Argo vs. Max vs. ?

[George]

I I do love the ground clearance on the frontier and wish that RC would go to work updating their machine by lowing the engine, putting the t-20 under the back seat, spreading the wheel base out a little and designing the machine for more ground clearance. I also wish they would put a high and low range on the Max for extreme conditions. If you could lower the center of gravity on a MaxIV and get the ground clearance up to 12" along with about 6" more wheelbase (better ride more back seat room-bigger tires) you would have a machine with no equal! Please RC, make me happy!!!!!! While I am dreaming, why not make a 27", 12 inch wide four ply version of the Argo Frontier tire-add a smooth bottom to the Max and you now have a vehicle no one else can touch! Come on rc, get with the program!!!!!

Mike or Jeff,

Either of you guys know whether or not the folks at RI or ODG monitor this site? I've heard these suggestions close to 10 years now (on other sites). I'd think they'd see these forums as free market research.

[hydromike]

Jeff can certainly add to my rant, and probably for good reason. I can't be sure that a lot of decision makers at RI monitor the Site. I certainly don't know the inner-workings of the company, so all I can say is from observation, and from speaking to a few of the folks there.

They (RI) seem very, very complacent with their current products, and not a whole lot of changes have been made in a long time. The Max II and IV have certainly seen their share of much needed upgrades, but a drastic change in either driveline or the body itself has yet to be seen. I guess one could certainly argue that both models work extremely well. Granted, engine choices have certainly improved over the years, and with the introduction of EFI in the Avenger, and liquid cooled models of both the Max IV and Argo models (not sure which you can get liquid in... just the Avenger?), it certainly shows that someone is interested in improving something. There just seems to be a lot of "inside-the-box" thinking that I, personally, think could be put to a test. Without a lot of competition in the market (There are really only two competitors), there isn't much of a catalyst for change. There's really no "oneupsmanship" in the amphibious ATV industry. I would certainly like to see a drastic change in either of the manufacturers that is grand enough to stand the other on its ear. The thing is, extensive R&D is expensive, and when there's little DEMAND for the change, that expense likely does not seem fruitful.

Personally, (no big surprise coming from me...) I would love to see a machine that's capable of 55mph off the showroom floor. It's not difficult. It's not extremely expensive. Sure, a springer would be amazing, and most of the R&D for a couple machines has been performed. Would RI buy the idea from Whipper? Probably not. Why? The attitude of the manufacturers isn't in performance, unfortunately. But the EXACT MINUTE that RI throws a 50-60 horsepower, 55mph capable Max on the market, you can be sure that the Argo guys are going to be hitting the AutoCAD pretty hard.

There just needs to be a catalyst. What will that take? Who knows.

~M

[McCoy]

Here are my two cents worth. I have a 2006 Bigfoot with the hadlebar type steering and I love the machine. Yes, it's jerky and looses tons of power when I turn, but, for me and how I use it, it was the right choice. I have ridden Mike's Max II and absolutely loved it. I would love to have one myself. However, being the shortlegged little rascal that I am, having nothing to brake my feet against made me rather uncomfortable. Also, alot of the time, I have my 2 year old daughter riding with me and have to drive with only one hand and I couldn't do this with a T-20. Many times, I have three people riding in the front seat and the argo steering is still fairly comfortable even with me sitting all of the way to the right. I also like having the engine in front of me. That's not to say that if I rode by myself all of the time, I wouldn't like to have a Max II or an Attex, because I would like to have one of both. But for me the Bigfoot works great. I guess it all boils down to which machine suits a persons needs and wants the best. I don't think that one particular machine is the be-all, end-all top dog of AATV's. They all have their perks and downfalls. It's just which one is right for you.

McCoy

[Roadtorque]

Seems like all this talk is about transmissions. So, transmission aside who has the better built machine? On a different point I think argo is "one up" due to its look alone.

[Mike]

Wow, where did this post get dug up from? I think this was one of the first on the site.

[Roadtorque]

Great, now people have had their machines a little longer they can re-comment with their new experience. I was just playing on the internet today and googled "max vs argo" and it redirected me back to this site. Read through all the post and they seemed to be solely directed towards the transmissions. Sorry to resurrect a dead post but I was wondering if any other aspect of the machine made one better than the other or is it as simple as remove the transmission out and they are dead even and left to personal "taste"

[Moallen]

Hate to say

I hate to say this being so new to AAtvs but the mudd ox beats them all ,
Allen

[Air Bud]

The name of the argo system is "we may be owned by a gear and drive company, but this is the simplest thing we could cobble together"

attex' are the best machine!!!

[Storms]

For work or for play, I have liked my Argo Bigfoot just fine.
It gets me wherever I go, and created a new hobby of creating my own accessories (piddeling in the shop).

[George]

OK...it's these, followed very closely by an Attex. BTW, the green one is an amphib.

[lewis]

George your first choice can not ride with us. I've seen you run over trucks. and you were smiling!

[Roadtorque]

A follow up email

Jeff can certainly add to my rant, and probably for good reason. I can't be sure that a lot of decision makers at RI monitor the Site. I certainly don't know the inner-workings of the company, so all I can say is from observation, and from speaking to a few of the folks there.

They (RI) seem very, very complacent with their current products, and not a whole lot of changes have been made in a long time. The Max II and IV have certainly seen their share of much needed upgrades, but a drastic change in either driveline or the body itself has yet to be seen. I guess one could certainly argue that both models work extremely well. Granted, engine choices have certainly improved over the years, and with the introduction of EFI in the Avenger, and liquid cooled models of both the Max IV and Argo models (not sure which you can get liquid in... just the Avenger?), it certainly shows that someone is interested in improving something. There just seems to be a lot of "inside-the-box" thinking that I, personally, think could be put to a test. Without a lot of competition in the market (There are really only two competitors), there isn't much of a catalyst for change. There's really no "oneupsmanship" in the amphibious ATV industry. I would certainly like to see a drastic change in either of the manufacturers that is grand enough to stand the other on its ear. The thing is, extensive R&D is expensive, and when there's little DEMAND for the change, that expense likely does not seem fruitful.

Personally, (no big surprise coming from me...) I would love to see a machine that's capable of 55mph off the showroom floor. It's not difficult. It's not extremely expensive. Sure, a springer would be amazing, and most of the R&D for a couple machines has been performed. Would RI buy the idea from Whipper? Probably not. Why? The attitude of the manufacturers isn't in performance, unfortunately. But the EXACT MINUTE that RI throws a 50-60 horsepower, 55mph capable Max on the market, you can be sure that the Argo guys are going to be hitting the AutoCAD pretty hard.

There just needs to be a catalyst. What will that take? Who knows.

~M

This post got me thinking, why dont they do a little R&D to improve their product. So I contacted MAX atv through email. Here is what I wrote

"Seems as though your product has never changed. Why not/when will an update the product line. Improved looks, ground clearance, addition of suspension, increase speed and so forth. The ATV market is always improving and competing with each other yet the AATV market is stuck in a rut with research and development, or so it seems. Why is this from your company's point of view"

This was their reply

"Thank you for your comments.

Most six-wheel enthusiasts don't understand that the niche nature of the "AATV" market precludes the volumes, cash flow, purchasing power, and economic justification to making big changes to the product design. Investing even say $100,000 in tooling changes to offer some new feature will take years to even break-even. I understand our dealer in Glendale, Arizona is manufacturing a suspension kit which can be added to MAX ATVs. He has sold just one so far for $6000 (just for the suspension kit), just to give you an idea of what it takes to put something out in small volume.

So we focus on evolutionary improvements to the product design which has made them much more reliable than in the old days, and we still have a decent-sized market for our vehicles.

We do have some more significant changes in the pipeline, but their release will have to coincide with an improvement in business conditions.

Thanks for following our industry.

Galen
Recreatives Industries Inc."

[mudbug3]

I called Recreatives today to order a new rear axle , because I bent mine backing into a mud hole that had a chunk of concrete under the water. I have a 2004 Max IV and it has set screws to hold the sprockets in place. Dan at Recreatives told me that all of the new Max 6x6,s now have snap rings to hold the sprockets in place , and also larger diameter axle bearing too. So I guess they are changing a few things , even if it takes years to do it.

[6X6]

......But the EXACT MINUTE that RI throws a 50-60 horsepower, 55mph capable Max on the market, you can be sure that the Argo guys are going to be hitting the AutoCAD pretty hard.

There just needs to be a catalyst. What will that take? Who knows.

~M

Now there IS

I hate to say this being so new to AAtvs but the mudd ox beats them all ,
Allen

YUP, THE OX.

the niche nature of the "AATV" market precludes the volumes, cash flow, purchasing power, and economic justification to making big changes to the product design. Investing even say $100,000 in tooling changes to offer some new feature will take years to even break-even. I understand our dealer in Glendale, Arizona is manufacturing a suspension kit which can be added to MAX ATVs. He has sold just one so far for $6000 (just for the suspension kit), just to give you an idea of what it takes to put something out in small volume.

So we focus on evolutionary improvements to the product design which has made them much more reliable than in the old days, and we still have a decent-sized market for our vehicles.

We do have some more significant changes in the pipeline, but their release will have to coincide with an improvement in business conditions.

Thanks for following our industry.

Galen
Recreatives Industries Inc."

I hate to say it but I do agree with this, their not selling them like 4-wheelers. That said, I DO think some of the stated changes could be made for very little cost, or simply sourcing new items (Such as tires) from vendors.

OH, I vote for ATTEX, fast, fun to drive, still goes darn-near anywhere, My Wolf is still supprising me and that's with a little 2-stroke engine, not a more Ideal for trails big 4-stroke (Yea, I said 4-stroke would be ideal) But the 2-Strokes are WAY more fun so it's more than worth the torque penalty. (I don't like the Diff steering idea (Good idea untill you throw in off-road), and Sorry, but I'm not the biggest fan of the design of the Max, not bad, just not my 1st choice. My Wallet will not allow me to vote for a Mud-Ox yet. (Not that it's more than a comperable Argo, but it's $$$$ thats keeping the Ox away, that it.)

[Roger S]

You would not believe the cost to change something.. make a body mold.. or even the rubber boot on the MuddOx control sticks. Big bucks. And the 55 mph idea? Mfg's can't do that, they have to keep center of gravity low and speed low, and wear helmets in the demo tape.

As for what vehicle? That gets impossible to answer, when the different types of riding and work are looked at. The tiny Attex and similar sizes must be a blast to pilot, but they would disappear in a Haspin Acres crack in the earth that my 8 wheeler would easily walk across. Meanwhile the max II's are making a slalom course out of every tree in the woods.