Track length

[Phat Cat]

So now that stock sled are coming out with 174 x 16 x 3" whats next? 185 x 16 x 3.5"? Sounds kinda rediculous eh? I thought that when i heard about the 174" track. If they build a longer, wider, more aggressive track will it sell? I think yes. How big is too big?

 

[fnDan]

I remember thinking a 159 was ridiculous and would never need one.
Now I'm on a 163 and love it.
Rode with a guy with a 174 doo. I was impressed.
I'm not sure where it will or if it will end but someone will always be thee to be the next longest machine.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[ippielb]

If i do remember correctly wasn't there an older fellow who had a custom 186" track made up for his m8 or m1000? I can't remember 100%

 

[rightsideup]

The 174 has been used by the aftermarket almost for 10 yr's so I think you would have to see a longer track in the custom sleds for around 3 yrs before a oem would respond

 

[extrmsled]

the funny part is when people say the longer tracks are crazy most probably havent driven one to know.
if theres a demand there will always be a chance of a bigger lug and longer track

 

[Phat Cat]

Yep back in the late 90's the 136 track was considered a long track. My first mountain sled had a 136 x 1.5" paddle. Some people bought a 141 x 2" from camoplast and that was awesome! lol. Back then I heard of the extreme mods using on a 156 a 2"!!! Then in 2000 i think Doo came out with the 151 highmark! Now a 153 x 2.5 is considered a short track mountain sled. How things have changed.

 

[pfi572]

This sled. 189 inch track and stock 800.

 

[Phat Cat]

This sled. 189 inch track and stock 800.

That definitely would need more under the hood. That track would make that 800 feel like a 600. I guess I am just thinking oldschool and track speed.

 

[brian h]

like phat cat said,look how it has changed over the years,i remember when you use to purchase after market paddles which bolted onto the track to get a paddled track.when will track size for length and size of paddle stop,as long as the horse power and snow is available the suppliers will continue building more agressive tracks and length will continue be getting longer

 

[Modman]

So now that stock sled are coming out with 174 x 16 x 3" whats next? 185 x 16 x 3.5"? Sounds kinda rediculous eh? I thought that when i heard about the 174" track. If they build a longer, wider, more aggressive track will it sell? I think yes. How big is too big?

It will never be big enough for some guys, the track producers will have to make it before its run commercially though. Bolting custom tracks together that are rotating at 50+ MPH would be scary to have under your bum. Unfortunately with the now 174" current stock track lengths and power on tap, we will see way to many newbies climbing wayyyy to high on the hills this year. Lots of peeps on the hill today already have more sled than talent, so longer tracks are no needed yet.

 

[Caper11]

This sled. 189 inch track and stock 800.

Any word on how that worked?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Polar_RMK]

Yep back in the late 90's the 136 track was considered a long track. My first mountain sled had a 136 x 1.5" paddle. Some people bought a 141 x 2" from camoplast and that was awesome! lol. Back then I heard of the extreme mods using on a 156 a 2"!!! Then in 2000 i think Doo came out with the 151 highmark! Now a 153 x 2.5 is considered a short track mountain sled. How things have changed.

+1, I had AC with 121" track in 1997 then I bought a Polaris with "extreme 136" then people were asking me why do I need such a long track. Thought I still miss maneavreability of 121"

 

[Weirboondocking]

long tracks are great for getting around in trees and such, they give you so much more time to think. Do they really climb better? thats up for debate. once moving the difference in track speed vs ground speed counts for more then track length in my opinion assuming you have the correct suspension set up to keep the front end down.

Ive seen 153 even 144 hang with 163 but they had to have way more track speed, but get into the trees and thats when people start to see the big pay off having that long track.
I remember my first long track 136 phaser with neon bolt on paddles the thing really went, when I saw 151 for the first time I couldn't see the point. Now my wife and I are on a 163 and I wouldn't dream of ether of us on a sort 153...
Things have changed and I see a place for the 174 with average riders. I will still be on 163 because all the 174s Ive been on seem to tractor along and don't left the skis like I want..

one other thought about the really long set ups is that they don't handle ditches, dips, creeks, sudden changes in terrain... as well

Looking forward to see everyone on the snow this year...

 

[meierjn]

Last year I "upgraded" my 670X from a 136 to a 144 x 16". Finally got everything tweaked right and went and bought a different sled with a 153" track for this year. I feel so inadequate...

 

[QuintinG]

Speaking of track length I watched a friend's roommate climb Maclaren's mile last year on a 156" boost it RMK last year. Neil was there to see what his turbo kits do. I was surprised to see a "short" track mountain sled pound up that chute.

 

[SLEDBUNNYRACING]

I'm a 154" fan but have always enjoyed riding a 163 when given the opportunity. Rode the 174" at Kuster's camp this spring and was shocked that you didn't feel the length of the track. With the new factory technology (IMO) they have tailored the sled to work with these huge tracks. The 174" felt properly powered and very nimble.
I believe the future will have manufactures going even longer with the tracks.


Sent from my Phone while sitting on the side of the road.....maybe.

 

[Modman]

Speaking of track length I watched a friend's roommate climb Maclaren's mile last year on a 156" boost it RMK last year. Neil was there to see what his turbo kits do. I was surprised to see a "short" track mountain sled pound up that chute.

156" to 163" is only 3.5" on the ground. Track speed can overcome that small of a difference in the right snow conditions if the shorter track sled has more HP/Torque. Would be a different story in deep pow with a 136" track. The extra length at the bottom of the hill helps to build that ground speed. A longer track will help in the slow stuff, if guys are point and shooting, the amount of torque needed to spin the track and gain ground speed plays more of a factor IMO.

 

[fisherman420]

My first mountain riding experiences were on a stock mm700 with 141x2 DEEP SNOW SPECIAL lol, the thing worked great for what it was then I put 151 x2, better skis, pipes, head, clutching yada yada yada.....made a HUGE difference with the right track speed and getting that tripe to float better. Just got a real nice mcx180 nytro 162x2.5 can wait to get it out, bring on the POW!

 

[Steve D]

I'm going on record here. You can come back to and quote me on this and make fun of me if ever becomes true.

1000 inches is too long for a track.

Same goes for lugs that are 36" deep.

And tracks that are more than 10 feet wide.

https://imgflip.com/memegenerator