This is approximately 2/3 to the end of the original thread.
These start on 8/18/1999 and go to 8/21/1999. I tried to get the wording right - If anybody sees anything glaringly wrong - just holler and I’ll try to fix it.
There were a few posts at the end of this thread that didn't get captured - I know Matt and I talked some more about floatation and such - Matt - feel free to fill in the gaps at the end if you remember.

 

Originator: Shane West
Posted: 08-18-1999

Gordon is right in the fact that the majority of people do not want to step out from behind their ego and admit that they made a mistake.

My 300 had the Vampires on it when I purchased it. The quad that I had prior to the 300 was a 250 2X that I had put 25x13.5x10 Super Swamper TSL’s on the rear. I can say that in my opinion, the SS TSl’s did not work as good as the Vampires. In sticky waterless gumbo mud I would end up with two big ***** of mud on the rear. The Vampires on the other hand only form small ***** of mud. I would like to find someone in my area to swap out tires with for a day and see if the claw tires would work as well and drain less power than the Vampires.

Gordon, question…. Is it the height, width, weight, or combination that drains the most power? Which has the largest a(e)ffect on the loss of power?

---------------
Shane

’97 Honda 300 4x4 - Vamped, Locked, & Lifted

 

Originator: mattsibley
Posted: 08-18-1999

I think it is a combo. Weight is the bigger issue but the taller or wider you get, the heavier it gets too. But the taller tires take more to turn them over once than a shorter tire. So this too could be a power taker. I’m satisfied with my Vamps even without the high performance or big bore kits.

---------------
Matt Sibley

1999 Honda 300 4x4 Vampires and 2500 lb. Winch

 

Originator: Texridr
Posted: 08-18-1999

It seems that the perceived power loss associated with increasing the tire size on an ATV, or any other vehicle for that matter, would be dependent upon a combination of the tire’s weight, height, and width…though the width is probably trivial. I didn’t work out the physics for the different tire sizes (I’ve forgotton most of it) but based part of my following xomments on intuition; so don’t flame me too bad if I’m grossly mistaken.

Increased height appears to be the primary cause for the loss here since it requires more torque to turn a taller tire than it does a shorter one. Because the increased torque requirement of a taller tire is not available ( the engine did not change), the capability to begin rotating the tire from rest as well as accelerate its rotation is reduced compared to the shorter tire.

As for weight issue, the heavier tire will not affect the engine’s capability to begin rotating the tire from rest nearly like a height increase will, but will have a more significant affect on it’s ability to accelerate the tire’r rotation since it requires more power. But the power spent doing this is not totally wasted. Much of this power is stored in the rotating mass of the tire/wheel - just like a flywheel. This stored power is greater for a heavier tire/wheel so a heavier could actually improve performance in certain situations. It will also increase the niminal stopping distance of the vehicle.

Comments?

---------------
Greg McKinney

 

Originator: Shane West
Posted: 08-18-1999

Greg,

I’d never attempt to nix your answer to a question that I myself am unsure of. The only other factor that I can see that may make a difference is the lug pattern. For example, slick sand tires would turn much easier than Vampires of the same or maybe even smaller size.

If I understood your reply correctly, you are saying that the weight of a heavier tire could, once spinning, actually help the tire continue to turn. Kind of like a weight on the end of a string. A weight on a short string seems to take more effort to keep it spinning tha does the same weight on a longer length of string. Although the longer string takes more effort to get it started swinging. (Kenetic energy & potential energy)

---------------
Shane

’97 Honda 300 4x4 - Vamped, Locked, & Lifted

 

Originator: Gordon_L_Banks
Posted: 08-18-1999
Question: Which tire factor(s) have the greater effect on one’s ability to apply power to the ground, height, weight, or width?

For the most part, I very much agree with what Greg has written, and for the same reasons and/or explanation he expressed (and very well done too, I might add). I think tire height will have the most noticeable effect, with tire width the least. Tire width will have a greater effect on handling with emphasis on one’s turning ability.

Except…. When dealing with mud, we have to plan on the very real likelihood of coming to a dead stop. And once stopped, our ability to apply torque to the ground is all we have to get moving again. At that point, weight won’t mean much, since weight has a greater effect on our ability to accelerate (i.e. build speed). It takes torque to get moving, and anything that greatly reduces our ability to apply torque to the ground, reduces our ability to get moving again. At this point, and especially with a small engine, tire width might, but not necessarilyso, come into play. We’re better off to have the ability to spin the tire in mud, than not to be able to move it at all. If we have too little torque to get a "high-traction" tire moving, then we are stuck. But this can be a "technical term" game, because it’s not just a tire’s width that determines its traction factor, but it’s tread design as well. We could certainly spin a very wide "racing slick" in the mud, so it’s not just the width. Available traction is a balance or "product" of width and tread design. We don’t need or want more traction than our engine can overcome, or overpower. We have to be able to turn our wheels, so we have to avoid wheels too big for our available torque.

Now, with a small-block V8 installed….

And to think, instead of four tires from 9-13" wide applying power to the ground, my new toy will have only one 4.5" wide tire!

 

Originator: mattsibley
Posted: 08-18-1999

Greg,

Nice job with the tire info. You are correct! You did better than me! Where are all of you guys from? I need some info about the Bonnet Carre Spillway in Louisanna. Post replies and I’ll let ya know exactly what I need.

---------------
Matt Sibley

1999 Honda 300 4x4 Vampires and 2500 lb. Winch

 

Originator: Texridr
Posted: 08-19-1999

Matt,

I grew up in a small town just north of Beaumont, TX, where I spent a lot of time riding in the Neches river bottoms. I still ride this area primarily, but have since moved to Houston. Don’t know anything about the Bonne Carre spillway other than where it is located.

Greg McKinney

 

Originator: Muddy_Doug_E
Posted: 08-19-1999

Something to consider with tire height is that you’re essentially loosing your mechanical advantage to the ground by increasing your gearing thisis like having 3.55 in your truck and when you put larger tires on it changes your final gear to 3.08. The only way to overcome this is to change gears and as far as I know this isn’t possible with shaft drive machines. To add to the problem and equation is that Bigger tires tend to be heavier especially when compared to the cheap two ply tires most of us get for stockers.

No matter what you do to your tire size your engine still puts out the same amount of torque at a given RPM, what determines your machines ability to turn this into work I.E. spinning tires is gearing. It is my feeling that the real power robbing characteristics of larger tires are weight and tread design since bigger lugs give you more traction ad therefore are harder to turn and spin. Weight is only a major factor until the tire is rolling because the theory that an object in motion tends to stay in motion I think applies here, correct me if I am wrong not positive here. So once these tires are rolling there weight tends to keep them rolling this would effect braking. Granted bigger lugs pattern would have more friction to the ground and might slow down faster than say a knobby tire. Who know coin toss on the weight/tread pattern question.

Now if someone would just make new ring and pinion gears for the front and rear of our quad like they do for trucks then all would be fine and we could compensate for larger tires with better gearing!!!

I think the Foreman has been designed with lower gears to accomidate larger tires. The top speed is around 48mph with stockers and people riding them have said they feel the Foreman is geared to low what do you think Gordon or anyone else with a Foreman larger tires would increase the gearing.

Muddy Doug E
2000 Kodiak, 425 Magnum, 220 Bayou

 

Originator: Muddy_Doug_E
Posted: 08-19-1999

After reading all the posts and not just the last couple you can skip my post and go back up to texridrs and read his much more scientifically correct. I too have forgotten mot of my college physics and science. Really good post Texridr and I absolutely agree with you this doesn’t mean I disagree with anyone else I just understand and relate to his point of view the best.

Muddy Doug E