• Don't miss out on all the fun! Register on our forums to post and have added features! Membership levels include a FREE membership tier.

08 D8 track alternative

R

RMOD800

Member
Nov 18, 2008
121
13
18
Really not excited about the stock polaris 163" track. Any suggestions on alternative tracks such as the new single ply polaris track, Maverick, Challenger Extreme, etc? I use the sled for mainly boondocking which consists of all types of snow conditions. Wasn't sure if anyone else is not quite happy.
 

sled_guy

Well-known member
Premium Member
Jul 5, 2001
3,566
843
113
Riverton, Utah
Yea, that track is pretty lame.

I would think any of the Camoplasts would be better, hard to imagine anything being worse.

If you don't mind changing drivers/pitch then the original Series IV 2.4 is a terrific track. But they are pricey.

sled_guy
 

mountainhorse

Well-known member
Lifetime Membership
Premium Member
Dec 12, 2005
18,606
11,814
113
West Coast
www.laketahoeconcours.com
The Arctic Cat Power Claw 162" seems to be getting everyones attention.

I've been hearing nothing but good things about this track.

At 2.25" you would gain much needed lug-tip to tunnel clearance and keep track speed up....

DUB:
Ahhh, the PC...

So far I really like the track! The thing hooks on the road and ice, as well as provides good stopping. We had my 162 PC and a stocker 163 side by side and the stocker takes the holeshot in really soft snow but once the PC gets to the top of the snow it just stays there.

I would do it again, so far it is an all around great track!


attachment.php
 

MURFDOG

Active member
Lifetime Membership
Jan 30, 2008
250
28
28
I'm running the Power Claw on my 08 dragon and have been very happy with it. I've got an extra set of Avid 7 tooth 3.0 drivers if your interested, brand new and smokin deal.
 
B
Nov 21, 2005
842
42
28
9 Mile Falls, WA
The 2.5 challenger extreme works awesome, from what I've seen this season thus far I prefer it over the powder claw. I run a 156 x 15 x 2.5 in 3.0 pitch. Try it, you won't be dissapointed!
 
E

EricW

Well-known member
Nov 26, 2007
1,867
691
113
NE Washington
I went to the 3.0 Camo Extreme and have been happy. Its fully clipped which helps since Poo cant afford to send bogie wheels for 10K. I went with the 7 tooth Avids for clearance as well. I put my Poo 5.1 163 under my sons lightly modded D7 155. It was a huge improvement for him over the 5.0 155 but I think the track difference is clearly noticable between the 2 sleds. Dad is the highmark now. LOL.

I would like to try the Power Claw as MH mentioned and still be able to run the 8 tooth. If I do I will update. EW
 

Kale

Active member
Lifetime Membership
Nov 26, 2007
300
33
28
55
Camoplast makes the camo extreme 2.5 in the 2.86 pitch in a 163 length. Straight swap of tracks, I did it on my D7 but in the 155 length. Very impressed with the track so far.

Kale
 
R

RMOD800

Member
Nov 18, 2008
121
13
18
Thanks to everyone so far. I have had a challenger on a cat and I did like the performace.

I'm glad to know that other people are not entirely happy with the stock track. I wasn't sure if it was my imagination or reality when the stock track just kept trenching and underperforming.
 

RMK935VA

Well-known member
Premium Member
Jan 14, 2008
1,054
431
83
71
I put the new Challenger Extreme 2.86 pitch track on my 08 D8. It is the 2.5" lug by 163" model. No driver change needed and it is is set up to run with the center driver that come on the D8. I am getting lots of track speed so clearance is not an issue. I had a 162" x 2.5" Challenger Extreme on my Edge 935 and I loved it. It required the 3.0drivers but I had the holz rolled chaincase so the clearance was not an issue on it either.
 
R

RMOD800

Member
Nov 18, 2008
121
13
18
Here's a ridiculious question, is the 08 D8 a 3.0 or 2.86 pitch? Assuming by your post, it is a 2.86. I was under the impression that it was a 3.0 pitch. Also, is it necessary to change drivers?

RMK 935,
It sounds like you didn't have issues with the camo fitting. My first impression is to follow your move and exchange without a bunch of head aces and use the camo.
 

KAWGRN

Well-known member
Premium Member
Nov 26, 2007
2,522
394
83
everywhere
I'm pretty HAPPY with my 09 Dragon track doesnt trench like the 08 and its folding back just like a challanger so far so good!!!
 

mountainhorse

Well-known member
Lifetime Membership
Premium Member
Dec 12, 2005
18,606
11,814
113
West Coast
www.laketahoeconcours.com
Hmmm...

Problem with the 2.5" tracks (heck... even the stock 2.4" tracks) is the lack of clearance to the roof of the tunnel. On the Dragons, without the front tunnel heat exchanger, the clearance at the exit/roll of the tunnel is just fine... on the non-Dragons, 2008 155" models, and all 2007 and previous IQ-RMK's With the front tunnel heat exchanger... this dimension at the exit is a bit tighter (about 5/8" less).

A good friend of mine has a turbo D-8 .... he has the 2.86" pitch 163" x 15" x 2.5"...
Running the stock 8 tooth drivers (stock 3 driver Dragon setup)...

There is less than 1/4" clearance at the roof of his tunnel...He trimmed his lugs a bit since install...

Basic fluid-mechanics.... the ch extreme moves more snow... and has less lug tip to tunnel clearance...parasitic drag as the track moves snow thru the tunnel is pretty significant with this small of clearance...kind of like running with the brake slightly pressed....this robs power, heats up the clutches and gives more inconsistent performance... less obvious in "Champaign" powder... much more in high moisture snow . Less obvious too for a turbo that can overpower the drag.

Now, EricW is running the 7 tooth drivers and a very high dollar M-10 suspension that was custom installed. Too many variables have been changed like suspension action and angle of attack to compare this to a stock setup.

On a stock sled, the 7 tooth drivers with the 3" pitch track will give a bit more clearance...no where near ideal... PLUS the smaller diameter will bring the inside of the top of the track into contact with the stock skids front swingarm at the top rub pads... you would need to suck up the limiter strap and relocate the tunnel to swing arm bolts a bit lower... for those that have this track (3" pitch 2.5" lug) with the 7 tooth drivers.. check for constant contact (rubbing) of the track and swing arm upper...Remember this is a 3" pitch track so a 7 tooth driver is not that much smaller than a 8 tooth 2.86" pitch... and no 7 tooth 2.86" pitch is available [yet, but maybe if engough people bug Robbie he'll make them]

I'm asking these questions sincerely because I'd like to get accurate info from people that are actually running the tracks on their RAW Chassis 2.86" pitch setups?

Bigfoot... check for that rubbing on the track I mentioned above (or have you moved/changed the skid?)

Murfdog... are you running 8 tooth drivers on your sled with that Power Claw now?

Kale and 935VA.....Have look inside of your tunnel from the rear... look fwd to where the tunnel coolers end ... you'll see that 1/4" I talk about. The front of the tunnel exit has decent clearance.. that is not the tight spot on these RAW chassis. Also, have you had it in any really deep, really heavy snow yet? Did you do ANY other changes to the chassis at the same time you changed the track (clutching/gearing/etc?)

I have seen the stock, series 5.1 [both single and double ply] 163" x 15 x 2.4" Dragon (not to be confused with the series 5.0 2007 Dragon Track) track kick azz on the hill ... heck, Alan at Timbersled has one on his Alpine Turbo'd Nytro with good luck.

IMO... on a non-D&R sled... a shorter lug will give you higher track speed and better performance....

For me, this year... I'll be running the 2009 155" single ply Dragon track with a Dropped chaincase/driveshaft. I'm thinking really hard about the power claw after hearing such stellar reports on it from people like DUB and others that I trust.... I think that a 2.25" track is more of an optimal height in this chassis... the stock 2.4" (only 0.10" shorter than the tall extreme) It's a big hit with the High Hp Yami and Cat crowd too

But then again... this is an opinion.... everybody has one...:face-icon-small-win

As a note... the 2.25" Challenger extreme uses a MUCH softer compound than the 2.5" version.
 
Last edited:

mountainhorse

Well-known member
Lifetime Membership
Premium Member
Dec 12, 2005
18,606
11,814
113
West Coast
www.laketahoeconcours.com
BTW... even with the Avid Combo drivers... Keep the track tension stock on the track... a loose track allows the track to distort, the paddles to fold over a bit more than normal and gives poor performance.

I believe that loose tracks that distort under load are the major reason for "stabbing" NOT the fact that the rails are trimmed or the teeth are "sucking" the track up between the the driver and rail... a tight track cant get "sucked up" in that gap. Early M-Cats had crappy rear suspension geometry that HAD to run the track loose... those are the ones that gave rise to the phenomona of stabbing...loose tracks to follow suit... stock Doos dont have stabbing problems, they have short rail tips and no issues with stabbing on a wholesale level.

The new single ply tracks will stretch more quickly than previous models and need to be checked for proper tension quite often (tensioning instructions in your Owners manual)

Proper tension = better performance than a loose (out of spec) track.
 
Last edited:
N

Nelson

Well-known member
Nov 30, 2007
1,496
73
48
39
Libby, Montana/Elko, Nevada
Here's a ridiculious question, is the 08 D8 a 3.0 or 2.86 pitch? Assuming by your post, it is a 2.86. I was under the impression that it was a 3.0 pitch. Also, is it necessary to change drivers?

RMK 935,
It sounds like you didn't have issues with the camo fitting. My first impression is to follow your move and exchange without a bunch of head aces and use the camo.

It is a 2.86 pitch........When switching to a 3.0 pitch track it is important to change your drivers to 3.0 pitch, but visa versa you can get away with running 3.0 pitch drivers and a 2.86 pitch track.
 
N

Nelson

Well-known member
Nov 30, 2007
1,496
73
48
39
Libby, Montana/Elko, Nevada
MH, chime in on this question.........

Whats the differance in clearance say going from a 8 tooth 2.86 pitch driver running the stock 163 to an 8 tooth 3.0 pitch driver and the 2.25 inch track? Will that give you less clearance?
 
Last edited:

mountainhorse

Well-known member
Lifetime Membership
Premium Member
Dec 12, 2005
18,606
11,814
113
West Coast
www.laketahoeconcours.com
It is a 2.86 pitch........When switching to a 3.0 pitch track it is important to change your drivers to 3.0 pitch, but visa versa you can get away with running 3.0 pitch drivers and a 2.86 pitch track

Nelson... Whaaaaaattt????????

Since I always like to learn.... how does a 3" pitch driver (bigger tooth and wider spacing between centers) work on a 2.86" pitch track???

This came up last season and according to Robbie at Avid and Bruce at Camoplast...not possible.

========================================================================

A 3" pitch driver has 3" between the base of the tooth at the rim of the driver (not the tip of the tooth)...

3" x 8 teeth = approx 24" circumference of the driver rim....
3" x 7 teeth = approx 21" circumference of the driver rim....
2.86" x 8 teeth = approx 22.8" circumference of the driver rim...

or in other words

Circumference / Pi = Diameter

3" pitch x 8 tooth.... 24/Pi = approx 7.64" diameter ... 3.82" from driveshaft center to inside surface of the track

3" pitch x 7 tooth.... 21/Pi = approx 6.68" diameter ... 3.34" from driveshaft center to inside surface of the track

2.86" pitch x 8 tooth.... 22.8/Pi = approx 7.25" diameter ... 3.625" from driveshaft center to inside surface of the track

A 3" pitch 8 tooth driver will push any given track about .195" closer to the tunnel than a 8 tooth, 2.86" pitch driver. If you add the extra 0.10" of a camo extreme 2.5" track.... mind you in the 3" pitch... you will decrease the tunnel clearance by more than 1/4" over the 2.4" polaris running the 8 tooth 2.86" pitch drivers. This is why the 7 tooth drivers are necessary.

The 3" x 7 tooth driver brings the inside surface of the track .28" closer (over 1/4") closer to the swing arm rub pads.

To answer your question (finally, because I had a brain fart in not reading your question carefully)

For the 2.25" track... on 3" pitch, 8 tooth drivers... an approximation... I'm assuming the Cat Power Claw is a single ply track.... the clearance would DECREASE by the .15" shorter lug PLUS the added radius of the 3" pitch, 8 tooth driver (.195")...

With this combo... there is about .045" Less clearance than the stock Dragon single ply 2.4"... wow... less clearance than the stock 2.4... Who da thunk it???

This is where a D&R comes in handy....

I wanted to figure this out anyway for a friend.

My brain hurts now... and I probably made some mistakes!!


Power Claw 2.25"
track.jpg
 
Last edited:
N

Nelson

Well-known member
Nov 30, 2007
1,496
73
48
39
Libby, Montana/Elko, Nevada
Whoops! I thought that I had read on here where someone had used a 2.86 pitch track with a 3.0 pitch driver:confused:and I cannot find the thread anywhere so I must have mis-read it or it was possibly deleted because they felt like an idiot to when they got corrected. Regardless thanks for the correction and explanation. That did answer my previous question. Now is the 166 a single ply track?


Now I may be getting back one of D9's, which has a 166x2.4 track, 9 tooth 2.52 pitch extrovert drivers and needs a new track, I am not wanting to run another 166 so...........

Theoretically!

2.52x9T=22.68/pi(3.14) will be 7.22 (166x2.4 polaris)
2.86x8T=22.88/pi(3.14) will be 7.28 (163x2.4 polaris)
3.0x8T=24/pi(3.14) will be 7.64 (162x2.25 powderclaw)
3.0x7T=21/pi(3.14) will be 6.68 (162x2.25 powderclaw)

So the 163 w/8T 2.86 pitch will be out of the question due to it being a larger driver, not by much but narrows my clearance and the 162 w/8T 3.0 pitch will narrow my clearance even more unless I drop to the 7T 3.0 pitch, but this will definetly bring my track closer to my rails. Wow! there is a lot of math you don't figure when wanting to do a track swap. So to go to the 8T2.86 pitch 163 or the 8T 3.0 pitch 162 I will more then likely be doing a D&R to clear?

My next question? If I go to the 7T 3.0 pitch being that it will bring the track closer to the rails and I"ll be running extro's again and an anti-stab wheel kit w/trimmed rails, should I worry?
 
Last edited:
Premium Features