Snowest weighs g4 and poo

TJ427 · Apr 10, 2016

cattracks said:
The 165 x 16 wide track has 30 sq inches more track than the poo 174 15 wide track. Not sure you can get any closer for apples to apples.

Your math is correct but roughly 45% of the track length is typically in contact with the snow. Snowest compared actual track contact with the ground and there was mild variation. Considering length, the Poo will have more track length in the snow and doing the math places them less than 5 square centimeters difference.

Either way, as stated the fun meter should be outstanding with both! Best option is get one of each...

sledjunky_86 · Apr 10, 2016

Bocephus said:
so lets compare apples to apples instead of snowest's stupid azzed 165 vs 174.....

polaris lists their 174x3 as 442# dry. they list the 163x3 as 426# dry. that is an 18# difference.

apples to apples.....the doo ready to ride is 19# heavier

polaris 163x3 = 517 (-13 pounds for a 2.6 track with belt drive)
skidoo 165x3 = 536 (i was not able to find weight specs for the difference between a 3'' and 2.5'')

So we're talking numbers and you can't even do the math right? 442-426 = 16lb difference and I'll take 19lbs heavier for 15 more horsepower. Also seems irrelevant to argue this when rider weight has more affect on a sled than its own weight especially when my new 850 is equally balanced side to side. Once they're boosted none of this matters anyways.

Bocephus · Apr 10, 2016

sledjunky_86 said:
So we're talking numbers and you can't even do the math right? 442-426 = 16lb difference and I'll take 19lbs heavier for 15 more horsepower. Also seems irrelevant to argue this when rider weight has more affect on a sled than its own weight especially when my new 850 is equally balanced side to side. Once they're boosted none of this matters anyways.

hah.....see what happens when i do math in my head?

kanedog · Apr 10, 2016

cattracks said:
The 165 x 16 wide track has 30 sq inches more track than the poo 174 15 wide track. Not sure you can get any closer for apples to apples.

That's a dumb statement.
You can get closer by comparing a 174 to a 174. The track length makes it longer and it's gonna sit farther back enabling better traction and climbing ability. That stupid doo is come over backwards on you.
Maybe just hang it from a tree and call it a winner.

Sulley · Apr 10, 2016

cattracks said:
I ordered a 850 165 track Skidoo to climb.... not pop wheelies. They better figure a way out for the suspension to stay in the snow on big climbs!!! May be some one has tightened the front limiter strap and it has helped? Anyone get a chance to try that?

softening the front shock and shortening the limiter strap on any sled will help keep the nose planted, basic sled suspension........

T3summit · Apr 10, 2016

Anyone watch the YouTube video of the 850 racing a slightly modded axys up hill race nuff said.

Snowmow · Apr 10, 2016

T3summit said:
Anyone watch the YouTube video of the 850 racing a slightly modded axys up hill race nuff said.

Lol. Here we go!!

Post that video up sir.

T3summit · Apr 10, 2016

850 summit X vs 800 axys with silencer. YouTube it.

Snowmow · Apr 10, 2016

T3summit said:
850 summit X vs 800 axys with silencer. YouTube it.

Already a thread on here with the vid.

Search it.

T3summit · Apr 10, 2016

Good then you've seen it.

Snowmow · Apr 10, 2016

T3summit said:
Good then you've seen it.

Yeap!

edgey · Apr 11, 2016

In this thread all you doo boys want to compare the 174 poo to the 165 doo now when snowest does you cry. Can't have it both ways!!!

http://www.snowest.com/forum/showthread.php?t=411110

snengineer · Apr 11, 2016

Until I see video evidence its all fairytails, Norona and SW are pumping propaganda until I see it with my own eyes, Nope I dont have faith in your word. I have seen one comparison video, would be nice to see more. :clock:

Scott · Apr 11, 2016

Is the Doo 165 a 16 wide?
the 174 Polaris is a 15 wide.

What's the difference in track surface area?
165x16=2640
174x15=2610

Looks like the Doo has MORE surface area...but not by much.

It's not always the length that counts...it's surface area that matters. And it's the way you use it that matters. Isn't that what some of you use for an excuse in other ares of your life also?

polaris dude · Apr 11, 2016

cattracks said:
The 165 x 16 wide track has 30 sq inches more track than the poo 174 15 wide track. Not sure you can get any closer for apples to apples.

From my 1st post in this thread I think you can tell I am not very certain snowest was unbiased in their assessment. But I heard somewhere that based on the polaris skid setup that they have greater surface area on the ground despite the 16 inch vs 15 inch width(on comparable lengths meaning the 163 against a 165). Can anyone confirm if that is still a thing or not?

T3summit · Apr 11, 2016

There's a reason there comparing poo 174 against doo 165. Simple answer that's poos best mountain sled against doos best mountain sled.

Snowmow · Apr 11, 2016

Scott said:
Is the Doo 165 a 16 wide?
the 174 Polaris is a 15 wide.

What's the difference in track surface area?
165x16=2640
174x15=2610

Looks like the Doo has MORE surface area...but not by much.

It's not always the length that counts...it's surface area that matters. And it's the way you use it that matters. Isn't that what some of you use for an excuse in other ares of your life also?

What's the surface are of an "object" 3/4" wide by 3" long?

mountaincat 800 · Apr 11, 2016

Snowmow said:
What's the surface are of an "object" 3/4" wide by 3" long?

Your wife's box.

kanedog · Apr 11, 2016

edgey said:
In this thread all you doo boys want to compare the 174 poo to the 165 doo now when snowest does you cry. Can't have it both ways!!!

http://www.snowest.com/forum/showthread.php?t=411110

Exactly. Doolaiders are a bunch of bedwetting posers. They cry the loudest. Go ahead. Compare a 174 poo to that pos 850 doo in the fresh. Then sit back and listen to the fairy doolaiders kick and scream and wave their arms that it's not a fair comparison. The new 850 is uncontrollable pig. It's gonna trench to China. Just u wait and see doolaiders. That is my belief.

Jason4 · Apr 11, 2016

kanedog said:
That's a dumb statement.
You can get closer by comparing a 174 to a 174. The track length makes it longer and it's gonna sit farther back enabling better traction and climbing ability. That stupid doo is come over backwards on you.
Maybe just hang it from a tree and call it a winner.

Check out the overall length of the Summit 850 165 (140") and the Summit 174 (140.9"). The extra track length doesn't change much in terms of it "sitting further back". I'd say it's a pretty fair comparison.

Edit:
I just checked the Polaris, it sits at 142" overall.

Snowest weighs g4 and poo

Well-known member

Active member

Well-known member

Undefeated mountain clutching champ of the world.

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Scott Stiegler

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Undefeated mountain clutching champ of the world.

Similar threads