The truth why you will need more than a 144 sometimes!

[brahm]

ha these threads are hilarious.. It's all about where you live, ride, and who you ride with.

We get huge dumps last storm dropped 8-10' in a few days..but it's wetter and heavier then most other places. We have mtns, hills, climbs, tons of boondocking, you can go all day without touching a trail, but nobody here rides anything in the 160+'s (or very few) Most people are in the low 150s, and the 140's...and the a good portion of the people I know with 150's all talk about going down to 140's

Yes maybe we can't get everywhere until a things are a setup..but then again it a **** load safer doing it that way, then charging into terrain when the avy danger is high with a 174 track vs waiting a couple days until after the storm and getting there just fine with your 151.

Although who knows it just so happens everybody I ride with has about that length track, maybe If I rode with a bunch of guys really into just climbing, we'd all be talking about wanting longer sleds. There are plenty of chutes, and gnarly climbs out here that nobody touches.. Nobody that I know of really seems into that sort of riding.

 

[snowhawkaddict]

3,864"

http://anchorage.craigslist.org/rvs/1583176994.html

The difference after you subtract the track length from the price!!

 

[BackCountryBob]

It's all a compromise!

Attack 20 vs PowderClaw vs Challenger Lite vs Challenger Extreme, hard paddles vs soft, 2" vs 2.25" vs 2.5" vs 3.0", 144 x 15 vs 144 x 16 vs 151 x 15 vs 151 x 16 vs 154 x 16 blah, blah. What about 7.5" wheels vs 8" vs 9" vs 10", ported vs non-ported, 2 stroke vs 4, NA vs Turbo, Sierra concrete vs Utah-Colorado pow, old vs young?

I ride with my Snobunjie, beacon, shovel, probe and radio and at least two riding buddies that ride better than me

BCB

 

[fordpickupman]

S.m.r.t.

I ride with my Snobunjie, beacon, shovel, probe and radio and at least two riding buddies that ride better than me

BCB

Now here is a smart man......that way you will always be pushed to improve and the challenge is always there. Then when you get in over your head you have some one with you that prolly has a level head and can figure out how to get you out of the "incident" fairly unscathed. How I prefer to ride.

 

[coyoteman]

Now here is a smart man......that way you will always be pushed to improve and the challenge is always there. Then when you get in over your head you have some one with you that prolly has a level head and can figure out how to get you out of the "incident" fairly unscathed. How I prefer to ride.

the originator of this thread is exactly one of those guys.

 

[Polaris_21]

Must be nice to have enough snow to have that problem...

No kidding! haha

 

[snowhawkaddict]

I a l w t t t i y w t r a r!

http://www.mccbrothers.com/index.asp












http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jFlNo1NjAEQ

 

[IdahoPowderHound]

Track speed is key any expert will tell you that, i do darn near all my ridding up in the greys river range where alot of companies film from Extreame team, Slednecks and Thunderstruck. i'm on my second turbo sled the last three sleds ive owned have 155" tracks and with boost track speed is where its at. I have stomped sleds with 163's 166's (that were boosted, simmilar setup) that dont have the track speed. buddy of mine has a 146 Assault with boost everyone says its too short but the track speed is amazing!!! sled only gets stuck when it flips over backwards!!! In the end as stated above 90% is rider ability wether u think your the shiit or not. Tell Dan Adams(146") or Chris Burandt(150"-155")that they need to get a longer track or there gonna get stuck and see what they have to say...lol Geard and clutched right a shorter track sled will climb just as well being boosted or N/A compared to a longer track. 146, 150,or 155 is prime in my oppinoin.

 

[SSWIM]

Yep, track speed is important, no doubt. But track length is also. So is set up. So is rider ability. Put a 153", 162", and 174" side by side. If all the sleds turn the same track speed it does not take a rocket scientist to figure out which one will go better.


Sam

 

[FrozenMOTO]

I have to give a vote for the 144. I had a 121 500 trail sled with an e start and reverse and had it going in 2.5' of fresh still falling snow. Now this was bone stock with terrible gearing that would only get the track to 35mph and had 1" paddles. My buddy had an 800 144' that was modded to hell and I could ALMOST keep up with him anywhere he went.

The real difference and the best thing for me. I only weigh 140-145lbs on a heavy day so I can make most sleds stay on top. My buddy on the other hand would get stuck on my sled on the trail. He weighed 260lbs. So to say a short track sucks is just means your not looking at the big picture in my opinion because I bet the power, weight, and flotation with me on a short track is pretty close to many sledders on their long track. That's why generally I dont recommend 200+ pound riders on a snowbike unless they have a really beefy bike.

 

[WaBackcountry]

Never seen it.

Never seen a short track (less than 162) perform as well in the mountains as a long track (of equal hp and rider weight).

I just have never seen it.

I was amazed how well a couple stock (motor) XP's did last year that had 174 tracks. They would just plug along like a tank while climbing and could virtually stop in the trees, navigate and continue. I would have to carry more speed through the trees becuase I had less track. The foot print keeps them on top of the snow. They were experienced riders and could handle the track even though one guy is lighter than I am.

Personally I probably would not go bigger than 162 becuase I am under 185 lbs. and to lazy to dig it out. I would prefer to keep my trackspeed up while maintaining a faster approach. This higher gearing may hurt me in the trees though.

And these are days of our lives...

 

[2Deep]

Perhaps this is a deadhorse, but track length is only 1 part of the equation. I am not sure I know all of the elements, but how about: track style (paddle / finger / etc); Track stiffness; Track tension; track width, suspension set up (set back; spring rates, limiter straps, etc.); sled wieght; rider wieght; gearing; clutching; engine power vs rpm, and about a million other variables. A 121 shorty set up perfectly can out perform a 162 that is running on 1 cylinder. Unless you have identical sleds that are both set up properly it is very difficult to determine what causes one to out perform the other.

 

[WAmtnsledr]

I say just go out bust some pow and have some fun. on whatever track length you like best. that's what sleddings about right, having fun?


Or you could just throw a 300" long 20" wide 5" lug track on your sled and highmark everybody. Until bob gets a 400" long track.

 

[jake432]

I still think you just have to be a rider yes your not going to be able to climb very high with a short 121 but how come the guys from the days when thats all they had could.

 

[glassman]

All things being equal, naturally a longer track will out float a shorter track. In certain conditions, yes a shorter track can compete with a longer track. It will generally require alot more effort to make a shorter track keep close in big snow. It also requires a little more effort to make a long track keep up to a short track in lesser snow conditions. This is all simple and common logic known by all of us. Unfortunately we dont all like the same things and that is what makes us individuals. It is your right to choose your poison. Some like more challenge (snowhawk) some like the comfortable couch (174) I for one like a bit of challenge but dont like being stuck all day that is why I ride what I do and enjoy every minute of it....How about you?

The simple truth is you dont NEED any specific track size, you just prefer a specific track size based on your experiences and how much you want to challenge yourself.

 

[Mjunkie]

Opinions are like a$$holes, everyone has one!! HERE'S MINE!!!

Too many variables to say that one is ALWAYS better than another.
Here's my example
Sled A - a 2010 M8 162
Sled B - a 2010 M8 153
Sled C - a 2010 M8 141 (if they made one)
Assuming that all three sleds produced EXACTLY the same power.
Assuming that all three sleds had the EXACT same track and set up (as far as this is possible with the different lengths)
Assuming that all three riders were EXACTLY of the same ability.
Assuming that all three riders went up the EXACT same hill and line in the EXACT same type of snow and depth.
And assuming that all other variables were EXACTLY the same, I'm not sure the 162 would always outclimb the others if you made this experiment many different times.

A Longer sled will give more flotation (that is the plus), but a longer sled will not carry the same track speed as a shorter track (assuming all things above especially same power amounts) because there is more load on a longer track than a shorter one (that is a minus), a longer tracked sled weighs more than a shorter tracked sled (that is also a minus, and no one can say that doesn't matter because most of us spend hundreds of dollars to lighten up our sled for this very reason). These are just plain facts that physical law cannot deny (or anyone else for that matter), so again I'M not convinced the longer track is ALWAYS better.

That's my a$$hole of an opinion!! THANK YOU!!

BTW, I ride a 141 and don't think I'll ever want longer.
LIGHT WEIGHT + HIGH HORSE POWER + HIGH TRACK SPEED = ME HAPPY!!!!

 

[AirForceSledder]

My Opinion: Everyone's view is great and most of them make perfect sense! But at this point, This thread has enough opinions and is full! If you read this thread start to finish, you will change your mind 5 times then decide to just sell your sled. . I love snowest! So much good information from a bunch of great people with the same interest!