Sand Shark
Well-known member
- May 5, 2021
- 4,361
- 4,424
Here is a shootout video done with the Speed, Pro R, Maverick R, X3 and a few others.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Pro R came out on top. They had a variety of drivers and cars. Suspension was great on the Speed UTV and it can not stop in the dirt after jamming on the brakes at 50mph. Took 150 feet. New Can Am Maverick R stopped in under 80'.Cliff notes?
I can't watch blog dudes for any subject...haha
Hahaha, that is funny. The more SxS "content" I watch, the more I understand why all these guys wad up their cars.Cliff notes?
I can't watch blog dudes for any subject...haha
Yep. It was an odd video and opinions afterwards. For example:Hahaha, that is funny. The more SxS "content" I watch, the more I understand why all these guys wad up their cars.
SxS threads are like watching a fight to be 7th place in the special olympics.Hahaha, that is funny. The more SxS "content" I watch, the more I understand why all these guys wad up their cars.
The Pro R 4 seater weighs about the same as the Speed UTV. The brakes apparently are not good. Even with different tires it might of stopped 10' sooner which is still way more than the 4 seat pro r.IDK about the validity of the brake test since every car just locked the brakes up......Weight, suspension and tire selection is probably more important to stopping distance than actual brakes in this particular test. The heavy speed car did poorly in braking, but maybe RG's tires aren't that good in that situation.
The brakes are not good, there's no hiding it.The Pro R 4 seater weighs about the same as the Speed UTV. The brakes apparently are not good. Even with different tires it might of stopped 10' sooner which is still way more than the 4 seat pro r.
I agree, but given the other car results; seems more like a traction test than brake test. Seems that doing the test on pavement would really show the differences in braking.The brakes are not good, there's no hiding it.
The Chupacabra test, the Speed was last as well, but not double as bad, I'm not sure why they are getting almost double the stopping distance here, but if you watch the video, it's the only car that doesn't lock the brakes.I agree, but given the other car results; seems more like a traction test than brake test. Seems that doing the test on pavement would really show the differences in braking.
Yeah, it's really odd since skinny 15s should lock up easy in the dirt, even if the pads were literally made of wood. It's almost like there isn't enough hydraulic pressure there.The Chupacabra test, the Speed was last as well, but not double as bad, I'm not sure why they are getting almost double the stopping distance here, but if you watch the video, it's the only car that doesn't lock the brakes.
I'm also speaking from experience.
Unless it's a bunch of patented RG brake stuff, it should take two guys about 4 minutes to bleed those brakes out real quick.Hopefully it’s just air trapped in the system and just needs to be bled completely of air. The owner of the Speed car Chad was taking it back to Speed to see what is up. Maybe they can retest the stopping power afterwards and give us the results. Thankfully he lives in Havasu.
Other owners have said the brakes suck, but the one in the video was scary bad. Curious to hear what the people that did the Wilwood brakes have to say compared to stock.Hopefully it’s just air trapped in the system and just needs to be bled completely of air. The owner of the Speed car Chad was taking it back to Speed to see what is up. Maybe they can retest the stopping power afterwards and give us the results. Thankfully he lives in Havasu.