Selecting the right track?

polemite.productions · May 12, 2017

very interesting options in the selection of mountain tracks these days. they sure do paint a pretty picture for the conquer 280. but i'd love to hear some real world reviews to go along with the marketing.

so if a guy wanted a good all-around pow track (boondocking, climbing, and braking) how would you prioritize rotating mass, lug depth, and lug shape?

in an ideal shootout, i'd love to hear comparisons between:
3" power claw
3.2" challenger
conquer 280
*all in the same track length

-and one more curve ball question: i know a 156 track will fit a 153 skid frame, but what about going down from a 162 to a 156? are the rails short enough?

officer farva · May 12, 2017

Same here, the conquer 280 is very appealing to me. I'm just wondering how it holds up. As far as traction and weight reduction it's great. My buddy put one on his axis and it works very well. Only has 200 miles or so on it in bottomless powder days. I'm curious how tough the lugs are. I have to do too much trail riding to get to our spots here in NY and it's hard for me to ditch my 85 duro 2.6 powerclaw cause it's just a tough track.

As far as a 156 fitting on a 162 I don't think it will work. I helped a buddy put a new 3" power claw on his 162 proclimb and I don't think there's enough adjustment in the rear axle.

kiliki · May 12, 2017

give this a read.
https://www.snowest.com/forum/showthread.php?t=431718

my vote is P.C 2.6 or 3.0

officer farva · May 12, 2017

kiliki said:
give this a read.
https://www.snowest.com/forum/showthread.php?t=431718

my vote is P.C 2.6 or 3.0

Thanks for posting that link. Lots of good posts in that thread.

As far as stiffer lugs go I notice my 2.6 powerclaw trenches a bit more than my buddies cause I have the 85 duro hcr track vs his 80 duro standard 2.6. Makes sense that the 280 would have similar results

kiliki · May 12, 2017

officer farva said:
Thanks for posting that link. Lots of good posts in that thread.

As far as stiffer lugs go I notice my 2.6 powerclaw trenches a bit more than my buddies cause I have the 85 duro hcr track vs his 90 duro standard 2.6. Makes sense that the 280 would have similar results

the standard is 80 duro this is softer than the hcr.
the 2.6 is about the toughest track out.

officer farva · May 12, 2017

kiliki said:
the standard is 80 duro this is softer than the hcr.
the 2.6 is about the toughest track out.

My bad I meant 80. Damn sausage fingers and smart phone!

I just picked up a slightly used 80 duro track that I'm gonna throw on before my trip out west this coming season. I do like the 85 for here in New York when running down the groomed trails to get to our riding spots.

Allseasons · May 12, 2017

This is a comparison I'd love to hear about as well. But in all honesty, I believe my 162 3" PC is the best track I've ever owned. Love how it picks up, hooks up, side hills, etc.

On my old m1000 I ran the original pc 2.25, then a 2.5 camo, then a 2.6 PC. Of those, the 2.5 camp was a better track. 2.6 wanted to find bottom.

sno*jet · May 12, 2017

Conquer seems more like a polaris option to me. Super light, but also lighter duty. If its stiffer paddle it will trench harder than the powerclaw no doubt.

kidwoo · May 12, 2017

It doesn't really matter what the question is.

The answer will always be the 3.0 powerclaw.

officer farva · May 12, 2017

kidwoo said:
It doesn't really matter what the question is.

The answer will always be the 3.0 powerclaw.

This seems to be the common answer regarding track selection when I talk to other members about which track. How have the 3.0 powerclaws been holding up mile wise?

DDECKER · May 12, 2017

officer farva said:
This seems to be the common answer regarding track selection when I talk to other members about which track. How have the 3.0 powerclaws been holding up mile wise?

that's a vague question, riding style is a huge determination on how many miles you will get out of a track.. deep trees, trails, hard pack, ect....

officer farva · May 12, 2017

DDECKER said:
that's a vague question, riding style is a huge determination on how many miles you will get out of a track.. deep trees, trails, hard pack, ect....

Yes I agree I was kinda vague. We mostly ride in the trees. But always seem to do 10-20 miles of trail riding a day to get in and out. For when I'm here on the east coast I'm probably gonna stick to my 2.6 but I'd like to find a 3" for when we go to west Yellowstone and Idaho.

DDECKER · May 12, 2017

officer farva said:
Yes I agree I was kinda vague. We mostly ride in the trees. But always seem to do 10-20 miles of trail riding a day to get in and out. For when I'm here on the east coast I'm probably gonna stick to my 2.6 but I'd like to find a 3" for when we go to west Yellowstone and Idaho.

For that yes sir id do a 3" it will tractor threw anything

poor mans turbo,

Vern · May 12, 2017

Before giving up on the 2.6 pc, cut the small fingers off opposite the larger paddles like how the 3" pc comes. I did this last fall and after riding all season I can say it's night and day better. It hops right up on top of the snow now vs just clawing it's way through like some of you have mentioned. I'm sure a 3" will still have an edge in deep fluff. I ride a fair bit of trails getting in and out of the back country so was also skeptical of goin up to the 3" so I tried this mod and now I feel I have no need to go up to the bigger track at this time.

My buddy has a 910 bb 162 pro he put the Conquer 280 on partway through the season and although it's way better than his previous series 5 or whatever his sled had stock, I wouldn't give my 2.6 pc up for one unless your looking strictly for weight savings. The paddles on the Conquer are alot softer than they look, but I still felt it trenched more than my mod 2.6. I had no problem running with him with my 153.

officer farva · May 12, 2017

Vern said:
Before giving up on the 2.6 pc, cut the small fingers off opposite the larger paddles like how the 3" pc comes. I did this last fall and after riding all season I can say it's night and day better. It hops right up on top of the snow now vs just clawing it's way through like some of you have mentioned. I'm sure a 3" will still have an edge in deep fluff. I ride a fair bit of trails getting in and out of the back country so was also skeptical of goin up to the 3" so I tried this mod and now I feel I have no need to go up to the bigger track at this time.

My buddy has a 910 bb 162 pro he put the Conquer 280 on partway through the season and although it's way better than his previous series 5 or whatever his sled had stock, I wouldn't give my 2.6 pc up for one unless your looking strictly for weight savings. The paddles on the Conquer are alot softer than they look, but I still felt it trenched more than my mod 2.6. I had no problem running with him with my 153.

Could you post a pic of how low you cut the lugs off? What did you cut them with.

bkm20x · May 12, 2017

I did the same thing Vern did, used a sawzall cut them as flush as i could couple beer project :face-icon-small-hap

Vern · May 12, 2017

I did it the same as bkm20x, sawzall and cut as low i dared without getting into the rod on the track. Takes no time at all with the sawzall. Well worth it

tswan · May 12, 2017

officer farva said:
This seems to be the common answer regarding track selection when I talk to other members about which track. How have the 3.0 powerclaws been holding up mile wise?

1500 miles on mine still like new. Not a lot of trail miles.

kidwoo · May 12, 2017

Yeah if you've already got the 2.6, I'd agree with these guys, do that finger cut first. Half of why the 3.0 (probably more than half) is just the more open lug pattern.

Those 3.0s aftermarket are way too pricey to not at least try that first.

polemite.productions · May 12, 2017

well that link definitely kills any interest in the 280... too bad. they almost had me at "20% less rider input on turns".

sounds like it comes down to lug design and composition. maybe they'll make a light version of the full cupped camo extreme some day?

getting back to the track shootout, who do we approach for an unbiased track comparison video?

lets say... 5 identical stock sleds, same track length, 5 different track designs, all ridden in the same location at the same time, rotating through the same 5 riders. each riders reviews each track. even better, shoot the video over the course of a month, to try and capture as many snow condition variations as possible.

Selecting the right track?

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Similar threads