154, 165, or 175?
- Thread starter logan1080
- Start date
L
logan1080
Well-known member
Yeah I spent a lot of days last season with the shovel out in the mountains with the 154". It went lots of places but in the waist deep light powder it's not hard to get stuck!
L
logan1080
Well-known member
If you ask me why not go with a 165 and get the best of both worlds. 75% of the time With my 165 all I need is a ski pull to get unstuck
I figured what's one more lug on the ground so go 175.
I see them like golf clubs, you need one for every situation!
S
If only we could all have a "bag" full of sleds!
154 ALL day. The new tracks hook up so well anything longer seriously takes the fun out of it. You can still do things on a 154 3" that would have taken a turbo a few years ago.
Also makes it a lot easier to whip around and jump with.
Also makes it a lot easier to whip around and jump with.
F
Flatland800R
Member
The deciding factor for me (6'4" close to 300# with gear) was the seriously deep days. I frequent the revy area when I do ride. Those nipple deep days are too fun for this guy to be digging all dam day. Every time I update the rubber keeps getting longer and deeper. Started out with a 136 1.5" in my lighter days, now awaiting a 165 3" had fun on them all
How much do you Weigh? That makes a big difference on how much fun a 154 is to ride...
I had a 154 Xm for 3 years. Rode a 165x3 last year and this year I'm back on a 154. The 165 was a tractor. It just keeps going and going but it's not as fun. The 154 is a lot more nimble whenever you are trying to whip the front around. I weigh 175lbs.
L
logan1080
Well-known member
I think my 175" will be easily tossed around. I'm 185lbs before gear and I thought my 154 XM was easy to throw around. I rode a 154 G4 and it was even easier yet. So I think the new 175 that's just 14" longer (look at a tape, that's actually not that much length) than my XM 154 will be similar to a T3 163" or easier to throw around. Less stucks on the deep days too. It's only 1 more paddle on the ground vs 165 so I figured screw it, go 175.
I guess it all just depends on the size/weight of the rider, terrain, snow, and how you like to ride.
I've watched a fit 250lb 6'3" guy whip around a 174" in the trees better than a skilled smaller guy on a 154"....
Go figure.
.
I've watched a fit 250lb 6'3" guy whip around a 174" in the trees better than a skilled smaller guy on a 154"....
Go figure.
.
With a 3.5" pitch on the 65 and 75's... and the 2.86" pitch on the 154's ... has something to do with it.
The 165 is really a 164.5" track...with 47 rows of paddles
The 175 is really a 175" track...with 50 rows of paddles
The 154 is really a 154.4" track...with 54 rows of paddles
The 165 is really a 164.5" track...with 47 rows of paddles
The 175 is really a 175" track...with 50 rows of paddles
The 154 is really a 154.4" track...with 54 rows of paddles
T
Trailsweeper
Well-known member
My Bad... Mis-information ....GRRR.
Yes... 3.5" pitch
The 154 is really a 154" track...with 44 rows of paddles
Yes... 3.5" pitch
The 154 is really a 154" track...with 44 rows of paddles
Last edited:
Last year I went with 165 and won't ever go longer. Came off a 14 154. While I love the 165 on deep days and can do things the 154 can't for days other than DEEP I go with the 154. Faster, nimble, fun. At least faster now, we will see if that changes with the 18 updates fron Skidoo
Sent from my LGL56VL using Tapatalk
Sent from my LGL56VL using Tapatalk
