The above situation brings to mind the big drawback of all around dual wheels, (besides the Schwarzennegger-like arms needed to steer the beast): leverage against the wheel bearings.
The distance measured from the centerline of the tire to the centerline of the outside wheel bearing compared to the distance from the centerline of that outside bearing to the inside (or opposite) wheel bearing is the mechanical advantage of the wheel mass that the bearings and suspension parts must support.
Adding a second outer wheel moves the leverage point out to the midline of the outer tire and MORE than doubles the weight and mass that must be handled. (due to the hardware used to mount the extra wheel)
The rear axle of a solid axle quad has bearings nearly the width of the machine apart. Let's say 30 inches. If the distance from the centerline of the back tire to the rear wheel bearing is three inches then there is a 10 to 1 leverage advantage for the axle against the load. Moving the load point out to the middle of an outer dual tire (Let's say 12 inch tires and a 1 inch space between them) is 6" +1"+6" plus the original three inches to total 16 inches. Against the axle width of 30 inches between bearings. So the axle now has a 2-1 advantage or so against the load. Still not bad and survivable. Front steering spindles on the other hand... (and rear on an IRS)...
On my King Quad the front wheel bearings are almost side by side. The centerlines are then about 1 inch apart. I can't speak for others because I haven't seen them apart but let's double it and say 2 inch centers, to be generous. If the centerline of the front tire is 3 inches from the outer bearing then there is a 1.5-1 mechanical advantage of the wheel/tire AGAINST the axle and bearings, right off the bat. If the, lets say narrower, front wheels of a dual setup move the load point out a bit less than the rear, say 14 inches, then you now have made a 7-1 mechanical advantage AGAINST the axle and bearings.
If the engineers who designed the quad built in a safety factor of a generous five (an industry standard for bridges), you have now achieved negating this and now have a safety factor of 1-1.
Meaning it can fail and break at any time, and more than likely will, without warning, sooner than later.
Sure looks cool though... [img]i/expressions/face-icon-small-smile.gif[/img]

 

go to highlifter.com and search it. i jus a post on there about a kit sumone made and will make for people

 

Saw kit on ebay for Honda.

 

I saw some advertised a long time ago but not lately. I don't think it would be good for your steering and suspension. We're limited to 50" wide on trails here and there aren't many other places you'd be able to go. You'd have to ride on private land somewhere.

 

There are kits for sale on Ebay to fit Honda or 110mm pattern.

 

After 14-15 years,....I don't think they are looking for a kit anymore.

 

I was going to point out that it's 15 year old thread too, but let it slide this time. 13 years between posts is ridiculous, but I may not have noticed it last year.

 

In the end, dual wheels just sounds like a bad idea. Turning 2(or 4 if you do the fronts too) extra tires would eat a ton of power and the added width would be a nuisance. The extra strain on your axles and driveline would probably mean a lot of breakdowns. Belts would get shredded on a regular basis too in a cvt machine.

 

BINGO! We have a winner! 4 extra tires and wheels, plus whatever hardware it takes to attach them, is too much weight. The suspension is built to handle a certain amount of weight and doubling it is a bad idea. Even if it would fit down the trails I ride, I still wouldn't do that to any ATV I own.

 

There's a nice kit on Ebay for Honda 4/110