just a couple of my ideas ......... I think I have a way to eliminate the chain drives that could be made into a brand new designed vehicle or able to retro fit on existing machines as a kit.....and was thinking for the hydro units a person could have an amphib trailer that's also hydro powered just plug it into the back of your machine think there could be some uses for something like that.Originally Posted by mudNmallards
Let me address some of your points. I work mainly in oil/gas, power, mining/minerals and machining/manufacturing and have been on brown/remote sites all over the world for the last 10 years. I not only see whats there every working day of my life but I normally do the procurement of them. (I’m at the approving level) Everything has to have a cost and value justification. Its easy to justify the Argos ( don’t know why but they seem to be the predominant brand overseas) in cases where vehicles have to go in mine leech fields or in ungraded areas where there is more moon dust than developed roads and even in snow. The track and multi wheel drive capability sells them for those applications. That said there are maybe 1 AATV to every 30 quads or trucks. (I’m including gators and mules in the quad category) I’ve heard the same answer so many times I quit putting in the requests. The mules are cheaper so for maintenance to throw tools in and scoot to the job and the cost of them is right at the same price I get the Toyota Hilux ( not sold in the US) which is a 4wd pick up for so I’m told to buy the truck. The prices are so close to the full truck that they get passed over. All you have to do to prove my point is to visit any remote site and count the number/type of ATV’s that are there.
A company can survive in a niche market but it will never make much money.
On your point regarding improvements- I do not doubt for a skinny second that you have 100 intelligent workable improvement ideas and if we polled this board we could fine a hundred thousand all equally workable and doable. Based on the technical posts I am reading there is no doubt whatsoever in my mind of that- if this board is nothing else, it’s a wealth of knowledge and experience. That’s not going to expand a market and sell more units. (ok, maybe by a few single digits) The reason its not is because these vehicles have been in the market for 40 odd years and they have been improved over the generations. They have a name and recognition. They have their niche and are well entrenched in it. Yet compared to the quad market ( the Hondas, Kaws, Yams, Polaris etc) they are so small to the point they are statistically insignificant. If you want to falsify my observation ( which is the textbook way to prove anything) ask the question why every major ATV manufacturer does not have an AATV on their production line. They don’t because their market surveys tell them the money isn’t there. What these AATVs do NOT have is the versatility to make them desirable to a large enough market base to make good amounts of money for the investors. The only way to enlarge that small niche market is to have something that something else doesn’t have or to be versatile over multiple markets. Does anyone really think the Hondas and kawasakis of the world have not seen and investigated these ideas? Why does anyone think the Mule became Kaws main utility vehicle instead of an AATV. They did surveys and market analyses and gave the market what it WANTED. That’s why I say that “improving” the current performance of already proven machines wont expand the market because if the mass market doesn’t buy it at 30mph and will go through a mud bog that’s knee deep- it wont be impressed if it goes 40 mph and goes through waist deep mud either. You have to sell functionality in areas people want or need.
On your point of the separation of the ATV,UTV and AATV markets, that’s an excellent discussion point I would like to tap further into your knowledge in. From my perspective I don’t see that as something that cannot be overcome. There will always be the “specialists’ who desire a certain quality such as speed, water flotation or whatever and that’s their sole decision criteria. That will never change but once again, they are the minority. The majority are going to employ the 80-20 rule.
My personal thought would be to take a page out of Jeep. They mainline the Wrangler ( which is a car that just looks like a jeep) but offer the Rubicon which is as close to the original CJ’s as you can get. I would have the more versatile “do whatever” vehicle for the masses to make my profit ( which would probably be more along the lines of a tractor wearing an AATV coat which is fine because the yuppies would never get further in the mud than plowing their garden after a rain but they “think” they accomplished something) and make a specialty model or two that’s a real performance enhanced AATV that would climb a 90 degree wall, pull skiers and hit 70 on the flat track.
Make no mistake, I’m as hard core mudder and rock crawler as there is and I respect these vehicles as they are currently on the market but now that I and my team are considering actually producing one I have to be realistic to what the market will allow.
Reply With Quote
