• 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.

165 or 154?

165 or 154?


  • Total voters
    668
P
Nov 28, 2007
1,795
761
113
Yukon Canada
They all handle easy in 3 feet of fresh, let it set up a bit and the difference becomes way more noticeable. The old 174 is an ungainly yellow school bus in not so great conditions the Axys 174 making the same name for itself.
No reason For the G4 to be any different.
All I can say make an informed decision on the snow you usually ride on an average snow Year.
 

Old Scud-doo

Well-known member
Premium Member
Dec 28, 2007
995
507
93
Middle Montana
I'd definitely go 2.5" on the 154. People say the 165 is easier to handle than the 154 XM. And they also say the 175 is a percent or 2 harder to handle than the 165, which is nothing.

My whole thought process was that if I was going to go to a 154 I would stay with 3". No reason to give up all the benefits of the T3 I am currently running. Zollinger currently doesn't have a relocation kit that works with the 154", only the G4 165. Being a wheelie monster is the only thing that scares me and it might not even be an issue but it is a perceived issue.
 

b-litt

Well-known member
Premium Member
Aug 21, 2012
464
531
93
McCall, ID
m.youtube.com
I've been on a 154 all season. I'm up to around 1,500 miles and absolutely love it! Well it's down right now, so I decided to take out the shop 165 demo. The conditions were possibly the deepest of the year. Three to four feet of blower pow on a solid base. The 165 traction was impressive. It pulls and pulls. You don't have to be nearly as quick on the throttle or as quick with body movement to get the sled to do what you need. On the 154 little body movements and english will make a huge difference in what you can get the sled to do. The 165 wasn't as easily effected. It defiantly felt bigger and longer because it is. I know some say you cant feel a difference but I could. The 165 climbed up steep and deep terrain with less effort for sure.

Personally I'd rather be on the 154. It has better track speed and just felt more agile in the tight trees. We ride very tight trees in our area and the 154 is better for me doing that. If I lived in the BC area where you have tons of open space and deep deep snow all the time I'd likely get the 165. When conditions are average to sub or in tight trees the maneuverability of the 154 is my choice. It's also what I'd pick for whips, re-entries, and popping pillows in general. I can whip it around in the air with the track rotating in such a small space.

The last thing I'll address is the suspension. The demo I took was what you get from doo out of the crate. I've been on full Raptor shocks with the t-motion locked out all season. I'm so used to it I really didn't think much of it. Well let me tell you...It's a huge difference! The stock suspension felt like a big wet noodle compared to mine. It was harder to control, was never stiff enough in the skid, and bottomed out too easy. Good suspension is expensive. I know some guys are over it and feel like you don't get what you pay for, but with my experience it's well worth the money. I would really have a tough time going back to what they give you from the factory.
 

Chadly

Forum Expert
Lifetime Membership
Aug 28, 2013
2,314
4,565
113
Snohomish, WA
Also on your 165?

Same set up on my 165. If you are into super steep stuff the 154 is definitely hard to hold the front down. My 165 is down so I rode my 154 in deep snow yesterday where we were making steep climbs that took several attempts to get up. I struggled all day trying to keep the front down. These picture explains it all. Remember nothing looks steep in a picture :face-icon-small-dis

IMAG0491.jpg IMAG0492.jpg
 

Chadly

Forum Expert
Lifetime Membership
Aug 28, 2013
2,314
4,565
113
Snohomish, WA
Also on your 165?


PS: SP boards kind of suck for super steep too. Not only do they have a little less traction but they don't turn up so you have something to stand on. Ultimately why I ended up off the sled...
 
0
Jan 24, 2013
14
2
3
46
This thread would be a lot more useful if you guys listed your lug height. :face-icon-small-coo 154 3" is going to act much different in most snow conditions then a 154 2.5"

Also I was of the understanding the zrp rear arm fits the 154. The rail braces are just for the 165?
 

b-litt

Well-known member
Premium Member
Aug 21, 2012
464
531
93
McCall, ID
m.youtube.com
The 154 is not a point and shoot sled, and can't be ridden like one. I have no problem keeping the front end down on mine with 3" lugs. It took me a while to figure it out. I'm on and off the brake and throttle more than my previous sled for sure.
 

Chadly

Forum Expert
Lifetime Membership
Aug 28, 2013
2,314
4,565
113
Snohomish, WA
I agree. It's not a great hill climbing sled. However, I was riding with 3 174's: 1 turbo, 1 872, and 1 stock. I was the first up on 3 out of 5 our big climbs. The great an amazing 1500PSI was on the turbo ????
 
P
Nov 28, 2007
1,795
761
113
Yukon Canada
If you can't keep up with a 154 you need to sign up for a riding clinic:face-icon-small-hap as stated above it will run with the big dogs all day but you have to ride it aggressive and hard. If you are more the mellow point and do it slow guy the 165 or 175 will be better for you. Thats why they make different models.
 

PaulAnd

Well-known member
Premium Member
Oct 17, 2010
2,186
586
113
Northern IL.
I agree. It's not a great hill climbing sled. However, I was riding with 3 174's: 1 turbo, 1 872, and 1 stock. I was the first up on 3 out of 5 our big climbs. The great an amazing 1500PSI was on the turbo



Its been kinda nice not having 1500 psi
And fred in the gen4 forum!

Hope they stay on their mighty 174 t3's!

J/K missing them over here!!
 

Old Scud-doo

Well-known member
Premium Member
Dec 28, 2007
995
507
93
Middle Montana
This thread would be a lot more useful if you guys listed your lug height. :face-icon-small-coo 154 3" is going to act much different in most snow conditions then a 154 2.5"

Also I was of the understanding the zrp rear arm fits the 154. The rail braces are just for the 165?

They told me it doesn't.
 
A

ak

Well-known member
Dec 7, 2007
2,776
723
113
Same set up on my 165. If you are into super steep stuff the 154 is definitely hard to hold the front down. My 165 is down so I rode my 154 in deep snow yesterday where we were making steep climbs that took several attempts to get up. I struggled all day trying to keep the front down. These picture explains it all. Remember nothing looks steep in a picture :face-icon-small-dis

If you don't mind sharing your thoughts, since you have ridden with Rasmussen and owned a few of his sleds. Why did you choose the Toms setup vs the RCS Rasmussen setup? What are the differences?
 

Old Scud-doo

Well-known member
Premium Member
Dec 28, 2007
995
507
93
Middle Montana
So lets add another ingredient to the pot to boil...anyone running a 165" x 2.5"? Everyone assumes the debate is 3" only but Ski-doo offers both in 2.5" and 3".
 
J
Oct 21, 2015
52
12
8
Minnesota
I asked that a few post's ago and I got...


"have put over 840 miles on mine now (850 x 2.5 x 165 in) did pull felt out drilled some holes in clutch cover , minimal belt dust thruout did throw 2nd belt on to breakin a few trips ago ,threw a ggb trail can on her a month ago, trying to keep her under 8000 rpms, hard to get her stuck, she kills it on hillclimbs, just towed friends dead 13 163 in pro back about 14 miles at least 10 miles uphills he is switching from Polaris and probably buying 850 maybe 165 3 inch but he loves my 850 also. in the meantime will be riding my spare loaner sled 12 xp 163 in"
 

Matte Murder

Well-known member
Lifetime Membership
Premium Member
May 4, 2011
3,579
2,259
113
I was riding with Chadly on the day he was talking about above. Deep day, about 3' on top of an ice layer with soft snow underneath that. The first hard climb we hit that day I watched Chadly on a few runs. There was a couple big bumps before it got really steep. His 154 was going near vertical on those bumps and he was having to chop the throttle. He's light enough that he could still accelerate uphill after coming fully out of the throttle but when it got really steep at the top he was having to get out of the throttle to keep from wheeling over backwards. All in, rider with gear I bet he's 120lbs less than 1500Psi.
 

Matte Murder

Well-known member
Lifetime Membership
Premium Member
May 4, 2011
3,579
2,259
113
I've got a 163Xm and 174xm. The biggest difference I see when riding the 174 is I can ride it a lot slower in the tight, technical steep stuff. Allows me a little more time to pick lines and make decisions. I'm running a KMOD rear set up on the 163 which really helps to keep the nose down too and a Toms on the 174. Both sleds are 872 Trygstad big bores. I'm definitely buying some talent with those mods.
 

b-litt

Well-known member
Premium Member
Aug 21, 2012
464
531
93
McCall, ID
m.youtube.com
I was riding with Chadly on the day he was talking about above. Deep day, about 3' on top of an ice layer with soft snow underneath that. The first hard climb we hit that day I watched Chadly on a few runs. There was a couple big bumps before it got really steep. His 154 was going near vertical on those bumps and he was having to chop the throttle. He's light enough that he could still accelerate uphill after coming fully out of the throttle but when it got really steep at the top he was having to get out of the throttle to keep from wheeling over backwards. All in, rider with gear I bet he's 120lbs less than 1500Psi.

Holly smokes! 1500psi must wear a lot of gear. :)

I agree that you can definitely slow down through the trees on the longer tracks. In my experience you actually have to slow down through tight trees. I struggle throwing a 165 or bigger sled around easily. I'm used to having momentum and speed being the difference in making a line or not. It's important on any sled, but the long track is much more forgiving in that aspect. (I call anything over a 154 a long track now)
 
E
Jul 23, 2008
36
22
8
It might be beating a dead horse but I'm looking at selling my 17 850 165x3 and looking at a freeride 154. I weigh about 185 ready to ride and feel the 165 has taken some fun out of jumping and being nimble. Don't get me wrong i know it's not designed for that, I just thought I was ready to ride pow and be happy but it's more fun in the air. I have a 17 154 freeride that is my go to 75% of the time. If it would dump snow in CO that might change. I like the g4 chassis, motor rips down low. So I was thinking a 154 the question is 2.5 or 3". 2.5 a little cheaper, better durability, but will it preform equal on a deep day by not trenching and more track speed? Addition of a turbo down the road would be of interest.
 
Premium Features