Reconmended track length

DTR

Member
Joined
Oct 18, 2009
Messages
18
Reaction score
5
Location
Cochrane
Has anyone ever had the chance to ride and compare the difference between track lengths 144-146", 153-155" and 159-163"? We ride mostly bc mountains but we will ride the alberta prairies when we have snow. Our prefferred riding areas would be the trees or technical riding areas and seeking deep powder. What length of track would you use and why?
 

maxwell

Active VIP Member
Joined
Apr 25, 2007
Messages
20,082
Reaction score
43,178
Location
Sherwood Park, Alberta, Canada
tried everything from 121-174 with some reasonable seat time. my reccomendation is 162.

i also prefer technical tree riding in the hills.

i just find the 162 opens up more lines and opportunities compared to the 151-154 lengths. without sacrificing anything besides turning radius
 

ferniesnow

I'm doo-ing it!
Joined
Dec 2, 2008
Messages
112,077
Reaction score
86,103
Location
beautiful, downtown Salmon Arm, BC
Has anyone ever had the chance to ride and compare the difference between track lengths 144-146", 153-155" and 159-163"? We ride mostly bc mountains but we will ride the alberta prairies when we have snow. Our prefferred riding areas would be the trees or technical riding areas and seeking deep powder. What length of track would you use and why?

IMHO it is plain and simple; 163" for floatation and forgiveness.
I have both a 163" and a 154" and at my weight 170# the 163 is better all around in the trees. I don't doo a lot of climbing (ie highmarking other than to get to some secret spots)....
 

dezmitchell

Active VIP Member
Joined
Jun 8, 2008
Messages
1,409
Reaction score
1,024
Location
Calgary
I rock a 153" and i love it and will keep up with any 162" while technical riding.

Ive never had a problem with it
 

j335

Active VIP Member
Joined
Jan 3, 2007
Messages
1,873
Reaction score
1,821
Location
AB
tried everything from 121-174 with some reasonable seat time. my reccomendation is 162.

i also prefer technical tree riding in the hills.

i just find the 162 opens up more lines and opportunities compared to the 151-154 lengths. without sacrificing anything besides turning radius

Gotta agree, but my 154" was outmarking my buddies 162" last trip with him in about 1.5' fresh... my sled just runs better I think :d

162" for mostly exclusive mountain riding
154" or lower if you're gonna ride around ditches & lakes occasionally also. I think 154" is the best bet for you.
 

hillclimb10

Active VIP Member
Joined
Dec 13, 2009
Messages
161
Reaction score
36
Location
saskatchewan
I like the 154 because i only get maybe 10 to 15 days of riding in bc the rest is in good old flat azz saskatchewan if I were to ride only in bc I would have to say 163.
 

summ-it-up

Active VIP Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2008
Messages
487
Reaction score
120
Location
center of no where
:smiliestirthepot:
want to test your theory :d

maxwell, i think i'll take you up on that, well put my rev to your rev, heck my 151 will spank that fancy pants 174 of your any day, besides you'll probably bend your rails as soon as you mention snow around it.. lol:d:beer:

but seriously, i think that the 151- 154 will be a good pick for the mix of terrain you figure you'll run.
 

snoking

Active member
Joined
Oct 26, 2008
Messages
50
Reaction score
46
Location
spruce grove
I prefer the stubby little 144. I'm pretty sure i'm the only one but its alot of fun to take it places it shouldn't go and even more fun when a guy on a bigger one cant get there.
 

Longhorn

Active VIP Member
Joined
Dec 19, 2009
Messages
3,809
Reaction score
415
Location
Medicine Hat, AB
Website
www.longhornenergy.ca
I prefer the stubby little 144. I'm pretty sure i'm the only one but its alot of fun to take it places it shouldn't go and even more fun when a guy on a bigger one cant get there.

My daughter has an M6 with a 141, tons of fun...

I prefer the 154, I find that it is just right for everything that I have tried.
 

SaskSummit

Active VIP Member
Joined
Jan 30, 2007
Messages
1,178
Reaction score
1,059
Location
Lloydminster
I like the 154 because i only get maybe 10 to 15 days of riding in bc the rest is in good old flat azz saskatchewan if I were to ride only in bc I would have to say 163.

I agree I amm in the same boat I still have to ride alot of flat land myself. Wife won't let me go every weekend.:nono:
 

BC Sno-Ghost

Active VIP Member
Joined
Feb 15, 2009
Messages
1,238
Reaction score
444
Location
Kelowna
I have the 800 REV with the 159 and the wife has the 600 REV with the 144. Her sled is definitely more nimble in the tight trees but mine isn't bad at all. Anything over a foot of powder and there's no way the 144 will keep with the 159. I didn't want the 159 when I was first shopping for sleds, because of the handling issue but very glad I've got it now. The other thing to keep in mind if you're talking about handling is getting the right skis. My stock skis on my 159 were ok, but put a set of Pilots on half way through last season and huge difference both on and off trail.
 

truerider411

New member
Joined
Dec 21, 2010
Messages
3
Reaction score
0
Location
Lloydminster
Ive road most track lenghts and I personally prefer a 144" by 2.5paddle.
i have highmarked past m1 163". I like the 144" because i can jump the hell out of it and have less worry of bending a tunnel as well as its fairly agile in trees and climbs. I am however only 160lbs so this helps lots. I do like 154" and if i was just hill climbing i would have a 163" but if i upgrade my summit in the next year or two to the e-tec it will be a 146". My girlfriend has a 151 and it is fun but i still preffer mine. The paddle length makes a large difference.
GOOD LUCK
 
Top Bottom