How long of a track would be too long

D

DieselTwitch

Well-known member

Dec 23, 2007

308

112

43

40

Gunnison, Colorado

• Dec 17, 2013

• #1

Im looking at upgrades for my bike and kits for next year. One of the things I want todo is a LT conversion. Im looking at different tracks to have trimmed. one I found is a 15x2.5x146" Challenger Extreme. Think 146" is too long? if not then Im going with the backcountry X2 15x2x137"

Along with this longer track I will be adding a turbo this summer

 

Last edited: Dec 17, 2013

Draxxus

Well-known member

Lifetime Membership

Feb 28, 2009

206

50

28

35

vancouver

• Dec 17, 2013

• #2

It would spin a 146 no problem with a turbo , but you are gona lose a lot of handling , the front end will push bad .


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

J

JimBridger

Well-known member

Mar 11, 2013

206

145

43

SE Idaho

• Dec 17, 2013

• #3

I heard when the backcountry x2 is trimmed down to 12.5" it is 4lbs lighter than the timbersled track. (120") Don't know how much difference would be between the 137's. Why do you want to go so much longer. the 120" pushes the ski enough as it is. I wouldn't go over a 137" imo.

 

Draxxus

Well-known member

Lifetime Membership

Feb 28, 2009

206

50

28

35

vancouver

• Dec 17, 2013

• #4

Your suspension geometry will probly start to be compromised at that length to


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

P

pinit

Well-known member

Nov 26, 2007

435

47

28

white sulphur springs montana

• Dec 17, 2013

• #5

what i would like to see is a 121 2.5 or 3.0 or maybe even a shorter track with more lug

 

D

DieselTwitch

Well-known member

Dec 23, 2007

308

112

43

40

Gunnison, Colorado

• Dec 17, 2013

• #6

The main reason I want to go longer is for the super sugary stuff. I rode this weekend super sugar and it did ok but i could tell it was dying for traction.

I agree a 3" lug on a 121 would be awesome! I just going for more float. I really don't care about handling on the trail. I ride about about 10 minutes on the trail and don't care how fast I go! lol for me its all about the deep snow!

 

C

Crash&Burn

Free Member

Feb 21, 2013

35

16

8

Idaho

• Dec 17, 2013

• #7

Ben running a 144 for 2+ seasons on a stock ktm 450 with no problems. It does push the front ski more though. It can work, it will work you though at times.

 

D

DieselTwitch

Well-known member

Dec 23, 2007

308

112

43

40

Gunnison, Colorado

• Dec 17, 2013

• #8

Crash&Burn said:

Ben running a 144 for 2+ seasons on a stock ktm 450 with no problems. It does push the front ski more though. It can work, it will work you though at times.

Click to expand...

Please explain "Plow"

 

C

Crash&Burn

Free Member

Feb 21, 2013

35

16

8

Idaho

• Dec 17, 2013

• #9

It does go thru the deep better for me. I can usually pick steeper and different lines than a similar bike on a short track. It is more difficult to turn at times and tends to be a challenge in real tight spaces at times. Pushing the front basically means harder to turn. Timbersled has kicked up their back part of the rails on the 137 to help this on the factory kits.

 

B

backcountrysnowbikes

Well-known member

Nov 12, 2011

235

120

43

Orting Washington

• Dec 17, 2013

• #10

174 x2.5 x16 might be to much but smaller than that would be ok.

 

D

DieselTwitch

Well-known member

Dec 23, 2007

308

112

43

40

Gunnison, Colorado

• Dec 17, 2013

• #11

Crash&Burn said:

It does go thru the deep better for me. I can usually pick steeper and different lines than a similar bike on a short track. It is more difficult to turn at times and tends to be a challenge in real tight spaces at times. Pushing the front basically means harder to turn. Timbersled has kicked up their back part of the rails on the 137 to help this on the factory kits.

Click to expand...

I thought the TS mountain tamer was designed to work to fix that? Does it have a hard time turning in the powder or just the packed stuff? Would pushing the ski rake forward help?

 

D

DieselTwitch

Well-known member

Dec 23, 2007

308

112

43

40

Gunnison, Colorado

• Dec 17, 2013

• #12

backcountrysnowbikes said:

174 x2.5 x16 might be to much but smaller than that would be ok.

Click to expand...

Hahah Im not even sure a 174 on a snowbike would be drivable on the trail... at all

 

B

backcountrysnowbikes

Well-known member

Nov 12, 2011

235

120

43

Orting Washington

• Dec 17, 2013

• #13

Straight across a lake. It would have to be a big lake to turn around.

137 is borderline to long, just my opinion

 

C

Crash&Burn

Free Member

Feb 21, 2013

35

16

8

Idaho

• Dec 17, 2013

• #14

I would not even want to try that long. Even on a large lake. Lol... the deeper and softer the snow, the easier to turn. My kit does not have some of the new upgrades as it is an older kit with a new front ski as that has been one of the best and most substantial improvements thru the years imo. Many of the improvements made since my kit was purchased may help the long track handle better in more conditions than mine, i just have not had the luxury of keeping up on all the changes.

 

C

Crash&Burn

Free Member

Feb 21, 2013

35

16

8

Idaho

• Dec 17, 2013

• #15

I do think the race bikes handle better than my woods bike due to the rake set up in their design and stiffer suspension set up. I just put the stiffest front springs i could find in my forks this year to help my bike. So far it has felt better but only made it out once with the new springs.