Longer Better Then Wider

[Cmoney]

The foot print on a 155 x 15 is almost the same as the footprint of the 146 x 16. So does that mean they will both float equally? Or is longer better then wider.
I am driving myself nuts as to what sled to snowcheck this year, all I want is a sled that handles and jumps like a 121, and floats and climbs like a 163. Is that to much to ask for?

 

[OuraySledder]

You need two sleds man Snow conditions where you ride are the biggest factor in my book. Where I ride we get a lot of really light dry powder. The longer the better in my book. If the snow is deep and soft a 163 rides like a 121 as far as handling. If you ride on firmer snow, no sense in having a 163, it is just going to steer like a pig.

As far as climbing, again firm or soft? In soft, you need the track length, if it is spring hard stuff a 136 will take you to stupid places. Unfortunately I don't think the 16 wide is the perfect answer. Some guys switch from 16 to 15 for sidehilling. I can't imagine it makes that much difference but people swap for that reason. If the snow is soft jumping a long track is no big deal. I've jumped the crap out of 151s, 159s and 153s for years with no problem.

I am a die hard longer is better guy. Seems to suit my style and conditions. It will either be a 162 Cat or 163 Poo for me next year. YMMV

 

[Wyoming T/A]

had 04 REV 151X16 AND PUT A 159 X 15 series 4 poo track on it and thought it was slightly better i some conditions and not as good in others but a 159 x 16 kills the 159 x 15--if i had it to doo over i would keep the 151 x 16--jmo

 

[alrevedup]

Rode two T-Nytro setup the same top to bottom. One is mine the other a dealer demo.

The 16in. track ate the 15in. on the same hill on the same day with the same rider.

162x16x2.5 C.E.

 

[bgreen776]

The best thing 16" wide tracks are for is when you and your buddy are neck and neck all the time, then you slip in a bigger track without telling them. Not many people are going to visually notice the difference between a 156 x 16 wide if you used to run a 153 x 15 wide but it can make a fairly noticable difference on the snow.

 

[NickH440]

The way one guy explained it to me, a wider track grabs more snow as it moves forward, a longer track with the same footprint has the same amount of snow in under it, it's trying to get traction from snow that's already in motion, therefore the co-effecient of friction is less, and acceleration is less. A wider track is able to grab more snow that is not already in motion, and create more acceleration-----<<dunno if all that made sense. He also said the advantage is only evident in powder snow.

Also have some real world comparisons. My dad and uncles have 6-7 utility sleds between then. The widest being track being 24 inches, and the narrowest 15. In powder snow, the 24 inch track will accelerate the sled faster then a similar sled with a 2 inch wide track, and the 15 wide just spins badly. All sleds had the ski-doo 550 engine, and had 156 inch tracks

 

[Cmoney]

So from what I am gathering a 146 x 16 will be better then a 155 x 16 in deep powder. Just doesn't seem right to me, but the snow in motion vs not in motion theory makes sense.
Anybody else?????

 

[PCDOC]

So from what I am gathering a 146 x 16 will be better then a 155 x 16 in deep powder. Just doesn't seem right to me, but the snow in motion vs not in motion theory makes sense.
Anybody else?????

I would say no. The 155x16 will pull better. You still need a certain amount of length footprint under you to make the sled float. Imagine a track 2 feet wide with only 2 feet of length touching the snow. Put that against a 2 foot wide track with 3 feet of length on the ground. The second track will float much better. (Bad analogy) My last two sleds started as 15 wide and I went to 16 wide and the difference is quite noticable.

 

[Bushpilot]

I have had both 15 and 16x162 tracks on a king cat. I could not tell any difference when boondocking except that the 16 wide was heavier and would not give the same track speed. With the 15, I could lay the sled over easier and sidehill easier.
In reality when you say the wider track is getting more traction, it is only 1/2 in on each side of the track. that is only going to make a minimal amount of traction.
I ended up selling the 16 and going back to the 15 to get the weight down and track speed up.

 

[moffatt]

track

I have had both 15 and 16x162 tracks on a king cat. I could not tell any difference when boondocking except that the 16 wide was heavier and would not give the same track speed. With the 15, I could lay the sled over easier and sidehill easier.
In reality when you say the wider track is getting more traction, it is only 1/2 in on each side of the track. that is only going to make a minimal amount of traction.
I ended up selling the 16 and going back to the 15 to get the weight down and track speed up.

A 16 wide should make more traction its not just 1/2 an inch on each its also 162 inches long dont forget, so you got alot more track to the ground than a 15 example; M1000 162x15 Rev 159x16 when you measure the difference the 159 Rev has about 30 more square inches of track then the 162 the 159x16 is like having about 172x15. Two guys I ride with one has a M1000 162x15 pipe, y pipe about 175hp, The other guy Rev 159x16 has 146 hp roughly, ther used to be alot of differnce in distance bewteentem when they climb now the Rev almost can go as high as the m1000 now with the bigger track so Im convinced that the track make a huge diffence in climbing and you dont notice the boondocking difference at all except maybe when its hard packed. My two cents and if your worried about track speed get BOOSTED!

 

[alrevedup]

Long and wide is what my mystress always says.



162x16 with tipped rails. Great for climbing and agile in the tight spots.

 

[ridehard1212]

had 04 REV 151X16 AND PUT A 159 X 15 series 4 poo track on it and thought it was slightly better i some conditions and not as good in others but a 159 x 16 kills the 159 x 15--if i had it to doo over i would keep the 151 x 16--jmo

Im with T/A on this, anything from 146-156 16wide is a real nice track, with 151-153x16 being optimal. unless you want to strait out climb stupid chit, then go 156-166(174 is ridicoulous IMO) but IMO a bigger the 156 track is not as fun for playin and boondocking. (but it is great on those really really deep days!!)

 

[XP Summit]

To compare...

The general theory is 40% of the track is touching the ground at any time.

146 x 16 = 2336 sq/in 40% of that is 934.4

155 x 15 = 2325 sq/in 40% of that is 930

So you have the same lbs per sq/in on a 146 x 16 to a 155 x 15.

I do like NickH440 explanation of the benefits of a wider track. But I also like the ability of laying the sled over more easy with a 15 wide...

Guys I know we don't like to hear it but an inch does matter

 

[PistonBroke]

The way one guy explained it to me, a wider track grabs more snow as it moves forward, a longer track with the same footprint has the same amount of snow in under it, it's trying to get traction from snow that's already in motion, therefore the co-effecient of friction is less, and acceleration is less. A wider track is able to grab more snow that is not already in motion, and create more acceleration-----<<dunno if all that made sense. He also said the advantage is only evident in powder snow.


I agree with you. You are "processing" more snow with a 16 wide, which I think really helps in certain conditions.

 

[Goin For Snow]

I would say no. The 155x16 will pull better. You still need a certain amount of length footprint under you to make the sled float. Imagine a track 2 feet wide with only 2 feet of length touching the snow. Put that against a 2 foot wide track with 3 feet of length on the ground. The second track will float much better. (Bad analogy) My last two sleds started as 15 wide and I went to 16 wide and the difference is quite noticable.

that is a good analogy.
If you dont think a inch makes a difference, try a longtracked Firecat.

 

[Cmoney]

There is no doubt in my mind if you compare two 154's one 15inch and the other 16inch's wide, the 154 x 16 will be better.

But I am still not convinced that a 146 x 16 will out perform a 155 x 15 in the deep powder, even though the 146x16 incher has a bigger footprint.

 

[TravRMK]

There is no doubt in my mind if you compare two 154's one 15inch and the other 16inch's wide, the 154 x 16 will be better.

But I am still not convinced that a 146 x 16 will out perform a 155 x 15 in the deep powder, even though the 146x16 incher has a bigger footprint.

This is especially true in bumpy climbs, where there will be more track still in the snow driving the sled when the front end comes up. With the front eng in the air while hitting a bump in the hill, the longer track will scrub less speed. Even though the "footprint" is the same. Now if both tracks were the same length the 16 would be better.

 

[alrevedup]

There is no doubt in my mind if you compare two 154's one 15inch and the other 16inch's wide, the 154 x 16 will be better.

But I am still not convinced that a 146 x 16 will out perform a 155 x 15 in the deep powder, even though the 146x16 incher has a bigger footprint.

Good question. I don't think I would put money on it, but my guess is with all other things being equal. The less lbs. per sqaure inch on the track, the better preformance a person will get.

 

[NickH440]

To compare...
I do like NickH440 explanation of the benefits of a wider track. But I also like the ability of laying the sled over more easy with a 15 wide...

I'm glad I didn't sound like any idiot when I wrote that post lol, didn't know if it made sense.

My high school physics teacher explained that too me one time when we we're discussing snowmobiles. He had all sorts of formulas done up on how to calculate acceleration in different snow conditions.

 

[Rixster]

SO after reading all this I am convinced. Its a 162x16 for me next year.