3 inch Track cut down to 2 3/4 inch

3" track cut down to 2.75"

Your friend will have to be careful. If he is using the stock 8 tooth drivers, he will have .5" less bulkhead clearance than stock. If he uses 7 tooth 3" drivers he will have .2" less clearance. Anti-ratchet teeth are about .75" long. There will be times when the track will hit the bulkhead and the it will be firmly engaged with the anti-ratchet teeth. Depending on how hard the track hits something stationary, the chain might break or the drivers will spin out. At rest you should have at least .5" clearance between the paddle tips and the closest stationary thing in the bulkhead. You can help this out somewhat by running your track tighter, than you normally would.

xp mountainrider said:

Guys just wondering if any one have done this besides my buddy who is telling me that I will be in trouble this year.......lol because he just put a track on his 163 xp, It was a new 3 inch track and he cut it down to clear with out changing the chain case and it is now roughly just over 2 3/4 and clears fine.His Sled is a 08 XP and it did run great last year with the 2 1/2.

I will be running a 2010 xp, I am putting on the new 2 1/2 chalengerlite 163 16 inch before it hits the snow, I no that I can go with the new 3 inch, and the Advid chaincase aswell and have nothing to worry about, But I am just curious on how his will work.

Your thoughts on this one guys??

Thanks

Click to expand...

I have heard of guys doing this on turbo applications...essentially getting a stiffer lug...I would be a little concerned on a NA sled that isnt running 80 mph track speeds....it may want to trench. ie..the challenger lite...stiff lugs and trenches horribly on a NA sled.. track works great on a turboed sled.

I would definitely recommend running the 163 challenger extreme or powdermax, as the challenger lite trenches terribly bad

nuttyn01 said:

I have heard of guys doing this on turbo applications...essentially getting a stiffer lug...I would be a little concerned on a NA sled that isnt running 80 mph track speeds....it may want to trench. ie..the challenger lite...stiff lugs and trenches horribly on a NA sled.. track works great on a turboed sled.

Click to expand...

This would be my opinion as well. If you are running big hp on packed snow it may work , if you are in pow .... bring a shovel.

ps... what is a new 2 1/2 challenger lite you speak of?

There is a NEW extreme on camos website. Its a 163 x 16 x 2.5 , 2.86 pitch SINGLE ply. The lugs are tapered in so it clears ice , rivets etc. Over all paddle width is around 15 1/4. Oddly enuff according to the webite its 6 lbs heavier than the 3 in pitch 2.5 x 16 x 162.

They are also making a copy of the 06 rev track that everyone says works so well. Its now in a 2.86 pitch to fit the xp drivers , Its a 2.3 in lug. Too many freekin decisions!!!!!

Insaneboltrounder/sjohns said:

There is a NEW extreme on camos website. Its a 163 x 16 x 2.5 , 2.86 pitch SINGLE ply. The lugs are tapered in so it clears ice , rivets etc. Over all paddle width is around 15 1/4. Oddly enuff according to the webite its 6 lbs heavier than the 3 in pitch 2.5 x 16 x 162.

They are also making a copy of the 06 rev track that everyone says works so well. Its now in a 2.86 pitch to fit the xp drivers , Its a 2.3 in lug. Too many freekin decisions!!!!!

Click to expand...

The 2006 track is a 16/2.25 2.52" pitch camo...the new single plys are the same just in 2.86 pitch...The "trick" is a going BACK to 2.52" pitch...BJ

Ive been trying to find ppl who have done that on the xp. Hve you talked to anyone BJ? Im going to try a new track this year but only want to do it once. Is there anyone making the 252 drivers at a good price yet? sj

BIG JOHN said:

[/B]

The 2006 track is a 16/2.25 2.52" pitch camo...the new single plys are the same just in 2.86 pitch...The "trick" is a going BACK to 2.52" pitch...BJ

Click to expand...

BJ,
How is this beneficial?

turbo800 said:

BJ,
How is this beneficial?

Click to expand...

Camoplast claims that the closer the pitch is the more track speed you get. i.e. you will get more track speed with a 2.52 pitch than a 2.86 or a 3.00. At least that is what I read in another post on here a while back.

XP mntnrdr I agree with everything that was said.
tunnel clearence, well i ran the 2.86 pitch 2.5 on the stock drivers it did ratchet on occasion the clearence worked for the season so i figured it was OK. 7 tooth avid robbies drivers are .4 less in radius than the stock so i figured 2.9 would give the same paddle clearence. the teeth as robie pointed out are .75" the stock teeth are .55" that worried me I toyed with cutting down the teeth and rounding corners for the added cleaence in case of ratcheting as well as for the install as track has to be riding on teeth til driveshaft slid sideways. but figured i'd run the track tighter with the taller teeth to prevent ratcheting. and tough out the install a little.
as far as the trenching goes i cut the V notches deeper after cutting. Original notches were .38 mine roughly .4 got a little overzealous with the tin snips,it won't trench but i do carry 2 shovels 1 on my back 1 on my sled. I am worried that it'll be an ice polisher on crappy trails to the alpine.
It is going to be geared down and there is definatly going to be more return force from the track. but at 7000 feet it's only going to have 120 horse, engineerred for 150, so i hope it evens out and doesn't snap the chain.maybe i'll pick up a spare chain and pack it for the season
Extended chaincase is the way to go but it doubles the cost and i wouldn't want to screw up the alignment from chain side to brake side, that would be bad.
Anyway you can install the 2.5 and give me some edge. I'm good with that.

this is already pretty long winded but the other stuff about the 2.52 pitch theres a couple ways to look at things.
Bigger paddles with bigger spacing would have to push more snow pushing sled forward instead of spinning/trenching.
tighter spacing each paddle pushing less easier to spin/ trench. I know we want to say all the paddles combined would push together, and not spin. higher speed doesn't mean drive force is getting to the ground. could be less rolling resistence could be less traction.
snowcats don't have very high track speed. i want a lightweight 65mph snowcat that i can back off in the tight spots and pin again without digging.
i want to maintain 30mph climbing with 40mph track speed instead of 30mph climbing with 50mph track speed.
and i'd rather not spend anymore than i have to.
I don't know what works best but we can't all do the same things, where's the fun in that.
JMO we all have our own

I have ridden with a friend who has the 163x3" with the Avid chain case. It works very well to say the least. No hassle, just install and go. The 3' track will pull so much more snow there is no comparison on the mountain. I would suggest that as a tested and no hassle way to go, and have all the benefits of a 3' track. Your buddy will be watching the back of your helmet all day! ha!
Good luck!

install and go = 30 hours by a shop that know whats its doing from what i hear.

No. Its not that bad. There are several of them in our group. All done without much hassle, then trouble free. Everything works perfect. Just like a stock-er but a 3' paddle. The bar has been raised for the steep and deep. That's for sure! They work awesome.

174 3"

Insaneboltrounder/sjohns said:

install and go = 30 hours by a shop that know whats its doing from what i hear.

Click to expand...

Avid products will install their Xp chaincase in your sled for $1,000 labor.

Decent....the drive there and back is killer

i would do the extended chaincase and 3" if money was no object.
i don't have enough for it all and what i do have i can only spend once.

Do the chaincase and 3" xp mntnrdr. you got more cash than me for sure.

Where is Motts?