The wide tracks do have big pros and cons. A narrower track would be nice in many regards but this is a big heavy machine. Would it be efficient with less track?View attachment 96107http://www.forumsforums.com/3_9/attachment.php?attachmentid=96109&stc=1&d=1518539989
In terms of flotation, measured as pounds per square inch (and assuming the length of the carriers x the width of the tracks x 4) the 1600 series despite their narrower tracks actually have the lowest PSI of the rubber belted Tuckers. Yes, the wide track machines have a lot more surface area, but they weigh quite a bit more, too.
For example 1600 series machines used Dana 60 axles. I think the 2742 used much heavier duty axles from IH. The frames are beefier and have many more gussets and frame support members. I think the fifth wheel plates are quite a bit stouter, and the extra grouser length x 124 adds up, too. The 1600 series standard engine was the Chrysler Industrial 318. But a 2742 would have a more powerful (and heavier) engine.
What's uber-cool about your machine is the cab. You have some fantastic possibilities, sir!