154 vs 174 3" Pro's and con's

[Merc63]

I have a 163 T3 and a 174 T3. The 174 will climb a wall. We play in creeks and trees lots, you get those creek hills where the top section is almost vertical, the 174 will tractor right over that without flipping backyards on you. The 163 would want to flip over backwards.

The 163 can turn a bit tighter because you can spin the track more, 174 has more traction so it doesn't get that track spin to turn really tight. (Unless the snow is deep)

174 you don't get stuck as much, but when you get that thing stuck it is a mission to get out. Tail is usually 9ft into the snow.

I find the 174 to sidehill way better. You can slow right down, it doesn't wash out like the 163 will (or as much).

The 163 is a bit more nimble, but the extra flotation and traction on the 174 make up for that. You can slow right down and pick any line. Some riders may think that takes the fun out of it, some will enjoy it more. I find I have more energy on the 174, it makes riding easier.

Have to be careful climbing on the 174, it will get you to places you might not like to be.

 

[ferniesnow]

Maybe the stars will align, and I can figure out a way to score some seat time on them, or at least see just how much I'd be gaining from the little Pro that could

I have a buddy coming out for 3 days with the T3 154 this weekend..............................I might be able to twist his arm into letting you take it for a spin.

 

[ferniesnow]

I went from a 2014 154 to a 2015 t3 174 the t3 is a far better sled very good in the trees witch is where we ride . Fix the heat problem with ski scratchers and extra wheels .I will never go back.

Not jumping to conclusions but I am quite sure you don't ride the trees like pistoncontracting and his buddy cdnreneck13 do. They are a special kind of "tree riders" and it is 90% horizontal at an angle of 45-60 degrees. They aren't the point and shoot, turn around riders that most tree riders are.

I may be wrong in my assumption about your tree riding but I stand by my words, "they are a special kind"...........and my personal opinion is that Troy would not really have the fun factor on the 174.

 

[Depsnolvr]

I am very lucky to have the opportunity to have both the 154" and 174" T3's in my shop and have over 1000km on each this season with the 154 having slightly more.

The fun factor on the 154 is crazy. In average conditions this sled rides like a non-hungover maxwell on 4 redbulls while being chased by a man eating tiger. Its so fast and fun and honestly now is my go to machine....but! When it gets deep, NOTHING replaces the 174. The 174 sled is so forgiving in the deep snow and timber that it allows you time to think, react, fail.... then trying it all over again without getting stuck....but when you do, your STUCK.

The fun factor on the 174 is down if you are a ski's in the air kinda person but keeping in mind, when the terrain gets big, the snow is deep or its time to explore, the 174 is on my truck and I am waiting for all of the others to catch up all day.

Good luck, they are both sick machines.

 

[pistoncontracting]

Excellent. Thanks guys.
I'm curious if any Cat guys with there 3" sleds would tell similar storys??


Also, would it be good to split the difference with the 163 3", or would it do a terrible job of both the fun, and endless climbing??

 

[pistoncontracting]

Anybody happen to know who this is??

 

[ferniesnow]

The YouTube handle is "Revelstoke rider" but there is not a member here with that handle.

 

[Bnorth]

Excellent. Thanks guys.
I'm curious if any Cat guys with there 3" sleds would tell similar storys??


Also, would it be good to split the difference with the 163 3", or would it do a terrible job of both the fun, and endless climbing??

I really enjoy my 3" 163. Great all around sled IMO. I'm on the fence as to replace it with a 174 or stay 163. It climbs well and is still a hoot and very easy to get the skis up.

 

[Diamondledinc]

I don't think he tried to tell you that, at least not in his post.

Thanks.

 

[pistoncontracting]

I really enjoy my 3" 163. Great all around sled IMO. I'm on the fence as to replace it with a 174 or stay 163. It climbs well and is still a hoot and very easy to get the skis up.

I'm almost thinking that same thing. And if it looks like a 154 or 174 would be better, the tunnel is half way between for future changes

 

[niner]

Keystone March 2014 - YouTube


well here's my 2 cents. Been riding 174 since 2006 when they first came out. Had one on my m7. They are awesome. As seen in the video the 174 is still very flicable. It holds side hills that will leave others at the bottom of the hill. Will get you to places others only wish they could get too. If you can't hang with a 155 in the trees then it will challenge you to become a better rider. But they are not for everyone , I have a 174 on my new pro and I love it on that chassis also.

 

[Degenstein19]

In my opinion it's honestly in what your riding style is. If you're into the big climbs and steep stuff then the 174 is for you. But if you're more into playing around in the deep
and the trees i would go with the 154. I just picked up a T3 154 this year and couldn't be happier. It gets me exactly where I need to go and it is super easy to
sidehill and throw around. I'm not into the super steep stuff but I have no problems getting up the climbs I need too. And when it's deep it pops you out of the holes like nothing! I was super impressed on how the 154 worked with the 3". It might take you a few times to make the steep climb in the fresh compared to the 174 but you'll get there! Haha the 154 is super fun to play with!