M10 vs Timbersled Comparison (w/pics)

modsledr · Mar 25, 2008

Happen to have an M10 and Timbersled in my shop, and couldn't help but notice the similarities.

Here are a couple of pics. They are different sizes, so I lined up the mount bolt holes for the front and rear pics.

This isn't to bash either one, just a comparison.

Enjoy,
modsledr

mattymac · Mar 25, 2008

interesting?!?!?!

R_8_N · Mar 25, 2008

there are about the same setup but the M10 has about 100% more adjustability. Both great skids.

modsledr · Mar 25, 2008

R_8_N said:
there are about the same setup but the M10 has about 100% more adjustability. Both great skids.

I dont have much experience with the M10...where is the adjustability? Looking at the 2 side by side, it appears the adjustability in the STOCK setup would be with mounting position...unless I'm missing something??

modsledr

mattymac · Mar 25, 2008

modsledr said:
I dont have much experience with the M10...where is the adjustability? Looking at the 2 side by side, it appears the adjustability in the STOCK setup would be with mounting position...unless I'm missing something??

modsledr

After owning a built up M10 I wouldnt have one even if it was given to me! ZERO TRANSFER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Everyone says that the mounting possision makes or breaks it... well Mike Vanamburg, Tison, CMX, ZBros must all be wrong then cause all their measurements were the same and the skid I had wouldnt pick the ski's up unless there was an arial winch hooked to the front bumber! even climbing there was so little traction it was scary! so bad it made a 200 hp sled a complete joke!!!!! but they do ride nice! ExpertX is the best ive seen IMO.

ttabs · Mar 25, 2008

anyone have expierence with the Timberthing on a T'd Nytro? That's the direction I'm headed.

modsledr · Mar 25, 2008

ttabs said:
anyone have expierence with the Timberthing on a T'd Nytro? That's the direction I'm headed.

I'm running the one in the pic with an MPI S/C, Stage II running 12-14lbs. Works great...still tweaking it, looking for a little less transfer to keep the skis down even more.

Randy Swenson (climbmax) is running one on his TNytro and thats good enough for me.

modsledr

Remmy · Mar 25, 2008

The M10 is awesome when you're running big horsepower.

R_8_N · Mar 26, 2008

you can change the angle of the rear shock on the go. it makes the rear softer or stiffer and changes transfer a little. the rear shock has 2 springs for adjustment.

Matty....where we ride in the steep hills ya dont want the front comin up. On my sled the front comes up about 1-2 feet and then it sticks there. no more big wheelie over backwards on ya. it does keep it down when in the trees which is a little less fun but when your wanting to keep the front down they both work well. I think the M10 has a better ride in the bumps.

XSKIER · Mar 26, 2008

I have an old M 10 in an old rmk chassis. I was apprehensive at first about the performance it would have due to all of the reading. Well I've finally go to log 200 miles on it, and I am fairly happy with the performance. I have the front preload cranked way up, straps all the way out. Rear arm spring set to medium, linkage in softest hole. It transfers good enough, handles the studders great, but does bottom on the hard hits.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BOaq_GYol_w

EricW · Mar 26, 2008

R_8_N said:
you can change the angle of the rear shock on the go. it makes the rear softer or stiffer and changes transfer a little. the rear shock has 2 springs for adjustment.

Matty....where we ride in the steep hills ya dont want the front comin up. On my sled the front comes up about 1-2 feet and then it sticks there. no more big wheelie over backwards on ya. it does keep it down when in the trees which is a little less fun but when your wanting to keep the front down they both work well. I think the M10 has a better ride in the bumps.

I agree with ^^^R8N^^^ so far. Only one ride on the M-10 so far, but at 340# I'm not calling skis in the air transfer, for me it's just plain scary. To be fair, I didn't tweak the Mt Tamer much to control the ski lift. I was just too fat for the Fox Floats and bottoming all the time. Alan at Timbersleds did give me some contact info for re-valving the floats for a fat guy but I didn't follow up. Alan is great to work with.

Not being a real skilled or athletic rider, My D8 held a pretty straight line with the skis 1-2 feet off the snow and even with my big azz I could gain on my son (220#) on a well modded D7 163 on the hill. I had my work done at Fastrax (see Polaris thread) and Curt measured my approach angle and said I got 2-3 degrees flatter the way it is mounted. Either that or the camo extreme or both resulted in my getting up on the snow like I never had.

I had the best pulls of my life with the M-10 and the kidney killin ride back was pretty nice too. My take is your need to have a lot of extra #'s or HP to justify the cost, but if you do it's worth it in my opinion. Fastrax did some other mods too, I couldn't be happier. EW

Heres the 2 side by side as well.

You can see a front track clearance difference here from the mounting and 7 tooth drivers on the m-10.

Timbersled

M-10

Approach angles

SLY · Mar 26, 2008

I have the Timbersled on my TNytro running 15-17lbs. The difference from stock is unbelievable. I have it set up so that I still have some ski lift as I am not into big climbs but I know if I want to make my sled stand up I have to make the effort. I have a lot more control and my skid doesn't bottom out all the time. I weigh about 230 and have 162 straight rails which also keep the front end down more than the curved rails.

rednytro · Mar 26, 2008

last year on a socked in day we were pulling a small hill for a hour or 2 pretty much every one had revs about 12 of them . one sled had an m10 in it and killed all the others even a sled with juice . it just let you carry so much more speed over the rough and hooked up much better .it also get up on top of the snow much better , i think set up is the key with the m10

mattymac · Mar 26, 2008

R_8_N said:
Matty....where we ride in the steep hills ya dont want the front comin up. On my sled the front comes up about 1-2 feet and then it sticks there. no more big wheelie over backwards on ya. it does keep it down when in the trees which is a little less fun but when your wanting to keep the front down they both work well. I think the M10 has a better ride in the bumps.

Yeah I understand that but ive seen skids that will do both, transfer and not transfer via a small adjustment. The m10 just wouldnt transfer no matter what I did, I was stuck with zero weight transfer and 100% track spin.

Reeb · Mar 26, 2008

mattymac said:
Yeah I understand that but ive seen skids that will do both, transfer and not transfer via a small adjustment. The m10 just wouldnt transfer no matter what I did, I was stuck with zero weight transfer and 100% track spin.

What shock did you have in the front? Coil? Did you take the aluminum spacer out from under the spring so it's not so stiff? That's numero uno for any M-10 in the mountains(minus the high HP sleds)

Sorry to hear it didn't work out for you, I had a M-10 for my sled before I decided to go with another skid instead. Strickly for weight purposes, but that was before floats and titanium arms.

boostedballz · Mar 26, 2008

Remember the Timbersled is less than half the price of the M 10. Both do an excellent job of keeping the nose down on 200+ HP sled. Durability goes hands down to the M 10. Weight is no contest Timbersled. I've found spendong tome on both you don't seem to sacrifice the trail and bondocking manners of your sled on the Timbersled near as bad as the m 10 just to make it controllable on a big pull. both are far and away better than stock.

LL

mattymac · Mar 26, 2008

Reeb said:
What shock did you have in the front? Coil? Did you take the aluminum spacer out from under the spring so it's not so stiff? That's numero uno for any M-10 in the mountains(minus the high HP sleds)

Sorry to hear it didn't work out for you, I had a M-10 for my sled before I decided to go with another skid instead. Strickly for weight purposes, but that was before floats and titanium arms.

it was the m10-w2, zeropros, dual rate front and tripple rate rear 144 200-210hp sled. I dont remember if there even was an aluminum spacer in the front. Basically it was in a vanamburg hillclimb chassis that was set up by them, the problem was the track tightening upon compression, most will say thats its the mounting geometry that makes them do that but like I said before I checked with VE, tison, CMX, zbroz, and they gave me all the EXACT same measurements. While talking to VE, Mike said thats why we dont do to many m10's!

Norway · Mar 27, 2008

M-10 geometry

mattymac said:
it was the m10-w2, zeropros, dual rate front and tripple rate rear 144 200-210hp sled. I dont remember if there even was an aluminum spacer in the front. Basically it was in a vanamburg hillclimb chassis that was set up by them, the problem was the track tightening upon compression, most will say thats its the mounting geometry that makes them do that but like I said before I checked with VE, tison, CMX, zbroz, and they gave me all the EXACT same measurements. While talking to VE, Mike said thats why we dont do to many m10's!

Sorr the M-10 did not work to good for you.

Said this before, at least on the old forum: It is the geometry of the WHOLE THING that makes a M-10 stretch the track. FAST only intended this to be a 121" suspension. Then you get no stretching.

To make it NOT stretch the track:
- move the lower front shock mounting about 1" back so the angle of the arm vs the rails is reduced.
- big rear idlers, at least 8"
- extrovedrts so the track can be loose
- last; get a polaris part #1541025-067 and relocate the carrier idlers further back in the tunnel.

I'm just about to hit the snow with mine, and althoug I will push past 200Hp I think I'll want some transfer. I'm gonna experiment with the coupler blocks and maybe cough up a quick-change system to be able to switch between a transfer and no-transfer position on my M-10.

RS

mattymac · Mar 27, 2008

RS, I had 8" wheels on it, along with 9t extros and the track was as loose as I could make it go, sit on the sled and the track tightened up like a banjo, I played with the live rear axle and got it better but it was so f'ed up from the get go I was still a mile off. Ended up putting in a cat 121 skid with 144 extensions and never looked back!

4Z · Mar 27, 2008

matty, you are not alone. Many guys suffered with a poor set up M10. In the begining, rail extensions screwed up the skid's geometery.

Then guys figured out how to minimize by mounting changes and shock length (among other tricks that I would get yelled at if I gave away).
Then along came CR Racing's billet rails, it fixed the short-rail with extensions problem, couple it with all the thing guys had figured out,......you get pure sexy in rear skid performance for stock or big power. I ran my 42lb billet M10 Ti skid with a good running 1200 w/c and with a 800 stock twin. Never ran the Alan's skid to compare to. But from guys that have them love 'em.

Fastrax did my M10 install as well.

Here is a properly set up 144 rail w/ext billet/Ti on a hillclimb race sled:

Here is a Fastrax/CR Racing billet/TI on a Poo

M10 vs Timbersled Comparison (w/pics)

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Modding mini's

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Similar threads