My new beer holder spilled some on the trails - in it's hair and down it's throat.
Joe Camel never does that.
Advice is free, it's the application that costs.
Ha! I don't want it. I promise you it won't go where my Hustler 950 will go!
shrink it down to the size of a max 2....... that would be a cool machine !!! thanks jim, johnboy
There you go John, winter project, I expect to see it in April.Originally Posted by john swenson
My new beer holder spilled some on the trails - in it's hair and down it's throat.
Joe Camel never does that.
Advice is free, it's the application that costs.
AJ, do you have dates yet? Will make reservations when we go this month. We need one for a tow back vehicle.
Those Sherps are some B.A. machines. I've watched all the videos on youtube that I could find, and I don't think there is anything out there that can compete with it. The ergonomics of the Sherp are a bit goofy though with both a manual transmission and lateral sticks that are mounted all the way to the left of the cabin interior. With the Sherp you have to either climb in the front door/window, or enter from the rear door and climb through to the front.
I think Johnboy is on to an idea that I had, to shrink it down a bit, simplify the drivetrain, and make it more usable. I may have to bite off on making something like it, maybe with just a t20 and a small water cooled engine, but keeping the overall look.
I do not see how shrinking the Sherp down in size could possibly be ideal.
The only things going for this machine is based on its size. It will both climb larger piles of logs and traverse larger diameter logs lengthwise as well as taller stumps and immovable objects with its increase ground clearance.
Take that away and every other property it has is scalable and already found in every common Max or argo.
It doesn’t have lower ground pressure, ground clearance for mud and water scales with vehicle weight and size so a 800 pound max or this monster are going to get stuck in swampy mud at the same rate (something I have seen Sherp do, get stuck in bottomless mud)
I view the Sherp as a “different” kind of off road vehicle not a superior one, and not one who posses elements that are unique to its design. I think ostacruiser’s video shows the Sherp doing the thing it does better than any other ATV, climbing logs. It clearly goes where I cannot fathom even an Escargo or Adair tracked Argo making it. The geometry would just be impossible for them to drive up and over without swamping / flipping. BUT that’s its. I’d bet the same Argo’s would far exceed this machine in snow or treacherous enough mud. Also… this machine is huge, and since making it smaller removes it’s one beneficial quality we’ll have to judge the design including this flaw. IRL you can’t just knock down trees all day long unless you have a lot of privet land. I can think of no forest trail this machine would fit on (or I should say not one that wasn’t so flat any 4x4 pick up could manage). It makes an H1 Hummer look thin. I get tense just imaging trying to drive it up the rocky sloped side hilling roads I’ve taken my Coot.
Would it be fun? YES! Am I being hyper critical? Maybe, but it’s 10x more money than one of our machines and clearly not packing 10x better performance.
i think the idea is not that if it was shrunk down to be able to do the same things as the sherp. just the idea that something like a max 2 , with tires the same style and high clearance ...both in the correct proportion to the body..... would possibly be a pretty capable machine. i just wonder if a 23 h.p. motor and a t 20 trans could turn it ? if it could, i would think with those big tires and say around 24'' of ground clearance from the tub, most mud and snow would'nt be too tough. i like the idea. with my sub frame design on my max 2, i could go with 2'' axles. then would just need to find the right tires, hubs and rims. johnboy va.
I agree with Johnboy. A nice Max2 conversion would be a workable idea. A few years back Ray Kohls came up with Maximus. It had a t20 and 31hp B&S and had four huge 31" tires on the outers as well as a small driven middle tire to facilitate not getting stuck by obstacles in the middle, here's a link to it:
https://youtu.be/4jKar71TcTU
I think a similar design but maybe with even larger and softer tires like the Sherp uses, and John's sub frame assembly, with 2" drive axles, and a t20, #60 main chains, with a weak link #50 on the t20, would be a beast.
In studying the t20 I think 80hp is the upper end of it's capability of transmitting power reliabily. So a nice water cooled industrial motor like a Ford 32hp or Kubota diesel would be about perfect.
Only problem is the Sherp has 23” of ground clearance and 63” tall tires ;-p
That is actually a pretty decent ground clearance to tire height ratio. At that distribution on 26” tall tires it would have 9.5” of gc. Which is a lot more than the Max-IV (which only manages 9” at the center and a few less where it counts) . But with 31” tall tires it comes in just a little shy of 11.5” of the Coot but that is because the Coot does not need to make room for sprockets and only a low profile worm gear.
So assuming best case you’re going to get no more than 2.8x less gc than tire height. I think the biggest tire you could go would be one of those low ply 33x15.5x15” chevron deals. You’d really have to look around I think they MIGHT make a 4 ply in this size. Obviously the Sherp has incredibly low tire pressure so your going to need as few plies as possible to allow tire flex unlike say the Aquatorques that run hard even with no air. By the time a 6 ply tire would start flexing enough the machines overall weight would have to of increased to the point it no longer would float safely.
Even as I type this it’s getting me thinking, this might not be as unreasonable as I imaged. On some 36” tires such as these: https://www.changshengtyre.com/produ...-trailers.html in size 400/60-15.5 you could have a pretty nifty little 4x4 skid steer. As with any engineering you can’t get something for nothing. Keeping the size factor of what we are used to with an AATV you are looking at a single seater more than likely. There just isn’t going to be room for 4 of these big tires and anyone else. Storage should be ample just no location for passengers assuming forward driver position and rear engine. Want to keep the tub narrow as well. As the tires take up a lot of width and any extra tub is just more to drag in mud. What I’m thinking is similar to how some guys run Max-IV’s with all the seats removed and a new central driver’s position. This could be quiet doable. Since I’m intrigued I’m going to go design such a machine for the heck of it. I’ll post what my results are in CAD when finished. Guess I’ll start a new thread later today.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote