Given:

standard 21-12-8 8-paddle Skat-trak hauler

vs

triple buffed 21-12-8 10-paddle Skat-trak hauler

Which is going to get my **** up the hill faster? Why?

How can it be rotational speed i.e. the buffed are less weight - they measured @ less than 1/2 lb difference?

 

I'd suggest you go with the tripple buffs in the 8 paddle combo or maybe even a 7, It has been very interesting to watch the sparks bikes at 4SW they run fewer paddles than most and beat the pants off just about everyone. Too much paddle and big hills like we have are not a good combo. Most people run a tire/paddle combo that will give them good all round performance and maximum traction and for casual dunning that works great but, if you want to beat the next guy up the hill you'll want some degree of splipage on the hills to keep your R's up. I'd go with a 7 or 8 paddle but no more.

Strange that the weight difference is so minimal- what rims are you runing? I think most guy run the lightest .125" rims to save some weight there too. I'd think you should be seeing at least a 5lb/ tire difference[img]i/expressions/face-icon-small-confused.gif[/img]

 

Thanks.

Exact same .125 rim.

What about the 467 (+3mm bore) & methanol factor? Just those alone have given me many quads more versus my old setup. Do you suppose the (10) would still be to much? When I spoke w/ Larry @ Skat-Trak yesterday, he said at least (9).

I'm going to have (2) separate/complete rear setups:

(1) for running the hill &
(1) for general dunning

It's a $350.00 ticket so I'd hate to screw it up or do something I'd regret later.

 

Is that the word on what Sparks runs? I heard they run less but I hadn't heard how many less. Tony mentioned six paddles, now you're talking 7. I guess I shoulda taken a look at their bikes at FSW but it was too nice sitting on top of the hill - the cool breese, nice view. Couldn't beat it! Compare that to FSW2 when I was at the bottom of the hill thinking I was about to pass out!

 

the raptor that won had 8 paddles, but most of there bikes have 7s.

 

I noticed that Glamis had a fairly high density sand. I mean it was composed differently than beach sand. I feel that where I live 22 inch rears are a must to avoid getting stuck whereas in Glamis I think 20s would do fine. A vehicle uses paddles to displace a certain weight of sand to move forward. If the sand is heavier, less paddles would be needed.

 

I remember talking to Ly;e from Sparks a few years ago, when their big bike was the 505EX.

He said tall and skinny with 7 paddles is what they were running.

 

Al, it seems maybe they are still using that philosophy eh. I wish I had the cash to just buy an extra set of paddles so that I could test that theory! I've got a GPS we can use to test hill speed if someone else wants to spend the cash on tires!

 

Vegas650 I have watch the videos posted on the forums & thought that their tires looked tall & skinny. I thought that was just them spinning their tires like the drag cars, get tall & skinny while burning out. But maybe not, just my 2cents worth which is very little.

 

Tall and narrow seem to be the ticket over low and wide. I tried some different tires last weekend that really made a difference and they happen to be taller and narrower than what I use, also considerably lighter.
A taller tire rolls over bumps and through dips easier and keeps each paddle in the sand for a longer period of time. I have an old off roading book, think 1970, that compared sand tires for off road vehicles, the interesting thing was a normal sears radial beat out all these big sand tires for contact patch. When the air was let out it didn't widen out much the patch was very long. The other tires got just alittle wider and a little longer. This was just for float and has nothing to do with a race type tire, it was just very interesting.
Selector, I don't understand why there isn't more of a weight difference?