Frostbite
TY 4 Stroke God
I was thinking of going to larger rear idlers to free up some more horsepower by making it easier for the track to go around the larger diameter idlers. I understand the distance the track must travel around these larger idlers will remove some of the track on the ground (maybe one paddle, two at the most).
Isn't that about what you get when you go with a 159" track? I understand you get about one to two more paddles in the snow when going from a 151 to a 159" track.
My logic (or lack thereof) is telling me if this is true I can go to larger rear idlers and a 156" or 159" and not have to extend my tunnel and rails? The only argument I can think of off the top of my head is; why go to larger rear idlers with 8 tooth drivers. It may make more sense to go to 9 tooth drivers than to larger rear idlers first. Doing both would be a benefit but I'm not particularily interested in going to 9 tooth drivers at this point. Feel free to blow holes in my theory. PB
Isn't that about what you get when you go with a 159" track? I understand you get about one to two more paddles in the snow when going from a 151 to a 159" track.
My logic (or lack thereof) is telling me if this is true I can go to larger rear idlers and a 156" or 159" and not have to extend my tunnel and rails? The only argument I can think of off the top of my head is; why go to larger rear idlers with 8 tooth drivers. It may make more sense to go to 9 tooth drivers than to larger rear idlers first. Doing both would be a benefit but I'm not particularily interested in going to 9 tooth drivers at this point. Feel free to blow holes in my theory. PB
Mountaintech
TY 4 Stroke God
PB, I just finished installing a 159 Camoplast Challenger, Holz rear skid, and an MPI tunnel extension. The tunnel extension kit included 3.8" rail extensions and everything fit beautifully. IMO I don't think 8" idlers would take up the slack of a 156 or 159 without extending rails somewhat.
Frostbite
TY 4 Stroke God
I tend to agree with you but I thought they might give a guy JUST enough room to squeek one under there.
I do like the idea of the larger idlers but not the idea going any longer with my sled. That's why I originally thought the 16" Skidoo track would be the ticket but it looks like a whole lot of work to may it fit properly.
Whta's your opinion of the MPI tunnel extension? Have you seen the Holtz, or Hartman? PB
I do like the idea of the larger idlers but not the idea going any longer with my sled. That's why I originally thought the 16" Skidoo track would be the ticket but it looks like a whole lot of work to may it fit properly.
Whta's your opinion of the MPI tunnel extension? Have you seen the Holtz, or Hartman? PB
snowmotion
Expert
- Joined
- Nov 5, 2003
- Messages
- 211
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 0
- Location
- BANFF ALBERTA WHISTLER BC
- Website
- www.snowmotion.com
has Any one Has Tried the A Skidoo 16inch Track on RX1
I Am curious to see Whom Has Found An Ideal Ski setup For the Deep
and steep
If anyone Has Made A 16 inch Skidoo track Fit a RX1 mountain I would love to know the cost and results. This or The King Cat Track Both Have some Appeal but perhaps when I see the math I Might not Like it.Powder Blue said:
I Am curious to see Whom Has Found An Ideal Ski setup For the Deep
and steep
Snow Fever
Expert
Unless you have a sled that is capable of spinning the track up hill in a couple feet of powder at 70-80 mph the big wheels in the back are just the latest craze! Go down to your local Artic Cat dealer make sure they have the track on one of those King Cats adjusted properly, have them lift the back end and then you grab the paddles and try rotate the track. NO diffrence in the amount of force needed to spin it from my RX-1 and I have 9 cog drivers (I put them in only to help stop the racheting) the rest of the wheels are stock. I also have reverse on my sled and if you lift up the back and just move the track back and forth where the play in the reverse is you can move the track with one finger. When the gears lock up the track is hard to pull just like the Cat that has 10 cog up front and big wheels in the back. Point here is that for high speed there would be some (Very little I believe) advantage but the speed these RX-1s make on a hill I think your wasting your time and money. Also to add what I know to be fact, if you put bigger wheels I.E. Drivers or rear Idlers you have shortened the overall foot print. This is more detramental to this sled because of its weight. I have a 159" track and it lays 1/4" more track on the ground then my kids 700 Doo with a 151" track because of the 9 cog drivers I put in and because Yamys suspension eats up track (The hieght from the bottom of the track to the top where it is in the tunnel) What this sled needs is more track not mods that eat up the track length. A 159"x16" Doo track is what this sled needs. NOT BIG DRIVERS or IDLERS!
Mountaintech
TY 4 Stroke God
PB, Here is my opinion on the tunnel extensions. The MPI and Ekholm extensions are identical in design but MPI's is cleanly punched and bent (and covered with removable plastic on one side so its scratchfree) whereas the Ekholm one looks as if it was made by a Grade 7 metal shop student. Holz makes great stuff with the exception of the RX1 tunnel extension. It does not tie into the rear of the tunnel well enough and as a result makes it VERY flimsy. The Hartman extension is also well designed and made but the outside edge is square and I wanted a round rolled edge that matched the existing tunnel. I love my RX1 as a 159 and would do it again in a heartbeat.
Frostbite
TY 4 Stroke God
I looked pretty hard at what it would take to run the 16" Skidoo track. The sticking point appears to be the rear suspension mounts. They protrude too far inward presently for the track to fit. That's one of the reasons I bought the MPI billet rear suspension mounts. Now if a guy could mount those billet rear suspension mounts on the outside of the tunnel (it might even look cool) I think you'd be in business except for a couple of very minor changes like larger idlers on the upper cross shaft.
I agree that IS what this sled needs. I'd like to see a a combination track of paddles and fingers (like a Hillcross track) in the 16" width on the RX-1M and you could slay about any dragon that comes your way. PB
I agree that IS what this sled needs. I'd like to see a a combination track of paddles and fingers (like a Hillcross track) in the 16" width on the RX-1M and you could slay about any dragon that comes your way. PB
HYERUP
Pro
PB- I run a 159" on my RX-1 with the original factory tunnel extension. I just removed the snowflap, trimmed the rear of the tunnel up about 1" and reinstalled the flap flush with the top of the factory tunnel extension. The I bent the thin 1/4" bar (that is located under the rear bumper) back about 1". Then I tied the flap back to it with zip ties. I have 1,000 km's on it (with extroverts, simmons skis and a Boondocker kit)- WITH NO PROBLEMS. No you don't need larger idlers, and as pointed out, they may not help.
Frostbite
TY 4 Stroke God
Ahha! I thought so! If the requirement to buy a tunnel extension is eliminated then it's only rail extensions should be needed, right? Thanks for the encouaging news. PB
