Jump to content

Speed UTV


Recommended Posts

54 minutes ago, Rockwood said:

Design wise, a clevis simply moves some load from the suspension arm to the shock end.  

And here's the main issue the Pro R had at the B1k.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Rockwood said:

If I had the choice between a simple clevis and portals, I’m picking the clevis, especially considering the cost involved (which can’t be ignored).   

 

 

Here we are comparing standard rod end to a clevis. Speed vs Polaris.

I simply used the portal as an example as it is the highest tech and what is used on top racecars at this time. Yes it's more expensive, complex, more parts etc etc.

However choice between rod end and clevis and the choice is simple.

I think what is comes down to is what do you want to rely on for maximum abuse?

A rigid mounted celvis which can't take any deflection whatsoever?

Or a single milspec bolt on a monoball with the majority of the load being transferred directly to the "beefy" (Polaris lingo) lower arm?

ETA: show me one modern race vehicle in any class that is somewhat successful using a clevis anywhere in their suspension design? (Barring the Pro R)

 

From what I remember the King clevis on trailing arms was incredibly short lived and saw many failures. They attempted to fix an issue which was non existent. It sure looked cool when it came out though. I believe they actually had more shafts being bent than the clevis actually failing.

Edited by DTA
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, DTA said:

Here we are comparing standard rod end to a clevis. Speed vs Polaris.

I simply used the portal as an example as it is the highest tech and what is used on top racecars at this time. Yes it's more expensive, complex, more parts etc etc.

However choice between rod end and clevis and the choice is simple.

I think what is comes down to is what do you want to rely on for maximum abuse?

A rigid mounted celvis which can't take any deflection whatsoever?

Or a single milspec bolt on a monoball with the majority of the load being transferred directly to the "beefy" (Polaris lingo) lower arm?

ETA: show me one modern race vehicle in any class that is somewhat successful using a clevis anywhere in their suspension design? (Barring the Pro R)

 

From what I remember the King clevis on trailing arms was incredibly short lived and saw many failures. They attempted to fix an issue which was non existent. It sure looked cool when it came out though. I believe they actually had more shafts being bent than the clevis actually failing.

Clevis on a trailing arm wouldn’t be the best design unless there was some sort of spherical bearing or rubber bushing it bolts to. Trailing arms twist, especially on a live axle.

Bushed A arms don’t see much twist in normal circumstances. Sufficient compliance in the bushing the clevis mounts to (or in the clevis itself) would likely take care of that. 

I personally very much dislike Polaris products, but I doubt the failure experienced in the race was any indication of an overall flawed design. This type of shock mount, while not on fabricated one-off racecars, isn’t something new. More likely, they had a metallurgy issue and it failed. I’m fine with it, and if it has problems, it had more to do with execution than the concept. It’s not like they’ll have to completely redesign the front end…

I still don’t get why the material on a clevis needs to be over 42,000 psi. Odd to specify material hardness for a shock mount without some other goal like dimensional or weight constraints. 

Edited by Rockwood
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, DTA said:

And here's the main issue the Pro R had at the B1k.

Yep. And either they need a beefier clevis, or there was a metallurgical problem. Not insurmountable. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, DTA said:

And here's the main issue the Pro R had at the B1k.

They have not had the issue since and I have not heard of one failing in non-race application.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, Sand Shark said:

They have not had the issue since and I have not heard of one failing in non-race application.  

Most likely because of team orders added on to the fact there are not many non-sponsored pro r racecars out there right now.

Same as the old Polaris racecars. The so called "stock" arms and trailing arms which were required at the time for certain classes were specially built out of non oem materials and powdered to look like oem parts.

Polaris does have tricks up their sleeves. 

I am confident the clevises you see in the racecars are not the same as what is oem.

 

Either way it's all a moot point.

I am simply describing my own opinion of the differences between the designs of two different oem manufacturers and the reasons why I believe one is better than the other.

I would love to have a 2000cc NA car. I personally hate turbos in the dirt. More things to go wrong. 

I like simple.

I would love a 2000cc NA engine inside a Speed UTV chassis. It would be the ultimate ripper and simple. 

We cant always get what we want.

I do believe the speed chassis is far superior in most ways over its counterparts for the simple reason it uses tried and true designs. 

No funky toe links or 5 link, no rear steer, no clevis shock mounts, no fancy electronic shocks. 

Don't get me wrong, there are some things on the speed car I am hesitant about.

First and foremost the mounting of the front rack. I love the hydraulic steering but the way the rack is mounted gives me pause. It is believed it is the reason RG was having steering feedback issues and nobody knows for sure if those issues have been resolved.

I wish the hubs were 5 lug.

I wish the engine was NA.

I wish the fuel cell was rear mounted.

I wish the suspension allowed for standard offset with wider tires.

I wish the engine was proven and they has used a widely produced engine already in existence.

However I still feel as a user end product it will be superior to what is currently on the market, except for the engine.

I have said from the beginning, I had started the original thread before the crash, I believe the biggest question mark is still the engine in this car.

That in itself I believe will make or break the success of Speed UTV.

 

Everything else is acceptable or far exceeds the competition. 

Edited by DTA
  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, Rockwood said:

Yep. And either they need a beefier clevis, or there was a metallurgical problem. Not insurmountable. 

I agree not insurmountable but it's still a bandaid for an issue which should have never existed from the beginning if they had mounted the shock to the lower and converted to front steer on their ground up end all be all UTV design.

You nor I will never know why it was done this way. It is what it is until the next iteration of the rzr.

Edited by DTA
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, DTA said:

Most likely because of team orders added on to the fact there are not many non-sponsored pro r racecars out there right now.

Same as the old Polaris racecars. The so called "stock" arms and trailing arms which were required at the time for certain classes were specially built out of non oem materials and powdered to look like oem parts.

Polaris does have tricks up their sleeves. 

I am confident the clevises you see in the racecars are not the same as what is oem.

 

Either way it's all a moot point.

I am simply describing my own opinion of the differences between the designs of two different oem manufacturers and the reasons why I believe one is better than the other.

I would love to have a 2000cc NA car. I personally hate turbos in the dirt. More things to go wrong. 

I like simple.

I would love a 2000cc NA engine inside a Speed UTV chassis. It would be the ultimate ripper and simple. 

We cant always get what we want.

I do believe the speed chassis is far superior in most ways over its counterparts for the simple reason it uses tried and true designs. 

No funky toe links or 5 link, no rear steer, no clevis shock mounts, no fancy electronic shocks. 

Don't get me wrong, there are some things on the speed car I am hesitant about.

First and foremost the mounting of the front rack. I love the hydraulic steering but the way the rack is mounted gives me pause. It is believed it is the reason RG was having steering feedback issues and nobody knows for sure if those issues have been resolved.

I wish the hubs were 5 lug.

I wish the engine was NA.

I wish the fuel cell was rear mounted.

I wish the suspension allowed for standard offset with wider tires.

I wish the engine was proven and they has used a widely produced engine already in existence.

However I still feel as a user end product it will be superior to what is currently on the market, except for the engine.

I have said from the beginning, I had started the original thread before the crash, I believe the biggest question mark is still the engine in this car.

That in itself I believe will make or break the success of Speed UTV.

 

Everything else is acceptable or far exceeds the competition. 

Have you seen the suspension arms Guthrie is running?  Interesting set up. We will see how he does this weekend at the Silverstate race. 
 

https://www.instagram.com/reel/CczKX4flxPk/?igshid=YmMyMTA2M2Y=

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, Lord of the Dunes said:

Well, if you hadn't noticed, the Nisan GTR is not an off road machine.

How's that for a fact?

I'm not a contrarian, I'm an anti-bullsh1tarian.

See the difference? Obviously not.

or you're just a prick?

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Sand Shark said:

Have you seen the suspension arms Guthrie is running?  Interesting set up. We will see how he does this weekend at the Silverstate race. 
 

https://www.instagram.com/reel/CczKX4flxPk/?igshid=YmMyMTA2M2Y=

Didn't know he was running those.

They have been around as a prototype for maybe a year or 2. A guy I know had a hand in designing them.

I still don't understand how they work.

https://www.instagram.com/p/CRJ1I2Yh0WS/?igshid=YmMyMTA2M2Y=

Edited by DTA
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, DTA said:

Didn't know he was running those.

They have been around as a prototype for maybe a year or 2. A guy I know had a hand in designing them.

I still don't understand how they work.

https://www.instagram.com/p/CRJ1I2Yh0WS/?igshid=YmMyMTA2M2Y=

All it does is move the SAI and KPI. Makes for less scrub and less steering wheel feedback from the road.

 

Also, the clevis for the Xtravel car had to be made MUCH wider to account for the CV's motion with the Xtravel suspension.

That clevis better be forged and designed properly.

 

 

More fuel for the fire: 

Brenthel TT's use a clevis.

UT it is FORGED and PROPERLY DESIGNED FOR RACE CONDITIONS

https://www.offroadxtreme.com/news/checking-in-brenthel-industries-gen-3-trophy-truck/

checking-in-brenthel-industries-gen-3-trophy-truck-2019-07-15_15-24-46_306688.jpg

Edited by michael.gonzalez
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, DTA said:

Didn't know he was running those.

They have been around as a prototype for maybe a year or 2. A guy I know had a hand in designing them.

I still don't understand how they work.

https://www.instagram.com/p/CRJ1I2Yh0WS/?igshid=YmMyMTA2M2Y=

I guess they make ATV suspension too.  Trippy set up, but it appears to work.  I believe the Murrays are running it on their X3. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, michael.gonzalez said:

All it does is move the SAI and KPI. Makes for less scrub and less steering wheel feedback from the road.

 

Also, the clevis for the Xtravel car had to be made MUCH wider to account for the CV's motion with the Xtravel suspension.

That clevis better be forged and designed properly.

 

 

More fuel for the fire: 

Brenthel TT's use a clevis.

UT it is FORGED and PROPERLY DESIGNED FOR RACE CONDITIONS

https://www.offroadxtreme.com/news/checking-in-brenthel-industries-gen-3-trophy-truck/

checking-in-brenthel-industries-gen-3-trophy-truck-2019-07-15_15-24-46_306688.jpg

Are they still running this set up on the latest generation Trophy Truck/Spec Truck?  I knew I have seen a clevis on a trailing arm, just could not remember which truck.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Site Sponsor
47 minutes ago, michael.gonzalez said:

All it does is move the SAI and KPI. Makes for less scrub and less steering wheel feedback from the road.

 

Also, the clevis for the Xtravel car had to be made MUCH wider to account for the CV's motion with the Xtravel suspension.

That clevis better be forged and designed properly.

 

 

More fuel for the fire: 

Brenthel TT's use a clevis.

UT it is FORGED and PROPERLY DESIGNED FOR RACE CONDITIONS

https://www.offroadxtreme.com/news/checking-in-brenthel-industries-gen-3-trophy-truck/

checking-in-brenthel-industries-gen-3-trophy-truck-2019-07-15_15-24-46_306688.jpg

Did you read the article, that's not forged, thats BILLET!:makerain:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

that X-travel is interesting, but they are almost as secretive as RG. Nothing on their site shows what/how it works....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, Dune-Track-N said:

that X-travel is interesting, but they are almost as secretive as RG. Nothing on their site shows what/how it works....

Dave Tounget is a buddy of a buddy. I "think" he and Nestor were behind it, havent talked to him in years though. 

After seeing some videos of people talking about it, it seems the wheels dont self center after a turn as well as a standard setup. And the video I linked he says it takes some getting used to. Sounds like the steering feedback loss is a weird sensation.

Maybe it will be the next big thing like clevises. lol.

And as far as the Brenthel trucks go, they are not what I would consider top of the line (newest tech), yes great trucks and their business model seems to be working great especially with Kyle getting some wins.

Yes the truck Kyle was/is driving has clevises in the rear.

Edited by DTA
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, parker@gearone said:

Did you read the article, that's not forged, thats BILLET!:makerain:

Well I hope it's machined from a properly selected material for the design.

Edited by michael.gonzalez
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, DTA said:

I agree not insurmountable but it's still a bandaid for an issue which should have never existed from the beginning if they had mounted the shock to the lower and converted to front steer on their ground up end all be all UTV design.

You nor I will never know why it was done this way. It is what it is until the next iteration of the rzr.

Bandaid?  ALL engineering of mass-produced items is a bandaid.  ALL suspension and chassis engineering, mass-produced or one-off, is a band-aid.  You make compromises to meet your overall combination of capability, cost, packaging and service.  There's no perfect solution. You pick your top priorities and make compromises somewhere else.

In the end, I highly doubt these shock mounts will fail prematurely.  Everything fails eventually, especially offroad, which is why I try to walk around my buggy after every ride.  I also don't think it's "wrong" or weaker, just different.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Rockwood said:

Bandaid?  ALL engineering of mass-produced items is a bandaid.  ALL suspension and chassis engineering, mass-produced or one-off, is a band-aid.  You make compromises to meet your overall combination of capability, cost, packaging and service.  There's no perfect solution. You pick your top priorities and make compromises somewhere else.

In the end, I highly doubt these shock mounts will fail prematurely.  Everything fails eventually, especially offroad, which is why I try to walk around my buggy after every ride.  I also don't think it's "wrong" or weaker, just different.  

Agree to disagree I guess? :cheers:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, DTA said:

Agree to disagree I guess? :cheers:

Hate to start something and not finish... :biggrin:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, Rockwood said:

Easy big feller. Debates on the Internet are one thing, personal insults are another. 

I’ll take this one as concession and chalk it up to one too many beers. 

ABC posted the pic.

I just turned it into a nod to Roadhouse, if you didn't get it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, mark5193 said:

or you're just a prick?

What's with all of the childish name calling?

If you need to be reminded, personal attacks are not allowed. Talk about the subject, not other members.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Lord of the Dunes said:

ABC posted the pic.

I just turned it into a nod to Roadhouse, if you didn't get it. 

Rockwood was a character in Roadhouse...?

Digging A Hole GIFs | Tenor

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Rockwood said:

Hate to start something and not finish... :biggrin:

Not at all, you wont change your position, and at this point neither will I. 

I believe the clevis is an inferior design, it was unwarranted and unnecessary on a ground up design/build unless there were legal concerns involved. Hence why I called it a bandaid instead of creating a superior design. This is Polaris we are talking about. They have great engineers. 

I will go further and state I believe their toe link design is inferior as well. I have heard real world feedback on that. Apparently with moderate to aggressive use, the rear needs to be realigned/checked constantly.

 

As I said, agree to disagree. 

 

Edited by DTA
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Shout Box

Shout Box

You don't have permission to chat.
    ×
    ×
    • Create New...

    Important Information

    Terms of Use Privacy Policy