the whole idea is that there is very little ground pressure, i remember a video of some of them testing the tracks and they showed a guy not being able to walk on the snow. and he drove a suburban with the tracks and the snow only compacted like 1.5". it was pretty cool. the way they get some of you power back is through the reduction from the smaller main gear.

I wonder how the CV's would take it?.

http://www.mattracks.com/105M1Spec.pdf

these only weigh 1340 pounds for all 4. how much do 35" muds with steel wheels weigh?

 

Nowhere near that much. I have a friend with 42" Michelin XL's with 20" USA 6x6 Rims and they weigh about 250 lbs per corner, 1000lbs total.

i would guess 35" muds on 16" rims would weigh in somewhere in the range of 100lbs per corner.

Edit: probably not even that much. A 35x12.50r15 BFG KM2 weighs 61 pounds.

 

if our 4runners came with tracks we would all be asking how to switch out to tires again.

 

I was just wondering for comparison because a 35" tire is normally about as big as some would go on ifs.

 

It looks nice and all but why in the world would you need tracks? I mean I drive past 70% of the other non-Toyota rigs out there on the trail with 31's and a single locker.

 

They ROCK there is a guy with a 4wd Van that lives up near me and he can take that thing anywhere. He was up in the snowmobile park and took a bunch of people where only the snowmobiles were going. The only drawback is he spent half of the day pulling a bunch of people out of the snow. But if I could afford then I totally would!

 

tires up front, tracks in the back? all you'd need then is a camo paintjob and a gun turret through the sunroof.

 

I think there was a Suburban on eBay with those. He claimed they cost about $30k for all for. Not worth it in my opinion. . .

 

the website shows em for as cheap as 3k each. so 12k could do your whole truck...