Argo vs. Max vs. ?

[whipper-ag]

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"

Just curious, Roadtorque. Did you send the same e-mail to ODG to inquire about the changes in their Argo Product line?

Contrary to what a lot of people might think, Max has made a lot of improvements over the years. The body style may not have changed much, but you'd have to know where they were in the 70's & what they are like now to know that they have done a lot of things to make their machines very reliable. I don't hesitate to take my stock Max out in the desert or down the river or in the lakes, because I feel confident about it's reliability to get me back.

I've made changes to my machines, like the springers, not because the Max or Attex were inferior, but because it's something I always wanted to do. We like to drive fast & for us we wanted springers.

Recreatives response is totally accurate about tooling costs involved in some changes that people might like to see. It's not cheap. I developed my springers for my own personal comfort & enjoyment, but it is not a modification that an AATV needs. Quality & reliability is what's really important. Personally, I think Recreatives machines are pretty awesome just the way they are.

Whatever kind of car you have for whatever reason or driving habits, they are ALL pretty cool just they way they are.

Whipper

[Don]

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.

Seems like it could be done, but quite possibly the manufacturers want to play to a different crowd than the quad makers: an "older" crowd maybe. In the late 70s, the stock Superchief approached road speed, although they advertised the top speed at 40mph. I don't know the legal aspects of selling a faster machine, but the Japanese quad makers do it- I had a Banshee for a short time (moment of weakness, sorry everyone) and it scared the bajeepers out of me. It doesn't seem like that kind of speed on four wheels is any safer than on six.

I have to agree that the differences in modern AATVs are subtle, but significant. The Mudd-Ox is a good example of what can be done with new ideas, but I wouldn't look for Matt to be doing major changes to the big machine, either. I'm sure none of the existing manufacturers sell enough machines in a year to make wholesale tooling changes financially feasible. I would like to see some other engine options (a liquid-cooled two-stroke is too much to ask for, but maybe a hotter four-stroke would be possible).

I've grown a new respect for Argos after riding with the Carolina Boys, but can honestly say that I haven't lost my "little" Attex in too many holes yet that the big machines could drive over.

[Roadtorque]

Just curious, Roadtorque. Did you send the same e-mail to ODG to inquire about the changes in their Argo Product line?

Contrary to what a lot of people might think, Max has made a lot of improvements over the years. The body style may not have changed much, but you'd have to know where they were in the 70's & what they are like now to know that they have done a lot of things to make their machines very reliable. I don't hesitate to take my stock Max out in the desert or down the river or in the lakes, because I feel confident about it's reliability to get me back.

I've made changes to my machines, like the springers, not because the Max or Attex were inferior, but because it's something I always wanted to do. We like to drive fast & for us we wanted springers.

Recreatives response is totally accurate about tooling costs involved in some changes that people might like to see. It's not cheap. I developed my springers for my own personal comfort & enjoyment, but it is not a modification that an AATV needs. Quality & reliability is what's really important. Personally, I think Recreatives machines are pretty awesome just the way they are.

Whatever kind of car you have for whatever reason or driving habits, they are ALL pretty cool just they way they are.

Whipper

No I didnt send it to ODG. I wanted to but the layout of the "contact us" part of their site made it seem like they would just have a dealer contact me. If someone doesnt beat me too it I will probably do it later on. I would be interested in what they have to say. As a side note is there a website for the Mud-ox aatvs? I have read they are pretty good but cant find a site for them through google. Appearance wise they look a lot like an argo to me (which a a good thing) I was just wanting to compare specs

[mudslinger]

Go to www.muddox.net for info on the Mudd-Ox.

[SiliconTi]

My two cents.

I was in the same boat this year and here is how I decided.

Argo: better for work. Has low and high range transmission, 8x8 available, floats a bit nose-down, better (stronger) winch mount.

MAX: floats level, better for recreational use, rear engine is quieter and (in a IV) uses space well, easier to see over the nose, T-20 has one issue - turning uses power unlike the Argo where it will transfer the power to the other side (though the full-time 6wd is better at times).

Hop that helps. :-)

[tpg]

There was an interesting paper on "Improving skid-steering on a 6x6 all-terrain vehicle"
presented at the 12th IFToMM World Congress.

http://130.15.85.212/proceedings/WorldCongress07/articles/sessions/papers/A100.pdf

"Overloading" the center wheels made a considerable difference in turning resistance.

This is particularly interesting wrt springers as it should be easy to change their handling
characteristics, somewhat, just by changing the preload on the center wheels.

Anyway, just thought others might find it an interesting read.

I kinda heard through the grapevine that the Argo center axle on a 6x6 is positioned lower then the front and rear axle. can anybody verify that? If true, Why? I know that I can sit on the cement with my Spider or my Max,and from a dead stop,spin 360 deg.instantly. If you can do that with your Argo in high gear from a dead stop, on cement, please post a video of it. I have driven an Argo and in my opinion it does not handle as good as a T-20 driven car, especially at high speeds.Which is my next question. Every video of an Argo I see, it's doing 10mph. They must go faster than that. with one exception, Roger S, I've seen him drive fast. Is it because they're hard to handle?
Anyway, this thread is about whats better, Max or Argo. And you now have my opinion. So let's hear from all you Argo guys why that center axle is lower.And now we're all waiting for that concrete 360. When the snow melts of course.

Whipper

[lewis]

There was an interesting paper on "Improving skid-steering on a 6x6 all-terrain vehicle"
presented at the 12th IFToMM World Congress.

http://130.15.85.212/proceedings/WorldCongress07/articles/sessions/papers/A100.pdf

"Overloading" the center wheels made a considerable difference in turning resistance.

This is particularly interesting wrt springers as it should be easy to change their handling
characteristics, somewhat, just by changing the preload on the center wheels.

Anyway, just thought others might find it an interesting read.

The Avenger is at least the 06 models are built with the 2 center axles lower than the front and rear. When on a flat surface my rear tires never touch. Helps turning with the more aggressive tires. Seems to work pretty well.

[bostatv]

AATV comparison

Gentlemen,

There is no doubt that all of the AATV's are superior to one another but you are forgetting the King of Kings ( MUDD OX )

Have a great day ALL
Ken

[jerbear]

Argo vs Max ....Easy!!!

Just my opinion, but between the Argo and Max.... I have to say Attex!!! Old skool two-stroke, loud as hell, fast enuf to scare me!! I wouldn't consider anything else, but that's just my opinion!!!

[SiliconTi]

Just FYI. There is a KID here in town. They are quite large and very heavy (something like over 1 ton). Also, the loading desk is very high off the ground. It would make a good tractor (what it was designed for), but probably not good for recreation.

[jwiereng]

I kinda heard through the grapevine that the Argo center axle on a 6x6 is positioned lower then the front and rear axle. can anybody verify that? If true, Why? I know that I can sit on the cement with my Spider or my Max,and from a dead stop,spin 360 deg.instantly. If you can do that with your Argo in high gear from a dead stop, on cement, please post a video of it. I have driven an Argo and in my opinion it does not handle as good as a T-20 driven car, especially at high speeds.Which is my next question. Every video of an Argo I see, it's doing 10mph. They must go faster than that. with one exception, Roger S, I've seen him drive fast. Is it because they're hard to handle?
Anyway, this thread is about whats better, Max or Argo. And you now have my opinion. So let's hear from all you Argo guys why that center axle is lower.And now we're all waiting for that concrete 360. When the snow melts of course.





Whipper

I have an argo, never driven any T-20 machines, can they turn each side of wheels in opposite directions at the same time? That would be sweet

[mudbug3]

jwiereng


Yes , a T-20 trans can turn each side of wheels in opposite directions " if " it has been modified to split shift. Some Hustlers came from the factory with this modification. I happen to own a Hustler 980 , Bigfoot that has this function. The forum member Brushcutter has modified his T-20 trans to be able to turn each bank of wheels in opposite directions , and at the same time. But , you have to stop first ,put one side of the T-20 in forward , and the other side in reverse. My friend plans to do this modification to his Max II , and I,m going to do it to my Max IV.

[mike bar]

RS, can't comment on max because i haven't drove one but love my argo 8x8.

[dgh110]

argo 8x8

i am not trying to be one up, i have a 97 argo conquest 8x8, my dad is on his second argo 8x8. my history with these other machines is very limited as there are very few around here. the reason i like argo is that it seems to be more of a work machine, for example. we have had a cow moose and a calf moose in the back with 4 guys riding and a broken front axle, we still swam across a river and climbed up and down hills back to camp. i do like the ride of 8x8 over the 6x6, as for the trans being an open diff style. i could see some improvements in that. but it still works and if you use your brakes to control the spinning side you dont loose out. as for making it turn better, i have played with tire pressures and found that if i run 1 to 1.5 pounds in rear 4 and 2 to 2.5 pounds in front four, this has really changed the turning effort. i like the lower pressures for crossing logs and the sharper bumps.

just my input, thanks
Darin

[cobalt]

That's a tough choice.

Would also have to be stock models.

I find the smaller argos (u shaped base) best. If you do get mired in the mud you don't have as much surface contact to the mud. Although it can also be a problem acting as a rudder, making turning difficult.

The max is better is water as it has better thrust with little cavitation.

My preference would be either the Argo Frontier or avenger with a few much needed mods.

I placeed a v-shape (pointing outward) plow like piece of 1/8" steel on the front of a couple of my 6x6s . All it really does is create a path for the under belley. Three inch tall piece of steel's bottom is level to the belley of the 6x6 and sticks out just enough that it won't clip the shore on the other side of the water/mud hole (much).

The V-shape pushes the water/muck out towards the tires. Instead of the vertical bow wave most atvs do.

Don't really feel a difference in weight or floatation.


Thanks.