Tweet
That's a very impressive video. I assume that this Argo 8x8 has the 3.3 transmission in it to be able to pull a load like this and make it look so easy. 
-
-
It does the job, no doubt. I do believe the mud in that video is much more firm that you might think. Slippery but pretty firm trust me. I think putting too much belt under the tire might encroach on the "open" concept of the track and the ability of the track crossers to be "more" aggressive with "cleaning out" and grabbing gobs of mud for traction. Especially a shorter profile cleat/tire guide area. No doubt it will still work very well (your track is an example) being as it is still an "open" track. Going narrow gets closer and closer to being a "closed" track. Right now I'm pretty sold (from what I've seen) that a larger, more aggressive "open" paddle with belts off to the side for floatation performs better...even if they're elevated a few inches.....a few inches is not that much. I do appreciate the idea of a narrow track that requires no spacers, but for me the allure stops there......for me (not that that matters). I'm not saying a less-open track doesn't work. There are plenty of videos showing yours working, but......I just think a more open design will work better, especially if you give it an equivalent belt width (or more) to help. It just requires a wider track. Similar to the shape you may have recommended that I cut for my project. Incidently, it would have been a wider, (but harder to turn) track with the belt at tire level. The reason I leaned away from design was because of the wider cleat that would be needed (19", all of which would have had to be on the ground). By doing this, you lose one of the best features of the escargo.....the difficulty in throwing or walking out of the track. It is just so resistant to track leverage outside of the tire. And, I just appreciate the gear-reduction of the escargo design too much. The small supposed "loss" of floatation (paddle engagement really) is not a factor for me. More testing will tell for sure.... I appreciate the input, and discussion. I would feel better if I knew for sure that the 61% price increase for a pro-series track was worth it....who knows. Seems to me that most people get pretty nervous with their money over about $2500-3000 especially if they have to "ship" the track to their location.
looks like a pro-series crosser requires a bit taller "squared dimension" on the UHMW sheet, it also requires a bit "narrower" one as well when crossers are nested together. I haven't looked to see how the pays-out on the whole sheet, but I'd wager to say there's not as much difference in the yield (I don't know). Either way, if you needed to spill over to a second sheet, you would need to use "so little" of that second sheet that the "second sheet" could be used as overflow for many sets of tracks (I don't know maybe a dozen, maybe half-dozen). If you divide the cost of that (1) extra sheet and routering....and you have the router.... into those 6-12 sets of tracks, it might raise your cost by maybe $100-200 per track. Add a few hundred more for 1.5" thick (doesn't bite as better ) vs. 1" thick. and now you're maybe $400-500 more (I think I'm overestimating). So that $2100 "classic" becomes a $2500-2600 pro-series. I mean no disrespect, I'm just trying to compare apples to apples.
I think people also don't realize the true benefit of having the majority of the crosser/guide area and belting elevated from the ground. Not only gear reduction, but the track is simply "anchored" under the tire and is extremely difficult to throw. I've heard mention of no-guides on an escargo-shaped crosser. It's no different than an Adair crosser, just a bit shorter. It would be very easy to design a bit more "guide-height" into the UHMW crossers w/o having to change the belt-mounting height. You might have to move from a 4" belt to a 3" belt like Adair and would have a 19.5" track, gear reduction, and super aggressive paddle. Or you use a 4" belt for 21.5". Or a 5" belt for 23.5. These are all main-tracks and would keep the belting absolutely protected, and the radiused crossers absolutely "pinned" under the tire (they already do as set-up). Conveyer belting, although very tough, can be cut especially when we're talking about supporting vehicle weight over sharp rocks, logs, etc. This kind of support or "ground-level" floatation with the belting can be very bad and damaging to the belt. I absolutely don't like the idea of having it anywhere the ground. To me 2 ply, 3 ply, 4 ply, it doesn't matter. It is beneficial to raise it up.Last edited by Mike; 04-04-2013, 10:35 PM. Reason: merged three consecutive posts. You can edit your original postComment
-
Hi Buzz...good thought process and your on the right track, but in addition to yield, and material cost, the biggest differences are CNC machining time, and overhead costs associated with the thicker material, as well as the additional steps necessary to prep the parts for assembly. As an example...it takes about 4 times the machining cost to produce the parts for a pro series track as it does a thin, simple grouser like the classic track... We could have, and we have in the past, produced simpler versions of the pro series track but over time and through our own testing as well as customer feedback we have come to value the small details that increase the final quality, durability, and performance of this generation of tracks... There are actually current generations of Adair tracks that have over 1,000 hours on them with no broken parts (which is virtually unheard of for any other brand of track). We spent the first several years trying to find the perfect performance (or blend of performance characteristics) and then the last few years perfecting the product durability without loosing that level of performance. our current generations of tracks work surprisingly well and are very tuff...You won't find a damaged or broken pro series Adair track anywhere, much less our even more durable designed shackle tracks...there are some people, myself included, that will invest the extra amount necessary to design and build a better product...not to say that there is not a great market for a simpler and less expensive style track we just haven't been focused on that group as much until recently...the nice part is you don't have to figure all that out you just have to listen to your customers and try to follow their advise, if you are doing an ok job people will let you know :-)
timComment
-
Buzz your point is interesting but the wear on the side wall of the tires is not being considered that belting rubbing the side wall of the tires will indeed destroy the sidewalls inevidably, lets face it rubber on rubber (edging) will cause grief and a full set of tires isnt cheap the side walls arnt designed to withstand that kind of constant wear whereas the adair pro series the wear is happening on the face the the tire and the side is only rubbing the UHMW which is much more slippery on the side wall as well with proper tension and tire pressure will not be thrown like I believe a escargo might.
Down pressure isnt the problem with throwing a track its when one is climbing logs or going through something very uneven and turning, in that situation that tracks can be thrown.
the metal crosser thing is all fine for climbing a hill when its winter time and the ground is frozen but stud an adair track and im sure it will climb well too.
and on any kind of log crawls or hard pack metal crossers will not last compared to UHMW and will certainly ride very rough and be extremely noisey.
low range on a 3.3 trans is low enough I wouldnt want it lower, so the gear reduction is not wanted tbh. JMO
RockComment
-
Rock- the belting is beveled on the sidewall side and actually sits outboard of the radius-shape of the UHMW guide itself. As you inflate the tire, the sidewall actually moves up and away from the beveled belt even more. On the other hand, a crosser or bolt-on guide...even if made of HDPE or UHMW, still provides quite a bit of friction. Mud and other goo gets smeared between the sidewall (the soft vulnerable part of the sidewall) and the guide. The rubber tire will always be more sacrificial that the tire sidewall. That's just an unfortunate side-effect of running tracks (sidewall wear). I have not witnessed the sidewall wear you mention. Instead, most of the tire contact area is on the tread patch, and tread-wrap of the lower sidewall (if I described that correctly. On the other hand, I have trashed many a tire even with well-rounded and smooth tire guides. Try running on a slant for 30 miles...you can imagine what the fat/meaty part of your upper sidewalls go through. Fortunately a UHMW crosser is probably not going to flex inward. Hopefully crossers that have narrow exposed guide "tips" don't gouge or become rough. I really don't think that would happen. I have experienced the tips of bolt-on plastic guides gouge and chip. Once that happens, the sidewalls can get destroyed very quickly. I actually really like rawhide III's for track tires, because they're tough for this application. In regards to throwing a track, you make a good point regarding uneven ground. What gets you is low tire pressure first, then high-load resistance to skid-turning especially when off-camber. If your track is stick and doesn't want to move with you, it's bad. Toss in a track whose guides can move independently from the track itself (directly under the tire) and it can be very easy to drive out of a track. I always use the example of a hard, sticky left turn when the right track is on the downhill side. The escargo shape is very resistant to this, I guess that's my point. Individual adair crossers (cleat and guide combination) appear to be similar. The main difference I see is the wider, more squared grouser contacting the ground all the time. Being UHMW it's going to skid turn effortlessly regardless.
Tim, I appreciate anyone who listen's to customer's feedback. I'll listen to feedback as well and give a "similar" design to yours a try. It's actually fun.Comment
-
Thanks for the reply Buzz, I would really like to see a direct comparison of the belted pro series adairs vs the escargo UHMW's in: mud, floating bottomless bog, water swiming, big log crawls and just bad angle situations.
I think this may be the ultimate comparison situation as both are made of the same types of materials, it may be an added bonus to let some air out of the tires to see how they react as one can get a flat tire at anytime while in the woods
RockComment
-
very true. And flat tires suck.Originally posted by rockrewls View PostThanks for the reply Buzz, I would really like to see a direct comparison of the belted pro series adairs vs the escargo UHMW's in: mud, floating bottomless bog, water swiming, big log crawls and just bad angle situations.
I think this may be the ultimate comparison situation as both are made of the same types of materials, it may be an added bonus to let some air out of the tires to see how they react as one can get a flat tire at anytime while in the woods
RockComment
-
I'm new here, in fact this is my first post. My 06' Avenger 700 has the 1/3 Steel, 2/3 UHMW hybrid tracks that Buzz built. I just wanted to share a short video I made yesterday. Most of the area I'm running in has about 3 feet of snow. The belting on the track is 4" IN/OUT and the crossers are 5" on center. I'm also running track tuners. Here is the video, let me know what you think.
06 Argo 700 with 1-3 Escargo, 2-3 UHMW Track - YouTube
CJComment
-
We're going to test a 22" main track in 50% steel very soon. Hopefully a 20" all-UHMW with winter kit tomorrow. We've been getting lots of new snow the last few days....light fluffy snow and cold temperatures. Kind of an unusual spring but really good for floatation testing.Comment
-
great video guys...loved all the deep snow...looks like the set up is working great!!!!
timComment
-
...having a ball that's for sure. We're going to take some video of the 1/3 steel 20" wide track on the Avenger alongside the mudd-ox wearing a similar 20" wide 1/3 steel track + winter kit (7"). I'm also going to see if it makes any difference in traction by placing 2 steel cleats followed by 4 uhmw. One track will be plastic x 2, steel x 1...... the other will be plastic x 4, steel x 2...repeat. With any luck, we'll get some good bushwacking to post.Comment
-
I think I am very, very impressed ! Wow what a video! And you like dogs to! That makes you alright with me! Did you notice you have and good sized branch wedged between the tracks and the tub on the left side, you can see it clearly at the 3:40 mark-that says a lot for the power of that Argo.Originally posted by kcj512 View PostLast edited by mightymaxIV; 04-09-2013, 10:07 PM.Comment
-
KCJ the metal crossers were rubbing on the body of your argo better fix that or you'll be replacing the tub!!
RockComment
-
-
Comment