I'll bet those were like 300 ply and never had to come back off!!!

 

One more for the winter..

 

I have on a couple occasions seen a tire and rim from a transport left on the side of the road and figured the driver managed to change a flat but gave up trying to put it bad where the spare was kept, now they just drive until the rubber is spread down the highway..lol
My guess was around 125 lbs but really have no idea, the rims alone would be heavy enough..

 

It's a wonder that those 1/2 tracks drive with what appears to be quite small drive teeth driving on the poor end of the track .

 

The Aussie unit uses the tracks and Cardon Lloyd suspension lifted right off the Universal carrier with the drive sprocket and idler locations reversed See below pic of a Universal carrier. The Tires I believe are
11.00 x 20 the Aussies used this size tire on many of their Ford 3 tons in North Africa and Greece. See below pic.

The Canadian unit uses #140 roller chain and drive sprockets as the basis for the track allowing for a maximum a working strength of over 45,000lbs per track far in excess of the capabilities of the drive-line . See below pic of the drive sprocket. The suspension was of the simple but reliable Vickers leaf spring box bogie type as used on the MkI Matilda, Vickers 6 ton and various others.

​​​​​​​

 

I have no doubt it worked but the tracks would have to be kept quite tight to avoid pileup of the loose track between the drive and the ground .

 

Uh no if the tension drops the tracks just hang more vertical off the drive sprocket. And if that was the case the Sherman nor any of the German tanks or any half track (they ALL used front drive) would have worked and the Germans ran slack tracks on the Panther and Tigers not as slack as on Christie suspensions but still slack.

 

I guess I should have said it would need to be somewhat tighter than a rear drive configuration Yes it will hang down off of the drive leaving the slack between the bottom of the drive and the first ground contact . I wasn't suggesting it didn't work just that rear drive pulls the chain around ( not push ) giving it more contact on the sprocket . There is no machinery that I am aware of that uses a sprocket to push a chain , although I'm sure there are exceptions . P.S one of the German aces ( Knispel or Wittman ? ) was known for throwing the tracks off by using the tank to turn instead of the turret . I don't recall what the reasoning was .

 

Uh none of them push the track they all pull it no tracked equipment pushes the track. You are thinking about this a little backwards.
Rear sprocket drive tracks are under tension (pull) from the drive sprocket to the ground and front sprocket drive tracks are under tension (pull) along the top of the track, around the rear idler to the ground. There is no pushing.

 

Yes it is a continuous drive and is always pulling from one side but if you look at it in the extreme if your track had excessive slack your front drive would pile up between the sprocket and the ground where as a rear drive is constantly pulling on the ground drive ( traction side ) and the slack is on the top " none drive side " would actually wrap more chain around the drive so not near as important . I don't think you will find any modern caterpillar - track hoe -tractor that drives from the front simply because they can run less track tension = less wear on all other components .

 

If you had that much slack you'd throw the track regardless what end it is driven from. And yes there are piles modern tracked equipment that is front drive, and you seem to forget track hoes really have no front and back.

Track tension is way way more critical on rear drive systems, NO rear drive track can use slack track (short of christie set ups as they do not use sprockets but rollers) cause the track does not fall down and off the drive sprocket but will bind up around the drive sprocket you can get away with WAY WAY more slack in a front drive system than before you have issuers compared to a rear drive system.

You are looking at this totally backwards. Rear drive is more commonly used for packaging reasons that's it. Front drive is the preferred way to drive caterpillar tracks. That is the reason the vast majority of tracked vehicles through out history have been front sprocket drives. Even today the only rear drive caterpillar tracked vehicles in the U.S army are the MBT chassis's, and this was due to packaging, everything else is front sprocket drive. And this is not just for the U.S but for every body.

 

This thread got off track quickly.
derailed.

 

double post

 

I guess I will have to respectfully agree to disagree .