Running on fewer wheels

[mudNmallards]

Hmmm liability issues I never gave that a thought as to the overall cost of a product,I guess Iam to old school I have fell off,rolled,endoed,high sided,flipped,and crashed almost every conceivable motorized vehicle on and off road,it was the only way to know the limitations of the vehicle and myself,never blamed anybody but my stupidity for any injury I incurred,generally got up brushed myself off and lesson learned.LOL NCT

Its not just the end liability of the product( even though thats what always makes the news), its workers comp, protective and safety devices, facility liability, environmental insurance, certifications for specialty devices such as cranes and a host of others. Thats a HUGE chunk of overhead.

[North Country Tough]

Hmmm liability issues I never gave that a thought as to the overall cost of a product,I guess Iam to old school I have fell off,rolled,endoed,high sided,flipped,and crashed almost every conceivable motorized vehicle on and off road,it was the only way to know the limitations of the vehicle and myself,never blamed anybody but my stupidity for any injury I incurred,generally got up brushed myself off and lesson learned.LOL NCT

[Ken Hiltz]

Yamaha Rhino

Liability issues! Check out the lawsuits over rolled Rhinos. With the choice between the 80's Argo and 2000's Rhinos, I choose the slower Argo. There were rolled Rhinos all over the place.

[mudNmallards]

MudNmallards, you missed a MAJOR cost.....liability, lawyers, insurrance. Perhaps you had it implied in the COGS. The last figures I heard, liability was the largest single cost of building an automobile (over $10k per unit)...where as the "union" labor cost per vehicle was under $2k (old figures). Why is it the "lazy union workers" get blamed so often for corporate losses? Published in the same article was toyota's labor costs, at approx 75% of GM's....a couple hundred bucks on a $30,000 car????

Oh no, I didnt miss it LOL. Thats a line item in COGS which is usually a fixed overhead cost under liabilities. On the process side of my work, thats the number one concern ( and highest single line cost) is when the risk assessment IAW LEEDS and ISO 14001 along with regulatory compliance and the highest cost factor of all of them. Right next comes product liability.

As far as labor- thats normally a small factor in manufacturing (contrary to the ever popular politically created lie) You are quite correct that the unions ( and non unions) simply get "blamed" for it but thats nothing more than a politically created lie that politicians use to keep the real truth out of the public eye. I say that because over 80% of my work is overseas and I set up and spec out the machines, work processes and train operators as well as do the business studies.

They pay these people cheaper wages because these new plants are generally state-of-the-art and run themselves. All they need are "operators" rather than experienced craftsmen to make the end product.

Plus, most countries do not have the crippling and expensive EPA and other litigation concerns and most that do have laws where the loser pays in a lawsuit and as such "frivolous lawsuits" with excessive judgements are almost non existant.

All one has to do to prove this to themselves is work overseas for a while and see the actual numbers or go back to the US in the 60's/70's when workers were the highest paid on average on the planet and the good were substantially cheaper then. The only change has been the liabilities associated with operating the business and the additional overhead.

The data from thousands of studies proves this time and again. You just dont see them highlighted because the finger of blame points squarely at politicians and now workers or business.

[thebuggyman1]

MudNmallards, you missed a MAJOR cost.....liability, lawyers, insurrance. Perhaps you had it implied in the COGS. The last figures I heard, liability was the largest single cost of building an automobile (over $10k per unit)...where as the "union" labor cost per vehicle was under $2k (old figures). Why is it the "lazy union workers" get blamed so often for corporate losses? Published in the same article was toyota's labor costs, at approx 75% of GM's....a couple hundred bucks on a $30,000 car????

[mudNmallards]

Thanks LarryW. Now there's a guy with more answers than questions. I'm going to go around with a little extra air and see how it goes. Beats shelling out for 25's when I don't have to.

On another note: It's funny how some claim piece parts are so cheap while our manufacturers fail to survive. To quote Homer's brother: "There's only about $50 worth of steel in those things (car)." A real bill of materials inculudes all the engineering, certifications, nuts/bolts, labor, equipment, advertising...

Respectfully, thats not quite correct. A BOM is just the aggregate costs of the parts of a unit. Engineering,set up, production facilities and machinery etc is factored in the mark up during the FEED (Front End Engineering and Design) and is considered a fixed expense over the life of a product. ( since its usually only done once). Labor, marketing etc is computed in the COGS (Cost of Goods Sold) on the back end and is constantly reviewed and adjusted for market and business considerations as those are usually dynamic.

The parts etc are factually a minor consideration in the cost of a unit because they are usually the cheapest part of the process. Manufacturing facilities lose money and go bankrupt in almost all cases not because of the BOM costs or a unit or a bad market- they go down because of all the losses due to quality problems, rework, ineffective methods, worn out equipment not operating at peak performance and human issues. ( thus the 7 major losses in TPM and six sigma) In the graph of the maintenance or process icebergs- these losses are the "bottom half" of the iceberg than nobody addresses until its usually too late because they are not above the water in plain view. This is why the japanese ( and not other countries) are eating our lunch- they are cheaper and better because their operating effeciencies are well above 90% compared to 40-60 for the average US firm.

[Ken Hiltz]

Thanks LarryW

I wouldnt take the middles off or miss match the tires with something smaller in the middle. Think of all the extra stress on the frame and axles. Newer argos have the front and rear axles up a tad to take some pressure off for steering. Another option is to put a slighly more amount of air in the middle tires. I know some manufactures actually recommend that even in 6x6's.

Thanks LarryW. Now there's a guy with more answers than questions. I'm going to go around with a little extra air and see how it goes. Beats shelling out for 25's when I don't have to.

On another note: It's funny how some claim piece parts are so cheap while our manufacturers fail to survive. To quote Homer's brother: "There's only about $50 worth of steel in those things (car)." A real bill of materials inculudes all the engineering, certifications, nuts/bolts, labor, equipment, advertising...

[mudNmallards]

Suspension,,,,,those who would benefit the most are fellas using them in desert conditions and competition,there is a cult following of sprung AATV,s and theses machines are impressive no question for the purpose that they use them for,the bulk of the people and industry buy them for a different reason and suspension would be a nice thing but nobody wants to pay for it or the upkeep costs.Price this is the biggest issue period,aside from the cost of the molding machine everything else can be bought at manufacturers cost very cheaply,so there is no justification for the price period,what R&D the basic machine has remained the same style for 40 years,went from three quarter inch axles to inch and a quarter so is that a added 2000 dollars cost LOL,Smog has it figured,get a design farm out component manufacture and some assembly,final assembly in house,if I had the time to sit down and check into it the actual dollar value in hard parts in a modern Argo would make me weep for what they are getting for one.NCT

I do the same thing- its kinda programmed into the way I think, LOL (I look at the component costs and compare them to the list price of a unit) I'm pretty certain the manufacturers are tier III customers just like I am so they pay approximately the same prices for the base components I do. Its customary to have about 100% mark up because of the overhead and regulatory compliance costs a manufacturer has to bear just to stay in business and make a reasonable profit but when I compare the costs based on some quotes I have gotten for a new machine ( comparing base models with comparable features for a reasonable "apples to apples" comparison) and so far the unit costs are closer to about 160%.

I have to wonder why they are so high myself unless the overall sales volume mandates such a markup because they dont sell enough units over the course of a business year to lower the mark ups.

[azz7772]

I think typically most things are 100 percent mark up after manufacture. I researched my triton predator and it has a kabota diesel and hydrostatic drive with chains I priced most of the components and looking at around $21000.00 not including assembly cost. and the owner at triton is advertising that a new one is $43000.00. I would imagine the tubs and tops would be cheaper the more you ordered.

[North Country Tough]

Suspension,,,,,those who would benefit the most are fellas using them in desert conditions and competition,there is a cult following of sprung AATV,s and theses machines are impressive no question for the purpose that they use them for,the bulk of the people and industry buy them for a different reason and suspension would be a nice thing but nobody wants to pay for it or the upkeep costs.Price this is the biggest issue period,aside from the cost of the molding machine everything else can be bought at manufacturers cost very cheaply,so there is no justification for the price period,what R&D the basic machine has remained the same style for 40 years,went from three quarter inch axles to inch and a quarter so is that a added 2000 dollars cost LOL,Smog has it figured,get a design farm out component manufacture and some assembly,final assembly in house,if I had the time to sit down and check into it the actual dollar value in hard parts in a modern Argo would make me weep for what they are getting for one.NCT

[mudNmallards]

mudNmallards


Argo could have made their tubs designed for suspension, but instead choose to offer two individual suspended seats on the limited edition Argo 8x8 and thicker foam bench seats on all of the other new models . A suspension system like you are talking about will add a lot more addition weight and this will also increase your chance of getting stuck by raising your PSI on the ground. The reason amphibs have a smooth bottom tub and with the tires covering up most of the exposed axle ,is to help the tub slide easier over mud as the tires grab traction. With 6 individual A-arms hanging down in the mud this will increase a lot more drag and greatly increase your chance of getting stuck. This is why Hydro Trax, Hydro Trek, Argo, Mudd-Ox ,and Max do not offer suspension on the tubs they sell.

Thank you

I would not have thought much about a suspension except for some posts here because I figured if none came with them, there was a reason someone else already encountered. (except for the potential vehicle I may be contracted to design if that comes through- I have been informed from the agency doing the feasibility survey that any design must have one due to problems encountered on MRAPs in Iraq and Afghanistan and be air dropable. I was curious if the recreational market users had similar desires)

[mudbug3]

mudNmallards


Argo could have made their tubs designed for suspension, but instead choose to offer two individual suspended seats on the limited edition Argo 8x8 and thicker foam bench seats on all of the other new models . A suspension system like you are talking about will add a lot more addition weight and this will also increase your chance of getting stuck by raising your PSI on the ground. The reason amphibs have a smooth bottom tub and with the tires covering up most of the exposed axle ,is to help the tub slide easier over mud as the tires grab traction. With 6 individual A-arms hanging down in the mud this will increase a lot more drag and greatly increase your chance of getting stuck. This is why Hydro Trax, Hydro Trek, Argo, Mudd-Ox ,and Max do not offer suspension on the tubs they sell. With a suspension system hanging down on either side of the tub, this will really limit your choices of where you can take your amphib.

[mudNmallards]

Suspension would be nice but fact is the complexity for the purpose that theses machines are built for would be a issue all the way around,to keep water and mud out of joints and the swing arms/A frames out of harms way would be a challenge,the simpler the better in the bush,strength is key,rocks,stumps,logs,swamp with hidden rocks and all manner of nasty stuff can humble even some of todays techno,the more complex the hardware the more expensive the repair,and trying to repair in the bush could be overwhelming,simply put some better suspension seat tech would be easier and less complexMachines----- IMO have became complex enough and price is prohibitive for the sport you check this site out and see that the majority of the people here buy used or are into rebuilding the older and gone models.NCT

On your 2 comments, I would like a bit of further information if you would

Suspension- I tend to agree any type of suspension ( that would be a benefit) is going to have a pricetag on it and would probably be cost prohibitive but I have a guy who retired from the auto engine who did bodys and suspensions so I have tapped him for some answers since I have never done one in my career. I got the idea because of threads I have read here from some people wishing the machines had one.

Price- Since I'm still cherry to owning one, I have been sending out RFQ's to various manufacurers for several because my first purchase will probably be new ( for the family to play with- if it were me I would buy a "project model" and rebuild it so that would be my second purchase) I can only say "oh my gawd" with some of the quotes I have gotten. Some of these units are in the 20-25k range.

I'm in the business of reliability upgrades and custom machine design/manufacture and with the exception of the engines and bodies ( nothing I do has small engines on them and I rarely need injection made bodys for anything except like double wall tubs for chemicals on plating lines and stuff like that) so I use every other component of these machines. I swear I do not see the justification for the cost of some of these units unless the manufacturer has some serious overhead issues. Thats why I'm deep diving into the specifics because I set up production lines and do cost analysis. I just do not see the justification for some of these "new" prices unless there is something serious that I have yet to discover.

[LarryW]

I wouldnt take the middles off or miss match the tires with something smaller in the middle. Think of all the extra stress on the frame and axles. Newer argos have the front and rear axles up a tad to take some pressure off for steering. Another option is to put a slighly more amount of air in the middle tires. I know some manufactures actually recommend that even in 6x6's.

[mudNmallards]

anyone can make an improvement on any kind of a machine I am all for it but my thinking is "the designs have not changed much since the first models came out, a lot of people tried a lot of stuff but I have not seen big changes, the biggest is diesel with hydrostatic but still the same shape body with small
changes. Aluminum and or plastic". Just saying

Well this thread prompted an impromptu thought in me. My original plan was ( and still is) at a point in the future to ask the site owner to post a detailed questionaire in a thread and get people to send it to a email address for me to tally. Thats really the basic first step in any type of prototyping is to find out what people want ( and as importantly, dont want).

Not having a personal ownersship history of an AATV I cannot speak from experience but based on my research on different models I am looking to buy and posts here and some other boards, my impression is that (mechanically at least) as a whole, these vehicles are grossly underdesigned from the get go.