to a Polaris dealer showed it was superceded by the part number I have on the old track, which is the normal 2.52" pitch.

But the used one I bought is a 3.0 pitch......

The track I just bought has "Camoplast" and "Polaris" on it - but I haven't found a Polaris listed that used a 3.0" pitch.

 

[boondocker1]

Strange. They never made a 166 with 3.0 pitch. Could this be a track for the 07 900 RMK which was cancelled last minute? It has a Polaris p/n so thats why i'm thinking this way

 

[Rider1958]

So then...IT'S WORTH A FORTUNE???
Just in time for Christmas!
Z-Man may have hit it - I need to measure the track length to know for sure.

To measure pitch you measure the distance between the drive lugs - right?

On the 5412444 both the drive lug and rib distance is 2.5" center to center, on the 5412935 it's 3" center to center on both drive lugs and ribs.

 

[Z-Man]

Your certain that it's not a 2.86 pitch? I have never heard of a 3.0 pitch polaris.

If it is 3.0 it would have to be 162,165 or 168 in length.

if it is a 2.86 like I have it could be 163.02 or 165.88?

Most likely it is a 163 with 2.86 pitch if it has a polaris part number. The length would be so close it would look almost the same at your 166.

 

[Rider1958]

It could be 2.86, I thought it looked to be right at 3" on both the drive lugs and the ribs, but I will measure more precisely tonight.

I called my buddy to measure the track length just now, and he came up with 166.5" on it.
But then he may not be measuring it correctly, I just asked him to run a tape measure around it.

I'll take the measurements again myself tonight.

 

[Z-Man]

I don't think you can get an acurate measure on it that way. I measured in the holes from the front of one clip to the front of the next clip. It should be easy to tell, it will look about 2 1/2, 2 3/4, or 3 inches. Then count the number of holes and multiply by the pitch.

 

[Rider1958]

I will measure in the manner you described, I did not know about that method, thanks.

Which brings me to another strange thing about that track - the clips are on every other rib, but strangely they are staggered - one clip on one rib on one side, next clip on next rib on other side.

What is up with THAT?
Maybe it doesn't matter, but......weird.

 

[Z-Man]

no idea but it sounds like something they might do on a factory installed track.

 

[Z-Man]

Does it have center porting? The way the paddles are on the new dragon tracks looks like it would be clipped that way.

 

[Z-Man]

Pretty sure you have a 163 x 2.86 track off a newer dragon. Look at the clips on this.

 

[mountainhorse]

I think I recall some proto series IV 166's that were done in the 3.0" pitch out there.

Probably a move to drop weight in the track .

 

[Rider1958]

It DOES have the center porting, and looks just like the track in your picture, staggered clips and all.

If it really is a track for a newer sled, shouldn't we just keep the track and change the sled? (kidding)

If it is 166" and is lighter, would you just need to change the drive sprockets to 3.0 pitch drivers to use this track?
Thereby freeing up a few horses?

 

[Rider1958]

I just got a call back from Camoplast - they said it really is a 166x15x2.4 lug track with 3.075 pitch.
He looked a bit on his computer and said it showed that it came on an 05 900 RMK (?)

How that is I don't know.....

 

[Z-Man]

If it looks like the picture it is off for a new dragon with center drive and is 2.86 pitch. I will bet money it is a 163. Might have been in the wrong box.

 

[mountainhorse]

If it is 166" and is lighter, would you just need to change the drive sprockets to 3.0 pitch drivers to use this track?
Thereby freeing up a few horses?

Yep... The stock drivers are 2.52" x 9tooth a 3" pitch 8 tooth driver would decrease the clearance by a hair under 1/4" Avid is the only maker of the 3" pitch for the Splined driveshaft that I know of since PPD/Wahl discontinued the 02-594 driver this past season.

Avid has the combo 8 tooth in stock .. but the standard drivers would take you a bit longer to get from Avid as they are made to order.

I really dont like the 7 tooth drivers on the stiffer 2 ply tracks, which yours is.

 

[guidoxpress]

yeh i know for sure they made a few Camplast made a few prototype 166, 3" pitchy tracks...i was trying to get one this summer but ran out of funds so didnt get it. i even had the drivers to match it but ended up selling them and getting a stock 166 2.52" track due to funds.

i would run that 3" pitch 166 i fi was you, if i got a deal on one i would buy it myslef.

 

[Z-Man]

If it is 3.0 it would have to be 162,165 or 168 in length.

if it is a 2.86 like I have it could be 163.02 or 165.88?

There is no physical way it can be a 166 and 3.0 pitch. The total length of the track has to be divisible by the pitch. So, if it truly is a 3.0 pitch it can only be 162, 165 or 168 in length. To be 166 it would have to have 55 1/3 open windows which will not work.

 

[dexter]

There is no physical way it can be a 166 and 3.0 pitch. The total length of the track has to be divisible by the pitch. So, if it truly is a 3.0 pitch it can only be 162, 165 or 168 in length. To be 166 it would have to have 55 1/3 open windows which will not work.

he said camo told him it was 3.075" pitch ???? who knows