What Track Length Do You Prefer? - Snowmobile World : Your #1 Snowmobile Forum
http://www.snowmobileworld.com/forums
» Sponsors
Go Back   Snowmobile World : Your #1 Snowmobile Forum > SNOWMOBILING SECTION > MOUNTAIN & POWDER RIDING

View Poll Results: What track length do you prefer for mountain riding?
136" 34 16.83%
141" 2 0.99%
144" 59 29.21%
151" 47 23.27%
156" 13 6.44%
159" 19 9.41%
162" 18 8.91%
166" 10 4.95%
Voters: 202. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 04-05-2005, 11:26 PM   #1
VerticalEscapeRMK
Senior Member
 
VerticalEscapeRMK's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Modesto California
Mileage: Not enough!
Primary Sled: 2003 Polaris Vertical Escape 800/159"
Where I sled: Sierras/Sonora Pass
Posts: 124
Default

I like my 159" track. I have always had a 136" track for years but this season I rode a 144" and a 159". I didn't find that the 159" was harder to handle than the 144" much at all but in the steep hills it will go higher.
__________________
Primary Sled 2003 Polaris RMK 800cc 159" Vertical Escape
Tow rig 2001.5 Dodge Ram Cummins 2500 4x4. Red Sport with black leather/ 2004 Interstate 27' Inclosed trailer, loaded
Other sleds in the trailer 2003 A/C 900 1M 159"/ 2004 Polaris RMK 700cc 144" Vertical Escape/ 1997 A/C Powder Extreme 600 triple

www.towrig.com pics of my junk
VerticalEscapeRMK is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Old 04-06-2005, 07:24 AM   #2
permafrost
Thread Killer
 
permafrost's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: North Kawartha, Ontario,Canada
Primary Sled: Renegade
Where I sled: Ontario,Canada
Posts: 4,659
Default

I picked 136", but that is all I know IMHO it is the best alround length for the area I live in.

Permafrost
__________________
2003 MXZ Renegade 800
1998 Dodge Ram 4x4 CTD AUTO ATS-TST#6/ 3K GSK,MBRP 4"304SS 400K
2006 VW Golf GLS TDI PD 102K




http://www.snowmobileworld.com/forum...1146054139.jpg
permafrost is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-06-2005, 08:54 AM   #3
labudda
Super Moderator
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 3,958
Default

I voted for the 136" as well. I can't to much mountain riding but I just don't see giving up totally on trails. And I would want the shorter track for that. If there were no trails just MT's..... proly a 144".
labudda is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-06-2005, 10:37 AM   #4
VerticalEscapeRMK
Senior Member
 
VerticalEscapeRMK's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Modesto California
Mileage: Not enough!
Primary Sled: 2003 Polaris Vertical Escape 800/159"
Where I sled: Sierras/Sonora Pass
Posts: 124
Default

Where's the western boys? :thumbsup:

I agree that a 136" with a decent paddle will take you to a lot of places, we always had 136" tracks before they all went longer. But, when it gets deep and really steep the longer tracks are wonderfull. :hallo1:
__________________
Primary Sled 2003 Polaris RMK 800cc 159" Vertical Escape
Tow rig 2001.5 Dodge Ram Cummins 2500 4x4. Red Sport with black leather/ 2004 Interstate 27' Inclosed trailer, loaded
Other sleds in the trailer 2003 A/C 900 1M 159"/ 2004 Polaris RMK 700cc 144" Vertical Escape/ 1997 A/C Powder Extreme 600 triple

www.towrig.com pics of my junk
VerticalEscapeRMK is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-06-2005, 02:13 PM   #5
RMKcowboy
Senior Member
 
RMKcowboy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Winthrop, WA, US
Mileage: A lot!
Primary Sled: 03 RMK 800 Vertical Escape
Where I sled: Methow Valley, WA
Posts: 103
Default

144 is all I know and I love it, but (1) I've only rode this sled about 200 miles and (2) I never got a chance to do any climbing this year. IMO, anything over a 151 is just for bragging rights. Two identical sleds with different length tracks can climb the same height on the same mountain, it's 90% rider.
__________________
03 RMK 800 Vertical Escape- my sled
99 RMK 700 136"- wife's sled

01 RMK 700 FS- $3200 OBO, email cowboyona426@hotmail.com
RMKcowboy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-06-2005, 02:38 PM   #6
VerticalEscapeRMK
Senior Member
 
VerticalEscapeRMK's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Modesto California
Mileage: Not enough!
Primary Sled: 2003 Polaris Vertical Escape 800/159"
Where I sled: Sierras/Sonora Pass
Posts: 124
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by RMKcowboy@Apr 6 2005, 12:13 PM
* IMO, anything over a 151 is just for bragging rights.* Two identical sleds with different length tracks can climb the same height on the same mountain, it's 90% rider.
[snapback]416478[/snapback]
I agree on any day that it hasn't snowed for a while and the hills have a thick hard crust over it the difference between the lengths doesn't matter much. However, on days that it had just snowed and you are pushing powder the longer tracks do make a difference climbing and staying on top the snow. But, I have found those conditions to be not very often around here so in most cases....I agree with you.

If you are going to compare two identical sleds with different length tracks you have to assume they both have the same rider since we are comparing snowmobiles and not snowmobile riders.
__________________
Primary Sled 2003 Polaris RMK 800cc 159" Vertical Escape
Tow rig 2001.5 Dodge Ram Cummins 2500 4x4. Red Sport with black leather/ 2004 Interstate 27' Inclosed trailer, loaded
Other sleds in the trailer 2003 A/C 900 1M 159"/ 2004 Polaris RMK 700cc 144" Vertical Escape/ 1997 A/C Powder Extreme 600 triple

www.towrig.com pics of my junk
VerticalEscapeRMK is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-07-2005, 11:17 AM   #7
VerticalEscapeRMK
Senior Member
 
VerticalEscapeRMK's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Modesto California
Mileage: Not enough!
Primary Sled: 2003 Polaris Vertical Escape 800/159"
Where I sled: Sierras/Sonora Pass
Posts: 124
Default

5 votes? :dazed:
__________________
Primary Sled 2003 Polaris RMK 800cc 159" Vertical Escape
Tow rig 2001.5 Dodge Ram Cummins 2500 4x4. Red Sport with black leather/ 2004 Interstate 27' Inclosed trailer, loaded
Other sleds in the trailer 2003 A/C 900 1M 159"/ 2004 Polaris RMK 700cc 144" Vertical Escape/ 1997 A/C Powder Extreme 600 triple

www.towrig.com pics of my junk
VerticalEscapeRMK is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-08-2005, 12:40 AM   #8
gman086
Senior Member
 
gman086's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Portland, Oregon
Primary Sled: 2003 REVegade X 800, 2007 Summit X 800R
Where I sled: Oregon/Washington and northern MI
Posts: 643
Default

15x144 - best for out here. Short enough so as not to be a burden in tight trees and twisties and long enough to float up in powder. 16" wide tracks are a fad (don't sidehill as well nor lay over as well for powder carving) as are anything longer than 151 (except for maybe utah with the light powder they get there). 136'rs are for midwesterners wishing they lived out here!

Have Fun,

G MAN
gman086 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-08-2005, 01:00 AM   #9
RMKcowboy
Senior Member
 
RMKcowboy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Winthrop, WA, US
Mileage: A lot!
Primary Sled: 03 RMK 800 Vertical Escape
Where I sled: Methow Valley, WA
Posts: 103
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by VerticalEscapeRMK@Apr 6 2005, 01:38 PM
I agree on any day that it hasn't snowed for a while and the hills have a thick hard crust over it the difference between the lengths doesn't matter much. However, on days that it had just snowed and you are pushing powder the longer tracks do make a difference climbing and staying on top the snow. But, I have found those conditions to be not very often around here so in most cases....I agree with you.
I'd be willing to bet that 90% of the time or more my 144" would do every bit as good as your 159" machine. I really think that the super long tracks are just a marketing scheme. There is a lot to be said for track speed and technique in fluffy snow.

Quote:
If you are going to compare two identical sleds with different length tracks you have to assume they both have the same rider since we are comparing snowmobiles and not snowmobile riders.
[snapback]416483[/snapback]
What I meant was if the same guy went up the same hill on my sled or an identical 700 with a 151 he wouldn't climb any higher. With me at the controls, it wouldn't matter much because I've never done any climbing before and my "high mark" would make most mountain riders laugh until they peed themselves
__________________
03 RMK 800 Vertical Escape- my sled
99 RMK 700 136"- wife's sled

01 RMK 700 FS- $3200 OBO, email cowboyona426@hotmail.com
RMKcowboy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-08-2005, 01:53 AM   #10
VerticalEscapeRMK
Senior Member
 
VerticalEscapeRMK's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Modesto California
Mileage: Not enough!
Primary Sled: 2003 Polaris Vertical Escape 800/159"
Where I sled: Sierras/Sonora Pass
Posts: 124
Default

Well I still slightly disagree. I still say a 151-159 will take you places a 144" just won't make it, in the right conditions of course.

As far as the long tracks being a marketing scheme...i say they are here to stay and will only get slightly longer. Reason is they really don't make that much of a difference with a tipped rail you can't even hardly tell on harder snow. I rode our '04 700/144 Vertical Escape early this year for a few trips and moved to my 800/159" Vertical Escape later this year when I bought it. I couldnt tell a difference at all, besides the extra climbing power from the bigger motor and longer track.
__________________
Primary Sled 2003 Polaris RMK 800cc 159" Vertical Escape
Tow rig 2001.5 Dodge Ram Cummins 2500 4x4. Red Sport with black leather/ 2004 Interstate 27' Inclosed trailer, loaded
Other sleds in the trailer 2003 A/C 900 1M 159"/ 2004 Polaris RMK 700cc 144" Vertical Escape/ 1997 A/C Powder Extreme 600 triple

www.towrig.com pics of my junk
VerticalEscapeRMK is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v3.2.2

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:13 PM.



Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.