Wheelbase, wheelbase, wheelbase (I'm looking at you Nolan)

[vanguard]

A week or so ago I mentioned this obstacle as one of the reasons that I thought long wheelbase rigs would be more popular for the trails. I know for cone dodging the turning radius is so important that they'll never had long wheelbases. However, when the goal becomes to run the hardest line you can find bigger rigs just seem to do so well. Sure, you'll find exceptions but in general the bigger rigs make the obstacles seem smaller.

I showed up at DPG with that obstacle on my mind. To me, it's one of the lines that separates the men from the boys and I was ready for my nuts to drop. It didn't happen.

I lined up for it 4 times. I tried careful crawling, I tried a few full throttle assaults, and I tried a few different lines. Did see Greg run it so I asked him to hit it so I could see the line. His response was, "If there is a line on that obstacle for a 107" wheelbase then I don't know it." The heavy rockwelled long wheelbase rigs were walking that obstacle bigwoody gave hell to all day long. They didn't even have the slightest amount of wheel spin.

And Pat

Even this very heavy 7' cab truck with no front limit strap made it. He makes it every time I'm there.

I know you told me the AZ boys like 110-118" wheelbases too. Regular rock gardens have become so easy for today's buggy's that they are almost boring. Cones and super tight turns are for competitors and just kind of dumb to worry about for the rest of us. Where are you seeing small buggies do better than big ones? Weight matters and you can't ignore it but I can't seem to get past the idea that big rigs make obstacles seem smaller.

Thoughts?

 

[wngrog]

Anywhere a heavy rig can hook its tire over the obstical, and it has a tire on both sides of it, you are negating its biggest drawback...weight.

Take a situation where you have all 4 wheels on a wall and have to throw the entire weight of the rig up a vertical, the light rig will win every time.

Gravity rides everything. I agree that a monster rig with monter tires will just roll over stuff and make it look stupid. Just make sure that rig can hok a tire over the top of the ledge.

The first rigs to ever climb Upper Helldorado were HEAVY Waggoner Machine rigs with 130'' WB. They could nose up, hook a wheel over the top (like the pics above) and pull.

Take a place like Money Shot in AZ. That waterfall is 20' from top to bottom. A long heavy rig has zero advantage there over a light rig. The light rig an launch up and stick to the rock face with sticky tires.

No rig works 100 persent of the time. I can tell you that it is proven time and again that a light, high HP rig with sticky tires is the ticket over heavy rigs. I just dont agree that that is the way most people would go if they could choose.

If you want rear steer and 500 hp, you will need a rig like TC's.

I dont dodge cones, nor do I wheel in the East, but I have done both and time and and again my light rigs make the heavy ones look stupid.

 

[vanguard]

Take a place like Money Shot in AZ. That waterfall is 20' from top to bottom. A long heavy rig has zero advantage there over a light rig. The light rig an launch up and stick to the rock face with sticky tires.

In a situation like that the long wheelbase rig does a better job of keeping the front tires on the ground and working for you (and avoiding the backflip). I bet an Icelandic hill climber mounted with 40" creepy crawlers would do really well there. I'm not arguing that heavy is good. Only that a long wheelbase is probably worth its weight. I'd go further and say this.

Let's say that rock crawling comps were set up differently. Let's say there was no penalty for backups and half the competition wasn't trying to turn around in a tight spot doing front and rear burns. Instead, the put a gate at the top of an obstacle and said, "Anybody that makes this gets to the next stage. The tie is broken by how many attempts you take." (Kind of like a pole vault competition)

If those were the rules (and they are the informal "rules" on a trail ride) the rigs would look very different. They would be longer but still light.

 

[wngrog]

Everything is a trade-off.

For the type of wheeling I see you guys do, a 110'' - 115'' would probably work best. I like to wheel tighter stuff with lots of boulders and wicked climbs. My 106-110'' rig (sub 3500 #) have been great for that.

Hell, Toyota mini trucks have been proving your theory for years. Light and long.

 

[DavidsCJ7]

I'm not an expert on the topic, but I have been wheelin big heavy rigs for the past few years. I have made some really cool lines in my Jeep but I did things this weekend in my new buggy that I wouldn't even think about doing in the jeep.I'm sure there will be lines that my Jeep, with longer wheelbase and more belly clearance, would make and not be able to make in the buggy but after this weekend I am sold on the lighter/smaller is better theory.

 

[vanguard]

I just ran across these two videos from yesterday. To me they look like an advertisement for a longer wheelbase.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_R5JoStve_0

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nIeuKFiPrEc

 

[InDaShop]

I see the arguement for sure, but where is the range for the break? 107-110? 110-114? 115-118? 119-125? And maybe some corrisponding MAX weights for each WB range?

I'm around 3200lbs and 100"wb. I know I'm too short, errrr, ridiculously short. I plan to get through this XRRA season, and cut mine in half and stretch it 6-8" and add a kids seat at that time.

what are the link lengths guys are running at each wb? I'm 7075 all the way around, 28.5" in the front, and 30" in back. Should I try to gain some wb there as well? Or all in the chassis?

 

[rock mafia]

Thoughts?

Quit posting my pictures

 

[GONOVRIT]

I've got more videos where those came from :flipper: I'm sure I have video of Greg and Travis making handfulls of obstacles that the 120/44 and up boys didn't make. Wheelbase vs. obstacle has to be one of the oldest, dumbest arguments in wheeling :

 

[Cole]

Lets see those Videos!!

 

[vanguard]

Wheelbase vs. obstacle has to be one of the oldest, dumbest arguments in wheeling :

One more rude comment and I'll report you to the internet.

Of course there is no one perfect wheelbase but you might have missed the other thread where Nolan and I debated the direction that trail rigs were headed. I just see the bigger rigs making the harder obstacles. Things that were cool two years ago seem easy now. Obstacles are getting bigger and I suspect rigs will be too. I didn't mean to take away from Greg or Travis. They both made t-rex and I didn't. Yesterday I even joked that the next mod to Greg's buggy should be a big cape because he's the local superman. ;D

 

[Cole]

I don't have a whole lot of knowledge on this subject, but my Wheelbase is 114" and my Jeep weighs 5400lbs, I would say that is not the setup that works the best.
In the future whenever I get a full awn buggy, it will be around 115" but only weigh around 4000lbs.

 

[Juan_Hong_Loe]

I'm shooting for 112" and around 3400lbs.

 

[Cole]

I'm shooting for 112" and around 3400lbs.

Next Century

 

[blacksheep10]

I don't have a whole lot of knowledge on this subject, but my Wheelbase is 114" and my Jeep weighs 5400lbs, I would say that is not the setup that works the best.
In the future whenever I get a full awn buggy, it will be around 115" but only weigh around 4000lbs.

or less. i am in love with the 112-113 wb, and my rig is 4300#. that's too heavy. there's a lot of places I can lose weight, and it'll take a full buggy to do it. I'd say shoot for 3500# cole.

 

[blacksheep10]

I'm shooting for 112" and around 3400lbs.

okay, so we agree laughing1
fuggin while I was typing.

 

[Juan_Hong_Loe]

Next Century

I don't wanna hear it. I've only been working on it for a year now! Just a few more months just wait and see! Just got done with my taxes and some of the money is going to the buggy!

 

[vanguard]

I'm shooting for 112" and around 3400lbs.

I think a rig like that would do really well at DPG, Harlan, Windrock, etc. Just about all the places I go. I don't have short term plans but I dream about my next rig all the time. Maybe a single seater could have a 112" wheelbase and still have a breakover angle on 40" tires. (Or 42" sticky iroks) If you go much bigger with the tires you're getting into heavier axles which brings other performance issues.

But that's my (susceptible to change) dream buggy. 112", light axles, single seat for a high belly.

 

[wngrog]

How high do you want the belly on your rig? Me, I like it low for a variety or reasons. That too dictates a shorter wheelbase if you want it to drag over stuff.

I too would like to know how many times Greg gets his ass handed to him by the bigger rigs. I would suspect that it is not much from all the lauding and praise he and his rig get on Pirate.

Sunbonnet Pass at the Hammers. My rig (106") Carls and Jims made it. A heavier rig wheeling with us (5000#) with 117" WB and a 26" belly could not climb it because it made you walk up to the face and literally climb straight up. The heavier,longer rig smoked everything on the trail until you went vertical. If it had been 10" longer, the front tires would have been over the top and it would have probably pulled the fall.

Ricky B called this Timmy's limb, but all I know is that it was dead vertical and my tires were 3' below the top when I nosed up. Loose dirt and rock and it was not pretty, but my 106" WB went up it.

A lot also depends on the way the rig is set up. My last buggy had 2/3 of the weight on the front axle and it stuck like glue to the rocks in climbing.

I am not doubting your theory, I just dont want to get a longer, less manuverable rig, just for the 1% of the time my light nimble rig gets spanked on a wheelbase climb like in the video above.

 

[vanguard]

I too would like to know how many times Greg gets his ass handed to him by the bigger rigs. I would suspect that it is not much from all the lauding and praise he and his rig get on Pirate.

It's really rare. Man, I hope I didn't come across like I was bad mouthing him. His rig is top notch and the fact that he wheels about 30 weekends a year has made him one of the better drivers I know. This was never supposed to be about Greg. It was about my guess that rigs will get longer.

As for how high I'd want the belly to be, I'm not sure. I haven't really thought it through. Length brings stability unless you're really on a long off camber trail. I think you can get away with a COG a few inches higher and have the same stability as a shorter but lower rig.