Did anyone see this independent rear suspension at Haydays? *Looked pretty different. *Of course, they say it rides pretty good.

Next year I definetly need to spend more time there. *You guys keep posting pictures and I didn't see most of the things you've posted.

looks really radical what else did they say about it?

Looks goofy. Somebody spent alot of money on R+D for that. Hope it works out for that company,but looking at it........not http://www.snowmobileworld-s2.com/forums/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/devil.gif

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (performancex @ Sep. 12, 2002, 10:18pm)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Did anyone see this independent rear suspension at Haydays? *Looked pretty different. *Of course, they say it rides pretty good.[/b][/quote]
Hahaha!

And here I thought I was the only one who saw that contraption!

Did you speak to the guy? *What a wingnut. *I tried to ask him how it transfers weight, who is going to make his custom tracks, who is going to build his shocks, etc. and all he would say is "I can&#39;t talk about that right now" and "Don&#39;t question my design, I have 5 engineers working for me right now"...blah blah blah what a crock. *Anyway, I continued to talk about how each component worked on his skidframe and also pointed out that the trend in snowmobile design is lightweight and simplicity. *Right off the bat, you now have 4 rails instead of 2 with this design, which adds significant weight right from the start.

I really hope that there are better ideas in R&D right now than that.

JUNK

Some guy in Quebec came out with something similar a few years ago. Good luck to them.

I see it doing nothing but spitting tracks off rails.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">
Did you speak to the guy? *What a wingnut. *I tried to ask him how it transfers weight, who is going to make his custom tracks, who is going to build his shocks, etc. and all he would say is "I can&#39;t talk about that right now" and "Don&#39;t question my design, I have 5 engineers working for me right now"...blah blah blah what a crock. *Anyway, I continued to talk about how each component worked on his skidframe and also pointed out that the trend in snowmobile design is lightweight and simplicity. *Right off the bat, you now have 4 rails instead of 2 with this design, which adds significant weight right from the start.[/b][/quote]

Maybe he trusted me more. *He told me all kinds of stuff. *(Don&#39;t take this info as gospel, I&#39;m just repeating what he told me.) *Of course he didn&#39;t tell me about any problems. *Those two thick square tubes on that prototype were actually billet, so it was a bit heavier than a stock cat ETT. *With aluminum tube, rather than billet, it would be nearly the same weight. *He said the track they cut themselves, and for production they would offer a custom track or instructions how to cut your own. *They just scored the track like you would score drywall, then put a deeper cut down the middle with the knife. *Then he took a sawzall to it and cut it right in half. *My big question was ski lift, because you would think it wouldn&#39;t stay flat, it would roll outward in a corner, and the inside ski would shoot way up. *He said it was actually exactly the opposite, that it kept the ski down. *Also (and this makes perfect sense) he said when you jump it, and come down unevenly, it is really forgiving. * Since one side compresses and then the other, it makes crappy, crooked landings very soft and manageable. *I can&#39;t remember anything else right now.

Found the company link:

http://www.soundandvibs.com/snowmobile.html

I think it is a good idea, as long as they can keep the tracks on and in good order. *I think it would be good for sidehilling and riding on the side of roads.

looks complicated to me *http://www.snowmobileworld-s2.com/forums/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/mad.gif

what is the advantage?

I can&#39;t see it...

I saw this thing there as well, and I&#39;m not impressed. If there not coupled side to side, and as go down a trail full of moguls, one side is go to be absorbing, with the other side having the possibility of rebounding (launching you) in certain situations. It all most seems dangerous, but who knows maybe there on to something? I guess will have to wait and see??? DooZ.. http://www.snowmobileworld-s2.com/forums/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif

That would be the worst thing for deep snow not much of an approch angle



Last edited by Rocketman at Sep. 13, 2002, 9:56pm

If that baby was any higher you would need a elevator to get on *http://www.snowmobileworld-s2.com/forums/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/wow.gif
You think she might be a little "tippy" in the corners? http://www.snowmobileworld-s2.com/forums/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/sarcasm.gif

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (louis @ Sep. 13, 2002, 10:22am)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Some guy in Quebec came out with something similar a few years ago. Good luck to them.[/b][/quote]
That was Bessette, but his system was actually outboard of the runnerboards and the tunnel area was then empty.

This system is all inside the tunnel.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (performancex @ Sep. 13, 2002, 12:02pm)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">
Did you speak to the guy? *What a wingnut. *I tried to ask him how it transfers weight, who is going to make his custom tracks, who is going to build his shocks, etc. and all he would say is "I can&#39;t talk about that right now" and "Don&#39;t question my design, I have 5 engineers working for me right now"...blah blah blah what a crock. *Anyway, I continued to talk about how each component worked on his skidframe and also pointed out that the trend in snowmobile design is lightweight and simplicity. *Right off the bat, you now have 4 rails instead of 2 with this design, which adds significant weight right from the start.[/b][/quote]

Maybe he trusted me more. *He told me all kinds of stuff. *(Don&#39;t take this info as gospel, I&#39;m just repeating what he told me.) *Of course he didn&#39;t tell me about any problems. *Those two thick square tubes on that prototype were actually billet, so it was a bit heavier than a stock cat ETT. *With aluminum tube, rather than billet, it would be nearly the same weight. *He said the track they cut themselves, and for production they would offer a custom track or instructions how to cut your own. *They just scored the track like you would score drywall, then put a deeper cut down the middle with the knife. *Then he took a sawzall to it and cut it right in half. *My big question was ski lift, because you would think it wouldn&#39;t stay flat, it would roll outward in a corner, and the inside ski would shoot way up. *He said it was actually exactly the opposite, that it kept the ski down. *Also (and this makes perfect sense) he said when you jump it, and come down unevenly, it is really forgiving. * Since one side compresses and then the other, it makes crappy, crooked landings very soft and manageable. *I can&#39;t remember anything else right now.[/b][/quote]
A bit heavier than a Cat ETT? *Come on now, that things gor four rails right from the start, twice as many shafts and many extra wheels, bolts nuts and washers just because it has two skidframes working next to each other. *The complexity and weight addition of this alone are major negatives.

The other thing that keeps me thinking is the whole distance part, between these independent tracks. *In the case of front suspensions, they are up to 48" apart at the runners and yes, there can be serious trail fluctuations 48" apart. *This approx 24" distance from the bulkhead also means that a bump at the ski can induce quite a torque at the bulkhead, thus producing significant body roll.

In the case of two tracked skidframes running side-by-side, we have to think about the trail. *Are there significant trail fluctuations 8" apart on the width of the trail? *Also, even if there is, the suspension is directly on the centerline of the vehicle, so if a bump is slightly off center, the entire skid will stroke through some of its travel. *Big deal. *Since the skidframe works along the vehicle centerline, even if a bump hits the very edge of the track it&#39;s only 8" from the vehicle centerline, which is not really far enough away to create a very big torque, especially if you compare the same bump hitting one of the front skis.

So basically, independent suspensions are especially important the further the terrain contact point is from the vehicle centerline.

That reminds me that dude mentioned they had followed the test sled with another sled with a camera, to watch the motion. *On even a "smooth" trail, the camera showed the two skidframes were constantly moving independently with each little bump.