2013 XM 163 geared down?

[mach123]

Well I don't think it was a dealer swap, and both my 154's were 19/49 stock. So don't matter because I went 163 this yr. How are the back shift and engine breaks on them.....

 

[takethebounce]

Well I don't think it was a dealer swap, and both my 154's were 19/49 stock. So don't matter because I went 163 this yr. How are the back shift and engine breaks on them.....

Gearing on the 163's were too low last year, the clutching is the same as last year.

It is a dog off the line, performs well at wot. Engine breaking is lacking unless on long steep hills. I prefer a little stronger engine breaking. Backshift isn't bad, regains rpm well enough but not spot on.



Sent from my HTC-Z710a using Tapatalk 2

 

[team-x]

Ahh no worries general. My search continues

 

[thegeneral]

There ya go. 19/51


Thegeneral

 

[summit1974]

So the original post was 52/19 but they are actually 51/19!!is that geared too low for the HP put out by the etec?My last sled was a 07 rev so i wouldn't know.Do the guys with turbos change the gearing?

 

[ferniesnow]

Dan (TTB) is 140# soaking wet so I don't know why the stock gearing doesn't work for him but he is a tinkerer. He likes performance and his sleds just go and go……...

 

[takethebounce]

Dan (TTB) is 140# soaking wet so I don't know why the stock gearing doesn't work for him but he is a tinkerer. He likes performance and his sleds just go and go……...

Actually I am about 150

The 154 gearing is decent at 19/49. A little low for many people. The 163 should be at the same ratio as the current 154. The 19/51 is just too low for most guys. The ratio should be lower or at 2.5:1. The easiest solution for the 163 is to run a 20 top gear. That gives a 2.55 which is what we used to run and still hover around.

Some tuners and clutch guys are going to say that is still way too low. They like to run taller gearing like a 2.25-2.3 ratio. I just never found the snap to be there in a lower ratio. The Polaris for example I believe runs around a 2:1.

In all honesty, aside from some performance enhancers I never touched the gearing or clutching on my 2012. I lived with its shortcomings. I would rather not tinker at all.


Sent from my HTC-Z710a using Tapatalk 2

 

[mach123]

Ya I agree I like more engine break, for them damm short 90 deg hills........

 

[cadman22]

my sons 09 has 19/45 used to be 21/45 when it was bought. pulls like a freight train. my 2012 163 had 19/51 on it. it had lots of bottom end power but not the track speed i wanted, put a 3" and 20/51 and the track speed went up tremendously.

 

[Deano670]

After some testing im now also a fan of 23/49

 

[takethebounce]

After some testing im now also a fan of 23/49

I might have to call you as I have not ever been able to run a clutching setup that would allow efficient use of that tall if gearing.



Sent from my HTC-Z710a using Tapatalk 2

 

[maxwell]

23/49 may work great in a field but not on a sled in 4 feet of heavy wet snow facing vertical tractoring along.

 

[Caper11]

my sons 09 has 19/45 used to be 21/45 when it was bought. pulls like a freight train. my 2012 163 had 19/51 on it. it had lots of bottom end power but not the track speed i wanted, put a 3" and 20/51 and the track speed went up tremendously.

I stuck 21/51 in my buddies 2012 with a 3". Lost bottom end grunt, but it had good track speed on a climb, it did have the stock clutching in it, the track speed did go up after the gear change, I felt that with the reduction of the 7t it was geared too low.

My 09 163 has 21/51 in it with a good clutch kit. The combo works really nice and the clutches shift out now when climbing.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[superduty 348]

well maybe the 20/51 maybe the ticket then

 

[Jonny Cash]

Should i be gearing down my new 163 xm

 

[Jonny Cash]

you gotta want it!

Should i be gearing down my new 163 xm

 

[Deano670]

23/49 may work great in a field but not on a sled in 4 feet of heavy wet snow facing vertical tractoring along.

Guess you will see first hand right shortly like wont ya. Whats ironic about your statement is 23/49 is the same ratio as 21/45. However with a much more pleasing chain angle as it doesnt have to wrap around such a small top gear there for reducing a whole lot of un wanted friction and rolls much easier. The 21/45 has been working awesome for 2 seasons now. This will only make it better.

Deano

 

[maxwell]

Guess you will see first hand right shortly like wont ya. Whats ironic about your statement is 23/49 is the same ratio as 21/45. However with a much more pleasing chain angle as it doesnt have to wrap around such a small top gear there for reducing a whole lot of un wanted friction and rolls much easier. The 21/45 has been working awesome for 2 seasons now. This will only make it better.

Deano

I'm more referring to 163 and 174 tracks with 2.5-3" paddles.

 

[Caper11]

Guess you will see first hand right shortly like wont ya. Whats ironic about your statement is 23/49 is the same ratio as 21/45. However with a much more pleasing chain angle as it doesnt have to wrap around such a small top gear there for reducing a whole lot of un wanted friction and rolls much easier. The 21/45 has been working awesome for 2 seasons now. This will only make it better.

Deano

Humm, I was looking at a summit etec clutch kit on the weekend and the kit absolutely wanted that gearing your talking about.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[thegeneral]

guys running the 7 tooth Avids have a 8% reduction from the drivers alone ( diameter of driver )