S
sounds like you already have a 3 incher axys.......MH.
3" terrain dominator?
- Thread starter sledneck_03
- Start date
Can you expound on that in bold? Never ridden a 3"...
S
ooooo so the 2.6 may be like a "clipped" 3"..... so could look like the 2.6 with some 5.1 nubs added. cool, cool.....
Just bought 2 new 3 inch tracks, 162x3 powerclaw weights 57.2 lbs and a new 162x3x16 T3 track and it weights 60.4, don't know what the 5.1 is but
would expect the new poo 2.6 to be close to the 3 PC as far as weight.
Also saw the RTR weight of the 2015 Poo and Doo, 163 Poo 516 RTR
T3 163 537 RTR.
DTR dyno on a broke in 2015 Etec is 164.2 @ 8000 rpm, trq 108.2 @ 7900
rpm. 2015 800 axys with a Polaris supplied ECU with break in removed also done at DTR 160.4 @ 8400, trq 101.6 @ 8100
Poo would have a ever so slight power to weight advantage if they can prove
there real world HP #s
would expect the new poo 2.6 to be close to the 3 PC as far as weight.
Also saw the RTR weight of the 2015 Poo and Doo, 163 Poo 516 RTR
T3 163 537 RTR.
DTR dyno on a broke in 2015 Etec is 164.2 @ 8000 rpm, trq 108.2 @ 7900
rpm. 2015 800 axys with a Polaris supplied ECU with break in removed also done at DTR 160.4 @ 8400, trq 101.6 @ 8100
Poo would have a ever so slight power to weight advantage if they can prove
there real world HP #s
The x3 takes some of the playfulness out of the sled. I have seen a huge difference to not such a difference depending on snow conditions. x3 runs 20 degrees hotter down the trail on a pro. I think the 2.6 will be a better all around track. On my wife's t3 174, when you lay it over and can on it, you can feel the track try to upright it and just go. Not a big deal. You can over power it. One thing with it that makes it easier to work out is when you are on a steep sidehill and need to turn it uphill around a tree and line out for an opening, you just gas it and the track kind of works it out for you. With some sleds it can be hard to get out of the turn when on the gas. Almost need to let out for a split second to roll the weight to the outside but with shorter sleds you don't always have that luxury. The t3 just straightens itself out. The x3 is like almost everything else on here, short bars or high bars. It is a preference thing. Mine will have a 2.6.
If they offer the 2.6 track in different lengths 155,163 and maybe, hopefully a 174 I don't think they will offer a 3 inch as well. I have a 174x3 under My Boost-it Pro and as much as it works great in the steep and deep, it does come with the cooling issues. Also something to consider. Look at Boost-it (NM) Pros and Axys climbing every chute and in deep snow at Revy, all done with 174 x 2.5 not 3 inch tracks. If PI offers a 174 2.6 it will be IMO a excellent starting point for the Turbo or NA guys.
S
Sorry. Fat fingers. Didn't mean to give you neg rep. I agree %100
It's all relative to what the chassis will bear as well. Put a 2.6 under an edge chassis and I bet it sucks to ride vs a 2".
There is a T3 163 that someone weighed at 533.6 wet but it had a diamond s can, carbon fiber hood, and tki belt drive. Those 3 are probably 30 pounds off but they added some bracing so I'm not buying 21 pounds different. DTR also dynoed a cat and the doo same day and the cat was 158 and the doo was 155 so the pro motor will be there. I also thought they claimed the 2.6 was 2 pounds lighter than the 5.1. Not sure what it weighs. If the new Pro gets up on the snow twice as fast as the pro like everyone claims, doo and cat are in trouble. They won't need the 3 inch.
What are all the cons tot the 3", like everyone else ive been going crazy waiting for Monday to roll around and have had nothing better to do then waste my time trying to speak my mind on things that dont matter since Poo already knows what they are doing and we wont know anything till the 2nd which everyone knows but keeps trying to read the future.... ANYWAYS what are the cons to the 3" I honestly feel like theres a fair amount of cons to it but ive never actually used one so I cant speak on if its overall worth it or not?
S
cons.flying down trails at 70mph.and icey hills
H
163x2.6 will be the boondocking weapon of choice! Here on the NorthEast mountains in the tight trees , guys rocking the 174T3 are strugglin with the agility to ride in those tight lines while they climb absolutely anything without any run-in speed wich is , IMO, the only good thing about a X3 in the woods. For everything else the 5.1 stocker does it pretty much all.
2.6 is the golden ticket
2.6 is the golden ticket
S
looks like even steven power to weight next winter.poo just needs a 3 inch.
As far as weight, if you look at what was taken off and what was put back on the T3 it was pretty much a wash, The one posted on snowest, I believe American snowmobiler is where I saw the 2015 RTR weight in there part 1 mountain segment test. Also the Axys tested at DTR was a ECU from Polaris so will it survive in the real world, the 2015 production axys came in at 145-146 none broke in as the doo was 10 higher non broke in! I don't think cat or doo will be in trouble against the new axys as far as getting up on the snow, the tuner/veteran will make changes in the chassis to accomplish the same end result. Funny how just a few years back the goal was to lower center of gravity, now poo decides to raise center of gravity, would make one wonder why, could be that being the lightest doesn't necessarily make them feel the lightest when out on the snow.
It totally depends on the track.
The old style CE 3" is stiff and heavy
X3 is lighter but the paddles are too stiff in my opinion
3" Powerclaw is lighter than X3 and the reviews are better
3" from doo is also lighter (relatively since it's a 16 wide) than the X3
A 3" that's lighter, and more flexy kinda like the 5.1 is going to kill anything in powder. But I imagine it would suck royally in the harder snow.
The X3 likes to trench from a stand still but does get up on the snow within a reasonable amount of time, but not as quick as the 5.1. Once you're moving, the X3 beats the 5.1 as far as propelling the sled forward. When maneuvering in the trees the 5.1 seems to slide a bit more if you will. When changing direction with the X3, it hooks and whips you that direction, often causing a situation where you have turned more than you wanted. It's hard to control basically. That added traction and heavier weight make the sled heavier to ride as well. It needs more input to keep the sled going the direction you want to go. It seems the 5.1 just flat out works with the dynamics of the sled better allowing less rider input and a lighter feeling ride. The X3 will go farther, accelerate harder, and turn sharper but it's a significant amount of added input to make the sled do these things.
I want to try a 3" powerclaw or a 3" based off the new 2.6 axys track. I'm pretty certain they would take that effort out since they're lighter and more flexible.... but they might suck too much in set up snow to be worth it. the X3 is still manageable in setup snow because it's stiff enough.
How much do you think the trenching of the doo from stopped has to do with the approach angle of the tracK? I was looking at profile views of the doo vs the axys and the approach angle of the doo is so abrupt, it seems that it would inherently want to trench no matter what track is on it.
http://www.snowest.com/Images/Articles/3741/800 PRO_RMK 155_Pr.jpg_600.jpg
http://www.snowest.com/Images/gallery/1893_1600.jpg
http://www.snowest.com/Images/Articles/3741/800 PRO_RMK 155_Pr.jpg_600.jpg
http://www.snowest.com/Images/gallery/1893_1600.jpg
Similar threads
