Full hydraulic machine

[Nubs]

There's Thousands of used Golf Cart differentials laying around for spools, cases etc from all three of the most popular MFG's. EZGO, Yamaha and Club Car. Axles, gear sets, hubs, input shafts etc are all available from several aftermarket Manufacturers

[Noel Woods]

Im curious. What is your reasoning for dividing the power to the tracks with a front and rear sprocket? having two points to power means twice the parts and twice the chance of something breaking or going wrong. Not being judgemental here, i'm honestly curious why you chose this route. Either way, i am very interested in your build and it would be a very interesting thread if you were to start one just for this build...(hint)

You know rcn11thacr, just like our tanks, Bradleys, P.C.s, howitzers, and most other tracked armored vehicles, all of which were only driven by one wheel per side. It does work pretty good that way. The two driven wheels per side do add some complication, but I think it will be worthwhile. I don't have tracks yet for this machine but soon will. Will test it further at that point with the one wheel driven per side, and dependant upon how it works, may not need the greater complication of front wheel drive.

[rcn11thacr]

Nubs, Being involved on a few of the major golf cart forums, I've thought of those as options also. Each time I get my mind to calculating I can't help but see visions of used motor/transaxle set ups out of these it utv's as a donor instead. Already a matched unit with the goodies already attached. Just food for thought (assuming you use a straight axle setup).

[rcn11thacr]

You know rcn11thacr, just like our tanks, Bradleys, P.C.s, howitzers, and most other tracked armored vehicles, all of which were only driven by one wheel per side. It does work pretty good that way. The two driven wheels per side do add some complication, but I think it will be worthwhile. I don't have tracks yet for this machine but soon will. Will test it further at that point with the one wheel driven per side, and dependant upon how it works, may not need the greater complication of front wheel drive.

Noel, that's the exact reason why I asked the question. Considering this one sprocket format has obviously been proven for over 100 years, I had to ask why you felt there was a better side of the egg to crack. Admittedly I've never heard of your reasoning with the mud buildup and without a much more indepth sit rep on why you feel this is the better way, I'm not sure I get how this is beneficial. However I've got more scars than I care to count from doing things the hard way (since I knew better lol), so knock yourself out and maybe we will find that persistence pays off. If the dual sprocket design does work I'll be just as pleased with your innovation as the rest of us

[john swenson]

hey friends, both front or rear drive sprockets have advantages. rear wheel drive pulls from the underside when driving forward instead of from the upper side, therefore reducing stress on the tracks. front wheel drive though gives less wear on the drive sprocket because the track has more time to get clean before getting back to the sprocket. also front wheel drive pulls the tension in the entire upper track length. rear sprocket drive accelerates faster, but requires more power and heavier gears, etc. most heavy equipment nowdays have rear drive. with drive sprockets in front, when m oving forward the sprocket must pull the track along the top and to the ground, so there is tension all the way around the track. driven from the back the sprocket pulls the track along the ground and sort of throws the track back up along the idlers. so maybe both drives give the best of both worlds. either way it's going to be a fun and educational project for all interested. johnboy va.

[kghills]

There are members out there that have commented that I should have been sharing more about my suspension for the good of the hobby. Been wondering since you started this project why aren't you sharing your build with it's own thread? Is this your project or a Mudd Ox/ Max project? Mudd Ox / Max can talk about it. When I did my 1st springer in 2007, I didn't know if it would work, but I still posted a step by step build to help people understand what I was doing & why. That said, I have a question. The pics in Shock & Awe say the front has 3" travel & the rear will have 5". How's that going to work & why did you decide to make it that way.?
R & D isn't easy, but it's always nice to see someone else's build & ideas. Still wanting to see more on Bugeyed 99's Hustler build, too.

Whipper

Moved my response to member whipper-ag's question to the http://www.6x6world.com/forums/gener...tml#post182529 thread as suggested by Mike the forum administrator.

Sorry for the hi-jacking. Keith.

[mfenmor]

http://www.6x6world.com/forums/max-atvs/33069-another-max-iv-diesel.html

Just started building a hydrostatic, turbo diesel Max IV.
We'll see how it goes.

[Theman10k]

Anyone thought about the Sierra Trail Boss and that transmission it uses FNR and does 0 turns
Also the Mobilera Trailblazer has the same style transmission set up it can also do 0 turns and go from F to R without changing from the video I've seen
Just thought I'd throw that out there

[Theman10k]

Said Video

http://youtu.be/77UBXhobV6Y

[eric101]

A hydraulic machine will be just fine if you're comfortable with your machine only going 2 miles per hour.....way to slow 4 me....