• Don't miss out on all the fun! Register on our forums to post and have added features! Membership levels include a FREE membership tier.

3"

T

twsandrew

Well-known member
Nov 26, 2007
678
152
43
I am deciding between going to a 162 3" or 174 3". For those of you running a 162 X 3 on the turbo pro was it a large improvement?
 

sledhead9825

Well-known member
Lifetime Membership
Nov 4, 2013
1,195
416
83
I am deciding between going to a 162 3" or 174 3". For those of you running a 162 X 3 on the turbo pro was it a large improvement?
I have had Turbo Pros with both 162x3,174x3 inch tracks and stock. I really liked the 162x3 but with a turbo it trenches pretty quick, it feels like your going down as much as your moving ahead. The 174 different story. Doesn't trench the same just moves out. To answer your question... Yea both are a big improvement over stock track.
Who says you can't boondock at 174 Turbo??

Ride Whistler Technical Clinic (23 of 49).jpg
 
Last edited:

Scott

Scott Stiegler
Staff member
Lifetime Membership
Nov 1, 1998
69,618
11,737
113
51
W Mont
Now that I have ARC, I wish I had a 155 instead of a 162. But no matter what the 3" works great!

Derailed...I want to know about that.

(Send me a PM so we don't derail this thread).

Thanks.
 
J

jason leckner

Well-known member
Feb 27, 2008
213
66
28
livingston-helena mt
3" ARC

Love it on my sled also. Amazing for deep drainages and side hill. Then when you want too wheelie up the fingers bam your golden lol.. My 2 cents. Worth every penny!!

image.jpg
 
Premium Features