3.2 Lug Track

Teth-Air · Jul 17, 2015

So who is going to be the first (crazy one) in line to put the 3.2" lug track on their AXYS?

I expect the Challenger may be a little heavy compared to the Poo 3"?

richracer1 · Jul 17, 2015

A friend of mine has an order in with Michelle for one.

LPIdaho · Jul 17, 2015

Word from Camoplast is that it is the same weight as the Polaris 3.0" track!

LoudHandle · Jul 17, 2015

Soon ya all will have to run 6 Tooth drivers (maybe 5's) to fit the big paddle tracks. Shame they don't stretch the center to center distance to like 9"-9.5"-even 10" stock.

WingNutRacing · Jul 19, 2015

Hmm

Does anyone know, scientifically,,,,, mechanically engineeringly speaking..... How much actual resistance are these smaller drivers creating? Its common sense,,,,,,, or,,,, maybe not here,,,,, that the smaller the diameter we are turning these tracks around, the less efficient they are becoming...

Are smaller drivers and bigger lug tracks really the answer? Now, I realize if a sled has a GOB of power and gearing is aiding in mechanically overcoming this resistance that it's probably gonna work out....

But,,, maybe the engineers at Poo,,,, the same ones we like to think we are better than, engineeracanically anyhow,,, may be starting to realize something here..

Maybe,,,,, just maybe,,,,,, they are trying to lean towards efficiency????

Or,,,,,,, maybe not?

What do you professional sled critics think?

assault11 · Jul 19, 2015

WingNutRacing said:
Does anyone know, scientifically,,,,, mechanically engineeringly speaking..... How much actual resistance are these smaller drivers creating? Its common sense,,,,,,, or,,,, maybe not here,,,,, that the smaller the diameter we are turning these tracks around, the less efficient they are becoming...

Are smaller drivers and bigger lug tracks really the answer? Now, I realize if a sled has a GOB of power and gearing is aiding in mechanically overcoming this resistance that it's probably gonna work out....

But,,, maybe the engineers at Poo,,,, the same ones we like to think we are better than, engineeracanically anyhow,,, may be starting to realize something here..

Maybe,,,,, just maybe,,,,,, they are trying to lean towards efficiency????

Or,,,,,,, maybe not?

What do you professional sled critics think?

the smaller drivers don't affect the new tracks as much. old tracks were moulded differently and didn't like the smaller drivers because they weren't nearly as flexible. the efficiency loss from 7 tooth to 8 tooth with a new style track would be minimal. i rode a pro with a drop and roll and 8 tooth drivers for 2 seasons and i will never do a drop and roll again

LPIdaho · Jul 19, 2015

WingNutRacing said:
Does anyone know, scientifically,,,,, mechanically engineeringly speaking..... How much actual resistance are these smaller drivers creating? Its common sense,,,,,,, or,,,, maybe not here,,,,, that the smaller the diameter we are turning these tracks around, the less efficient they are becoming...

Assuming all things equal between drivers a 7T is 1-6.25"/7.125"= 12.2% less efficient compared to a 8T driver.

However all things are not equal as the 7T driver creates more clearance for snow evacuation through the tunnel which is one of the largest energy robbing mechanisms on the a snowmobile. It's clear that Polaris isn't aware of this huge performance loss they have or they simply aren't interested in building an efficient drivetrain.

Sheetmetalfab · Jul 20, 2015

All i know is that a sled with a drop and roll resists changes in direction more than a sled without.
Hard and fast swap from carve one way to the other shows the difference in spacing between rotating masses.
Large drivers make the same effect more prominent.
A heavy track also exasperates the effect.
I think poo is acting along these lines.

Part of the reason the xp/xm resists changes in direction.

Teth-Air · Jul 20, 2015

Sheetmetalfab said:
All i know is that a sled with a drop and roll resists changes in direction more than a sled without.
Hard and fast swap from carve one way to the other shows the difference in spacing between rotating masses.
Large drivers make the same effect more prominent.
A heavy track also exasperates the effect.
I think poo is acting along these lines.

Part of the reason the xp/xm resists changes in direction.

Never really thought about the feel of small vs large drivers when carving. I guess rotating mass is going to be higher with a larger diameter.

Dworek · Jul 25, 2015

LPIdaho said:
Word from Camoplast is that it is the same weight as the Polaris 3.0" track!

Did you hear that from Camoplast themselves?

Thinking about doing the 3.2" on my axys 155 as well, but dont want to gain to much weight. :face-icon-small-win:face-icon-small-win

What is the weight of the new 2.6", anybody know?

89sandman · Jul 25, 2015

I'm waiting on the 3.4, no wait the 3.6, no wait didn't I read about a 4.0...

DUKHTR3 · Jul 26, 2015

89sandman said:
I'm waiting on the 3.4, no wait the 3.6, no wait didn't I read about a 4.0...

What is the tallest lug we are going see? I just cant see ever needing a 4" lug or being able to cool a sled on a low snow trail. I am also someone who cant see needing a 174. My turbo T3 163 is pretty insane already.

Search

3.2 Lug Track

Teth-Air

Well-known member

richracer1

Well-known member

LPIdaho

Well-known member

LoudHandle

Well-known member

WingNutRacing

Well-known member

assault11

Well-known member

LPIdaho

Well-known member

Sheetmetalfab

Well-known member

Teth-Air

Well-known member

Dworek

Free Member

89sandman

Well-known member

DUKHTR3

Well-known member

Similar threads