Info on the new 163 3 inch

[dabensmiller]

If all your looking for is it "works", then the polaris 3" will be fine. the suspension is ok if you have the clicker shocks and the clutching is horrible. Not that much of an expense to get some more track speed. Polaris has the same clutching for 155, 163 and a 174, but they have different gearing in chain case models and belt drive models. Yes the clutching works. But theres some easy gains in proper clutching.

I can certainly agree that there are improvements to be made. Shocks are my #1 complaint, I have been spoiled with Exits, so it’s tough to beat that now. But for the average rider, the rider them selves are the biggest thing that affects performance.

 

[gunner3006]

Is the 2018 axys 174 still chain drive?

 

[dabensmiller]

Is the 2018 axys 174 still chain drive?

. All 3” are chaincase, the 174 is only 3”

 

[gunner3006]

Love the belt drive on my 15 pro. 2100 km on it, same belt and no issues.

 

[dabensmiller]

Love the belt drive on my 15 pro. 2100 km on it, same belt and no issues.

I wish i could say the same, 3 sleds with belt drives and 5 different blown belts. 2013 pro 800 155, 2015 pro 600 155 and a 2015 XM 154 with a C3 kit. The chance of me buying another belt drive anytime soon is slim.

 

[TDR]

Wow I’m on my 4th sled with belt drive and I’ve never had one fail 2014, 2015, 2017 and 2018. I replace them every 2000 miles.

 

[Quicksand]

Man I wish there was an answer to this. I'm in the exact same boat, 210lbs, riding a 2012 163" and I love the 163 but i think a 155 would be a lot more fun, and maybe a little more of a challenge, 155 3" i think would be the way to go but i dont want to give up the benifets of the longer track, 163 2.6 seems like to bigger better brother to the sled i have and the belt drive would be nice, I'm sure I wouldn't be disapointed with it either. I ride around Home on the river and fields lots too so I'm also not sure about a 3" for cooling issues with low snow.
On that note, what is it about the 3" that makes it worse for cooling?

 

[dabensmiller]

Man I wish there was an answer to this. I'm in the exact same boat, 210lbs, riding a 2012 163" and I love the 163 but i think a 155 would be a lot more fun, and maybe a little more of a challenge, 155 3" i think would be the way to go but i dont want to give up the benifets of the longer track, 163 2.6 seems like to bigger better brother to the sled i have and the belt drive would be nice, I'm sure I wouldn't be disapointed with it either. I ride around Home on the river and fields lots too so I'm also not sure about a 3" for cooling issues with low snow.
On that note, what is it about the 3" that makes it worse for cooling?

The 3" lugs do not direct as much snow into the tunnel as the 2.6" due to the fact they flex more. The 2.6" will bite much better into harder pack snow as well.

 

[Quicksand]

The 3" lugs do not direct as much snow into the tunnel as the 2.6" due to the fact they flex more. The 2.6" will bite much better into harder pack snow as well.

still not sure how, is it just because the longer paddles have more speed as they come around the rear wheels, they don't flip the snow upward?

 

[dabensmiller]

still not sure how, is it just because the longer paddles have more speed as they come around the rear wheels, they don't flip the snow upward?

No, it has to do with the flex of the taller paddle.

 

[Quicksand]

Really, so the 2.6 is a stiffer rubber/track?

 

[dabensmiller]

Really, so the 2.6 is a stiffer rubber/track?

Its all about leverage, the taller the lug the easier it will flex.