Decent Opportunity

[canoehead]

Just wondering if anyone has input on trail performance of a 2010 MTX with a 180 mcx turbo. I do the majority of trail and lake riding and would like to know the trail performance of this type of set-up before I pull the trigger. I currently run an 09 XTX with go fast add ons, but being a guy I know I would love the extra hook up and power, but I've never run a MTX on trails. I'm concerned about overheat and limited fuel mileage. Any input or advice would be appreciated because at the price this guys asking I don't think it will last long.
Thanks

 

[nitris223]

We run MTX 's on the trails here in Saskatchewan. Our trails don't get iced over unless we have a real stupid warm day or something. Only time we get iced over is in the spring when it warms up and freezes again. I have run the duraflex scratchers for the last 1500 miles and that is all I use besides the larger idler wheels and dip into the fields or ditches when the snow is scarce. This year I am installing a temp gauge just to keep a eye on the temp but I have yet to see the light come on or have a overheat condition. I think the 153 is only 6 or 8" longer total length compared to the XTX. 153 to 162 is only the depth of the lug difference in track length on the ground. If it's a SE model you get the floats for suspension and no coil springs to mess with.

As for fuel mileage I have gone 80 miles and still had some fuel left but then again I have a problem with my thumb and brain working together. My thumb usually wins . They say a turbo is just as good on gas as stock if not better.

 

[Mountaintech]

I can run 50 mph down the trail with 0 PSI showing on the boost guage.......that translates into good mileage.

 

[Vmax4]

Having grown up in New Hampshire riding trails and having been in Washington and British Columbia riding mountains............

I would not buy a mountain sled to ride trails. In my opinion you will be disappointed in the handling on trail and have limited exposure to off trail where the sled is more designed to work. I would look at a cross over sled if you wanted something in between.

My analogy has always been, if I cloned myself and had one of me on an MTX and one of me on an RTX and we were trail riding. Only one of me would be fastest through the trees on a trail.

 

[canoehead]

Appreciate the input guys. Have decided to keep the ole XTX. I've just got too much time and mods invested in it. I'm going to throw a 1.75 BC on it and hope it doesn't take any or much performance away.
Thanks again

 

[derek_thompson21]

I ride the #*$&@ out of an mtx on the trails and keep up with 136 doo's all day.. then when we get into the fun stuff I can outride em..
I think I might try and find a 2" track or 2-1/4" because most of my riding is on trail.

 

[Vmax4]

I call Derek_Thompson21 out. No way. You take two sleds out for a ride on a trail. One is a 162" Nytro MTX stock. The other is a 121" Nytro RTX. You ride both. I am betting the farm that there is no way, if we could clone you and ride the same trail at the same time, that you could keep up with yourself on the short track. And if you could, lets do it for a 250 mile trail ride. Then see how tied you are man-handling that extra track around all day. See if you are still smoking that shorty in the twisties and bumps after mile 201............ If a long track sled worked well in trail conditions across the country, the mountain segment wouldn't be the smallest segment of the market.

It doesn't matter if you can "out ride" you buddies on their 136"......... Maybe your skill set is better?

99% of the time, a guy that buys a 162" didn't need that sled anyways........... Get the sled that is right for you, your preferred riding terrain, and your ability.

My 2 cents.

 

[derek_thompson21]

All I'm trying to say is that coming from a 1997 700 sx to a 153 4 stroke I didn't notice much change in how the machine handled trail wise. I didn't think these mountain machines would handle this well on trails but it does.

 

[nitris223]

I ride a 162 MTX on the trails in Saskatchewan and I can ride with the shorter track sleds just fine. I came from a 2005 RMK 700 and I would never be able to ride the RMK as fast as I can ride the Nytro through the trails or over the rough stuff. Both the wife and I find that we have to pull over after a short while and let people catch up. I still had my Polaris in the shop when I got the nytro and the Nytro was 2 " longer overall then the RMK. I also had a 136 Polaris in the shop at the same time and my 162 was about 6-8" longer then the 136. Where you sit on a nytro is like sitting behind the seat on a older style sled. I describe the nytro to guys like it is a cab over Mack and the older sit down sleds are like a flat top Peterbuilt. We have a 162 and a 153 and everybody said I was nuts getting such a long track sled. The numbers sound big but when you do the math my track is only a 4.5 inches more on the ground then the 153 and 9" more then a xtx 144.

There are more and more guys going to the mtn sleds to use on the trails. I prefer a longer track sled on the trails , my main reason is that when the trails get rough I can still ride home and not have my back beat to crap in the rough stuff. It gives me a getter ride. I haven't owned a short track sled in 20 yrs and I don't ever see a reason to get one.

To me the new standard for a short track should be a 136" track. The suspensions have grown so much over the last 15 yrs that there is still probably less track on the ground with a new 136 sled then there was on a 15 yr old 121" sled. Remember the older sleds , you could barely see the full rear idler and the running boards were parallel to the ground. Then a few years later you started to see the rear shock , holy crap that must be a smooth riding sled with that extra 2" of travel. Now we see the whole guts of a rear suspension, bumper is 20" in the air, need a step ladder to climb aboard . Little exaggeration there but hopefully you understand what I am getting at when it comes to new longer track sleds compared to older short track sleds of the past.

 

[TBay Sledhead]

I don"t know where you went to school for math but my calculations the 162 should have 9" more track on the ground than the 144 and 4.5" more than the 153.

 

[nitris223]

Late night math. Might have been a couple of wobbly pops involved. Your numbers are correct I will change the post. Some how last year I had my 163 and 153 ski tips up against the garage door and I only measured 2.5" difference from the door to the outside edge of the idle wheel. Something must have been goofy.

 

[derek_thompson21]

That all depends on the skid layout and attack angle of said brand sled.
A 2009 136 skidoo renegade is about 4 inches shorter than my 08 nytro 153.

That's from ski tip to the edge of the track.