Your thoughts on tracks - Let's talk about snowmobiles!

Your thoughts on tracks - Let's talk about snowmobiles!

Post by Scott Aleckso » Thu, 25 May 2000 04:00:00


Thought we might start a new tech thread.  Let's share some ideas,
theories, and experiences about one of the most important parts of
your snowmobile.

What are your thoughts on the best track for a given riding style?
It seems that everything is going longer and deeper for us mountain
riders.  There is more to a track than its length and lug height
though.  Let's hear some thoughts on which way things should go from
here.  Is it better to keep getting longer?  At what point do we
reach an optimum length and anything beyond that point becomes a
negative feature?  Is it possible to come up with a formula that
matches track size to a given horsepower output?  We seem to have
settled on a 15" industry standard width, but is that ideal?  What
would be the difference in performance between a 15x136 and a 17x120
track (both have 2040 square inches of total surface area)?  And
what about those lugs.  They get deeper every season.  There are
numerous different configurations, from full width paddles to
staggered paddles, to paddles at different angles, to pin-type lugs
of varying heights.  What are the advantages and disadvantages of
each style?  And let's not leave out the trail riders.  Is the
15x121 standard the best we can do?  Apply the same thoughts to
different types of riding and let's see what we come up with.

Scott

 
 
 

Your thoughts on tracks - Let's talk about snowmobiles!

Post by Rob Lyon » Thu, 25 May 2000 04:00:00



Quote:
>Thought we might start a new tech thread.  Let's share some ideas,
>theories, and experiences about one of the most important parts of
>your snowmobile.

>What are your thoughts on the best track for a given riding style?
>It seems that everything is going longer and deeper for us mountain
>riders.  There is more to a track than its length and lug height
>though.  Let's hear some thoughts on which way things should go from
>here.  Is it better to keep getting longer?  At what point do we
>reach an optimum length and anything beyond that point becomes a
>negative feature?  Is it possible to come up with a formula that
>matches track size to a given horsepower output?  We seem to have
>settled on a 15" industry standard width, but is that ideal?  What
>would be the difference in performance between a 15x136 and a 17x120
>track (both have 2040 square inches of total surface area)?  And
>what about those lugs.  They get deeper every season.  There are
>numerous different configurations, from full width paddles to
>staggered paddles, to paddles at different angles, to pin-type lugs
>of varying heights.  What are the advantages and disadvantages of
>each style?  And let's not leave out the trail riders.  Is the
>15x121 standard the best we can do?  Apply the same thoughts to
>different types of riding and let's see what we come up with.

>Scott

Never having ridden out west, (although I'd love to), I don't have too much
knowledge of the different track styles.  One thing that bothers me though,
is the increasing use of deep-lug tracks on groomed trails here in the
east.  They sure can destroy a groomed trail fast!

Rob in Vermont

 
 
 

Your thoughts on tracks - Let's talk about snowmobiles!

Post by JohnSowar » Fri, 26 May 2000 04:00:00

I put a Camoplast track on my XCR last year an noticed a few things. Yes it
does have the alternating raised ribbed track clips and full length lugs. The
OEM lug height was .920" and the Camoplast is a full 1 inch. Not much dif. in
the height but what I did notice was the lugs are a lot bigger/thicker. I
studded it with 144 Woody's 1.175" before installing it so I don't know what
affect the longer studs had, but the hard pack hole shot was much improved. I
don't think the lugs give as much and stand up better to the heavy loads of a
hole shot. The difference was night and day.

I also noticed an increase in engine temperature. The snow-flap sits higher
after extended rides and I think the track is spitting more snow (with greater
force) out the back instead of it bouncing off the flap and back onto the track
to cool the front exchanger. I keep a closer eye on eng. temp. but it I haven't
had any excessive temps. I like this track and I think it made a big change. I
hope my new SRX track is as stout (I'm sceptical).

All this and a buck will getcha a cup of coffee.

JJS

 
 
 

Your thoughts on tracks - Let's talk about snowmobiles!

Post by Jeff » Fri, 26 May 2000 04:00:00

<<<<<<<<<<<<<snip>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Never having ridden out west, (although I'd love to), I don't have too
much knowledge of the different track styles. One thing that bothers me
though, is the increasing use of deep-lug tracks on groomed trails here
in the east. They sure can destroy a groomed trail fast!
Rob in Vermont  
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<snip>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

A T-Cat in the east with a 1-1/2 track is known as a rototiller on skis.
=-)

Ride with others in mind at ALL times.

J B    

 
 
 

Your thoughts on tracks - Let's talk about snowmobiles!

Post by Mike Bake » Fri, 26 May 2000 04:00:00

I have a 99 600 RMK with the 2x136" track. I read Extreme Polaris results of
their testing and they say it is "absolutely worthless". At first I was in
denial but I tried to compare it to other sleds the best I could in a
non-scientific method. After a season I was convinced that some tracks
definitely work better than others for a given size. Some had suggested that
I remove every third lug on the outside of the track. Knowing that I would
eventually replace and sell this track, I tried something different. I cut
the 2" lugs with a knife down to 1 3/4". Didn't seem like much but it
completely changed the personality of the track for better. Instead of
digging down into the snow (trenching) it began to turn without digging and
I was getting stuck a lot less and climbing higher. Why did the 1 3/4" track
rate so much better than the 2" track in Extreme Polaris's testing and many
others experience? Too deep of lugs in my opinion. I believe the
manufacturers are learning quickly what does and does not work well in
mountain conditions. Maybe in the future we will have methods of rating
tracks such as "aspect ratio of lug height vs. distance", drag or rolling
resistance, durometer ratings, recommended horsepower and etc.
No doubt about it, seems to be more of an art than a science right now.
Remember selecting different wax compounds for your cross country skis? I
don't believe one track will always be best in any type snow but if anyone
has a 141" Camoplast challenger in good shape, give me a holler...

http://www.mcn.net/~bikemaker


Quote:

> What are your thoughts on the best track for a given riding style?
> It seems that everything is going longer and deeper for us mountain
> riders.  There is more to a track than its length and lug height...
> what about those lugs.  They get deeper every season.  There are
> numerous different configurations, from full width paddles to
> staggered paddles, to paddles at different angles, to pin-type lugs
> of varying heights.  What are the advantages and disadvantages of
> each style?

 
 
 

Your thoughts on tracks - Let's talk about snowmobiles!

Post by Greg Mi » Sat, 27 May 2000 04:00:00

A T-Cat in the West with a 2+" track is known as a Mountain trencher on
skis.
Quote:

> <<<<<<<<<<<<<snip>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> Never having ridden out west, (although I'd love to), I don't have too
> much knowledge of the different track styles. One thing that bothers me
> though, is the increasing use of deep-lug tracks on groomed trails here
> in the east. They sure can destroy a groomed trail fast!
> Rob in Vermont
> <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<snip>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

> A T-Cat in the east with a 1-1/2 track is known as a rototiller on skis.
> =-)

> Ride with others in mind at ALL times.

> J B

 
 
 

Your thoughts on tracks - Let's talk about snowmobiles!

Post by xcpi.. » Mon, 29 May 2000 04:00:00

I heard a rumor a while back that some eastern states were thinking of
banning deep lug tracks on the groomed trail networks, I think it was
Wisconsin. Anybody heard anything on this? I think the proposed max.
track depth was 1 1/4 inches.
Terry



Quote:
> I have a 99 600 RMK with the 2x136" track. I read Extreme Polaris
results of
> their testing and they say it is "absolutely worthless". At first I
was in
> denial but I tried to compare it to other sleds the best I could in a
> non-scientific method. After a season I was convinced that some tracks
> definitely work better than others for a given size. Some had
suggested that
> I remove every third lug on the outside of the track. Knowing that I
would
> eventually replace and sell this track, I tried something different.
I cut
> the 2" lugs with a knife down to 1 3/4". Didn't seem like much but it
> completely changed the personality of the track for better. Instead of
> digging down into the snow (trenching) it began to turn without
digging and
> I was getting stuck a lot less and climbing higher. Why did the 1
3/4" track
> rate so much better than the 2" track in Extreme Polaris's testing
and many
> others experience? Too deep of lugs in my opinion. I believe the
> manufacturers are learning quickly what does and does not work well in
> mountain conditions. Maybe in the future we will have methods of
rating
> tracks such as "aspect ratio of lug height vs. distance", drag or
rolling
> resistance, durometer ratings, recommended horsepower and etc.
> No doubt about it, seems to be more of an art than a science right
now.
> Remember selecting different wax compounds for your cross country
skis? I
> don't believe one track will always be best in any type snow but if
anyone
> has a 141" Camoplast challenger in good shape, give me a holler...

> http://www.mcn.net/~bikemaker



> > What are your thoughts on the best track for a given riding style?
> > It seems that everything is going longer and deeper for us mountain
> > riders.  There is more to a track than its length and lug height...

> > what about those lugs.  They get deeper every season.  There are
> > numerous different configurations, from full width paddles to
> > staggered paddles, to paddles at different angles, to pin-type lugs
> > of varying heights.  What are the advantages and disadvantages of
> > each style?

Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
 
 
 

Your thoughts on tracks - Let's talk about snowmobiles!

Post by TIGE » Tue, 30 May 2000 04:00:00

Eastern State??? ...Here in NY we would call Wisconsin "out west"!
You from Washington? ;)

TIGER~

Quote:

> I heard a rumor a while back that some eastern states were thinking of
> banning deep lug tracks on the groomed trail networks, I think it was
> Wisconsin. Anybody heard anything on this? I think the proposed max.
> track depth was 1 1/4 inches.
> Terry



> > I have a 99 600 RMK with the 2x136" track. I read Extreme Polaris
> results of
> > their testing and they say it is "absolutely worthless". At first I
> was in
> > denial but I tried to compare it to other sleds the best I could in a
> > non-scientific method. After a season I was convinced that some tracks
> > definitely work better than others for a given size. Some had
> suggested that
> > I remove every third lug on the outside of the track. Knowing that I
> would
> > eventually replace and sell this track, I tried something different.
> I cut
> > the 2" lugs with a knife down to 1 3/4". Didn't seem like much but it
> > completely changed the personality of the track for better. Instead of
> > digging down into the snow (trenching) it began to turn without
> digging and
> > I was getting stuck a lot less and climbing higher. Why did the 1
> 3/4" track
> > rate so much better than the 2" track in Extreme Polaris's testing
> and many
> > others experience? Too deep of lugs in my opinion. I believe the
> > manufacturers are learning quickly what does and does not work well in
> > mountain conditions. Maybe in the future we will have methods of
> rating
> > tracks such as "aspect ratio of lug height vs. distance", drag or
> rolling
> > resistance, durometer ratings, recommended horsepower and etc.
> > No doubt about it, seems to be more of an art than a science right
> now.
> > Remember selecting different wax compounds for your cross country
> skis? I
> > don't believe one track will always be best in any type snow but if
> anyone
> > has a 141" Camoplast challenger in good shape, give me a holler...

> > http://www.mcn.net/~bikemaker



> > > What are your thoughts on the best track for a given riding style?
> > > It seems that everything is going longer and deeper for us mountain
> > > riders.  There is more to a track than its length and lug height...

> > > what about those lugs.  They get deeper every season.  There are
> > > numerous different configurations, from full width paddles to
> > > staggered paddles, to paddles at different angles, to pin-type lugs
> > > of varying heights.  What are the advantages and disadvantages of
> > > each style?

> Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
> Before you buy.

 
 
 

Your thoughts on tracks - Let's talk about snowmobiles!

Post by RMK70 » Wed, 14 Jun 2000 04:00:00

Quote:
> but if anyone
> has a 141" Camoplast challenger in good shape, give me a holler...

I'll second that!...I have the 136 challenger and it has to be the best deep
snow track ever, but the 141's are a bit better, especially if you move the
rear skidframe rearward instead of rail extentions, then they perform
beautifully, the 800 RMK's around here with the 141" challenger tracks are
unbeatable.....Thats what i want for my 700.

If you compare the challenger 2" to the stock 2", you'll quicly see why its
better. The lugs are fat near the track and skinny at the tip, so much that
you cant bend the lugs flat over like you can with the stock 2" tracks, so
they can bend a little, but not too much. Thats why they work so well in the
soft powder. They are a great mountain track, but in hard pack conditions
they are scary, its like having no brakes at all coming downhill......so I
guess you cant have the best of both worlds.
There's little scarier than coming down a trench between two trees on the
trail.....BACKWARDS........
Actually, when the trail is trenched the track spins so easily that
sometimes it feels like you have snow on your belt or something, but iots
just the track spinning...oh well, I wouldn't trade it for anything.....

Pardon the mindless ramble, its just nice to talk about SLEDDING for
once!!..haha
--
Darren
97 RMK 700
http://members.xoom.com/RMK700/

Quote:
> I have a 99 600 RMK with the 2x136" track. I read Extreme Polaris results
of
> their testing and they say it is "absolutely worthless". At first I was in
> denial but I tried to compare it to other sleds the best I could in a
> non-scientific method. After a season I was convinced that some tracks
> definitely work better than others for a given size. Some had suggested
that
> I remove every third lug on the outside of the track. Knowing that I would
> eventually replace and sell this track, I tried something different. I cut
> the 2" lugs with a knife down to 1 3/4". Didn't seem like much but it
> completely changed the personality of the track for better. Instead of
> digging down into the snow (trenching) it began to turn without digging
and
> I was getting stuck a lot less and climbing higher. Why did the 1 3/4"
track
> rate so much better than the 2" track in Extreme Polaris's testing and
many
> others experience? Too deep of lugs in my opinion. I believe the
> manufacturers are learning quickly what does and does not work well in
> mountain conditions. Maybe in the future we will have methods of rating
> tracks such as "aspect ratio of lug height vs. distance", drag or rolling
> resistance, durometer ratings, recommended horsepower and etc.
> No doubt about it, seems to be more of an art than a science right now.
> Remember selecting different wax compounds for your cross country skis? I
> don't believe one track will always be best in any type snow but if anyone
> has a 141" Camoplast challenger in good shape, give me a holler...

> http://www.mcn.net/~bikemaker



> > What are your thoughts on the best track for a given riding style?
> > It seems that everything is going longer and deeper for us mountain
> > riders.  There is more to a track than its length and lug height...

> > what about those lugs.  They get deeper every season.  There are
> > numerous different configurations, from full width paddles to
> > staggered paddles, to paddles at different angles, to pin-type lugs
> > of varying heights.  What are the advantages and disadvantages of
> > each style?