Choosing Track Length

vortex64 · Oct 4, 2011

Okay here is the dilemma, we are going to add another sled in the next couple of weeks and we can’t decide which way to go, we would like some input on track length from riders who have been down this road. currently we have a 2010 XP-154 and a older cat with a 144, we are looking at adding a 163 or 174, 80% of our riding is in the mountains on the west coast, lots of tree riding and narrow trails with snow conditions anywhere from wet and heavy to deep powder. Just wondering what it’s like to handle these longer tracks in the hills, especially the 174. Any advice would be greatly appreciated.
Thank You :face-icon-small-hap

winter brew · Oct 4, 2011

Have spent time on everything from 154 to 174 and we typically have all these lengths in our riding group every weekend.
The only downfall of a 174 is it takes away a little of the fun-factor. It's a heavy track so it makes the sled a little lazier (if that makes sense). We ride alot of thick trees and heavy snow as well....the 174 is the king in these conditions IMO. Very forgiving and allows you to go farther, especially when obstacles don't allow getting a run at things or getting your speed up. It's tough for a 163 to even follow a 174's track in deep conditions. Throw in a 3" paddle compared to the more common 2.5 and it takes it to yet another level. :face-icon-small-win

Tim Healy · Oct 4, 2011

love my 174" but somedays I would like to have a 154 just for track speed

Christina Nadeau · Oct 4, 2011

track

Depends on how much of a challenge you want. We ride the mountains of Montana and a 174 would be fun, but also it can take the fun out of a area because that size track makes it too easy. I like the 154 because you have to work a little bit to get to the tough places. My guess would be to meet in the middle with the 163.

Tim Healy · Oct 4, 2011

whitefish area lol

P Money · Oct 4, 2011

Love my 154, weigh around 165 and I don't think I would want any bigger personally. I can throw it around and with a 16" hardly eve get it stuck... real bad anyways. Still feels big but learn how to make it nimble, I think if I were personally on anything longer it would be overkill, that's what she said, but that's just me. Dont get me wrong a 163 or 174 would be awesome to get anywhere but as small as I am, I love the 154, but its also the biggest I've ridden... my. 02
P

summit154 · Oct 5, 2011

I agree! I love my 154" and would have a hard time going any bigger. If you are going bigger I would probably stop at a 163". Unless you ABSOLUTELY need the extra track for the flotation I just don't feel its worth it. Better have some mods too with the 174" if you want to keep that baby spinning!

pfi572 · Oct 5, 2011

winter brew said:
Have spent time on everything from 154 to 174 and we typically have all these lengths in our riding group every weekend.
The only downfall of a 174 is it takes away a little of the fun-factor. It's a heavy track so it makes the sled a little lazier (if that makes sense). We ride alot of thick trees and heavy snow as well....the 174 is the king in these conditions IMO. Very forgiving and allows you to go farther, especially when obstacles don't allow getting a run at things or getting your speed up. It's tough for a 163 to even follow a 174's track in deep conditions. Throw in a 3" paddle compared to the more common 2.5 and it takes it to yet another level. :face-icon-small-win

Same as Winter has stated and love the 174 but its like RV'S or boats you need two or three to cover all conditions.:face-icon-small-win

i'llDooit · Oct 5, 2011

pfi572 said:
Same as Winter has stated and love the 174 but its like RV'S or boats you need two or three to cover all conditions.:face-icon-small-win

154x3x16 may prove to be the happy meduim,:light:

09 Blue Ski-Doo · Oct 5, 2011

174!!!

i'llDooit said:
154x3x16 may prove to be the happy meduim,:light:

Once you go big, you'll never go back!

kodpkd · Oct 5, 2011

follow

The most important thing is who you are trying to follow. If you are the guy on the 154,,, and everybody else is on an older sled or the 146,,,, you are the king. If you are trying to follow guys that are better riders than you,,, with 163's,, you are the shmow! I try my best to follow a bunch of guys that are better riders, on their 163's... UGH! I am going to a 174. You can go slower, and maybe not get stuck so much.

vortex64 · Oct 5, 2011

Thanks for the replies, still trying to decide but I think PFI172 is right; you need a couple of sleds to cover all snow conditions. I am fortunate that I already have a 154 and I am adding the second sled so my son has a better chance at keeping up with me. The main reason I was looking at the longer tracks is because we are both over 6 feet tall and weigh 210 pounds before our gear goes on. we are at a disadvantage to the smaller guys before we start. The 174 big bore is awful tempting :face-icon-small-hap:face-icon-small-hap

Yella Belly · Oct 8, 2011

We also have everything from 136 to 163 in our group, and I'm on a 163. I'm thinking of dropping down to the 154 next season for the track speed. Unless I can get the clutching figured out better for this year. I've been on the long track since the 06 (159) and have never had any issues with making turns, or getting around in the trees.
Go long... you will like it.

Search

Choosing Track Length

vortex64

Free Member

winter brew

Premium Member

Tim Healy

Free Member

Christina Nadeau

Free Member

Tim Healy

Free Member

P Money

Well-known member

summit154

Free Member

pfi572

Well-known member

i'llDooit

Well-known member

09 Blue Ski-Doo

Member

kodpkd

Well-known member

vortex64

Free Member

Yella Belly

Well-known member

Similar threads