Polaris 2.7 track on a g-4

[tinkerjohnson]

I’m just looking for info on if anyone has looked seriously into throwing one of these new tracks in their 850, I’m in the market for a new track and this one being lighter and is already a 3.5 pitch maybe a easy swap. I no it’s untested in the field but if it’s like the 2.6 it should be a good option. Just looking for info from others that are considering trying this out.

 

[el__gato]

how much lighter do you think it is? I would suspect its gonna be a softer fingered track, if that is good or not on a doo.

 

[NHRoadking]

Here's a blurb about the Polaris 2.75 track:

The brand-new track from Polaris with a 2.75” lug and 3.5” pitch will be available in 155” and 165” lengths.

The Series 8 track has been lightened and optimized for flex, while the lugs feature improved stiffness. It has been developed in partnership with Camso over the course of several years to bring it to production. Polaris says the new track delivers better lift, traction and flotation for all types of mountain riding.

 

[Scott]

I am looking to sell my 3.2" x 162 for this new 2.75" x 165.

I've heard a lot of great things about this track.

 

[tinkerjohnson]

I am looking to sell my 3.2" x 162 for this new 2.75" x 165.

I've heard a lot of great things about this track.

Are you running it on a skidoo 850?

 

[Scott]

No, Polaris 850.

 

[xpturbo600]

Why would you even consider this trade? The doo track is hands down a better track. What matters most is lug cross section and how much snow each lug can throw. The difference in weight will not justify the switch. They are both single ply tracks. The extra weight in the doo track is where it matters...lug height!

If you want to try a track like that, put the camso 280 on it. The polaris 2.7 is designed to mimic the technology in the camso 280 while maintaining the polaris branding. I have a doo track sled and a camso 280 sled. Like I said, the doo track is a better track. They perform similar at WOT, but the doo track performs much better at slow speeds and starting from a dig.

 

[engine_man1714]

I added the Camso 2.8 to my 850 154 3" after an encounter with a fence post. Not that impressed preferred the ski doo track.

 

[tinkerjohnson]

Why would you even consider this trade? The doo track is hands down a better track. What matters most is lug cross section and how much snow each lug can throw. The difference in weight will not justify the switch. They are both single ply tracks. The extra weight in the doo track is where it matters...lug height!

If you want to try a track like that, put the camso 280 on it. The polaris 2.7 is designed to mimic the technology in the camso 280 while maintaining the polaris branding. I have a doo track sled and a camso 280 sled. Like I said, the doo track is a better track. They perform similar at WOT, but the doo track performs much better at slow speeds and starting from a dig.

If your referring to the camso 280 conquer track they are a totally different Design than the Polaris track and I had one on my last sled and is was a trenching pos, I like the factory track other than the the track won’t stay together one season and all the lugs are delaminating. I want a more durable track

 

[xpturbo600]

If you are having a trenching problem with a 280, you are not making enough power to flex the lugs. Those tracks were designed with a durometer that holds up to turbo sleds that make significant power over stock. The 280 is a great track if you ave the power to use it. And, yes the polaris track has similar lug design technology to it. The 2.7 lugs are designed to cup when flexing so as to hold more snow per lug while reducing rotating mass. Yes the lug pattern is different, but it has to be. In addition, it may be that the 2.7 lugs are simply weaker so they flex more while on sleds with less power.

Also, delamination is a manufacturing problem. You must have got a bad track. The only reason to deviate from a doo track is to save money when buying a new one.

 

[xpturbo600]

Ignore the prior post. I felt, I was unintentionally vague. I clarified everything for the benefit of all readers. Forum managers, please delete the prior post.

If you are having a trenching problem with a 280, you are not making enough power/track acceleration from a stop or at low speeds to flex the lugs. That is not a track design issue, it is a characteristic of your sled's power curve. Those tracks are designed with a durometer to hold up to turbo sleds that make significant power over stock without the paddles folding over. The 280 is a great track if you have the power to use it.

And, yes the polaris track has similar lug design technology to it. Albeit, the 2.7 lugs may be softer so as to flex a little more. In speaking with people I know who work at polaris, the 2.7 lugs are designed to cup when flexing so as to hold more snow per lug while reducing rotating mass. That is the same exact design objective as the camso track, which inspired the design team changes to the new track. The differences are in the lug pattern and durometer across the paddles and paddles support columns.

The quirk with a track like a 280 that has new generation lugs, which are designed to form cups under load, is they require sufficient load via track speed to work efficiently. By efficient, I mean each lug starts to form a cup that holds a larger volume (mass) of snow than a traditional flat lug of comparable cross-sectional dimension. That is why camso engineers say the 280 track moves snow mass equivalent to a standard 3" track. While this is true at high track speeds, it is not true at low track speeds. At low speeds and ignoring sufficient track acceleration, the lug functions similar to a flat paddle design with a shorter profile that mechanically has less bite.

Comparatively, the doo track does has more bite on the bottom, so it performs better from a dig because it mechanically has more to surface area to do work with. And if you look at a doo track paddle, they are not 3" paddles by traditional track measurements. By those measures, they are bigger with a 3 and 1/8" profile, which is a true 3" paddle measured from the lug base. While these tracks have a little more mass to spin than a 280, i can say there is effectively no performance loss between the two. In fact, the Doo track is atleast as good as the camso 280 in most all cases and better in others.

Lastly, delamination is a manufacturing problem. You must have got a bad track. The only reason to deviate from a doo track is to save money when buying a new one, but that decision gets rid of a key component that makes the g4 850 perform the way it does.

 

[tinkerjohnson]

Ignore the prior post. I felt, I was unintentionally vague. I clarified everything for the benefit of all readers. Forum managers, please delete the prior post.

If you are having a trenching problem with a 280, you are not making enough power/track acceleration from a stop or at low speeds to flex the lugs. That is not a track design issue, it is a characteristic of your sled's power curve. Those tracks are designed with a durometer to hold up to turbo sleds that make significant power over stock without the paddles folding over. The 280 is a great track if you have the power to use it.

And, yes the polaris track has similar lug design technology to it. Albeit, the 2.7 lugs may be softer so as to flex a little more. In speaking with people I know who work at polaris, the 2.7 lugs are designed to cup when flexing so as to hold more snow per lug while reducing rotating mass. That is the same exact design objective as the camso track, which inspired the design team changes to the new track. The differences are in the lug pattern and durometer across the paddles and paddles support columns.

The quirk with a track like a 280 that has new generation lugs, which are designed to form cups under load, is they require sufficient load via track speed to work efficiently. By efficient, I mean each lug starts to form a cup that holds a larger volume (mass) of snow than a traditional flat lug of comparable cross-sectional dimension. That is why camso engineers say the 280 track moves snow mass equivalent to a standard 3" track. While this is true at high track speeds, it is not true at low track speeds. At low speeds and ignoring sufficient track acceleration, the lug functions similar to a flat paddle design with a shorter profile that mechanically has less bite.

Comparatively, the doo track does has more bite on the bottom, so it performs better from a dig because it mechanically has more to surface area to do work with. And if you look at a doo track paddle, they are not 3" paddles by traditional track measurements. By those measures, they are bigger with a 3 and 1/8" profile, which is a true 3" paddle measured from the lug base. While these tracks have a little more mass to spin than a 280, i can say there is effectively no performance loss between the two. In fact, the Doo track is atleast as good as the camso 280 in most all cases and better in others.

Lastly, delamination is a manufacturing problem. You must have got a bad track. The only reason to deviate from a doo track is to save money when buying a new one, but that decision gets rid of a key component that makes the g4 850 perform the way it does.

Ok I like the tracks performance on the factory 3” but doo must be making bad tracks without fixing the problem then. We have 3 in our group a 18-19-20 all three have delaminated and threw the lugs off. I haven’t seen the mass problem with that from cat and Polaris like the doo has. I ran the conquer track on a 872 xm and not a gen-4 so I can’t really say how it works on a 850 but it’s was terrible on my 872, it’s was good and would float at low speed low throttle but as soon as you pinned it it would dig to china, let off the throttle and it would pop back on top of the snow. Climbing made my sled look like a pos i was getting spanked by everyone it was unbelievable how bad it made my sled perform. On the hard pack or setup snow it was great pulled your arms off and hooked up great I tried a bunch of suspension changes and setup changes until I gave up on it and took it off and replaced it with a power claw 3” it was a monster after that and track held up never ever lost a single paddle two seasons and still perfect shape

 

[tinkerjohnson]

Ignore the prior post. I felt, I was unintentionally vague. I clarified everything for the benefit of all readers. Forum managers, please delete the prior post.

If you are having a trenching problem with a 280, you are not making enough power/track acceleration from a stop or at low speeds to flex the lugs. That is not a track design issue, it is a characteristic of your sled's power curve. Those tracks are designed with a durometer to hold up to turbo sleds that make significant power over stock without the paddles folding over. The 280 is a great track if you have the power to use it.

And, yes the polaris track has similar lug design technology to it. Albeit, the 2.7 lugs may be softer so as to flex a little more. In speaking with people I know who work at polaris, the 2.7 lugs are designed to cup when flexing so as to hold more snow per lug while reducing rotating mass. That is the same exact design objective as the camso track, which inspired the design team changes to the new track. The differences are in the lug pattern and durometer across the paddles and paddles support columns.

The quirk with a track like a 280 that has new generation lugs, which are designed to form cups under load, is they require sufficient load via track speed to work efficiently. By efficient, I mean each lug starts to form a cup that holds a larger volume (mass) of snow than a traditional flat lug of comparable cross-sectional dimension. That is why camso engineers say the 280 track moves snow mass equivalent to a standard 3" track. While this is true at high track speeds, it is not true at low track speeds. At low speeds and ignoring sufficient track acceleration, the lug functions similar to a flat paddle design with a shorter profile that mechanically has less bite.

Comparatively, the doo track does has more bite on the bottom, so it performs better from a dig because it mechanically has more to surface area to do work with. And if you look at a doo track paddle, they are not 3" paddles by traditional track measurements. By those measures, they are bigger with a 3 and 1/8" profile, which is a true 3" paddle measured from the lug base. While these tracks have a little more mass to spin than a 280, i can say there is effectively no performance loss between the two. In fact, the Doo track is atleast as good as the camso 280 in most all cases and better in others.

Lastly, delamination is a manufacturing problem. You must have got a bad track. The only reason to deviate from a doo track is to save money when buying a new one, but that decision gets rid of a key component that makes the g4 850 perform the way it does.

I just looked at the tracks on tracks USA and there is 2 different 280 tracks. The epic 280 is a lot like the Polaris series 8 track. I have no experience with that track. The track I’m referring to is the conquer 280.

 

[xpturbo600]

Me too. I run the 174 conquer track on a big turbo viper with a built race motor. I have turned it up to 330 hp so far and it does exactly what you are looking for. It lifts and pushes the sled forward from a dig or low speeds. But, the motor is very strong, so it is different. My in-law had a 165 conquer 280 on a turbo pro. It did well, but it did not generate as much lift as my sled does from a stationary position. The difference is how fast the big sled can generate track speed. Like I said, the conquer works really well on big turbo sleds, which make sufficient track speed such that the paddles design can operate as intended. Camso built the conquer 280 for high horsepower turbo sleds.

I cannot comment on a camso epic 280. I have never ran one. It looks like a modern take on an apex maverick track.

 

[xpturbo600]

Ok I like the tracks performance on the factory 3” but doo must be making bad tracks without fixing the problem then. We have 3 in our group a 18-19-20 all three have delaminated and threw the lugs off. I haven’t seen the mass problem with that from cat and Polaris like the doo has. I ran the conquer track on a 872 xm and not a gen-4 so I can’t really say how it works on a 850 but it’s was terrible on my 872, it’s was good and would float at low speed low throttle but as soon as you pinned it it would dig to china, let off the throttle and it would pop back on top of the snow. Climbing made my sled look like a pos i was getting spanked by everyone it was unbelievable how bad it made my sled perform. On the hard pack or setup snow it was great pulled your arms off and hooked up great I tried a bunch of suspension changes and setup changes until I gave up on it and took it off and replaced it with a power claw 3” it was a monster after that and track held up never ever lost a single paddle two seasons and still perfect shape

I don't know what to say about your track troubles. My dad runs a 175 doo track on his turbo 1200. We have ran it for several season on 18 to 20 pounds of boost without any issues. At those boost levels, the 1200 is well over 300 hp. Guaranteed that is harder on that track than any big bore or turbo 850. Lastly, both of these tracks really shine climbing chutes. My guess is you needed more track speed to make the conquer track work well. Lastly, if you want more durable tracks, camso makes them. They are just heavier since the durometer and lug designs are different from the latest single ply light weight designs.

 

[jdrmx]

Ok I like the tracks performance on the factory 3” but doo must be making bad tracks without fixing the problem then. We have 3 in our group a 18-19-20 all three have delaminated and threw the lugs off. I haven’t seen the mass problem with that from cat and Polaris like the doo has. I ran the conquer track on a 872 xm and not a gen-4 so I can’t really say how it works on a 850 but it’s was terrible on my 872, it’s was good and would float at low speed low throttle but as soon as you pinned it it would dig to china, let off the throttle and it would pop back on top of the snow. Climbing made my sled look like a pos i was getting spanked by everyone it was unbelievable how bad it made my sled perform. On the hard pack or setup snow it was great pulled your arms off and hooked up great I tried a bunch of suspension changes and setup changes until I gave up on it and took it off and replaced it with a power claw 3” it was a monster after that and track held up never ever lost a single paddle two seasons and still perfect shape

Out of curiosity did warranty cover the tracks? If the machine was still under warranty


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

 

[xpturbo600]

If the sled is under warranty the manufacturer is liable to cover any tracks where delamination is the problem. Delamination is separation of the layers in the track such that it comes apart. The most recent warranty I went through was for a track with a manufacturing defect. They did not give me all the details, but it sounded like one of the kevlar bands broke, causing the track to whip back and forth in the tunnel.


The manufacturer won't cover destruction of the track caused by a rider ripping paddles off or chewing them up on stumps and rocks. Nor should they. It is not any manufacturers responsibility to replace tracks for people who chose to abuse their equipment. To be clear, I am not saying that is what happened in tinkerjohnson's case. I would recommend people in his group to inquire about warranty if delamination is the problem.

The reality is that as tracks get lighter, trade offs are being made such that tracks are starting to become wear items.

 

[tinkerjohnson]

Out of curiosity did warranty cover the tracks? If the machine was still under warranty


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

Skidoo won’t warranty the track all three sleds still under warranty

 

[tinkerjohnson]

If the sled is under warranty the manufacturer is liable to cover any tracks where delamination is the problem. Delamination is separation of the layers in the track such that it comes apart. The most recent warranty I went through was for a track with a manufacturing defect. They did not give me all the details, but it sounded like one of the kevlar bands broke, causing the track to whip back and forth in the tunnel.


The manufacturer won't cover destruction of the track caused by a rider ripping paddles off or chewing them up on stumps and rocks. Nor should they. It is not any manufacturers responsibility to replace tracks for people who chose to abuse their equipment. To be clear, I am not saying that is what happened in tinkerjohnson's case. I would recommend people in his group to inquire about warranty if delamination is the problem.

The reality is that as tracks get lighter, trade offs are being made such that tracks are starting to become wear items.

No luck from skidoo on warranty. And I hear the same from others online that have had no luck getting warranty. I have no damaged lugs just cracked at the bases of the lugs and you can flex them back and see they are getting ready to tear off anytime now. My buddies 19 looked the same as mine at the beginning of the season and two rides in 70 percent of his lugs were gone. I get a new sled every 2 years and if I put a new doo track on and it does the same thing agin I’ll have to replace it agin when I sell it so that’s around $3,000 in tracks in 2 years I’ll try something else this time I think.

 

[xpturbo600]

No luck from skidoo on warranty. And I hear the same from others online that have had no luck getting warranty. I have no damaged lugs just cracked at the bases of the lugs and you can flex them back and see they are getting ready to tear off anytime now. My buddies 19 looked the same as mine at the beginning of the season and two rides in 70 percent of his lugs were gone. I get a new sled every 2 years and if I put a new doo track on and it does the same thing agin I’ll have to replace it agin when I sell it so that’s around $3,000 in tracks in 2 years I’ll try something else this time I think.

Are you getting the run around from skidoo, or the dealer? Often times dealers choose to become the ones who deny you because their staff doesn't want to go through the process of getting skidoo customer service involved, shipping things back and forth, etc. Meanwhile, your sled sits in their storage while everyone just waits to hear back from the production defect engineers. In that case, your mad, the dealer gets blamed, and skidoo may just deny the claim. Unfortunately, dealers frequently blame the customer and deny the customer a shot at warranty because it is easy.

Skidoo, the manufacturer, has service reps you can request to speak with. Call skidoo customer service directly or ask the dealer to speak with their zone rep directly. If many sleds have the problem, they will want to know about it. But, your sled has to be under warranty.