Which track should I get?

  • Thread starter Deleted member 10829
  • Start date
O

old abe

Well-known member
Tracker said:
had both....the ripsaw changed lug design from good to worse by adding fingers at end which flex and take away that length of bite from lugs....years ago before this change I would of told you ripsaw....not anymore....now cobra....the lug designed by the computer is far superior now in take offs and stopping...the scoops allow the track to function as good as studs but without them....id do the 1.35 cobra on a 137 unstudded....I am running a 137 x 1.6 unstudded cobra....came off a 129 x 1.375 ripsaw unstudded....22,000 miles on unstudded 1.375 ripsaw testing.....now about 1500 miles testing on 1.6 cobra unstudded...can tell the difference already and some has been on sheet ice...never spun out or got squirrely....performed really good and wont be going back to ripsaw....my 2c
Click to expand...

Hmmmmmmm????????? A 1.375 Ripsaw???????
 
G

G

Guest
If you are not going to stud go with the higher profile. You won't lose that much speed. It really isn't that much taller. I don't think you can go wrong with either though. Both good trail tracks.
 
T

Tracker

Guest
highlander and old abe.....if you knew tracks then you would know that 1.375 with fingers.... IS..... a ripsaw II with fingers.....I was wrong though....I have 9500 miles on that track...this one....no good IMO

2602-474-99.jpg
 
O

old abe

Well-known member
Tracker said:
highlander and old abe.....if you knew tracks then you would know that 1.375 with fingers.... IS..... a ripsaw II with fingers.....I was wrong though....I have 9500 miles on that track...this one....no good IMO

2602-474-99.jpg
Click to expand...

I still can't find a RipSaw II 1.375?????????
 
M

momoney2123

New member
old abe said:
I still can't find a RipSaw II 1.375?????????
Click to expand...

There is no such thing. I was confused by that post. the track in the pic is a rip saw 1, 1.25. The rip 2 doesn't have the finger style paddles.

As mentioned the cobra is called a 1.325 but it really is a 1.25. The cobra is a few lbs lighter. Both tracks hold up well with studs. as long as 2 ply.
 
T

Tracker

Guest
since this is 2017 ya noobs....they changed it again just a few months ago to 1.5....why....cause it suks.....badly that's why....its on page 7 and the cobra is on page 8.....youse guys want I should wipe ya too????? they also eliminated the fingers too.....go back and forth between page 7 and 8 and have a lookski for own dam selfs


PS....notice how CUPPED designed lugs are taking over in all catagories...why johnny? forgetaboutit

https://camso.co/resources/docs/Brochure_Snow_Camso_EN_WEB.pdf
 
M

momoney2123

New member
Tracker said:
since this is 2017 ya noobs....they changed it again just a few months ago to 1.5....why....cause it suks.....badly that's why....its on page 7 and the cobra is on page 8.....youse guys want I should wipe ya too????? they also eliminated the fingers too.....go back and forth between page 7 and 8 and have a lookski for own dam selfs


PS....notice how CUPPED designed lugs are taking over in all catagories...why johnny? forgetaboutit

https://camso.co/resources/docs/Brochure_Snow_Camso_EN_WEB.pdf
Click to expand...

its tough to follow what your trying to say....what sucks? what track is 1.5 now? eliminated fingers lol, the rip 2 or cobra never had fingers newb, lol

To me it seems the OP is asking about 2 tracks

the rip 2 137 x 1.25 2.86 pitch - 9223H

And the cobra 137 x 1.352 - 9307H


Both of which for trail riding on a 600 will net virtually the same result. Its 6 to one, half dozen the other.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top