Mulling this one over in the AC forum. Engine in the rear seems like its going to make the front end light. Thats my opinion, though maybe I'm wrong and everyone else is right. Anyone see this as a better hillclimbing quad than other designs? Seems like with all the weight in the rear it would make the front end light and make it more prone to flipping over backwards.

Also, anyone agree that a 300AC will outpull any other quad tail to tail? I don't.

Just looking for nonbiased opinions to see if I'm stupid or not, because I'm being told that the 250 and 300 AC quads are unbelievable hillclimbers. Better than their ACT 500's and stuff. (the ones that have all the weight up front)

 

VW make good sand rails just for that reason. They get good traction because they weight is over the power. if the seating position is correct the weight difference from front to back can be minimized. All depends on the design.

 

That actually makes sense. The long wheelbase doesn't hurt them either though.

My arguement in this is 300 Arctic Cat or say 400/500 straight axle Arctic Cat. Which is more stable up a hill? Thats the argument I'm in the process of losing to the majority on.

 

Andy, sometimes people's hard set oppinions cloud their thinking.

It is all a tradeoff on where you put the CG. I doubt that AC 300 can outpull the SP700 (heavy as all getout).

The engine in the back helps tranction on a 2x4. Very true, nobody should argue against that. However, if it was 4x4 with a locker, it would be best for traction and stability with the center of grav right in the middle.

Moving the center of gravity further back on the AC300 will help it tip over backwards. That is also equally true. AC may have aleviated tipping backwards too easy by making it longer. That is ok for them to do, but if it is longer, now it is harder to turn around, easier to get center hung etc. It is a tradeoff. It is not the perfect design.

Nobody wants to flip forward or backward. There is a very good reason all the other quad manufacturers put the center of gravity as close to the middle as they can, and that is for safety. I watched people riding double a lot. I have seen rear engine quads tip backwards riding double a lot. I know that you aren't supposed to do it, but people still do it. That fact is, the Prairie650/700 is one of the least likely quads to tip forward or backward due to the center of gravity being low AND halfway between front and back. The Prairie is the best overall design by far, even though an AC300 may climb better in 2x4. I watched a P650 carrying two adults up a steep, rough hill and it was extremely stable.

Those AC guys can argue until they are blue in the face, it may do some things well, but it just isn't the best design for every situation.

 

well man, at least one person thinks the way I do here.

thx