track length what is the best?

[JustinB]

So I have been running two Summits one with a 151 one with a 144 I definitely like my 151 over my 144. Today I had the chance of breaking in my buddies brand new M8's one had the 153" and the other the 162". I am torn i didn't really get to boondock due to not enough snow but I did get on some hills that 162" got up and over no problem then I climbed the same hill in the 153" and hit the same mark with a little extra work; but not much more.

so the question is what is the best track size all around?

 

[Bkinz]

I would go with the 153, ya your going to have to work a lil harder. But it will just make it that more technical, plus the shorter track is nice in the air, lighter, and is in a sense more nimble than the 162. I personally have a 163; but I will be going to a 155 next time.

 

[Tree Boss]

I voted for the 153 as well. A guy I ride with put a powerclaw on his Pro and I am curious to see how this will compare to the rest of us having the stock track on the Pro

 

[JustinB]

I voted for the 153 as well. A guy I ride with put a powerclaw on his Pro and I am curious to see how this will compare to the rest of us having the stock track on the Pro

Nice. I like your currently ha ha

 

[Dogmeat]

196x20x5

 

[94fordguy]

There's several pros and cons to each size. I went from a 151 to a 166 and I really like it most of the time, it floats way better and is more forgiving particularly when moving slowly. The trade off is that it takes more room to turn and takes some getting used to when you want to jump- there is a lot more weight back there to factor in when balancing. For bigger guys like me they are nice though.

I'd say all around for the average size rider, the 151, 153, 154, 155 sizes are good all around sizes depending on brand/year.

 

[Wheel House Motorsports]

im a 162 guy myself, I just love having the floatation it provides, the 150 class tracks are a blast in any sort of harder snow or anything with a good base. when the snow is deep I just love the 162... you can still jump it if you want to, but you have a lot more freedom in the deep snow. For the riding I do, the 162 just gets it done, might even be out to 174 in the next year... I just love boondocking in stupid tight woods with lots of fresh, and the big tracks just allow you to go places the shorter tracks just WONT do. plain and simple.

 

[jlebrun_05]

I thought when I got my sled it would be too long and clumsy for some reason compared to my 156, and personally I cant tell any diffence in handling or boondocking. Going up the hill or starting out in deep snow it really makes a difference though. Dont know if I would ever go shorter now

 

[Leardriver]

I guess I'm a minority. I'm not caught up in the bigger is better crowd. Give me a 144 or even a 136. I hate these big behemoth slow turning lumbering snowcat tracks. Every year someone adds 2 inches to a track and proclaims it as a bold new idea. Why don't we just go to a 250" track?

I like light and nimble. Off course the behemoth tracks can float better and go more places, but the trade off in manueverability and fun factor isn't my first choice.

 

[drypowder]

a friend of mine in denver who deals a lot in sleds said the 151-155 tracks made up 80% of all sleds in that area. so i would say that track would help in resale.
i personnally ride a 153 but i want to try out a 162

 

[Hemi]

I'm going from a 155 C/E to a 162X15X3"paddle this year in my T-Dragon.
(Yes 15" wide)

I like the 155 but I'm 240lbs so want more track. Not to mention the 3" paddle is like cheatin !!

Most younger guys want the biggest track going and they should do a little more research before they buy.

5' 8" tall 150 lbs on a A/C 153x15x2.5 POL 155x15x2.5 Doo 154x15x2.5
6' 2" tall 250 lbs on A/C 162x15x2.5 POL 163x15x2.5 DOO 163x16x2.5

Turbo'd Yam with a 162 or 174 16" wide if the guy is 5' 8" 150lbs he better be in good shape unless all he wants to do is point and shoot. Put the tall heavier guy on that sled he won't be as played out at the end of the day.

It's all about upper body weight not strength !!!!

 

[sledneck434]

i would say run a 153. you dont wanna go to big, well its really up to what kinda riding you do.

 

[Mafesto]

The shorter the funner for me.
This is balanced by the higher rate of stucks, which I don't mind until I'm tuckered out.

If your buddies run 163"s you can't expect to go where they go with a 136" though.

Pro's & con's each way for sure.

 

[backcountryislife]

I prefer the short track, like my 141... but I'd say for the average guy a 153 is a good balance. It takes a lot of work to get my 141 to where a well built 153 can get it to.

 

[VTMTcowboy]

I voted for the 153, but I think a 151x16 is ideal. I just wish the 16" wide was offered in more sleds. I guess it never caught on.

 

[snokaw]

I started with a 159"/2" paddles, then got a couple of 155s/ 2.4" paddles. Not much difference in those 2 different tracks. The 159 climbed a bit better in deep pow, but the 155" sleds were lighter. Rode the 155" sleds for 2-3 years.

I bought and rode a 162" last year, still had one of the 155s. 162" = better float when boondocking, climbs awesome, always felt confident with it in deep pow. When I rode the 155" it did what I wanted, was a blast to ride, After a year with both am sticking with the 162".

Sold the 155" last spring and kept the 162". Will most likely buy another 162 or 163" (depends which brand I buy) this winter. Need 1 for the wife and a back-up, ya know.

 

[Jaynelson]

I'm 6'2" 215lbs and would be lying if I said I could notice a difference in manueverability between a 151 and a 159 or 163. All I notice is getting stuck less, and not having to do things at high speed trying to avoid getting stuck.

Also, when buying a new sled, to upgrade from a 155 to a 162 costs about the same as an aftermarket can. Considering what people pay for aftermarket parts that offer tiny, immeasurable hp and traction gains, going to a longer track if you ride mountains seems like a no brainer. I'm sure a 155 would suit me just fine, but for the money, and IMO for no sacrafice in agility, why not??

If you are a smaller, lighter person, you will likely go through the same snow on a 155 compared to a bigger person on a 163, so I think rider weight is a factor to consider when picking a track.

 

[sandorsnow]

It's a trick question. There isn't a perfect length. Snow conditions change thruout the year. Sounds like we ride a lot of the same places. I have a 155" daily driver, works great all year long. But for my "fun factor" I also have a 144". I have a blast on that sled, it's more of a challenge and make's me a better rider, if I get lazy I'm digging out. I used to have a 99 rmk 136" and that damn thing would go anywhere, you just had to poach once in a while.

On a side note, it's next to impossible to find a new pro 163" in utah right now, but there are plenty of 155"s. Maybe I'm missing out!!

If I had to choose one I'd go 150's, but I think I'll always have a 144" for fun.

I'm 5'10" and a monstorous 155 lbs.

 

[Wheel House Motorsports]

it definately changes throught the year..

all I know is it depends on what your doing and where you want to get to. I was out riding in some damn deep snow the other day. guys on 141's and 144 class sleds bombing around having fun, 150's playing a little more agressively away from the trail.. trying to make lines.. 162s playin farther up into the woods workin on the trails. 174s breakin the trails into the bowls. once trails were broken everyone could get in, play, have fun, whatever, but there wasnt gonna be a trail without some pretty hard work on a 162, thats when the big dogs come in handy.. the 174's were workin to get up there. its way to tight and windy to haul asss so the turbo is useless.. slow and steady and tractor along.

point being, same day, way different tracks, all having fun, just where you want to go.. some sleds wont take you up into this stuff, its how it is. I wanted to be in the bowls.. thank goodness they broke the trail in.

 

[jakey-boy]

I have always been a 162 guy and thought it was the only track worthwhile other then maybe a 174. But I bought a 153 last year and I absolutely love it. I can take it anywhere and I mean anywhere a 162 can go unless maybe its a turbo. There really is not a whole lot of difference between a 162 and 153 tho... Less than 4 inches on the ground. I would say if you are a bigger guy the 162 is a better way to go. I only weigh 150 geared up so I have a pretty big advantage over most guys. Riding the 162 shouldn't be much more work then riding the 153. If you are having to muscle it around and use a bunch of body weight you need more practice on your technique. I was riding 162 just fine when I weighed 130 lbs. The 153 is definitely noticeably easier to get unstuck tho...