LennyR
Active VIP Member
Or tweaked s module
T3 174? Bigdeal !!!
- Thread starter pfi572
- Start date
Or tweaked s module
LennyR
Active VIP Member
Or busted t- motion joint
LennyR
Active VIP Member
Or busted rear axle
LennyR
Active VIP Member
Or one ski pushed back an inch or two from a ski bump
neilsleder
Active VIP Member
Oh yah I get that! The biggest problem with them all is the loose nut in between the handle bars and the seat! Lol. I have owned all but Yamaha and had best luck with doo.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
maxwell
Active VIP Member
Alotof my videos are "humps" a snowmobile track has never been made on before. Sure there are some repeat humps but as the snow reloads and the wind shifts the challenge repeats itself
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk -
LennyR
Active VIP Member
Sounds fun. Lol.
Fixed properly without a clamp. Properly. 1 season issue only.
Quite rare. internet hype. Eat it up Lenny...
You have a point, but can be strengthened, and it won't leave you stranded.
HUH? So a nut comes loose, in one model year...FIXED
Uh no..
You said they all have problems.... Except you just mention doo..
You forgot your usual hackneyed comments about the big cheeked side panels, flexy track, and teeter-totter skid..
And nooo... you don't hate one brand any more than the other....
Caper11
Active VIP Member
Whatever!!
So back on track!
I had a chance to look at a 13 or 14 with the new rear suspension, 7t doo drivers, dropped case and new 162 3" installed. Lots of clearance in the tunnel with this setup. Track lugs are very soft compared to the 2.5.
I like the look of the track I'm curious how much it weighs.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
So back on track!
I had a chance to look at a 13 or 14 with the new rear suspension, 7t doo drivers, dropped case and new 162 3" installed. Lots of clearance in the tunnel with this setup. Track lugs are very soft compared to the 2.5.
I like the look of the track I'm curious how much it weighs.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
- Thread starter
- #71
pfi572
Active VIP Member
IMO a good review posted on Snowest . Note a bunch of bull crap by someone blinded by brand loyalty? Lol
I rode the T3 174 all day long yesterday in 1.5-2 ft of fresh untracked in Golden. It was the perfect demo. It was just the Rod the rep, a tech from dealer, myself and a friend. The 3 of us rode it all day long. I tried it in tight trees, numerous climbs, and many steep sidehills. This is my opinion only and even the other two riders didn't see/feel the same things i did.
On the trail the rear skid is a better ride than the XM. Arm is moved back a little and has better bottoming resistance than the 14 XM 163. The skis also track better on the trail. I think on the rock hard trails the 174 will overheat a little easier than the 2.5 163. In the morning it was running hotter 6 bars vs my 4 bars. The new scratcher seems to work but not as good as some of the others i have used.
In the tight trees the sled is very nimble and in the deep snow it is hard to tell that you have a 174 under you. The new front end seems to work as advertised and allows you to turn and flop it over easily. I would say easier than the 163 in a way.
I did notice (this is my opinion only) that the sled felt heavier in the front than my 163. It seemed to have a planted feeling where i find my 163 lighter. I found myself always pulling up the front to have that ultra light feeling of the 163. I equate it to the drop and roll. In the past i have tried other drop and rolls and they have that same type of feeling. Other 2 guys didn't seem to notice it like i did.
The T3 is more like a tractor. You can move slow and it will float and grab traction instantly where the 163 will saw a little to get moving. The T3 is geared low and i noticed after thrashing it for quite some time the clutch heat was say lower than mine. It was a concern for me but after riding it the clutching worked well and heat was not a factor. With its gearing the track speed was obviously less and it seemed to make the sled feel slower as compared to the quick playful 163. Don't get me wrong the 174 will go everywhere the 163 in the trees albeit a little slower imo.
I purposely drove the T3 into a nice big hole and got it stuck. I called it my Yamaha Apex test LOL. When this sled is stuck its stuck. It took a while to break it and with 2 ski pulls it walked out of the hole as i expected it to with the 3".
Now where this sled shines is its climbing ability. We found a great steep area to climb. Not one of these smooth roll into chute climbs but a in the trees with a instant steep blast onto the climb type of hill. My 163 would need to be moving to even have a chance to get up the first 1/3 of it. The T3 just tractored all the way up it. My friend with his turbo went up and over it first try. I tried it again and every time in fresh tracks just kept climbing to the top. It won't beat a turbo but it is still impressive for a stock hp Doo. I feel bad for all the Poo owners lol. Their 800 won't hold a candle to this machine next year in a climb.
I tried some big sidehills with it and it holds the hill no problem. The new ski sort of helps this new front end do what its meant to and that is having that tippy front end. On a sidehill you can stop and once again you can't tell its a 174. This new front end will be available for all the current XM owners if thats your thing in the future.
The 174 is a big big track. It hooks up all the time. I tried some donuts and with my 163 you could just do them forever. The T3 is a little tougher because the track just grabs so hard and it stands you up straight especially if there is another track in your way LOL. Not as graceful lets say ! The T3 owners will have to learn some new throttle technique in some of these situations.
All in all i was impressed with the T3. I have been riding Yamaha for a long time and i find the 163 XM super light and playful, kinda zippy if you will. The T3 is a little slower in track speed and slower when you want to change direction with the front end unloaded (gyroscopic effect ?). It may not be for everyone but for the guy who wants a climber with a all around good tree riding sled it may be the ticket. Props to BRP Rep Rod. Thanks for letting me have a go at the new T3 !
I rode the T3 174 all day long yesterday in 1.5-2 ft of fresh untracked in Golden. It was the perfect demo. It was just the Rod the rep, a tech from dealer, myself and a friend. The 3 of us rode it all day long. I tried it in tight trees, numerous climbs, and many steep sidehills. This is my opinion only and even the other two riders didn't see/feel the same things i did.
On the trail the rear skid is a better ride than the XM. Arm is moved back a little and has better bottoming resistance than the 14 XM 163. The skis also track better on the trail. I think on the rock hard trails the 174 will overheat a little easier than the 2.5 163. In the morning it was running hotter 6 bars vs my 4 bars. The new scratcher seems to work but not as good as some of the others i have used.
In the tight trees the sled is very nimble and in the deep snow it is hard to tell that you have a 174 under you. The new front end seems to work as advertised and allows you to turn and flop it over easily. I would say easier than the 163 in a way.
I did notice (this is my opinion only) that the sled felt heavier in the front than my 163. It seemed to have a planted feeling where i find my 163 lighter. I found myself always pulling up the front to have that ultra light feeling of the 163. I equate it to the drop and roll. In the past i have tried other drop and rolls and they have that same type of feeling. Other 2 guys didn't seem to notice it like i did.
The T3 is more like a tractor. You can move slow and it will float and grab traction instantly where the 163 will saw a little to get moving. The T3 is geared low and i noticed after thrashing it for quite some time the clutch heat was say lower than mine. It was a concern for me but after riding it the clutching worked well and heat was not a factor. With its gearing the track speed was obviously less and it seemed to make the sled feel slower as compared to the quick playful 163. Don't get me wrong the 174 will go everywhere the 163 in the trees albeit a little slower imo.
I purposely drove the T3 into a nice big hole and got it stuck. I called it my Yamaha Apex test LOL. When this sled is stuck its stuck. It took a while to break it and with 2 ski pulls it walked out of the hole as i expected it to with the 3".
Now where this sled shines is its climbing ability. We found a great steep area to climb. Not one of these smooth roll into chute climbs but a in the trees with a instant steep blast onto the climb type of hill. My 163 would need to be moving to even have a chance to get up the first 1/3 of it. The T3 just tractored all the way up it. My friend with his turbo went up and over it first try. I tried it again and every time in fresh tracks just kept climbing to the top. It won't beat a turbo but it is still impressive for a stock hp Doo. I feel bad for all the Poo owners lol. Their 800 won't hold a candle to this machine next year in a climb.
I tried some big sidehills with it and it holds the hill no problem. The new ski sort of helps this new front end do what its meant to and that is having that tippy front end. On a sidehill you can stop and once again you can't tell its a 174. This new front end will be available for all the current XM owners if thats your thing in the future.
The 174 is a big big track. It hooks up all the time. I tried some donuts and with my 163 you could just do them forever. The T3 is a little tougher because the track just grabs so hard and it stands you up straight especially if there is another track in your way LOL. Not as graceful lets say ! The T3 owners will have to learn some new throttle technique in some of these situations.
All in all i was impressed with the T3. I have been riding Yamaha for a long time and i find the 163 XM super light and playful, kinda zippy if you will. The T3 is a little slower in track speed and slower when you want to change direction with the front end unloaded (gyroscopic effect ?). It may not be for everyone but for the guy who wants a climber with a all around good tree riding sled it may be the ticket. Props to BRP Rep Rod. Thanks for letting me have a go at the new T3 !
Last edited:
Caper11
Active VIP Member
Yep very good review indeed.
The comment about the t3 being slower than his 163 makes me curious. My 3" and any other 3" I rode my ground speed increased. After reading the specs of the gearing at the dealer I wonder if it's geared to low, it's at 19/51.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
The comment about the t3 being slower than his 163 makes me curious. My 3" and any other 3" I rode my ground speed increased. After reading the specs of the gearing at the dealer I wonder if it's geared to low, it's at 19/51.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Last edited:
maxwell
Active VIP Member
19/51 is what the 163 2.5 is at aswell the only gearing change is the drivers?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk -
Caper11
Active VIP Member
Apparently, he had a spec sheet on the 174 and it showed 19/51. May change for production but I thought it was geared a little low myself. I didn't go that low with my 3". I actually geared up a tad.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
scrfce
Active VIP Member
Was a great review. Tried givin nonbiased ride reports here before and theyre drowned by raatardedness. honest reasonable results of the everyday guy that dont give a damn about brand color go instantly ignored or dismissed. One reason snowest is the go to for info where s&m is go banter with dootards,
scrfce
Active VIP Member
Especially wen theres only been a handful of guys that have ridden this new machine, seriously if ur that impotent and feel doo is the be all end all, give a real pro con report, gives people way more confidence in trusting their info for their next buy...... Not just doo rules and martin motorsports will hook ya up lol
maxwell
Active VIP Member
- Thread starter
- #78
pfi572
Active VIP Member
Some tech info on T3
T3 PACKAGE DETAILS
PowderMax 3
While the 3 in. lug track is basically a PowderMax 2 design with FlexEdge technology, efforts
were made to reduce weight:
1. 4 rows of slim slots Reduction for 174: .78 lb./355 g
2. Reduce material thickness in FlexEdge zone Reduction for 174: .71 lb./325 g
3. Tightening of edge trim tolerance Reduction for 174: .90 lb./410 g
4. Lug pitch increased from 2.86 to 3 in.
The longer lugs were meticulously designed using Finite Element Analysis for optimal light
weight, flex and durability.
Chaincase
To accommodate clearance for the longer track lugs, the chaincase had to be lengthened by 1.1
in. (2.7 cm). Weight reduction efforts shaved 1.5 lb. (705 g) from the chaincase and bottom
sprocket.
1. The case is redesigned for use with 2-stroke engines only, eliminating mechanical
reverse features and their required added bracing.
2. Inside surfaces of the case and cover are CNC machined from the cast 3 mm thickness
down to 2 mm.
3. The bottom sprocket is manufactured at a uniform 16.5 mm thickness and the area
between the teeth and spline is machined down to 2.5 mm.
Heat Exchangers
Rather than carry-over the design and components of the current Summit for the long T3
packages, the heat exchanger design was optimized to reduce weight while providing the
necessary cooling capacity.
The tunnel exchanger is about half the length of the tunnel extrusion (the rear half, for the most
snow exposure). This change save 4 lb./1.8 kg in wet weight (174 version).
tMotion rear suspension improvements
To accommodate the 174 in. (442 cm) track, the rear arm mount is moved 5.25 in. (13.3 cm)
rearward; the rear wheels 6 in. (15.3 cm) rearward.
Weight reduction efforts include:
1. Lighter axles. Suspension axles have been turned down where possible to reduce mass;
the shock axle uses a cold forged thin tube with stronger ends for receiving the bolts.
Reduction: .45 lb./204 g
2. Removing the rubber outer ring lightens the rear wheels. Reduction: .37 lb./168 g
3. Removal of idler wheels on rails, addition of ice scratchers. Reduction: 1.74 lb./788 g
4. Select rear arm components move to chromoly material and have added holes.
Reduction: .47 lb./214 g
Pilot DS 3 skis
Designed to work in tandem with the deeper and longer tracks, the Pilot DS 3 skis are a
variation of the well-received Pilot DS 2 with a 12mm deeper keel. Riders will find it holds a
sidehill better and offers great control.
Lightweight Muffler
Reducing muffler weight while meeting OEM sound output regulations is a substantial
challenge. New materials and design techniques enabled BRP to create a muffler that is 4 lb
(1.8 kg) lighter than the current version while still meeting standards. Thinner, yet stronger
materials are used and select elements have mass-reducing perforations optimized through
computer-aided design.
RAS 2 Front Suspension
While designed primarily to improve precision in trail riding, the new RAS 2 front suspension
brings 1.76 lb (0.8 kg) of weight saving. This made it ideal for inclusion in the T3 package.
New A-arms feature revised forgings and thin wall chromoly tubing to save weight. They also
make a more direct line from the bulkhead to the ball joint – resulting in an extra 20 mm of
ground clearance and lighter weight.
Their refined style also matches the premium positioning of the Summit X models with T3
package. The upper A-arms use flattened tubes and a structural X-brace. The ski legs are
forged and CNC machined to add surface interest and expose the aluminum,
The Summit model leads once again as the T3 package brings an unprecedented level of
traction and floatation to mountain sleds while losing 16.1 lb. (7.3 kg) in weight through careful
optimization of key components with no loss in durability or reliability.
T3 PACKAGE DETAILS
PowderMax 3
While the 3 in. lug track is basically a PowderMax 2 design with FlexEdge technology, efforts
were made to reduce weight:
1. 4 rows of slim slots Reduction for 174: .78 lb./355 g
2. Reduce material thickness in FlexEdge zone Reduction for 174: .71 lb./325 g
3. Tightening of edge trim tolerance Reduction for 174: .90 lb./410 g
4. Lug pitch increased from 2.86 to 3 in.
The longer lugs were meticulously designed using Finite Element Analysis for optimal light
weight, flex and durability.
Chaincase
To accommodate clearance for the longer track lugs, the chaincase had to be lengthened by 1.1
in. (2.7 cm). Weight reduction efforts shaved 1.5 lb. (705 g) from the chaincase and bottom
sprocket.
1. The case is redesigned for use with 2-stroke engines only, eliminating mechanical
reverse features and their required added bracing.
2. Inside surfaces of the case and cover are CNC machined from the cast 3 mm thickness
down to 2 mm.
3. The bottom sprocket is manufactured at a uniform 16.5 mm thickness and the area
between the teeth and spline is machined down to 2.5 mm.
Heat Exchangers
Rather than carry-over the design and components of the current Summit for the long T3
packages, the heat exchanger design was optimized to reduce weight while providing the
necessary cooling capacity.
The tunnel exchanger is about half the length of the tunnel extrusion (the rear half, for the most
snow exposure). This change save 4 lb./1.8 kg in wet weight (174 version).
tMotion rear suspension improvements
To accommodate the 174 in. (442 cm) track, the rear arm mount is moved 5.25 in. (13.3 cm)
rearward; the rear wheels 6 in. (15.3 cm) rearward.
Weight reduction efforts include:
1. Lighter axles. Suspension axles have been turned down where possible to reduce mass;
the shock axle uses a cold forged thin tube with stronger ends for receiving the bolts.
Reduction: .45 lb./204 g
2. Removing the rubber outer ring lightens the rear wheels. Reduction: .37 lb./168 g
3. Removal of idler wheels on rails, addition of ice scratchers. Reduction: 1.74 lb./788 g
4. Select rear arm components move to chromoly material and have added holes.
Reduction: .47 lb./214 g
Pilot DS 3 skis
Designed to work in tandem with the deeper and longer tracks, the Pilot DS 3 skis are a
variation of the well-received Pilot DS 2 with a 12mm deeper keel. Riders will find it holds a
sidehill better and offers great control.
Lightweight Muffler
Reducing muffler weight while meeting OEM sound output regulations is a substantial
challenge. New materials and design techniques enabled BRP to create a muffler that is 4 lb
(1.8 kg) lighter than the current version while still meeting standards. Thinner, yet stronger
materials are used and select elements have mass-reducing perforations optimized through
computer-aided design.
RAS 2 Front Suspension
While designed primarily to improve precision in trail riding, the new RAS 2 front suspension
brings 1.76 lb (0.8 kg) of weight saving. This made it ideal for inclusion in the T3 package.
New A-arms feature revised forgings and thin wall chromoly tubing to save weight. They also
make a more direct line from the bulkhead to the ball joint – resulting in an extra 20 mm of
ground clearance and lighter weight.
Their refined style also matches the premium positioning of the Summit X models with T3
package. The upper A-arms use flattened tubes and a structural X-brace. The ski legs are
forged and CNC machined to add surface interest and expose the aluminum,
The Summit model leads once again as the T3 package brings an unprecedented level of
traction and floatation to mountain sleds while losing 16.1 lb. (7.3 kg) in weight through careful
optimization of key components with no loss in durability or reliability.
Last edited:
- Thread starter
- #80
pfi572
Active VIP Member
The way it sounds and reads to me is that everything is the same between the 174 and 162 other than the moved cooler and rear arm being moved back 5.25 inch on 174.
Kind of reads like the track is different on 174 but can't imagine that.
Kind of reads like the track is different on 174 but can't imagine that.
Similar threads
