Hi all any body got any experience with these tracks think I am getting a set I want them mainly for mud some times snow just wondering are they as good as they look.
Hi all any body got any experience with these tracks think I am getting a set I want them mainly for mud some times snow just wondering are they as good as they look.
I've run a wider-bodied version of that all-uhmw track. Just run track tuners, they should do well. In some conditions, you'll want traction grousers of some sort though. All UHMW works well only when it works well.
Steve, I was seriously thinking that this was the style track I wanted too, but after an email conversation with Tim @ Adair I have reconsidered..... I'm now leaning towards the "pro series". I made a few assumptions about the "classic" that Tim cleared up for me. Below is a copy of the response Tim sent with a few minor changes by me....call it a paraphrase and not a quote. Hopefully this gets people a little closer to knowing what questions to ask Tim before making their final selection. One more track to consider is the Muddox chevron style Mudd Ox Accessories | Mudd Ox 6 & 8 Wheeler Land & Water Machines I think they would make a great snow track, with occasional mud/water use.......but hard on the machine on dry hard groundOriginally Posted by steve w
Classic style Tracks.
Pro’s
They have the unique ability to reduce the final drive gearing by about 25%...actual number depends on the size of the tires being used and the exact belt placement on the grouser assembly. In many cases it is approximately 3” so on a machine with 22” tires, it is like running a track over 16” tires so in that example it is a reduction of final drive gearing of about 27%
They also are a very easy set of tracks to keep guided over the tires and tend to stay on well.
They are an “open block design” so they tend to clean out very well and are much more aggressive in soft terrain than a factory style “solid block design” track.
Generally the contact patch can be made smaller and the tread of the grouser can have more of an arch which tends to slip sideways (turn) easier than a flat profile factory type rubber or plastic track.
They are simpler to machine and generally cost less to build.
Con’s
By design, and without “track Tuners” they cause a significant amount of drive train stress and chain windup issues due to the fact that all center tires are still traveling at full speed but driving on top of a track that is trying to roll approximately 25% slower.
With out “Track Tuners” the tracks tend to be much noisier at mid to high speed because of the “popping” of the center tires and the drive chains as the stress is released.
Because the design places the belting in the sides of the tires the over all construction tends to require a wider footprint ranging from 17 -27” wide.
They tend to disrupt the water more and don’t tend to swim as well as other designs.
Because they are wider they generally require wheel spacers (and “Track Tuners”), which adds width, weight, expense, maintenance, and stress to the machine.
They are not as easy to splice together and generally just use a simple belt overlap method which results in a rough spot (or stiff spot) in the track.
Because the belting generally extends past the edge of the grouser and also generally rubs on the sidewall lugs of the tire a typical mechanical hinge splice creates a risk of tub damage or tire damage and therefore is not generally used like in many other track designs.
The design requires lifting the belting up closer to the belly of the machine which in effect gives up about 3” of ground clearance and flotation in really soft mud or snow. Snow depths of more that a foot generally require modifying the width of this track design from 17-20” to as much as about 27-28” so that it can still give good performance in deeper or softer snow conditions.
Winter kit added to this design becomes pretty wide, heavy, expensive, and hard on the drive axle assembly of a machine.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pro-Series Tracks
Pro’s
Highest customer satisfaction, and most “compared to” design in the world…. J
Are shipped full assembled and ready to install.
Design maintains the final drive gearing and speed of a stock machine without tracks.
Creates very little chain windup and is very easy on the machines entire drive train.
Has a uniquely narrow footprint for a very aggressive, open block style track.
Narrow track footprint keeps overall width of the machine very narrow at just an inch or two over a stock width machine, and can be used over the standard 25” tires on a modern 8x8 machine. (All other track options for a modern 8x8 machine with stock 25” tires require the width of the machine to grow by almost a foot or more)
They tend to be much lighter than most other track designs, especially when covered in mud or ice.
They are very easy to convert from a narrow summer track to a superior winter track with the simple addition of a bolt on winter kit which increases track width from 14.5” to 18.5” and adds a 7” wide, very aggressive ice cleat for winter traction.
Can be kept narrow at just 14.5” and still have an effective 3” wide winter ice cleat added to the outside belt for additional traction on frozen surfaces.
Swim better on a modern 8x8 Argo than any other track design.
Proven to be a superior blend of traction and flotation in most mud, water, and swamp like conditions, and the open block design is very self cleaning in sticky types of mud.
Stainless Steel Hinge Splice makes them very simple to install, fully corrosion proof, and they don’t generally require the use of any additional wheel spacers or “Track Tuners” (although ¼” wheel shims are provided to simply take advantage of additional leftover wheel stud length)
Con’s
They are slightly more complicated to manufacture and therefore are not the cheapest design to build.
By design, they are more slippery on hard packed snow and ice than a rubber or steel track if not equipped with either “tire screws, narrow ice cleats, or the wider 7” ice cleat on the optional winter kit.
More sensitive to tire pressure and track length than wider designs.
Sat here for a long time trying to be objective and cant really come up with any other downsides to the design…its not perfect, but in my opinion its as close as you can get in an amphibious track design.
………………………………………… ………………………………….
I agree that if you are running an older style of machine that would benefit from the reduction of gearing than the classic style track is a pretty good option especially if deep snow is not much of a consideration. Yes you can add a winter kit to any of these open block, belted styles of track, however the winter kit is more effective on a machine that keeps the belting closer to the ground, although a machine that lifts the winter kit and ice cleats 3” up off the ground will defiantly turn with less effort.
Unbelievable. I've tried to throw out some bones to help anybody and everybody. Didn't want to be an a-hole. If anybody wants to actually shoot me a PM, I'd be happy to B.S. with them over the phone.
These claims sound "amazing"
Similar bullet points could be made to work "against" that pro-series track. I actually tried that track myself....it's not all it's cracked up to be in some conditions. If it was, I'd be screwing around with a similar track in Alaska. It's marketed like the end-all be all, and in some conditions it's just a liability.
We are all entitled to our own opinion- Adair's "classic" track on the other hand serves one purpose... to try and put their "pro" series track on a pedestal. Very clever. The pricing schedule, the claims that are made about that track and all others...costs and performance...When (I think) that really it's ease of assembly....big profit margin, world satisfaction. Come on now! The pro is the easiest design of all to "assemble" labor wise, requires far less hardware $$. Takes a few extra crossers but at 14.5" you get a higher crosser quantity from a 4x10 sheet....more than you'd use on a set of tracks anyway. You can use the same 1.5" repro on other designs if you want for very little price increase. On the other hand, 1.5" is a requirement on the pro-design but marketed as a durable upgrade (mmm okay). Solid 1" should not be used on the pro-series because the grouser gets its stability simply from the body-"width" of the UHMW and high belt tension. Twisting can happen easily with the narrow belts...with the pro-series and 1" UHMW, the guides would move around an incredible amount. So 1.5" helps a little, and it sounds amazing. High air pressure is needed for a very tight belt. These both help a little but don't fix the tendency to fall off. The same hinge can be used on any other track.
It' very difficult to turn in many applications, and falls off in others. But, it's easy to add u-shaped traction cleats to the ground-level belting. Which is a great labor-savor if you want traction, or want to sell a bunch of them. Newer HDI's with super low gearing have more than enough power to turn that track.
I've heard multiple times now that people have walked out of the pro-series, but you'll never read about that on this site. Adding more air and track tension is not the answer.
A more practical design (I think) is one that allows for the ground-pressure floatation of your tires to do the work....until the track is needed. Excellent for transitional terrain types, especially if traction is needed. Think escargo-style....keeping the track belting from being squished into the soft dirt/tundra etc. if the tires provide enough floatation. When you do actually "sink", you get huge paddle engagement and anchoring in the mud, self-cleaning, + wide belt-floatation and better performance. The water speed videos you've likely seen are not entirely accurate. Not to mention water speed is the least important thing in the world. Tracks staying on are. The tracks not working against you when turning is a big giant deal. They kinda go hand in hand.
I personally like Adair a lot. This isn't about knocking them. It's about giving real input from our conditions. I applaud the design effort and dedication to the "pro" design...in concept. I was excited to try the track after reading all the "amazing" info on this site.
Touting it's world domination is a slippery slope-
Last edited by Buzz; 01-31-2014 at 12:34 PM.
Buggyman.... thanks for the concise and factual summary. I have a pair of the adair swamp/snow tracks. And the few things about them I thought could be improved Tim has addressed with the pro series and traction adders. I love mine and wont run the machine without them or similar track system. With the tracks it seems like my machine goes from "run of the mill" to "king of the hill" instantly.
Buzz.......This forum is very unbiased and I don't believe that any information is being censored. The only time I have seen the moderator step in when people break the forum rules on personal conduct or commercial self promotion. So please post any video proof or links you have of these hearsay claims. I have walked out of my tracks when I had soft tires, but have only done it a couple of times for all the hard driving I put my machine through.
I appreciate the discussion and comparison of the track types and I hope it doesn't go to PM so that I can continue to benefit from it.
I have not seen this be a site where those who don't agree with the moderator, or who disagree with the herd, are shut down so I hope that anyone with something to add to the topic will chime in.
I don't think anyone here would believe any claims of "one size fits all" or more precisely "one track is good for all conditions". Everything seems to be a compromise....good on fluffy snow and ice= too much grip on hard ground, good in puddin mud= too slippery on rock or pavement, etc.
Yes, Tim has a vested interest in promoting the tracks, but I don't think he would steer people wrong, and he admits that he hasn't come up with the perfect design yet.
All we can hope for is to put as much info out there as we possibly can and let/help people make a more informed choice that suits them.
MaxIV- I'm glad your tracks work in your conditions. That's all you need.
I sold the pro-series tracks I had (for the same great deal I got from Adair) to someone up here that was sold on everything they read. I even shortened the tracks for them to make sure they were very tight (Mudd-ox to Avenger), indexed his tires, installed the tracks etc.
When I had them, we went out for a simple berry picking excursion on mild terrain. My pregnant wife was less than impressed out how easily the track peeled off on the tundra. We later returned home on one track. Not a big deal, I could have been running on just tires there anyway. I put even more air in the tires and drove around on a dirt hill. If I even attempted to make an uphill turn with the uphill track turning at all, it would begin to derail. It's just a downside of the design. You could probably avoid it, but it's almost impossible to completely "stop" your inside track during these risky maneuvers.....if you're not paying attention, it's easy to forget.
I "was" going to router some improved pro-series crossers to show this very thing. A more fair test would be to get together with someone up here who has the "actual" tracks so nobody can claim I tweaked anything. I really am trying to help. If I believed in that design, I would make it for my buddies up here that wanted it.
I actually don't have faith and really don't want to waste a sheet of plastic.
It would be more reliable to just build a hybrid version using that "belt slot" concept and pro-series style fasteners on an elevated-belt crosser...pick your belt height and reduce hardware and assembly labor. I just don't have faith in the guide-instabliity of having the belt at the ground level (pro series)....in our conditions. If it works down there, that's awesome as far as I'm concerned. The increased trouble/resistance it causes on soft conditions in Alaska is problematic that's all. An add-on winter kit just worsens the problem. In other conditions it's okay and can even be very aggressive.
In mud and water, no problem. In snow no problem. You still have to be careful sidehilling/turning like I described.
I think it would be great if Adair made a wide-bodied "classic" style crosser that's durable and has durable traction devices that work "with" you not "against" you. Install track tuners and then use wider belts and a larger paddle "below" the belt. You'd probably never even need a winter kit, and the track turns like it's 8 inches wide and uses the ground-pressure of the tires to support the vehicle weight most of the time.
The extra belt width mainly affects how your track swims if your belting is at the same level at your cleats (pro series or chained I presume).
When you have a large paddle "below" your belt, and you spin the track appropriately, it works well. Especially a bouyant UHMW like Adair uses. I haven't been shown that a properly set up track such as this has problems in any terrain or condition. A narrow "classic" all-UHMW track with skinny belts is not going to work as well as an escargo-style crosser with wide belts. A narrow "classic" (even all UHMW) will work great in the mud though, just like a pro-series.
Here's a pic showing how you can manipulate the guides even when the track is installed on the machine. Maybe on lighter machines with smaller tires, it's a little more forgiving to driving out.....but I'm skeptical.
The elevated belt design has been proven to work over years and years of use in all conditions with no side effects. Use Tim's track tuners and you're set. All it needs is reliable traction, wide belts, and improved weight/bouyancy/cost. That's just simple "advice" I really want people to have. Even adair could build one if they wanted to. I do it for guys up here (garage project style) because I know for a fact it works well.
Last edited by Buzz; 02-01-2014 at 03:52 AM.
I think we all tend to butt heads a little during any discussion. That's grown men for ya. But at the end of the day all shared information is helpful. Some of my best friends are guys I butted heads with at first.
Last edited by Buzz; 01-31-2014 at 03:39 PM.
I was thinking the classic style would be better for me due to the smaller contact area with the ground. I figured that would make the machine turn easier, therefore be easier on the bearings/chains/etc. When you hit the soft stuff it would sink to the belting and give the additional flotation needed. I was surprised to hear from Tim that this style was harder on the machine.......And I still don't understand the gear reduction thingThe tire is still spinning at the same RPM, how can a belt on the side reduce the travel speed?
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
