Best 155 track and 2.86 drivers on 3.0 track???

[carson.608]

I just bought a 2018 pro rmk 155 with a track that is missing 3 lugs. They all delaminated. I'm looking for the best track to replace the stock 155x2.6 that isn't too expensive. I saw in this thread that you can run Polaris 2.86 drivers on a 3.0 track. snowest.com/forum/threads/avid-polaris-drivers.445881/ is this correct? and a good idea?
I was looking at Camso 280 tracks and im not sure if I should go with the camso epic 280 https://www.cbperformanceparts.com/camso-tracks/mountain-tracks/epic-280-15-x-156-x-2-80-9408m/ or the Camso conquer 280 https://www.cbperformanceparts.com/camso-tracks/mountain-tracks/conquer-280-15-x-156-x-2-80-9336m/

What are the benefits of the Powerclaw design of the conquer and is it better or worse than the epic that is designed like a Polaris track?

 

[nibrandon]

Based on that thread, I put a Camso X3 track with 3.0 pitch on stock 2.86 drivers. It worked great all last season.

 

[rydningen]

Camso X2.7 or X3, get correct drivers for it.
Researched it myself before getting Avids, allegedly those who tried it ran into problems after a while and I didnt want to gamble on a wrecked track midseason..

 

[Indy_500]

I wouldn’t risk wrecking a pricey track running the wrong drivers. I have a 2.5” camo extreme on my 16 pro and have had it for 2 years and love it. I don’t ride bottomless powder but it is 90% as good as the stock 2.6 imo and 200% as durable.

 

[carson.608]

Camso X2.7 or X3, get correct drivers for it.
Researched it myself before getting Avids, allegedly those who tried it ran into problems after a while and I didnt want to gamble on a wrecked track midseason..

If I went with avid 3.0 7 tooth drivers. Would I have to cut the rails and get an antistab kit?

 

[goridedoo]

If I went with avid 3.0 7 tooth drivers. Would I have to cut the rails and get an antistab kit?

If you get center drive drivers and center punched track you do NOT need an anti stab. This is what I run. Works great. Easy.

Some guys prefer to run the non punched track and an antistab.

Most guys dislike the Conquer 280 for deep snow. Trenches bad. Also seems like you see alot of durability issues with that track.

I think Madmax here runs the Epic and likes it. Maybe he'll chime in. Haven't seen alot of other reviews on that track, pretty new.

The Challenger Extreme 2.5 is suppose to be a really good all around track. Likely the most durable mountain track you can buy. It will bolt right up no mods. Part number 9104M. $655 from Tracksusa, and I know they can be had for cheaper.

 

[Reg2view]

X2 on the CE 2.5. Durable, fully clipped, once broke it does everything well - better in setup snow that the 2.6, good in the pow, not a trencher, abit more sensitive to FTS setup. Bang for buck is unbeatable. JMPE on my 800 155s. Paddle breakin has been 200ish miles.

 

[sledhed]

times 3 on the Camo X 2.5 in 2.86 pitch, center punched, fully clipped... ran those tracks for years and loved them in pow AND especially in spring, leaves the Polaris track guys sitting and spinning at the bottom while you shoot up the hills LOL.

Now I am running the Camo X 2.7 3" pitch track on my Axys, chaincase sled with stock drivers. So far I am loving it too...

 

[xpturbo600]

Focus on track weight. If you are within 5 pounds do as you wish if the lugs are tough and don't fold over. The conquer 280 is a great track, but it was made for turbo sleds with a lot of power. If you don't make big power, it won't flex the lugs and you may experience some trenching. I run it on a 350 hp 4 stroke, and it is taking the beating like a champ. The first round of tracks had problems. New ones are better. Thus, run a single ply track like an x3, x2.7, conquer 280, epic 280. The x models flex more and are nice on 220 hp and less. The conquer is great over 220. Not sure about the epic.

 

[carson.608]

Focus on track weight. If you are within 5 pounds do as you wish if the lugs are tough and don't fold over. The conquer 280 is a great track, but it was made for turbo sleds with a lot of power. If you don't make big power, it won't flex the lugs and you may experience some trenching. I run it on a 350 hp 4 stroke, and it is taking the beating like a champ. The first round of tracks had problems. New ones are better. Thus, run a single ply track like an x3, x2.7, conquer 280, epic 280. The x models flex more and are nice on 220 hp and less. The conquer is great over 220. Not sure about the epic.

I'm leaning towards the epic because its only 45 lbs and all the other options are around 55lbs. Rotational weight is very important especially on a sled that only makes stock power.

 

[xpturbo600]

The conquer will be similar weight to the epic. My 174 track weighed in at 48 pounds. From the conquer brochure, a 162 track weighs 46 pounds, a 165 track weighs 45 pounds, and a 154 track weighs 42 pounds. I have never seen a weight spec on an epic, but is should be close to those weights.

X tracks are fully clipped...thus more weight. But they should be a little more efficient on the driver extrovert interface.

 

[whoisthatguy]

Assuming 3 drive sprockets with 2.86" pitch, and a 3" pitch track, only 3 track drive lugs would have full contact with the drive sprockets at any time. If the matching drive sprocket was used, then it would be about 12 track drive lugs having full contact with the drive sprockets at any one time. Which tends to imply that the track drive lugs will experience a premature failure at some point, which may or may not be before the end of the track's natural life based on other factors like paddle loss or catastrophic track failure due to cross section tearing.

 

[vector boy]

For those running the 2.5 CE, was clutching needed in order to run this track? The weight difference is quite high, but didn't know what real world application has been showing.

 

[sledhed]

For those running the 2.5 CE, was clutching needed in order to run this track? The weight difference is quite high, but didn't know what real world application has been showing.

When I ran it, no clutching changes needed. 3 Dragons (2x 155, 1x 163), 2 Pros (155). A couple more pounds of track makes very little difference in my experience.

 

[vector boy]

When I ran it, no clutching changes needed. 3 Dragons (2x 155, 1x 163), 2 Pros (155). A couple more pounds of track makes very little difference in my experience.

Thanks. I ran the Conquer 280 on a couple different Yamaha's, however they were both turbo's and had to do my own clutching anyways. Looking at replacing my 163 with a CE 2.5, numbers make it look like clutching is needed, just wanted to make sure real world was fine leaving it as is.