600 hours on HDI/ pro series tracks

[Buzz]

who's in whose camp
you have to make sure the chains are loose (at the very least tensioners are released) and that none of the tires/axles have rotated and tightened up the chains...when you check bearings. Just a simple wiggle of the axle is not going to reveal whether or not bearings have play. The chains have got to be super loose.
Wheel spacers do move the centerline of the tire out a bit, and this does add a little bit of length to the "lever" (axle). But, that is not where the weak point is...not even close. That's what factory bearing extensions are for, and it's also why a factory-width (2.5") spacer is completely fine. Using a larger wheel spacer is not necessary. A narrow track doesn't need a spacer because it's narrow, but provides less floatation and performance in some conditions. In other conditions, extra width isn't needed.
A best situation is when the extra performance of a wide track can be obtained without having to experience the typical side-effects of a wide track that touches the ground over it's entire width...requires more power and tight track tension...and that has guides that can be manipulated on uneven terrain.
You know my preferance for the conditions where I live. I'll leave it at that.
I said it before - the primary wear/n/tear item is the hub flange, because in using a wheel spacer you're simple extending the axle a bit, and adding a bolted-together junction at that point that has to carry weight. It's better if you have an upgraded HD axle with heavier flange and a quality wheel spacer, but more importantly, you need to avoid a track being TIGHT. A track that needs to be tight to stay on adds a different kind of stress to the frame. That's as bad as anything not to mention unreliable- if you want to talk about field reliability. I'm well aware of why some would want to bash a wheel spacer, especially if they prefer a narrow track. I guess it would be easy for the same person to argue against 4-wheel drive on a truck, or studded tires in the winter because they're not really needed and would require additional cost and more "parts."

[JohnF]

The bearings installed in these vehicles are not designed to take side loading like a tappered bearing, the added leverage from spacers pushes in as well as up on the bearing. It's this twisting load that affects their service life.

I'll have to think about this a bit. What you are talking about is a translation due bending of the axle and I am having a tough time imagining that being increase more than the tiniest of a fraction from a wheel spacer and I imagine it to be well within tolerance for the bearings. It's going to be super tiny; inconsequential.

Try to pick up the corner of your deep freezer with your right hand only, bet you can't. Now try to lift it using a crowbar and your right hand. You can now lift that same freezer with a crowbar that you could not lift with your hand alone. Did the weight of the deep freezer change? (it didn't right?) or did you somehow manage to apply much more force to the bearing surface with the crowbar than you could without it?

I understand levers. You are using the wrong mind experiment for this problem. Back to the tube (we'll call it lever now) with the mass hanging from bearings. Fix one end and lift from the other and measure how much force you needed to lift the load. Did the forces change for the bearings? [no] Now add 10 feet to your lifting end and measure the force you need to apply to lift the mass. It will be much much smaller for you. Did it change for the bearings that the load hangs from? [no]

[Canadian_Zuk]

I understand levers. You are using the wrong mind experiment for this problem. Back to the tube (we'll call it lever now) with the mass hanging from bearings. Fix one end and lift from the other and measure how much force you needed to lift the load. Did the forces change for the bearings? [no] Now add 10 feet to your lifting end and measure the force you need to apply to lift the mass. It will be much much smaller for you. Did it change for the bearings that the load hangs from? [no]

Gotcha, I follow your train of thought....Perhaps I'm overthinking this is all.

If these units used tapered wheel bearing similar to those used on motor vehicles I would definately agree that spacers are moot as far as bearing life goes.

I currently run 3" spacers on my MAX and I probably only need a 2" spacer but at the time I wasn't sure how true the tracks would run and I didn't want to come up short. This is always in the back of my mind. I'm currently working on an axle supprt system for my MAX to put my mind at ease, I should have a prototype ready for testing by Spring.

We can at least agree that spacers are not going to help your bearings last any longer lol.

[Buzz]

yep, it's not that big of a deal for the bearing. It's more about the hub flange, but 2.5" factory width spacer is conservative and gives you the option for running a wider track. Now, it's more than narrow vs. wide. We all know that a wider footprint helps in many situations. An elevated belt track gives you the benefits of a wide tack with the "driveability" of a track that is only as wide as the tire itself. Not to mention stable guides and the ability to be run loose. And since we're talking about hub flanges and "torque", I'll just state that it takes a certain amount of torque to drive the axles that drive certain styles of track. Of course, this is "twisting" load on the axle itself lets not forget. It takes 20-25% more torque to drive a flat track (argo rubber or pro-series) vs a gear-reduction elevated-belt track like the channel or escargo. So, many turning and climbing maneuvers require more torque to drive the track. Elevated-belt tracks require the least amount of torque to turn and to make the machine move forward. This means less throttle when similar machines are compared or "standard" gears being plenty sufficient when a different style of track will require "low" gears to operate equally.
The axles of a machine with an elevated-belt track do not need to see as much torque to operate as the axles of a machine that operates a "flat" track. The flat track machines will require more throttle, or lower gears to move the machine up a steep incline or to tow heavy loads. Either way, the axles on a flat-track machine will see more torque if the machine has to work hard to provide forward momentum.
The engine, clutching, and transmission gears will determine how much torque can be delivered to the machine's axles, but the terrain conditions and the track style will determine whether or not all of that torque needs to be delivered to the axles or if it is sufficient to do the job.
Thx all for input! Buzz

[SHOTGUN]

I agree that the bearing is not the weak point in the system, bearings are very very tough as long as the conditions are met for proper use. There would be much more side load on the outer bearing when skidding the outside tires on a non tracked rig than the extra leverage from extensions. There is some extra leverage with spacers the difference is there is no difference in the maximum leverage because the machine will lift or tip(force has overcome the weight of the machine).

[Fox Valley Argo Sales]

The farther the distance(cantalevered) the wheel is from the bearing, the more stress will be applied to said bearing,and it has nothing to do with any track type.You can't change the laws of physics.
Now add more moving parts,2.5" spacer, and 5 extention bolts, and you are creating even more issues.Anybody that tries to tell you that this setup is as strong as the wheel bolted to directly to the axle flange makes even Dr, Suess green with envy.

[Buzz]

I don't think anybody's saying that a wheel spacer doesn't add "some" leverage (I know I'm not). It's not an issue in the slightest with the bearings. They're designed for it. I think what most people know for a 100% fact is that the main place to "beef up" if you're concerned is the hub flange itself. That's why all new machines (like the one you're using as an example) come with HD axles from the factory now. You can't even buy a replacement "old style stamped flange" axle. You can only get a bolt-in HD axle replacement. And, the new machines now have a larger bearing that doesn't require a separate lip seal (which grooves axles btw), and it's easier to grease because of a single zerk and a machined hole in the HD axles. Maintenance is key, and Argo has made improvements to make maintenance easier on new machines. They know people get lazy.
The bearings are designed for use with a wheel spacer. Especially a conservative, argo-approved 2.5" wide wheel spacer. Some guys even use that with old style axles w/o problems. That's why there are bearing extentions on corner axles.
We're not trying to change the laws of physics. Load in water is virtually nothing with any track type. And narrow vs wide track and track-type depends on the conditions you are running, as does whether or not a wheel spacer is needed. Proper set up is key.
There is much more to the traits of a track and how it performs in various conditions than whether or not it uses a wheel spacer. You have an obligation to sell a certain type of tracks as a dealer, so I understand the spin and don't blame you for trying.

[JohnF]

The farther the distance(cantalevered) the wheel is from the bearing, the more stress will be applied to said bearing,and it has nothing to do with any track type.You can't change the laws of physics.

...

I don't think anybody's saying that a wheel spacer doesn't add "some" leverage (I know I'm not).

Fox Valley, you are right. I did simplify the problem quite a bit and a call for the math is completely fair.
I ignored the moments. Your intuition of a cantilever is not allowing you to ignore them so let's add them back.
We need a model so let's imagine a beam that's 3 feet long and it has a bearing on top at each end (imagine a pillow block) and 2 more bearing 8 inches inboard from them. Out of these bearings are axles 16 inches beyond the outer bearing.
A conquest weighs about 1000lbs and has a rating of 1000lbs but we expect RD as a user so let’s bump the total to 3000lbs. We will only assume 4 wheels are on the ground, so two of the above described axle pairs each carrying 1500lbs. Each side of each pair 750lbs split between the two bearings. So, each bearing carries 375lbs due only to the mass of the vehicle.
The cantilever we are talking about is from the wheel back to the load that is split between the bearings so it’s length is 16 + 4 [1/2 distance between bearings] or 20 inches. 375lbs at 20 inches gives us a moment of 7500lb.in. that will have to be supported by the bearings. This moment is centered and split between the bearings which we can view as cantilevers too so a 3750lb.in. moment over a 4 inch lever gives us a reaction force of 937.5lbs. Bearing load total is 937.5 + 375 = 1312.5lbs.
Add 3” extension:
Moment – 8625
Counter Moment in each bearing – 1078.125
Total bearing load – 1453.125
A UC206-20 is rated at a static load of 2540lbs. Without extension load is 52% design static load and with the extensions 57% for a difference of 5% but well below design.

But, fair enough.

Just for fun I calculated that a 30 inch extension puts the bearings at max design static load for the above model.

Anybody that tries to tell you that this setup is as strong as the wheel bolted to directly to the axle flange makes even Dr, Suess green with envy.

This is a fallacious argument. A strawman. Nobody has argued in the realm of “as strong as” here. The argument is that other things are more at risk than the bearings and that the bearing life is not effectively changed due to extensions.

[Fox Valley Argo Sales]

A argo factory width (2.5") wheel spacer is not a problem in the slightest, and the added wheelbase is beneficial in many circumstances. Buzz

Sorry, wrong choice of words,how about "as good as or better."

[Buzz]

not sure I follow, but I do know that a wider wheelbase is beneficial when sidehilling and also when in the water for stability. Wider track belts also contribute to stability in the water because it prevent your machine from dipping to the left or the right as quickly. I always use the analogy of a snow shovel horizontal in the water vs. vertical in the water.