You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us. Looking forward to seeing you in the forums and talking about AATVs!
I've had a chance to "play" around lately with several track combinations. My focus has always been the Escargo in all-steel, UHMW, and various hybrid combinations and widths, as well as half-track Escargos. The elevated belt design comes along with tremendous guide-stability...and resistance to throwing off. That along with gear-reduction are the most desirable...to me anyway.
This past fall, I felt it was probably time to give Adair's Pro-Series track a try on the same machine.
Regarding the track itself, I discovered some interesting things about required track-tension, tire-guide movement, and some machine conditions/situations you should try to avoid with this track. I've also received some input from a few members on here. I've also got a few thoughts on why 1.5" vs. 1" UHMW is used. Narrow Belt-slot clearance to the tire (strength) and general crosser-body (and therefore guide) stablilty over the belt come to mind. The 1/2" additional thickness (1.5) helps here, but mainly because it's needed. Belt tension (very tight) is absolutely needed. You still cannot eliminate guide "tilting" in certain situations. Maybe "light" machines don't have the issues I did.
I had it come off a couple times in situations I really didn't expect it to..mild side-hilling/turning on soft terrain. Wanting to give this design a "fair" shake...because of all the internet-promotion,...I thought I must be missing something. So, I opted to router-out some "tweaked" "Pro-Series" style crossers 1.5" thick. I was always curious about materials and labor in comparison to my other experiments. I opted for a flatter tire-radius shape that couldn't stuff as much belt-width within the crosser-body itself @ 14.5" (on purpose). 14.5" is a magic # that allows an additional crosser in each row to fit on the 4x10 sheet in CAD if I remember right. So it only seems natural to try to maximize belt-width within 14.5" even if it means altering the tire-guide radius. I opted to leave the crosser ends open to scoot the belt out a bit(and for wider belts if wanted...a couple/three inches of hangover is okay as an option), as well as adding a full-thickness (from ground-surface to tire-tread) "slot" for a 3/16" steel insert that is sandwiched together with through-and-through mechanical fasteners....not screws, and it's dead-center within the UHMW...so thick walls on either side.. .. Ala Escargo Hybrid.
This provides forward/backward traction with no resistance to lateral "skidding". It also prevents UHMW wear...and the inserts are replaceable. Increased labor...yes. But, they'll be directly under the tire, and they won't pack with snow like u-channel does. And talk about strong. UHMW height and steel height can be adjusted for overal crosser-height and tub-clearance. As they are, the Pro-Series crossers require no washers or backer plates- they use (2) outdoor lag fasteners. So nylocs and loc-tite can be skipped. No pre-drilling of rubber either (huge time saver). Seems to be a great bang-for-the-buck for the track-maker...... $300 more for 1/2" thicker material, but less "hardware" cost required make it a wash. The lag fasteners look strong.. (I haven't heard any reports of them backing out). They are being used as replacment for lag-bolts on deck ledger boards, ect...so I'm sure they're strong. But we'll see. I like nuts and bolts.
Routering costs for me were very comparable for 1.5" pro-shape vs. other shapes I have played with. All included pre-drilled holes, and routered inside edges. You get more "pro" crossers off a sheet. Takes 4-5 additional crossers per side vs. elevated belt. Remember....way less labor and less hardware for pro-series so again a wash in my mind. The sheet is the expensive part....especially freight to Alaska. I am experimenting with a different grade of UHMW vs. typical re-processed as well. I am happy to share more information and testing as it comes along. Assembly of a few sets is getting close. Escargo Hybrid vs. Pro-Series in all terrains. Well at least I'll know for sure...of my own accord. The track staying on will be my focus.
The escargo turned much easier in the tundra for what that's worth.
Twin-track escargo eliminates differing wheel speeds over the center tires as well (all things being equal) vs. using track tuners. Just another option. Here's a few pics anyway for now. Hopefully nobody's pissed.
One design allows for different belt heights....elevated belt or tire-tread level with the same crosser.
