Convert your 4X4 into a true caving vehicle

[Wayne Harrison]

Someone try this conversion and let me know how it works:



http://www.mattracks.com/

[volica]

Too much impact on enviroment, no thx

[NZcaver]

Too much impact on enviroment, no thx

Maybe less impact than a regular tire, though. It's a trade-off. Greater surface area means a bigger footprint, but it also should provide more traction and less chance of you "digging in" on soft surfaces - compared to a regular wheeled off-road vehicle.

All depends on what you need to do.

[Evan G]

Too much impact on enviroment, no thx

Actually, they are much less impact than reg tires because they spred the weight of the vehicle . The snowmobile companies, Yellowstone & Teton park use them all the time here in the winter time. And also the security services use them here. They work on small Jeep really well.

[GypsumWolf]

From their website:

"Environment
Do you work or travel in sensitive environments?
MATTRACKS high floatation and low ground pressure provide low impact in fragile environments."

[speloman]

alot more maintnance than a tire though but cool may be worth it bepends on the person

[fr73ed]

I dunno , these tracks might be ok in low snow conditions, but somathe people I talked to said they git stuck in powder reeaal easy.

Way I heard it was durin the sorta big front range snowstorm where alla them towns to the east got buried, they was a couple them matrack vehickles what dint do so good.
Admittedly, that was almost severe conditions...
Opinions vary, of course.

Way I see it is like this, fer what it's worth... if ya really want to move over snow, ya gotta have the complete ability to travel on the snow, not thru it.

Again opinions...

comments ?

fr73ed

[Jonathan]

spell check much? just playing. mattracks are good when applied in an appropriate environment. to the 2nd poster, sorry you're wrong, they impact the environment much less (but that was already covered). drawbacks I see: vehicle speed is limited to 40-45mph, "road noise", fuel economy, cost of tread replacement, and just too many darn moving parts/things to go wrong.

[fr73ed]

spell check much?
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Nah, I quit doin that. Whole damn screen lights up.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


just playing. mattracks are good when applied in an appropriate environment. to the 2nd poster, sorry you're wrong, they impact the environment much less (but that was already covered).
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I agree with this, they gotta have less impact than tires.
An I oughta know, back when I boughht my first er second 4wd, holy croak, I tore up the environment. Thought it was fun. My truck could really take it an keep on tickin.
Then I found out about what it takes to repair them f.... mistakes.
Anyhow , them ruts prolly STILL exist.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------




drawbacks I see: vehicle speed is limited to 40-45mph, "road noise", fuel economy, cost of tread replacement, and just too many darn moving parts/things to go wrong.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I read somwhers that trucks with em installed only git 2 mpg.
In reality, I feel these matracks are a real good attempt to invent somthin worthwhile.
My hats off to the guy or gal what thought them up.
On the other hand , if I need to go over snow, my recce is to use a Tucker.
Or a Thiokol.
Or a LMC.
Or a Bombardrierar. Or somthin like that.( Jeeze, how inthehell do ya spell that anyway ?????)
Dam computor. Always messin up with my spellin.

But if ya "really" want ta go over snow in rough conditions, stick with a Tucker.

yers, over the snow,
fr73ed

[copelandcaver7]

Sounds like a cool rig I wonder how much those would cost?

[cruiser88]

Too much impact on enviroment, no thx

Sorry they have considerable less impact on the enviroment than regular tires and wheels.

[volica]

Guys,
I was in military (for one week only, but still) Have you seen tracks left by a tank? True, tank is much heavier, but just see tracks left by snowmobiles and snowcats left early spring.
Bigger footprint is damaging greater area.
And anyway...
Driving up to the very cave entrance at all cost is like fighting over closest parking spot at the entrance to the gym. Ridiculous.

[NZcaver]

Guys,
I was in military (for one week only, but still) Have you seen tracks left by a tank? True, tank is much heavier, but just see tracks left by snowmobiles and snowcats left early spring.
Bigger footprint is damaging greater area.
And anyway...
Driving up to the very cave entrance at all cost is like fighting over closest parking spot at the entrance to the gym. Ridiculous.

I agree. Is anyone here is seriously considering getting fitted with these for accessing caves? I can't imagine it. Most of us cavers gladly(?) suffer a hike to get to the cave of our choice. However... I know of at least one cave rescue where the patient, after exiting the cave, was evacuated down the hill by snowmobile. So there may possibly be a place for something like this after all, if only in extreme circumstances.

I think the point people are making is that these retro-fit tracks apply low ground pressure by spreading the load, hopefully avoiding the tires digging in and/or getting stuck and/or getting no traction at all. Yes, tanks are MUCH heavier. They also employ full length steel tracks (not short all-rubber ones), and use skid steering - which accounts for a lot of the impact. I managed to suffer a bit longer than a week in the army, and even got to drive some of their oversize tracked toys. It was fun while it lasted, but I can't see they'd be terribly practical as caving vehicles.

[tncaver]

Although many people think ATV's are hard on the environment,
they are much less destructive than you might think. I've been on
logging roads before and after an ATV has riden past,
and I could hardly tell that any kind of vehicle had passed along
the road.
It is after multiple trips that ATV's begin to put wear and tear on a
trail. But that would be true for any vehicle. Horses make much deeper
tracks. Heavy trucks on skinny mud tires tend to dig in as well.
ATV's have wide, soft, low pressure tires that make very little impression
unless they are fitted with the most gnarly tread available.

ATV's can go almost anywhere and I think that is how they have earned
their bad reputation. It is because of this ability that they are used OFF
trails. When ATV's are run up and down hills with no trails, time after
time, they are quite capable of causing damage or making new trails
where none existed before. Like anything in the hands of man, ATV's
can be easy or hard on the environment. They get great gas mileage
too.

[NZcaver]

It is after multiple trips that ATV's begin to put wear and tear on a trail. But that would be true for any vehicle. Horses make much deeper tracks.

Uh-oh! Now you've got me started on how bad those damn mule tours are that share the trails in the Grand Canyon. It's obviously no place for ATVs, mountain bikes, or any other vehicles... but dare I say it, the mules are worse. They rut the trail, and poop and pee everywhere. The liquid stuff is particularly pungent when you're sucking wind on the climb. Plus the mule handlers are seldom courteous to hikers. Ban them all, I say!

Like anything in the hands of man, ATV's can be easy or hard on the environment.

So true. They get such a bad rap, probably because some users have the prevailing attitude "I can go anywhere and you can't stop me" - and they spoil it for everyone. And yet most people see a few pack horses or mules impacting a wilderness hiking trail, and think "gee, it's cool to see something so natural."

<Ahem> Since this thread isn't really about ATV's/quads or mules, I guess we're getting a little