Track info ?

[Murph]

WPS Catalog

 

[TreeThrasher]

I wonder if there is a chance of getting camso to build a batch of 3.5 pitch 280 tracks in 175 length? I would take two..

 

[JMCX]

I see some referring to the Polaris 3" track as a 162 is this correct? The website says 163. So 2.86 pitch right?

The Camso website no longer shows a 165" Conquer track.

 

[summ8rmk]

I see some referring to the Polaris 3" track as a 162 is this correct? The website says 163. So 2.86 pitch right?

The Camso website no longer shows a 165" Conquer track.

All sleds, from all of the manufacturers, with a 3in track have the same 3in pitch.
Skidoo-153, 162
Polaris-156, 162

I should clarify, skidoos new 3.5in pitch track also has a 3in paddle.
GS6

 

[Sheetmetalfab]

All sleds, from all of the manufacturers, with a 3in track have the same 3in pitch.
Skidoo-153, 162
Polaris-156, 162

GS6

Cat and yamie 153, 162

 

[Robbie]

I see some referring to the Polaris 3" track as a 162 is this correct? The website says 163. So 2.86 pitch right?

The Camso website no longer shows a 165" Conquer track.

I can't speak about the website, but I talked to them today and they are proceeding full speed ahead on the 3.5" pitch tracks.

 

[turboless terry]

I was told the 3.5 pitch 155 weights 42 pounds. So that is a 7 pound savings over my series 7 155.

 

[AKFULLTHROTTLE]

 

[JMCX]

I wonder if the 165 2.8 would fit with a 7t driver?

 

[Robbie]

I wonder if the 165 2.8 would fit with a 7t driver?

It probably would on the Chain case models that come with 3" tracks. The paddles are a little shorter on the Conquer and the drivers would be about .5" a side larger. The clearance would be closed up a little. I'm not that familiar with the belt drive sleds and how much clearance they have with the stock 2.6" track. Going from the 2.6" track to the Conquer and 7 tooth 3.5" pitch drivers, you'd lose about .7" of clearance.

 

[d8grandpa]

I can't speak about the website, but I talked to them today and they are proceeding full speed ahead on the 3.5" pitch tracks.

Any advantage you would see going to 3.5 pitch vs 3.0 pitch track? A slight weight savings, but what about any performance difference.

 

[summ8rmk]

Deep snow performance should be substantially better

GS6

 

[sledheader]

What are the disadvantages of going to a 3.5" pitch track?

 

[JMCX]

What are the disadvantages of going to a 3.5" pitch track?

That's the $1500 question.

 

[summ8rmk]

Rail tip has a better chance of stabbing the track.
More weight on each paddle, may affect wear on the rails?
Probably more track noise?

GS6

 

[roni87]

What are the disadvantages of going to a 3.5" pitch track?

You have to buy new drivers when 4.0p tracks come out.

 

[d8grandpa]

Rail tip has a better chance of stabbing the track.
More weight on each paddle, may affect wear on the rails?
Probably more track noise?

GS6

Not sure how deep snow performance would be substantially better, and how would paddles be heavier?

 

[sledheader]

Not sure how deep snow performance would be substantially better, and how would paddles be heavier?

less paddles means more sled weight on each paddle, not each paddle is heavier

 

[d8grandpa]

I have a 3" axys with a torn track and need to replace. So looking at the 280, the 3" would fit right on without new drivers. But if the 3.5 pitch had advantage I would get new drivers.
Just looking for ideas on performance difference. At this point I know it would only be speculative as I doubt there would be any real world testing between the two.

 

[summ8rmk]

Burandt is in Argentina on the new track.
I would bet he has the 3in and 3.5in pitch tracks, comparing them.

GS6