Running on fewer wheels

[Ken Hiltz]

An 8x8 is great in the woods, but I'm wondering if it would run easier around the yard with only the outer 4 wheels. Any comments?

[mudNmallards]

I have a question about this too that I would like the more experienced riders ( who really go deep in the mud and muck and those who just “ride around”) to comment on.
I and a few others are in the beginning stages of “kicking around” design ideas for a possible future design for industrial grade AATV’s that may branch off into a recreational model as well. A few of us are experienced off roaders with other types of vehicles (jeeps, trucks, 4 wheelers, dirt bikes etc) but none of us have ever owned one of these AATV’s so we have a bit of a knowledge deficit regarding some of the unique characteristics of these machines and there is no substitute for experience.

I get the drive train part because that’s my area of expertise.

My first thought is something along the line of a high/low range ( road V. trail) set up where in the low range, all wheels are pulling and high range where only the front ( or rear) are pulling. I see little advantage to “all wheel drive” for nothing more than road riding but I can see benefits on fuel economy and reduced strain on the drive train when all that’s being done is “riding”.

So if people would indulge me, I would like to call this an ad hoc “owners survey” to get opinions on what they think is best and why.

I would ask for this format ( so I can copy/paste into a spreadsheet)

On road or off road ( to qualify the use type)- 2 front/2 rear or all wheel ( which ones[ in groups] you want to pull)- then an explanation as to why you prefer ( or do not prefer) such an arrangement.

Secondary question- Suspension

I see most of these units do not have a suspension. A suspension is always best when considering ride comfort, handling and reduced wear on a drive train. However, a suspension would add a significant cost and stress engineering to a vehicle and almost mandate a metal body or beefed up frame to absorb the strain. So I would also request this

Suspension Y/N ( do it or not)- what you would be willing to pay for such an upgrade- ( round numbers for the overall cost such as $1000, $2000 or whatever)- then why( or why not) such an addition would be desirable for a base model and what type you believe best ( or worst)

Thank you

[azz7772]

I am not real experienced either but I think the idea is to keep these machines super capable but also at the same time have the drive system kept as simple as possible. A person can add all kinds of things to these machines but that means more to break down in the middle of nowhere.

[Ken Hiltz]

I was just thinking along the line of having 22's in the center and putting 25's on the ends. That would mismatched the ground speed in the woods, and you'd get a little more torque when the center wheels touched down going over a hummic.

[mudNmallards]

I am not real experienced either but I think the idea is to keep these machines super capable but also at the same time have the drive system kept as simple as possible. A person can add all kinds of things to these machines but that means more to break down in the middle of nowhere.

Well, "simple" is a term that means whatever it means to whoever is using it. What is simple to me may not be simple to others or vice versa.

My personal thought is that the more robust a design is- the better it operates and has a lower cost of ownership over the life of a given device ( whatever the device is)

As far as technical complexity- there are many straight forward ways to design one

[Dan67]

An 8x8 is great in the woods, but I'm wondering if it would run easier around the yard with only the outer 4 wheels. Any comments?

I would not do that. Leave all the tires on it, that is the way it was designed to operate. If you took off the center 4 tires, all that weight and stress on the body is transferred to the remaining tires on the ends. Doing that could damage the Argo, not something I would want to do.

[amphibious drew]

An 8x8 is great in the woods, but I'm wondering if it would run easier around the yard with only the outer 4 wheels. Any comments?

I only got 6 wheels on my machine, but whenever one falls off I roll around with 5 till I can put it back on. Worked pretty good; when I first bought it, at Busco last fall, and at Amphimans a few times. It was better when it was a middle wheel that fell off though. Its amazing how much traction a front or a rear supply, on the other hand take the front and rears off and you could be having a blast spinning around and those are the tires that push and pull the most when skid stearing.

[mudNmallards]

I was just thinking along the line of having 22's in the center and putting 25's on the ends. That would mismatched the ground speed in the woods, and you'd get a little more torque when the center wheels touched down going over a hummic.

I would strongly recommend against doing that. ( especially on the chain and sprocket drives) Because these things are on a constant driven drive if you reduced size ( and traction) then you have basically a counterweight swinging at a possible higher speed (shocking the system) and thats about the worst thing to do with a driveline.

[azz7772]

Well, "simple" is a term that means whatever it means to whoever is using it. What is simple to me may not be simple to others or vice versa.

My personal thought is that the more robust a design is- the better it operates and has a lower cost of ownership over the life of a given device ( whatever the device is)
far as technical complexity- there are many straight forward ways to design one

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

[george_pimpdaddy]

Kinda like trying to reinvent the wheel really Lol you bought the Argo because it is what it is the way it was made to be and works great. Ive seen 6x6's run on flat farm land with just 4 tires and it seamed to be just fine for gentle use. But on the 8x8 its gonna be flexing the frame way to much in ways it was not designed to be. The idea of having only a few drive tires isnt a bad one and could help i guess but with the chain and sprockets system your not really getting around much with extra weight and now chains that are being pushed and not driven. Just my thoughts

[North Country Tough]

Many years of ownership,many machines,as far as all wheel drive vs switchable for road use,sorry dont see it,I own a aatv for off road work and here in Ontario they are not legal for road use,and if they were I still buy this style of machine for off road only,if I wanted to travel distances a four wheel atv would do.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 complex,I remember when all we had were rimless tires the balloons them machines rode excellent mind you the tires didnt stand up and with todays weights they would explode but something as simple as tires made a huge difference.Machines 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,if the Attex brand came back with nothing more changed than heavier axles,4 stroke motors and a drink holder and was priced at 6 grand ish you couldnt build enough,I like my Argo Avenger but is this thing worth 20 K no,much more "improvements"and whats it worth 30 K,snowmobiles are pricing themselves out of the market the aatv market is next.NCT

[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.

[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]

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.

[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.