UHMW traction devices

[Buzz]

I'd really like to pick everyone's brain on their experiences with add-on traction spikes, cleats, screws, ect. on UHMW tracks. I am becoming more and more interested in a UHMW track the more and more I think about it. I do think my traction "worry" can be realistically dealt with though. I do realize that in certain situations, it may be almost impossible to get enough traction, and I don't expect any track to levitate or "walk on water" so to speak.

I've always known that UHMW floats (barely) but never really saw it as a huge advantage. What I failed to realize was that because UHMW crossers are "solid pieces" they displace a significant amount of water. They are about 1/2 the weight as a steel crosser, but more importantly they have NO buoyancy penalty while in the water. And for that matter, neither does rubber belting. It's really only the crossers that are out of the water and the nuts/bolts that really add any "payload" to the machine in the water. It also looks much easier to mill complex shapes that may be difficult to make out of steel or aluminum. In a practical sense, the track is even "lighter" when in the water than I thought.....

[Buzz]

this is a crappy drawing. I plan to try one of these. The bottom is simply an escargo crosser with more paddle left at the sides. More paddle when in deep snow or mud, slightly less floatation than the top design. Would use 5" belting on either side. 22" overall

The top fits within the same "squared' dimensions as the escargo, it just leaves the belt surface closer to the ground. It would be 1-1.5" (cleat height) off of the ground. This would use 4" belting on either side. 20" overall.

Escargo traction cleats could be used as replacements on the bottom design.

Top design would require something different, maybe replacement cleats made from u-channel (1-1.5" tall) and argo tire guides. Or a different traction add-on.
You can fit roughly 70 of either design on a 4x10 sheet.

[Bazooo guy]

What is the cost to cut them?
If you could make a mold and have them injected with plastic
it might be cheaper than cutting from a sheet.
How many would be needed to make each track?
Im thinking around 40 per side for a six wheeler.
The side belting seems to work good but the plastic grousers will slide on rocks or ice.
Rubber tracks are best for those conditions.

[Obsessed]

I like the one on the top....much better floatation in the mud and snow...and won't create all the chain windup issues that the bottom one will ....bottom design will swim better (if all things are equal) and use less track parts

Tim

[Buzz]

What is the cost to cut them?
If you could make a mold and have them injected with plastic
it might be cheaper than cutting from a sheet.
How many would be needed to make each track?
Im thinking around 40 per side for a six wheeler.
The side belting seems to work good but the plastic grousers will slide on rocks or ice.
Rubber tracks are best for those conditions.

I'm just going to do it, that's the only way you know for sure.
I am shooting for roughly 46 per side based on 4.5" spacing, give or take.
No doubt it could be slippery in certain conditions, but for my summer/fall machine (which is already heavy) it should well-suited for water, mud, and tundra. I'll figure out the best option for traction add-ons if needed.
For me, I like the floatation the belting offers. I also like the stablilty that the belting and wheel spacers provide in the water, and am willing to give up a "narrow" wheelbase.
Tim, I tried to wrap my head around the chain wind-up, but I couldn't figure out what you mean? Thanks for the input....

[Obsessed]

Tim, I tried to wrap my head around the chain wind-up, but I couldn't figure out what you mean? Thanks for the input....

Hi Buzz,

its a simple concept but always seems hard to explain but i will try....in short, with a track design like the escargo track the center wheel(s) are always turning much faster than the track that they are sitting on, this is why they are such a good candidate for "track tuners"...............here is more detail.....

your track is essentially a pair of rubber belts with the grousers attached..........assume that the tires are all turning at a speed that would move the machine at 10 mph on a hard flat surface....but you are not driving your track (belts) on the outside tip of the tires (the part that determines final ground speed) you are actually driving them on a much smaller circumference which is up on the tires side wall.... its like having two different size sprockets....one that is 25" and the other that is maybe only 19"....the only thing that keeps the tires and track from completely grinding to a stop is the fact that the tire tread and your track wont lock together like a chain and sprocket would......so you are now driving the track mainly with the front and back tire which is only advancing the track at a rate of about 60" per revolution of the axle, yet the center tires are still trying to cover about 78" per revolution......this is why a machine that would normally be able to roll at a top gear speed of 20 mph on just tires now only has a top speed of about 14 mph with the tracks installed.....you can install "track tuners" and get rid of most of the binding, but you are never going to be able to drive (re-gear) the track as fast as the machine would roll on just tires......

up side to this is that it talks a shorter "chain" or track to circumference the two end tires so less track is needed, and if you were to build a track that would normally require about 19' 4" (for your Mudd-Ox with 25" tires) you will probably only need about 18' of track (approx...depending on your grouser design) hope this makes sense....

Let me know

tim

[Buzz]

I do agree that it takes slightly less belting to build, as the belting follows a smaller circumfrence, but I'm having a hard time grasping that the wheels are trying to move at different revolutions.
All of the tires are riding inside of identical shaped crossers, and even though the tire guides are essentially connected with the belting (fixed position lengthwise), the portion of the crosser that contacts the ground (larger circumfrence) is able to move or "splay" out, taking up different distances over that larger circumfrence if needed. Hopefully I described this correctly.

[Obsessed]

the wheels ARE all moving at the same speed and revolutions.....the track is what is being driven at a slower pace, because it is not driven by the outside tip of the tire (such as a conventional track design), it is driven by a much smaller gear and therefor the the the center tires are now turning and covering ground at a normal speed while sitting on top of a track that is moving much slower...this is why the grousers tend to "pop" off the center tires when the machine is driving

another visual indicator of how much of a differance the travel speed is on that type of track design is simply look at how the grousers are forced to fan out as they go around the front and back tire and the distance from tip if grouser tread to tip of grouser tread....then compair that to the center tires and look and the gap between the grousers there....

you could also think about what would happen on an 8x8 if you could run small tires on the front and back and then big tires on the middle then wrap a belt around all four tires and spin the axles at the same speed....thats what the escargo track design does....that style of track design (for its origional purposes) was never intended to be run on an all wheel drive machine where all the tires were the same size and turning at the same rate....as it was originally designed it would have been driven by a single sprocket and the other center tires would have just been idlers where tire speed and track speed would never have been a conflicting drawback to the design

hope this helps explain it a little better

Tim

[Obsessed]

[QUOTE=Buzz;138446]I do agree that it takes slightly less belting to build, as the belting follows a smaller circumfrence, but I'm having a hard time grasping that the wheels are trying to move at different revolutions.

Got me to thinking....if you have the "track tuners" installed on your 8x8 with ESCargo tracks....take 4 pieces of tape and mark the top dead center of the 4 wheels on one track....now drive the machine ahead about 6 feet and watch how quickly the center tires start to lose time with the front and back tires that are still in time with one another....now take that amount and multiply it buy the number of revolutions at a normal speed in just one minute of driving and it starts to become pretty amazing

tim

[Buzz]

[QUOTE=Obsessed;138464]

I do agree that it takes slightly less belting to build, as the belting follows a smaller circumfrence, but I'm having a hard time grasping that the wheels are trying to move at different revolutions.

Got me to thinking....if you have the "track tuners" installed on your 8x8 with ESCargo tracks....take 4 pieces of tape and mark the top dead center of the 4 wheels on one track....now drive the machine ahead about 6 feet and watch how quickly the center tires start to lose time with the front and back tires that are still in time with one another....now take that amount and multiply it buy the number of revolutions at a normal speed in just one minute of driving and it starts to become pretty amazing

tim

Tim I will definitely try that. The track-belting speed is the key.
I personally think that any track that can be driven up a hill without slipping the tires, has enough grip inside to at least benefit "to some extent" from track tuners. Event though the chains may not bind up severely, the difference in tire diameter is enough to add addtional load to the chains. I can't imagine that even a UHMW track wouldn't pick up a little speed and "feel better" with a set of tuners. If you have enough friction to drive your tracks, you have enough friction to load up your chains, and noone's tires are perfect. Just some thoughts. I would love to hear comparisons, and I will try your suggestion. I appreciate the dialogue.

[Buzz]

the grousers splay out as they go around the tire only because they are not connected to each other where they make contact with the ground. Track tension causes the tire tread to grab a crosser and start driving it around the tire. The guide portion (higher up) of the crosser is secured to the belt, but the cleat portion is able to flex. I can grab two adjacent cleats and squeeze them together with my hand. It's just gravity, lengthwise pull from the tire tread, and the fact that the cleat is flexible that makes them "splay" out. When you see the track "popping off" the center tires it is usually because the track is too loose and the crossers "catch" on the lugs of the tires. Not a big deal at all. Just increase pressure. If you look closely, you can see that the pressed radiused portion of the crosser (horizontal part where the tire rides) is bent "up" to avoid a direct "on edge" piece of steel from grabbing the lugs of the tires. Just increase air pressure, all is well. Hope this helps.

[Obsessed]

[QUOTE=Buzz;138467]

The reason the escargo track is slower is because of it's weight and the fact that rotational mass sucks power.

Buzz....very true, but I believe that if you continue to study the design, then what I have learned will make more sense...the tape experiment with track tuners will support what I am saying...
Ground speed is not reduced so much by the addition of more weight than any other track system, but instead because of actual reduction of track drive circumference.....no differance than taking your 25" tires off and putting a set of 20" on...won't matter if the 20" tires are lighter, if you can't spin the axles any faster your gonna go slower

Tim

[Obsessed]

When you see the track "popping off" the center tires it is usually because the track is too loose and the crossers "catch" on the lugs of the tires. Not a big deal at all. Just increase pressure.

The reason they "pop" when they catch the tires is because the tire tread is turning faster than the metal cleats on the center (or straight part) of the track... The only reason you don't see them "pop" off the bottom of the center tires is because the entire weight of the machine is pinching them to the ground....in the dozen or more styles of track I built that started out similar to the ESCargo track design, not only were they slower and louder than my more current designs, but you could actually watch the grouser twist as the center tires roll over them

If you look closely, you can see that the pressed radiused portion of the crosser (horizontal part where the tire rides) is bent "up" to avoid a direct "on edge" piece of steel from grabbing the lugs of the tires. Just increase air pressure, all is well. Hope this helps.

The bent up portion of the steel cleat base does helps reduce traction between the tire and the track and hide the design problem...I think that this was always an acceptable solution with the old style "bald" runamuks tires...the newer tires used today are much more aggressive and less forgiving to the design flaw..

Please don't think that my opinion of the ESCargo grouser shape is all bad...I could talk just as much about unique aspects of that track that I really admire....my only point is that if your going to built a track, go with the design that doesn't have the belting below the tip of the tires....on the other hand, if you like the added gear reduction and torque, your have the track tuners so that's just a decision, not necessarily a drawback :-)

BTW...I was hoping to get to watch some more fun winter videos of that big beast of a snow machine you have...please share with us when you have time.

tim

[Buzz]

It's all good conversation as far as I'm concerned. Everyone benefits from reading all of it. I really hope to make some more videos very soon, and my intent is to keep everyone posted with any helpful results. We've had only a so-so year for snowfall this season. We do still have plenty of time for snow, and I'd really like to add some slushy/overflow type videos very soon too.

[Obsessed]

I agree Buzz.

We have been having a blast this past month riding on our frozen creeks and rivers around here...seems like we have been getting a few days of really cold weather then a couple of just above freezing days that were really nice to go out and ride...we have been going out after work a lot of nights and riding 10-20 miles at a time...we have been developing and testing a few different styles of ice cleats and winter track options and the mixture of snow, ice, slush, open water, brush piles, logs, concrete and a little trash is a great place to learn more about what works and why...seems like its always just after dark when we get started so I haven't had much luck getting any pics or video to share...

Thinking about trying to put a little group ride together to enjoy it all before it warms up for good....probably one of the most fun winters I've had since I started playing with AATV's

Thanks for the fun conversation also and look forward to your posts!

Tim