X3 an improvement over the 2.6?

[Jaynelson]

Ive also heard the polaris 3" sucks. Here in mccall area


Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

In what way and in comparison with what track(s)? Surprised to hear anyone say that track "sucks." I would take it over an X3 from a performance standpoint. But again area (and snow type/amount that goes with it) could be causing the discrepancies in preference we're seeing here.

 

[Jaynelson]

If I was sitting with the nose of my sled pointed over a 50 foot cliff and needed to do a really tight 5hit hook to get out of that situation I certainly do not want a 3" track. I would want something that I could stab the throttle and get that track spinning without grabbing and launching the sled forward over the edge. Once a track is spinning the sled will be super easy to pull over and spin on the spot. This is where some guys see the advantage of some tracks over others. Also when standing central on your sled, to spin the track makes it really easy to roll the sled on to one ski to carve a corner. If the track is hard set you may have to jump to one side to get the sled on one ski. SO it comes down to 2 factors, the first riding style, the second snow conditions.

After saying this, I went and ordered a 174 x 3" for 2019 and really hope I don't hate it. The reason I did was because I ride super soft deep snow as the norm. If I was to ride hard packed areas I would definitely stay away from the 3" track.

BTW the Polaris 2.4" track is still an awesome "light powder" track and is very durable.

Great observation....many don't understand that a track that spins somewhat actually helps the handling of the sled in slower tech stuff. That older 2.4" was a lot of what made the Pro chassis such an easy sled to sidehill (for its time). Install a stiffer 3" on a Pro and it totally changed the handling.

 

[edgey]

In what way and in comparison with what track(s)? Surprised to hear anyone say that track "sucks." I would take it over an X3 from a performance standpoint. But again area (and snow type/amount that goes with it) could be causing the discrepancies in preference we're seeing here.

Interesting, your in BC right is your snow more dry powder or wet? Always heard that the poo 3" was a trencher might have to try one I have to buy a new track and after this thread I'm really on the fence about what to buy.

 

[b-litt]

We get a mix of coastal type snow with some deep dry pow days. Very few dry pow days like I've seen in Utah or Colorado though. If you run two sleds I'd set one up for the deepest days. On that sled I'd pick the 3.2 camso. Many of my friends have the series 7 and love it. In our snow both seem to perform great. I'd give the edge to the 3.2 or x3 in deep dry snow. The Polaris 3" does do better on hard pack with the stiffer lug. Is durability an issue with the Polaris 3" I've seen three series 7 tracks rip this season, and they aren't cheep. I do want to try the 3" cat track. Those are a rare sight here, but they sound good.
The 2.6 track is what I'd go with if I was running the same track all season. You can set an edge quicker, and it pops up better than any track out there. It does spin more than I like in the dryer powder. I ride on the pin much more with the 2.6. Deep pow days it stays taped. Also the 2.6 has been very durable except for the wear from the rails. And that wear is bad. 1,800 hard miles on it this season, and the lugs look new. I'm hoping the new clip location will fix that.

 

[Jaynelson]

Interesting, your in BC right is your snow more dry powder or wet? Always heard that the poo 3" was a trencher might have to try one I have to buy a new track and after this thread I'm really on the fence about what to buy.

Interior BC...snow is not as wet as the coastal stuff typically. On the dry side, and usually deep in a year like this. But we ride from November to May at least, so see lots of variance.

I find all of the 3” tracks can trench easier than the 2.6” depending how you ride them.

 

[Ron Burgandy]

so I am gonna do one of three things to this thing, 3” track... pipe/clutching.... or raptor 36” front end. kind of sounds like I should focus on the other two. Been eyeballin the raptor front end.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[SRXSRULE]

You like the Polaris 3" ? I think your the first person I heard that likes that track. Where do u mostly ride?

Also everyone that is replying could u state where u ride I think that makes a difference on what track u like.

I had the factory 3" on my 16, and the 2.6 on my 17, both were 163's. 3" was better in every way for me.

But, I agree that it does depend on where you ride. I ride 100% off trail, Eastern Idaho / Western Wyoming.

 

[aksledjunkie]

I find all of the 3” tracks can trench easier than the 2.6” depending how you ride them.

Agreed big time. Having ridden a 2.6", 2.8", and 3" in Alaska, Revy, and Whistler the 2.6" trenched the least.

 

[Teth-Air]

Agreed big time. Having ridden a 2.6", 2.8", and 3" in Alaska, Revy, and Whistler the 2.6" trenched the least.

I wonder if gearing had anything to do with this? The reason I mention it is that maybe the higher gearing for the 2.6" track models actually gives a little more throttle control over the lower gearing for the 3" track models. I normally would say lower gearing should have more control but the AXYS motor is so aggressive on the bottom end that it may not see much load with low gearing and immediately start spinning the track when starting out. I have personally seen stockers with the 2.6" track gently walk out of stucks. Sometimes at the cost of slightly burning the belt though. When we gear down these sleds we lower the primary spring start rate to reduce trenching.

 

[tuneman]

so I am gonna do one of three things to this thing, 3” track... pipe/clutching.... or raptor 36” front end. kind of sounds like I should focus on the other two. Been eyeballin the raptor front end.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Option #4 is best: Turbo

 

[gonehuntnpowder]

I have the series 7 3 inch on mine. It seems to work good, but I have thought about installing the x3 or 3.2. Anyone done this?

 

[Scott]

I rode a 16 Axys with a 163 x 3.2 on 8lbs of intercooled boost this weekend.
THAT was fantastic!!!

The 3.2 looks like an identical lug design to the X3 except the nubs on top the lugs. The top 1/3 feels just a little softer on the 3.2 when you play with them side by side. I think it will make it a better all around trqck than the X3.

 

[Sheetmetalfab]

I have the series 7 3 inch on mine. It seems to work good, but I have thought about installing the x3 or 3.2. Anyone done this?

The x3.2 eats the series 7’s lunch. (Side by side testing identical sleds)
On anything but hardpack.

Unless you get a crazy good deal on an x3 why would you not do the x3.2 instead?