Gen5 850t 2.5” vs 3.0”

[captain extreme]

Firm believer bigger is better when it comes to track lugs, but wondering everyone’s opinion between the two track heights offered on these sleds?
Powdermax 2.5” vs 3.0”

Thanks
MM

 

[dragonweld28]

Firm believer bigger is better when it comes to track lugs, but wondering everyone’s opinion between the two track heights offered on these sleds?
Powdermax 2.5” vs 3.0”

Thanks
MM

In this case its not just bigger is better:

Ther 3" track is a 3.5" pitch which allows more snow to be pulled in between each paddle. It also makes the track lighter with less overall lugs on the track.

The 2.5" is 2.86" pitch so it loses traction on lug height and how much snow can fit in between each paddle. This makes the 2.5 heavier then the 3" track as there is more paddles on the track.

The 2.5 will do better on trails, however, as long as you dont go over 60km on the trail, the 3" will last a long time.

 

[maxwell]

i have tried both, the 2.5 is a faster sled in marginal snow. The track is also more durable, however i also tore lugs on it, so it is still not indestructible like the old 2.5 tracks. Overall i found the 2.5 took a lot of the fun factor out of the machine. It just doesn't have any "hook" if you will. When you want to flop it over it just spins and lets the front end back down. The only thing i sort of like is in the trees side hilling it doesn't lurch forward to aggressively due to the lack of traction, this is why brandt likes the 2.75. I would still take the 3" overall in those conditions as when you want to point it uphill after side hilling the 3" will leave it in the dust. In my opinion there is nothing to gain from the 2.5" track other than you might get 2 years out of the track rather than 1. Or, if you ride mostly low elevation with the occasional mountain trip. I watched some phenomenal riders hate life in 3ft of snow with that 2.5" track. Even turbod it still doesn't touch the 3" in the deep stuff

 

[Teth-Air]

i have tried both, the 2.5 is a faster sled in marginal snow. The track is also more durable, however i also tore lugs on it, so it is still not indestructible like the old 2.5 tracks. Overall i found the 2.5 took a lot of the fun factor out of the machine. It just doesn't have any "hook" if you will. When you want to flop it over it just spins and lets the front end back down. The only thing i sort of like is in the trees side hilling it doesn't lurch forward to aggressively due to the lack of traction, this is why brandt likes the 2.75. I would still take the 3" overall in those conditions as when you want to point it uphill after side hilling the 3" will leave it in the dust. In my opinion there is nothing to gain from the 2.5" track other than you might get 2 years out of the track rather than 1. Or, if you ride mostly low elevation with the occasional mountain trip. I watched some phenomenal riders hate life in 3ft of snow with that 2.5" track. Even turbod it still doesn't touch the 3" in the deep stuff

A very light sled does well with a 2.5ish inch lug. Makes it feel even lighter as it spins easier. It is about the power vs weight v.s. traction triangle If this trangle gets too lop-sided the sled doesn't perform well. Mind you I'm sure super light, lots of power and lots of traction can be the exception.

 

[maxwell]

A very light sled does well with a 2.5ish inch lug. Makes it feel even lighter as it spins easier. It is about the power vs weight v.s. traction triangle If this trangle gets too lop-sided the sled doesn't perform well. Mind you I'm sure super light, lots of power and lots of traction can be the exception.

skidoos arent light thats why we have 3" tracks and 190hp

 

[oler1234]

Size matters, don’t forget it boys!

 

[Teth-Air]

skidoos arent light thats why we have 3" tracks and 190hp

The G6 will be.