Track question coming from Polaris
- Thread starter Zad
- Start date
I did loosen the limiter strap one step. I like to have low ski pressure and light front end. But when needed I use precision mode for bigger climbs and tighter lines. Otherwise my sled is 100% stock on suspension.
If you are getting washed out, try to relocate your weight on running boards, go back and forth to see what works best for you. I would guess your weight is too back on the boards. You can also try to turn your riser more forward so your weight is also automatically more forward. Always remember that what works on Poo doesn't work same way on Doo.
One benefit on 154 vs 165 is that on low snow conditions you can ride with more track speed and higher engine speed and those factors stabilise the sled and makes riding more effortless.
Here in Europe we ride quite low elevation, around 0-1000m. We don't have that many deep days either. Average snowpack is around 80cm to 130cm as its best on peak season. Very technical riding on dense terrain. Besides nowadays 165" are not needed here as modern deep snow sleds are so good. Actually on our conditions longer tracks are harder to ride because of low track speed and more work to initiate and get to the edge on low snow conditions.
Now as t-motion is locked as stock from the factory on G5 Expert and Freeride, they are totally different machines than G4. 16Wide track gives great flotation and isn't the issue and never was.
I'm similar weight and rider skills.
If you don't get that many deep days, you will be just fine with the 154. Lately Utah snow has been similar.
The 154 x 3 is a handful (wheelie) even w/o the turbo.
The factory turbo come in strong off the bottom, but lays flat on the top (stock clutching).
If you decide 154 is the way to go, I'd suggest a 2.5" paddle. Tracks are more durable and they seem to get around fine 99% of the time (Buddy has a '22).
I personally lean more toward the 165 because I like to slow poke thru the trees before WOT into a meadow or hill.
I don't think the 1" wider track will give you the extra traction or floatation your thinking it will (comparable to 163 Polaris track)
Either way, I don't think you can go wrong with the track length you pick.
Well said, the extra 1/2” on each is much less an advantage as some would make it out to be. You’ll notice much more of a difference in track length (154 vs 165) regardless of whether it’s 15” or 16” wide.
When you decide on getting the Dooey, look me up for a clutch kit. Silky smoooooth engagement speed, tightest connection between throttle and track. And when you are in the groove, off / on throttle, the backshift is quick and the track wheels up quickly.
When you dont have that deep day and have to do some wrong foot forward on setup or low snow, the throttle control has no handlebar tugging, smooth clutching like a widetrack.
F
firstkitty
Well-known member
I run a 15” track on my 23 expert 850T never once have I thought man if only I would have had a 16” track I would have done better. The biggest reason I like it is for the stupid ice build up in the g5 tunnel the 15” helps let it fall out on the front when it freezes overnight.
Hi Joe, I bought the sled today and I’m getting your clutch installed by Derrick in Revy on Monday. Very much looking forward to trying it out. My last clutch was a cycles and sleds tuned clutch on a ‘’22 Polaris and I loved it. looking forward to the downhill braking of yours…it would have saved a clutch belt last year on a long, very steep trees and dangerous descent where I had to use reverse.
If you are doing tight technical treeriding be aware that most clutchkits on the market use steep helixes, tight springs and have a lots of pivot weight etc. They do pull hard but dont fit very well to technical riding where you want the sled to be revvy and light feeling. I recommend try out the stock clutching first.
I wish companies that sell clutch kits would tell how they are designed and for what kind of type of riding. Be straight forward how those kits change characteristics of the sled. There is no kit that would work all the riders, all the riding styles, conditions and snow and elevation.
I wish companies that sell clutch kits would tell how they are designed and for what kind of type of riding. Be straight forward how those kits change characteristics of the sled. There is no kit that would work all the riders, all the riding styles, conditions and snow and elevation.
Hey Driver, thanks for responding. my last clutch kit was from cycles and sleds who test and build in the Rockies specifically for tight technical trees. I didn’t think about how ibackshift might not be oriented toward the riding I do. The reason I bought the CnS clutch was from riding a friends clutched kit and being very impressed with how snappy it was off the bottom. I was surprised at the difference. I think I’ll post and Ask this question about ibackshift and the riding I do to get some perspective from others.
If you are riding a low snow conditions and you have powertrain that engages hard and tracks starts to push right away, you will find that riding will get more difficult on low speeds and on low snow. You want to get engine rpm up first as it stabilizes your riding and then the track speed up. You want that sharp engine/throttle response and light feeling of riding. Otherwise you need to use a lot effort by your own body to keep the sled on control until you get the track speed up.
Ive seen this so many times among the years, people ride these clutch kits here on low snow and slow speeds and they get exhausted quickly. And its not about "arm pulling clutch kit" its because you have to use so much energy of your own to control the sled instead of letting the sled do the work.
This is an topic that those old school tuners wont understand no matter how much I debate with them. They only see rpm, track speed and no understanding about riding characteristics. Deep snow riding has evolved crazy past 10 years. Stuff and principles from 2000-2010 wont work anymore. In the old days the way was to see how much weight and load you can give to an engine before it stalls. But on technical deep snow riding you rather try to see how light you can go without overreving and sacrificing track speed.
Same goes for engine tuning. In the old days we tried to see how lean can we go before pistons melt. Now we try to burn as much fuel and air as possible to get more power.
Last edited:
I should clarify that by low snow I mean 6” to 1 or 2’ dumps with a 4 meter base by the end of the season, as compared to the high snow conditions and multiple feet dumps of a place like revelstoke. It’s typically only spring riding where we ride consistently firm snow. Does this change your perspective on the decision I’m making?
No, it just confirms my idea. Thats about the same snow we are riding here.
Now as you choose 165", you have more flotation and traction. Combined with hard pushing powertrain on low engine rpms, will make riding dificult on low speeds. You will constantly have low rpm, lots of traction and sled thats pushing hard. Will take a lof of effort from YOU to control.
Interesting. I get what you’re saying. I wonder how CnS designed their clutches to work so well for the type of riding we’re talking about.
I would recommend, try it stock first. Find the correct riser height and bar position for yourself. Learn how the sled handles as its different breed than the other brands.
After few rides if you still feel that clutching is off and holding you back, its time to do something.
Most common thing I seen people complain about is too high engagment. But that is not a reason to buy a clutchkit. You can simply swap to a softer primary spring (20-30$) and get that engagment down.
After few rides if you still feel that clutching is off and holding you back, its time to do something.
Most common thing I seen people complain about is too high engagment. But that is not a reason to buy a clutchkit. You can simply swap to a softer primary spring (20-30$) and get that engagment down.
I appreciate the advice, thanks.
