[Beaxch]

I haven't seen anything but what the manufacturers have to say about these different types of tracks. You have a 2" paddle track and a 2" finger track at 15" wide and 136" or maybe 144" long. The paddle track is supposed to be for "proven powder performance" while the finger track is supposed to be for "packed powder and hill climbing". The fingers are arranged mostly in the shape of paddles with a similar general angle pattern. (I'm looking specifically at the Camoplast "Finger" and "Challenger" for this example, but I'm really concerned with the different characteristics between these general types.) So I'm guessing that with a finger track you might gain some traction on the trail or anytime the powder has a firm base (and spring snow), but it won't have the pure powder-pushing power that paddles of the same size will give you, if only because some snow will slip between the fingers. The big question is does it really work this way in the real world, and to what extent? How much of each type of traction are you gaining and losing between these two? Anyway, I know nothing about this topic so any opinions are welcome. I was just thinking how we have so much more packed powder and hill climbing here and a very long spring season (last riding day was May 22) I might want to think about a finger track for one of the 136" sleds. But if a 2" finger track does not have as much powder traction as, for example, the 1.5" paddle track currently on the Vmax (which has an aggressive powder profile), then that is a problem because the Vmax has marginal pull in the deepest stuff as-is. Less powder traction would be unacceptable. I don't want to come up short in the fresh and deep because I switched tracks. And do the fingers really help where they are supposed to help or is it just a gimmick? Any opinions? Firsthand secondhand or overheard are all welcome.

 

[snowmutt]

IMO I like the full paddle . We have 1 of each 1.25x136 finger (predator) and 1.5 full paddlex136(9818) on our SS's. The one thing that I notice is wear, on the finger tracks your more prone to ripping the fingers off from catching on ice,rocks and such. Most finger tracks are made of a softer compound than the full paddles. Ive had my 1.5 for a year longer than the 1.25 and it has less wear than then the finger track. The finger track has a few fingers missing vs's the full paddle 1.5 , which has a little rounding on the front edge and both were ran in the same conditions.

If you have a finger track thats 1.5 and lose some fingers you will end up with a 1.25 over time.
But with the full paddle you wear the whole paddle evenly and has more resistance of wearing due to the solid profile vs the fingers w/ spaces inbetween for things to hook on and rip it off.

For the money I would go FULL PADDLE . oH BTW they both get stuck just the same :slick: and I really didnt notice the diffrance from one or the other on the trail ether far as bite and performance, in off trail conds though I look at it as more surface to dig the better.

Truthfully I think the manufactures came up with this track(finger) to save wt and cost but still charge full price to make a profit in todays world by getting people to buy the new hype
mutt

 

[Droptop]

The way I always interpreted finger vs. paddle was the finger is more for trail riding while paddle is for mountain riding. I also read that finger throws more snow on the exchangers than paddle (obviously a trail benefit).

Good luck.

 

[test-reg]

the finger is to grab corn snow or packed like late season riding

paddle track is to flot on powder

 

[Mikadoo]

Do they even make a finger track anymore?
They are so poor on performance and wear that I thought they were scrapped.

 

[billww]

I like the paddle track the best.