Alpha H/C on my mind

[line8]

I’m thinking of getting a new Alpha.
My 18 MC with elevate is so fun and easy to ride, really anywhere. I’m just very comfortable on it. It’s got 1900 miles, just put a new clutch on it. That equates to about 2600-2700 by the end of the season. So, it might just be time to get new.

What will I miss? Some Aftermarket parts can be moved over.
Will it be the best decision I’ve ever made or regret? I’ve been stubborn about the alpha.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Octanee]

Alpha takes a bit to get used to, but I sure do love it, makes everything easier to do and the track just straight up hooks up, but like many of the newer sleds they don't take abuse well, so keep slow on the trails, like 30-35mph max.

I had the elevate on my alpha and took it off/sold it, I honestly couldn't feel t
A difference to make it worth 1k and when my clutch cracked it was easy for me to sell it to fund the new adapt clutch.


Moneys money, if you have an 18 you could find somebody to swap the skids/drivers out and away you go.... You already have the ctec 800 engine, I do see time to time guys do that, or if they turbo the alpha it's deff way too much so most go back to twin rail.

 

[line8]

Yeah I will not be turboing.
35 on the trail, darn, sometimes thats all part of the end of day fun.
The additional ease of riding I am interested in. Not that the MC is hard to ride, but certain riding conditions do require some body english.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[IDspud]

Have five Alphas and have never gone that slow going in or out.

 

[CO 2.0]

The 2.6 track single rail is a nice medium between the twin rail 3" and the Alpha 3". It climbs better than the twin rail, just not as good as the alpha 3" in deep pow. But in lower pow conditions and on trail the single rail 2.6 definitely feels better than the Alpha 3". Feels more like a twin rail with the track stiffness, track fingers, and paddle spacing. I own all 3, and would pick the single rail 2.6 if I only had one sled.

 

[Pinchecharlie]

You have all three now tell me if you only had one which length would it be? And why does a 165 not come in 2 6 or why should it not? Iam Seriously asking as I've been trying to learn and for some reason like artic cat when most do not . Iam actually buying a blue alpha in 154 and iam allways 2nd guessing the length. lol. Thanks!!

 

[line8]

The 2.6 track single rail is a nice medium between the twin rail 3" and the Alpha 3". It climbs better than the twin rail, just not as good as the alpha 3" in deep pow. But in lower pow conditions and on trail the single rail 2.6 definitely feels better than the Alpha 3". Feels more like a twin rail with the track stiffness, track fingers, and paddle spacing. I own all 3, and would pick the single rail 2.6 if I only had one sled.

CO, I always look for your info as you give honest reviews of things. So thanks for chiming in.
I’m still having a hard time committing to the alpha because in the pnw our snow conditions are neurotic. It can go from the Best ever anywhere to what happened on any given day or week.
I bought a 21 850 Khaos 155 earlier in the season and really like it.
I’ve been reading about the 2.6 as you mention. Unfortunately the two I’m looking at are both 3”, 1 is 154 the other is 165. Leaning toward the longer.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[CO 2.0]

Pinchecharlie, I don't ride 165 lengths, only shorter tracks. I like having the ability to pull the front end up when doing creek crossings and such. And the sleds are so good now, I can go anywhere on a 154, even at 11K ft +

 

[boondocker97]

Alpha takes a bit to get used to, but I sure do love it, makes everything easier to do and the track just straight up hooks up, but like many of the newer sleds they don't take abuse well, so keep slow on the trails, like 30-35mph max.

I had the elevate on my alpha and took it off/sold it, I honestly couldn't feel t
A difference to make it worth 1k and when my clutch cracked it was easy for me to sell it to fund the new adapt clutch.


Moneys money, if you have an 18 you could find somebody to swap the skids/drivers out and away you go.... You already have the ctec 800 engine, I do see time to time guys do that, or if they turbo the alpha it's deff way too much so most go back to twin rail.

Can confirm Alpha on boost is a bit squirrelly!

Cat probably didn't bother with the new 2.6 track design on the 165 since the target audience that rides longer tracks are usually concerned about the best deep snow performance. Which is in the 3" wheelhouse.

@Chewy22 went from 154 Alpha back to a 153 twin rail elevate. He can probably give you some thoughts on the two.

 

[Chewy22]

I’m tall and as I get older my reaction time is slowing down. The alpha 154 was just to twitchy for me. If I was still in my 20s/early 30s the Alpha 154 all the way. One other factor, the alpha likes to make its own tracks. Following my buddy through the tight trees on a side hill is more challenging on the 154 Alpha unless I took my own lines. You do give up traction on a twin 153 3”; the Alpha 3” traction is awesome, I do miss that. My next sled most likely will be a 165 Alpha. I like elevate twin rail setup a lot. The elevate kit was good on the alpha but I personally think it’s a bigger change on the twin setup.

 

[geofharries]

Pinchecharlie, I don't ride 165 lengths, only shorter tracks. I like having the ability to pull the front end up when doing creek crossings and such. And the sleds are so good now, I can go anywhere on a 154, even at 11K ft +

I'm 6'3" and ride a 162 M8000 (2014) because of the length.

Do you generally it's still the case that tall people should be on longer tracks? Does it really matter?

 

[line8]

I’m tall and as I get older my reaction time is slowing down. The alpha 154 was just to twitchy for me. If I was still in my 20s/early 30s the Alpha 154 all the way. One other factor, the alpha likes to make its own tracks. Following my buddy through the tight trees on a side hill is more challenging on the 154 Alpha unless I took my own lines. You do give up traction on a twin 153 3”; the Alpha 3” traction is awesome, I do miss that. My next sled most likely will be a 165 Alpha. I like elevate twin rail setup a lot. The elevate kit was good on the alpha but I personally think it’s a bigger change on the twin setup.

Yeah on my 18 I noticed almost 5 minutes from the truck how big of a change it created.
I would agree with the reaction time in my riding. For me I react almost as quickly, I just don’t have same strength to hold onto it. Dumbbell time!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Pinchecharlie]

Twitchy is hard when your old lol! Like wrestling the thing stuck is crazy hard lol!! Well shoot now iam 2nd guessing again lol. I can say that for a newbie I really have a much easier time on the alpha rail as compared to my twin rail sled. But you guys are actual riders lol!!!

 

[hansenmac]

the 162 or 165 tracks can mask a driver error. Or the heavier the rider the more track it takes to hold you up and out of the snow. I'm 160lbs but i ride a 162x3 so i can go more places and for the holy grail 3 foot dump of fresh powder day.

 

[line8]

I’ve got a 155 Khaos, it’s not an alpha, but I can compare it to my 18 MC 162. It’s a bit less stable in certain scenarios. I’m not a big climber but I will to get to other places. Both are very similar.
This is what’s giving me a little confusion on what track length to get.
Comparing those 2.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[turboless terry]

The 2.6 track single rail is a nice medium between the twin rail 3" and the Alpha 3". It climbs better than the twin rail, just not as good as the alpha 3" in deep pow. But in lower pow conditions and on trail the single rail 2.6 definitely feels better than the Alpha 3". Feels more like a twin rail with the track stiffness, track fingers, and paddle spacing. I own all 3, and would pick the single rail 2.6 if I only had one sled.

2.6 doesn't wash like the 3?

 

[Sage Crusher]

Keep in mind that the 2.6 is considerably a heaver track than the 3 that comes on the Alpha !!

 

[Pinchecharlie]

Huh, well that doesn't make since? 2.6 is only on 154. So how come that's like that?

 

[Vern]

I was always a 150’s length guy on twin rail sleds and never seen the need for anything longer, but after hearing how playful the alpha was I went 165 when I finally switched to the alpha. I have zero regrets in that decision. I feel it still out maneuvers the shorter two railers and often times I still struggle to keep up with the sled on real quick turns. IMO the alpha rides like a shorter sled than it actually is. Has anyone ever measured the actual foot print on the snow compared to a two railer? With the big wheels and drivers I wouldn’t be surprised if the alpha foot print was actually less on the snow, essentially making it a shorter track.

 

[line8]

I was always a 150’s length guy on twin rail sleds and never seen the need for anything longer, but after hearing how playful the alpha was I went 165 when I finally switched to the alpha. I have zero regrets in that decision. I feel it still out maneuvers the shorter two railers and often times I still struggle to keep up with the sled on real quick turns. IMO the alpha rides like a shorter sled than it actually is. Has anyone ever measured the actual foot print on the snow compared to a two railer? With the big wheels and drivers I wouldn’t be surprised if the alpha foot print was actually less on the snow, essentially making it a shorter track.

I would agree with the footprint.
I put the 10” alpha wheels on my MC and it shrunk it up a bit. At least an inch with the offset. But the actual footprint seems more.
Course there’s really not much approach angle either so it practically prints to the drivers.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk