Running on fewer wheels

[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)

[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

[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.

[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.

[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]

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.

[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]

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.

[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.

[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

[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.