3.2 track on an xm

T

TreeThrasher

Free Member

Aug 8, 2011

711

458

63

• Feb 13, 2017

• #1

Has anyone run a 3.2 track on a skidoo? How does it work in the powder? What about when the snow sets up? Any negatives? Positives?

I currently have the 280 track on...it's got to go. Looking for the next option

Thanks!

 

F

FEZ

Free Member

Nov 26, 2007

584

153

43

Minnesota

• Feb 13, 2017

• #2

The 3.2 is amazing in powder! The deeper the better.


Now on the flip side, it is terrible in set up snow.




SW user Hobbes ran a 174 3.2 on his SHR880.


This year he is running a turbo 850 with the conquerer.


Maybe the new Doo 3.5 pitch 3"? I like it on the 850.

 

Last edited: Feb 13, 2017

Goinboardin

Well-known member

Premium Member

Nov 15, 2009

1,409

820

113

Laramie, WY

• Feb 13, 2017

• #3

Would a 3.2" fit on a non-T3 sled? I'm running T3 drivers & Cat 3" track with very little clearance over the drivers (non-T3 sled, the shorter chaincase). By very little clearance I mean I can't fit one finger between the cooler & paddle. The Cat track is a monster though, totally transformed my sled.

 

T

TreeThrasher

Free Member

Aug 8, 2011

711

458

63

• Feb 14, 2017

• #4

FEZ said:

The 3.2 is amazing in powder! The deeper the better.


Now on the flip side, it is terrible in set up snow.




SW user Hobbes ran a 174 3.2 on his SHR880.


This year he is running a turbo 850 with the conquerer.


Maybe the new Doo 3.5 pitch 3"? I like it on the 850.

Click to expand...

I need a 174 or I would already have the new doo track off the 850!! It's a sweet track in our conditions

I have the 280 and it trenches to china I feel like...even with 400 miles on it.

So how bad is the 3.2 in setup snow? Like it handles bad or it won't get traction?

Thanks!

 

F

FEZ

Free Member

Nov 26, 2007

584

153

43

Minnesota

• Feb 14, 2017

• #5

Will not grab anything. The paddles fold over. it is a definite love/hate relationship.

 

T

TreeThrasher

Free Member

Aug 8, 2011

711

458

63

• Feb 14, 2017

• #6

Dang...at what point in snow condition does the 3.2 quit working? Like how dense can the snow be before its junk?

How about the camo x3? Does it work in varying conditions?

Thanks!

 

F

FEZ

Free Member

Nov 26, 2007

584

153

43

Minnesota

• Feb 15, 2017

• #7

You would have to PING Hobbes if u want specifics.





The X3 is a very good track. The X3 will have a wider range of performance. Not necessarily excelling in either extreme of snow, but perform admirably in most conditions. The only drawback is they are a bit heavy by todays standards, but if memory serves they are about the same weight as the Doo T-3 tracks.

 

T

TreeThrasher

Free Member

Aug 8, 2011

711

458

63

• Feb 17, 2017

• #8

I'm told the 3.2 is just an x3 with tips?

So if I ran the 3.2 and it sucked, I could cut it and have an x3?

And maybe go back to the 280 after the snow sets up?

What do you guys think?

 

M

Matte Murder

Well-known member

Lifetime Membership

Premium Member

May 4, 2011

3,579

2,259

113

• Feb 19, 2017

• #9

I'm running an X3 174" on my Cat. It's the best all around track I've ever ran. Works great in new bottomless WA snow or our set up cement.

 

T

TreeThrasher

Free Member

Aug 8, 2011

711

458

63

• Feb 19, 2017

• #10

Thanks Matte!

 

S

sledhead9825

Well-known member

Lifetime Membership

Nov 4, 2013

1,195

416

83

• Feb 20, 2017

• #11

Matte Murder said:

I'm running an X3 174" on my Cat. It's the best all around track I've ever ran. Works great in new bottomless WA snow or our set up cement.

Click to expand...

Have it on My T Axys and had it on my T Pro, both 174. I love the X3. The 280 not so much

 

Nytroty

Well-known member

Lifetime Membership

Nov 26, 2007

812

204

43

Chaska, MN

• Feb 21, 2017

• #12

What length 3.2 you looking for? I have the 3.2 174 off Hobbes sled.

 

F

FEZ

Free Member

Nov 26, 2007

584

153

43

Minnesota

• Feb 21, 2017

• #13

TreeThrasher said:

I'm told the 3.2 is just an x3 with tips?

So if I ran the 3.2 and it sucked, I could cut it and have an x3?

And maybe go back to the 280 after the snow sets up?

What do you guys think?

Click to expand...

The 3.2 is not the same as the X3, but your idea has merit. The 3.2 is MUCH softer than the X3. . Maybe cut the fingers off? That would help move in the direction u want to go.

 

T

TreeThrasher

Free Member

Aug 8, 2011

711

458

63

• Feb 26, 2017

• #14

Dang I didn't see the post above about a 174 3.2 for sale...

Bought on last week and stuck it on the sled. In the powder or basically anything other than hard pack, it is so much better than the 280 it's not even funny.

Hard pack she lights up a bit

Time will tell but as of right now I'm calling total BS on the claims of the 280 track lifting. It trenches, 3.2 lifts up on top and takes off. 3.2 will trench and grind when it gets gnarly going, but then when the 280 would trench and trench and stick you, the 3.2 gets up on top and takes off.

As far as handling, it's a little difference. 2.8 is better carving side to side coming down hill. Any time you are on the gas though the 3.2 is better simply because its not dug down into any given snow as deep.

My opinion and it could change with time. I think I'll put the 280 back on for may and June.

 

C

CBX

Well-known member

Jan 21, 2008

492

187

43

• Feb 28, 2017

• #15

Does the 3.2 fit with just T3 drivers on an XM? Or does it take a longer chain case to work?

 

Goinboardin

Well-known member

Premium Member

Nov 15, 2009

1,409

820

113

Laramie, WY

• Mar 2, 2017

• #16

CBX said:

Does the 3.2 fit with just T3 drivers on an XM? Or does it take a longer chain case to work?

Click to expand...

This is by no means definitive, but I have a Cat 3" on my 13' SP using T3 drivers, there is not a lot of space. 3.2" might go in? I can measure clearance on mine. At the very most I'd guess there's 0.25" clearance. Maybe with Avid 7t 3.0" pitch drivers the 3.2 paddle would fit, I've been told the Avids are a little smaller diameter than the T3 drivers.