Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

New Type of Tracks - Chanel Tracks

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Hi, he ships anywhere. My avenger makes 78" with the 20" chanel track and 2 1/2 " spacers. I hope I'll be able to go this weekend. There is a lot o snow here. I think that all tracks are good depending of your need. But I've tried the plastic track years ago and like old trucker said floatation on snow is about all for them. One thing I like about the chanel track is that I will use them year round. But it is a rough ride on gravel road and I don't recommend going fast with them. Another thing if you plan to get chanel track put some mud guard unless you have a top. If not by the time you get home you'll look like a snow man and the argo will be full of snow. But I think that all tracks throw snows.
    Jack

    Comment


    • On the 2002 conquest Its 73" wide with the 20" inch chanel tracks. And I am using 2 1/2" spacers. I do have 1 1/2" clearance between inside edge of track and tub with the tire and rim combo I have.

      Comment


      • Originally posted by Old Tucker View Post
        On the 2002 conquest Its 73" wide with the 20" inch chanel tracks. And I am using 2 1/2" spacers. I do have 1 1/2" clearance between inside edge of track and tub with the tire and rim combo I have.
        Thanks for the info. My trailer is 72" wide. I am running super tracks and they run 71" wide. I am wondering if I could get away with running 1 3/4" spacers with 20" tracks and still squeeze onto my trailer. I know one gent on here is running 17" chanels with no spacers and claims not to have any rubbing. They are dam close to the body, too close for me, but pushing them out an 1 3/4" might be OK?

        Comment


        • How close together are the grousers on these channel tracks? I'm curious
          MUSCATEER 6x6
          Kubota 14hp 2cyl diesel engine, Hagen/Rooter transmission Comet 780 Drive/770 Driven 22x12x8 Bearclaw tyres
          Soon to add on a ... RHB31 Turbo..guess that would make it a
          MUSCA TUR BOTA then eh?
          94 F350 4x4 7.3 IDI ZF 5sp
          90 Bronco..awaiting a rebuild like no other = Tons and turbo diesel

          Okanagan Similkameen BC Canada
          Al "Camo pants"

          Comment


          • Originally posted by thorn View Post
            Thanks for the info. My trailer is 72" wide. I am running super tracks and they run 71" wide. I am wondering if I could get away with running 1 3/4" spacers with 20" tracks and still squeeze onto my trailer. I know one gent on here is running 17" chanels with no spacers and claims not to have any rubbing. They are dam close to the body, too close for me, but pushing them out an 1 3/4" might be OK?
            Well, the wider design works much better, especially with a corresponding paddle body, but I understand your wheelbase concerns.
            My advice is to use 2.5 or 2.75" welded spacers and matching track-tuners. Here is how you can do so and keep your desired wheelbase. With 4" inner and 4" outer belts, you will have an 18" wide track just like your super-tracks. We know that "should" fit. If you go with a narrower inner crosser body (and belt) so you can use narrower spacers, you won't be able to run matching track tuners that small, and you lose belt-width and floatation on the inside. These would be huge drawbacks. Instead, you could continue to use 2.5" spacers, add 2.5" track tuners, and simply use a roughly 4" inner belt. This will give you adequate tub clearance. Then, instead of using the typical 4" outer belt, just use a 6" outer belt, making a 20" wide track that is set up properly and won't damage your tub. The best part is that the additional outer belt width past the crosser body will simply fold up if you need to squeeze it between trailer fenders or trees etc. The outer crosser body shouldn't extend past the current location of your supertracks. I'll attach a picture showing 2.75" spacers with 4" inner belts on one particular track. You can see how there is plenty of room to use a 1/4" smaller wheel spacer/tuner combo. I personally would not run that track with any less than a 2.5" spacer simply because of the ability to mount decent-width belts and track tuners. If you want the best performance. Luckily I think the wheelbases and clearances work out in your favor doing so! Hope that helps.
            Attached Files

            Comment


            • Originally posted by Buzz View Post
              Well, the wider design works much better, especially with a corresponding paddle body, but I understand your wheelbase concerns.
              My advice is to use 2.5 or 2.75" welded spacers and matching track-tuners. Here is how you can do so and keep your desired wheelbase. With 4" inner and 4" outer belts, you will have an 18" wide track just like your super-tracks. We know that "should" fit. If you go with a narrower inner crosser body (and belt) so you can use narrower spacers, you won't be able to run matching track tuners that small, and you lose belt-width and floatation on the inside. These would be huge drawbacks. Instead, you could continue to use 2.5" spacers, add 2.5" track tuners, and simply use a roughly 4" inner belt. This will give you adequate tub clearance. Then, instead of using the typical 4" outer belt, just use a 6" outer belt, making a 20" wide track that is set up properly and won't damage your tub. The best part is that the additional outer belt width past the crosser body will simply fold up if you need to squeeze it between trailer fenders or trees etc. The outer crosser body shouldn't extend past the current location of your supertracks. I'll attach a picture showing 2.75" spacers with 4" inner belts on one particular track. You can see how there is plenty of room to use a 1/4" smaller wheel spacer/tuner combo. I personally would not run that track with any less than a 2.5" spacer simply because of the ability to mount decent-width belts and track tuners. If you want the best performance. Luckily I think the wheelbases and clearances work out in your favor doing so! Hope that helps.
              Thanks for the info. I just want to get as much flotation as possible for deep snow and really want to go to a 20" chanel type track. How does that set up work on that Conquest in deep loose snow? How do they compare flotation wise to the Super tracks. Do they take more power to turn than the Super tracks or does the gear reduction design offset the additional weight? I know you have done some videos, but I don't know if I have seen the Conquest in deep snow.
              Last edited by thorn; 01-10-2014, 08:06 PM.

              Comment


              • as long as you use track tuners on a single track that has (2) end wrap tires and (2) middle tires (where the crossers don't splay out) you will have the full gear reduction without any additional load given back to friction. Track tuners are necessary if you mix "end-wrap" tires and "non-end-wrap" tires within the same track. When properly set up, an elevated belt track will perform better than an over-the tread design on equivalent machines - horsepower, gearing, etc being equal when you are in conditions that require additional power and difficult skid-turning. Climbing, soft terrain, deep snow. The paddle helps tremendously about the time you sink far enough to engage the floatation of the belt. I'll try to get you some conquest video here pretty soon. It basically turns a conquest (even MU gearing on tracks) into a crawler in low-range. And high-range is more usable. I think even a higher geared conquest would work pretty well. I need to get some video, you're right. Just been too busy screwing around with other projects. We should have some video pretty soon.
                Now if you could imagine such a set up but on a machine that makes more HP and can turn a higher RPM + better clutching set up to transfer that extra power to the transmission at a higher RPM as well....then you can get a higher "track speed" and make for some really interesting argo driving.
                Forum member "Spookum" is working on such a project at the moment.
                Last edited by Buzz; 01-10-2014, 11:37 PM.

                Comment


                • I suppose you could maybe.....it's a big maybe depending on the machine and wheel offset.....run an inner belt of up to 4.5" (safely) with a 2.5" spacer, but I personally wouldn't go any wider because of tub clearance. Just my opinion, but it's not worth it to push the clearance issue. People do, but trust me, it can be risky. I like to have +/- 1.5" clearance. Trying to squeeze that extra smidge of width on the inner belt doesn't really do much except risk rubbing your tub. Conveyor belting is tough. Make up the extra width on the outer belt, it works just as well. A winter kit is an option, but would make your wheelbase too wide for the trailer by a long shot. It doesn't take forever to take a winter kit on/off, but I suppose it could be just enough of a pain that you wouldn't want to do it every trip. Then again, you're only talking a handful of aluminum angle extensions, there's only 2 bolts on each (on the main belt side only), and with a cordless drill and small wrench, you could do it pretty fast. It's something you could do easily with the machine sitting on the ground. It's not like you would need to remove the tracks to do it as the belting is elevated.

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by riotwarrior View Post
                    How close together are the grousers on these channel tracks? I'm curious
                    [IMG][/IMG] The grousers spread out as they go around the tire.
                    I did get a chance to test the tracks today. Between the chanel track to compared to the super track. The chanel is playing in a different ball park. What a difference. I went in places where I would never go before. I was able to drop down into the Xditches and climb right out the other side . Tonight we have a good storm brewing. And they say we could get 30cm of new snow in the hills. I just wish I could be out their tonight.

                    Comment


                    • Buzz are those Escargo hybrid tracks in the picture? How deep of snow have you been through with them ?

                      Comment


                      • yes, they are hybrid tracks. That picture is of a 19" wide track. 4" inner belt, 5" outer, 2.75" spacers/tuners. I have 3 buddies running conquest/frontier tracks like that picture. Most of the use has been fall time so far. They don't have any deep snow to work with yet, but the track will perform like any other escargo track on a conquest. It's got the added benefit of being more bouyant, lighter on ground, and it skid-turns easier. All 3 are using track-tuners. I believe that a 20-22" conquest main track with this design could probably get by with never needed additional width, except for rarely. They're just not heavy machines, and the belt is also not elevated as much as the larger crossers that fit 12" wide tires. Adding width to the outside if you have crazy-deep conditions to deal with is a simple option.

                        Comment


                        • heres a short video of an all-steel version (closer spacing, more crossers too) on a conquest. By listening to the engine, I don't believe track-tuners are being utilized. So the performance would easily improve speed and engine-load wise.

                          argo conquest climbing - YouTube

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by Old Tucker View Post
                            [IMG][/IMG] The grousers spread out as they go around the tire.
                            I did get a chance to test the tracks today. Between the chanel track to compared to the super track. The chanel is playing in a different ball park. What a difference. I went in places where I would never go before. I was able to drop down into the Xditches and climb right out the other side . Tonight we have a good storm brewing. And they say we could get 30cm of new snow in the hills. I just wish I could be out their tonight.
                            Good to hear. I am watching your reports very closely as you have the same machine I do and you are running in the same type of conditions I do. I have a couple of questions though.

                            What tranny ratio are you running and how would you say the chanel tracks perform as far as engine power loss. Do you feel the machine had to work harder or less. I know you made a post about your tires you are running, but can you tell what they are again.

                            Do you guys think running a wider tire with these tracks is better or is narrower with more belting better for deep snow?

                            I hope you get your storm and can really get in the steep and deep.

                            Comment


                            • more belting is going to help you more. A larger tire will give you more clean-out area between the belts, but an escargo, hybrid, or chanel-type track already has quite of bit of clean-out area in addition to the belt floatation. Adding belt width helps, especially if you don't want to add a winter kit. If you match tire and belting speeds (track-tuners is one way), you will have significantly....significantly...... more power to turn the track than you would with a track whose belting or other connecting material is at ground level alongside the tire tread. Even if you don't have low "track" gears, your performance should be plenty fine.

                              Comment


                              • I noticed on one of those photos, that the belting appeared to extend into the tire sidewall a fair bit. It's not a bad idea to trim it back (basically to where your washer or backer-plate begins.....just outboard of where the crosser/guide round-over would be. And bevel it at an angle (away). I use a stiff filet knife. Once you get a start and have a good pinch of belting to hold onto, (and keep your knife sharp), you can easily move pretty fast cutting with one hand while using the other to pull hard back and away on the cutoff piece (if that makes sense). Much easier than trying to bevel the belting with a utility blade.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X