Iceman31

I found a sled I am interested in. 2010 Polaris Dragon 800. More track than what I need 163" as I never go to the mountains but looks good and he is asking $7200 for it which I could probably negotiate lower. Do these have the same top end issues that the 08 and 09 RMK's?

My buddy owns a Polaris dealership and he has a nice 2010 Polaris Dragon 800 with a 163" track. We are flat landers and never go to the mountains. What are the cons of a flat lander using a 163" track? I have never had anything larger than a 121". I have two of those right now and would be getting rid of one for this sled. Your advice is greatly appreciated. My son sleds with his buddies and they all have 150" + tracks. He tells me he feels left out - LOL

99Polaris500

Unless you get tons of snow, I don't think anything over 144 is even practical for us flatlanders. I imagine you would have overheating problems on the trails.

__________________

'99 Polaris xc 500
'91 Arctic Cat prowler 440

Snowweasel

The general feeling is that the longer the tack the better off you are, but on the flatlands it doesn't give u any advantages. Sure, it will handle in deep snow better. But on the trails it will feel as if you are driving an 18 wheeler. For the riding it sounds like you are doing I would go 136", anymore and it may feel strange.


Sent from my iPod touch using Snowmobile

__________________
-my ride
2003 arctic cat zl550 (looking to sell)

joshkidner

the more track the better. always. it may not be needed but it does give a better, more confortable ride. idk bout that motor wait for someone else to reply:P

Iceman31

We get our fair share of snow but nothing super deep. Can you tell me why it would overheat? I am not familiar with anything larger than 121" but my son seems to think our next sled can not have a track any shorter than 144" He tells me he gets stuck all the time with the 121", I have to admit even I have gotten stuck.

99Polaris500

With the longer track it'll be harder to kick enough snow up under the tunnel on hardpacked trails. You maybe need longer track, but 163" is too long in my opinion.

__________________

'99 Polaris xc 500
'91 Arctic Cat prowler 440

Roof_991

163 is crazy long for flatlanding I think. I wouldnt go bigger than a 144 but would stick around the 136 range

Sent from my SCH-R830 using Snowmobile.com App

kccats

Yep a 136 will work perfect for you! Is your 121 a 11/4" lug? Likely more like a 3/4 ?
The Pollaris Big Blocks have had there issues!

smokingcrater

keep in mind that sled also has a narrow ski stance. It might seem a little tippy...

__________________
1) 2000 Arctic cat ZR 700, which now thinks it is a 2001 ZR 600 EFI APV w/136" ripsaw. (for sale!)
2) 1995 Yamaha VMAX 600, which now thinks it is a Polaris! (Polaris x10 suspension, Polaris P85 clutch) (for sale!)
3) 2004 Yamaha Warrior
4) 2006 Yamaha Nytro

jordandakota

I was talking with one of the mechanics at an area Polaris dealer who had an 08 Dragon 800 and had all the issues he could have with it, then got a '10 Assault and didn't have any issues with it the whole season. Can't speak from first-hand experience though. And I'd have to agree with everyone else on the 163'' is too long for anywhere other than way out West.

__________________
1974 Arctic Cat Cheetah 340
Gonna be set up for ice fishing. Should be good for it's purpose!


Most snowmobile problems are caused by a loose nut connecting the handlebars to the seat.

Phaze

136" is plenty. Good luck in the twisties with a 163. You'll practically have to come to a stop to turn it. Like taking a bus down the trails. I'd keep looking.....

__________________
'05 Yamaha RX1 ER 1000
'93 Yamaha Phazer II LE 485
'96 Polaris Ultra SP 700 - SOLD!!

2012/2013 miles: 484 WooHoo!!
2011/2012 miles: 737
The sled is fixed... Now my wallet is broke..

rgoers

You will NEVER be able to turn that thing on the trails!!! The only way to turn a long track like that is by carving, and you don't get enough snow for that.

I came from the NE and I can tell you I wouldn't want anything over a 136" for riding there. Heck, I don't even want something that long where I am now... and we get 10' of snow on the ground at one time!!! If you know how to ride; a 144" with 2" paddles will get you anywhere! The only thing a 163 is good for is going straight up mountains - nothing else!

__________________
2004 Polaris Trail RMK 136
1997 Ski Doo Summit 500
2000 Arctic Cat ZL550 ESR (in NY)
2000 Arctic Cat 440 Panther (sold)
1980 Arctic Cat Jag 3000 F/C (in NY)

"If it ain't broke, take it apart and find out why!"

BC_Dan

I will echo the others. The lug height on that 163" is 2.4". When you ride hardpack trails, the lugs are horrible for traction and the back end will be all over. Manufacturer recommends not to exceed 75 mph top speed, as the reciprocating mass of the track at speeds greater than that can cause the track to come apart. Mountain riders aren't concerned with cornering ability on the trails and definitely don't care about top speed going up the hill.

The taller lug height of the track also contributes to excessive hyfax wear as well as overheating on the hardpack.

If you ride mostly trails, this is not the sled for you. THere are much better options out there.

__________________
2007 Dragon RMK 700 155", 2008 RMK 600 155", 2006 RMK 600 144", 95 Prowler 550 2-up, 1990 Indy 650, Really OLD AC Cheetah

http://www.avalanche.org/accidents.php