New Polaris Pro R

NIKAL said:
It does impact or change land use restrictions. Because it’s not a ROV/UTV it does not have to follow the same laws. No helmets, no seat belts, no passenger grab handles, no seating restrictions. 
 

How does this effect racing? Technically the Pro R should not be legal for any UTV class, as it’s by definition not a ROV or UTV. Even CARB does not identify it as a ROV. Sound like they need to be moved to a buggy class or it’s own specific class? 
Click to expand...
Identity is muddy in CA these days anyway…

 
Dune-Track-N said:
what I see next is either a change to the ROV wording or a change the sand rail wording, worse both
Click to expand...
Yup, probably will affect the sand rail/buggy crowd and force them to wear helmets. Yippee I’m sure they’ll love that one. Thanks Polaris!! Lol. Ehh it’s probably for the better anyways. 

 
NIKAL said:
I guess using the XTravel front suspension does not fix any of the positive camber issues at droop. 
 

View attachment 40883

Not sure what front suspension parts Sims is using? Maybe stock, but the Pro Turbo has the same camber issue. 
 

View attachment 40884

I think the only real fix is to take about 3 or more inches of travel out of the suspension. You would never miss it as it’s down travel and the car will work better. 
Click to expand...
I doubt you’ll notice the camber either…

 
NIKAL said:
I guess using the XTravel front suspension does not fix any of the positive camber issues at droop. 
 

View attachment 40883

Not sure what front suspension parts Sims is using? Maybe stock, but the Pro Turbo has the same camber issue. 
 

View attachment 40884

I think the only real fix is to take about 3 or more inches of travel out of the suspension. You would never miss it as it’s down travel and the car will work better. 
Click to expand...
It's also UP travel. when landing.. And Rockwood is correct.. You do not notice the Camber.. What is an issue is Bump steer... Not any more than any other current brands, but you'd think that with all of the engineers and design software out there, that this should be a thing of the past.. 

 
NIKAL said:
I’m sure some won’t, only because they don’t know what they are feeling or reacting too. It’s like shocks. How many think the stock shock valving is fine? You don’t know how off tune they are until it’s fixed. 
 

The group we camp & ride with all had RZR’s and I had my buggy. When I got the RZR it was so much fun, but the first thing I talked about is what I called rear steer. I was surprised at how much I chased the rear suspension. No one knew what the heck I was talking about, because they had never driven a proper suspension. I went home, pulled the rear shocks and cycled the suspension to see what was going on and it was exactly what I was saying. Besides the extreme track change and outward tire scrub, I could see how as the suspension traveled, how the toe changed. The rear toe change was greater then the front “bumpsteer” and the rear is where your forward momentum comes from. 
 

Per the Shock Therapy guys the Pro R has improved the front bumpsteer and ST’s BS kit can remove most of it. But the track width change was close to 12 inches, with several inches of positive camber. The camber is there as they can’t get the wheel travel they want due to the outer CV angle. Polaris claims to have  “27 inches of usable travel” and 22.75 actual wheel travel out of 74 inches wide. 
 

Between the track scrub, then add positive camber and your going to feel that if you know what’s going on or have driven a proper geometry suspension. Can you imagine how sketchy it feels to land on one front wheel first at 10-15 degree lean, then add another few inches of positive camber. Your basically landing on your tires sidewall, then pushing the track width out from 64 to 74 inches as it compresses. The smart racers will learn to reduce the front wheel travel to 19 or less inches, and fix the camber. The car will be faster and more controllable with less travel. 
Click to expand...
You won't.  It's on the end of droop where there's so little load on the tire, I doubt the contact patch needs to be maximized all that much.  Camber is to maximize grip and flatten the tire IRT the ground.  At full droop, there's not enough load there to stress the tire beyond grip anyway.

NIKAL said:
I would have to politely disagree. Like I mentioned back in 2012 I was talking about rear steer with the XP900, 14 inches of travel and no one else was really talking about it. It was not until Can Am came out with the X3 and it’s 3rd toe link to help reduce the rear toe change did people take notice. 
 

When we were racing in 5/1600, 1600, 10 & 1 we worked on suspension tuning & geometry. With the 5/1600 we used 0 degree caster spindles and 2 degree caster spindles and you could feel a difference. We learned link pin shims and how we wanted it to feel. We learned what rotating the inner rear trailing arm pivot did to camber on a rear trailing arm. Or how to change Camber on the hub face of the trailing arm. When I was racing the Jimco “House” class 10 car with Justin Lofton we were the first to try a new billet caster spindle Mike Julson designed. Jimco actually reduced wheel travel in the Julson/Lofton class 1 car to get a better balance for the weight of the car. It was all these experiences that have taught me to understand what’s going on, and I have felt what caster, camber & toe changes feel like. I’ve also been blown away what a few turns on a bypass tube can do! 
Click to expand...
Caster is definitely noticeable and gives you reassuring steering feel since the more caster you have, the more the vehicle will want to return the steering to center.  The other benefit to caster is dynamic camber increases (which is why the most accurate way to measure caster is to rotate the wheel X* and measure camber delta) with camber, meaning you get more camber when you want it (wheels are turned).  

However, caster is not camber.  You will only "feel" camber (aside from bumpsteer as a result of "excessive" camber gain) if you're running out of grip on an end of the vehicle in a corner, or if you're losing traction (acceleration or deceleration) when going straight.  More camber = more grip, less traction.  This is going to be more of a seat of the pants "I can't make this corner" type thing though.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
200.gif


Thank goodness these are Sign and Drive type OHV.

 
NIKAL said:
I guess using the XTravel front suspension does not fix any of the positive camber issues at droop. 
 

View attachment 40883

Not sure what front suspension parts Sims is using? Maybe stock, but the Pro Turbo has the same camber issue. 
 

View attachment 40884

I think the only real fix is to take about 3 or more inches of travel out of the suspension. You would never miss it as it’s down travel and the car will work better. 
Click to expand...
Sims is a likely running Lonestar, if they make suspension components for the Pro R and Turbo R.

I have seen I-beam trucks that look way worse.  

 
So Shock Therapy just did a YouTube video on the Pro R. Said they now have a fix for the front Clevis. Says the shock shaft snaps off where it threads into the Clevis when it goes into bind due to side loading from big jumps or wrong spring packages. Also shows his fix for the rear toe link. 
 

Oh and the best part, he now has a patent pending on them. 🤣 RG. ain’t the only one protecting himself. 
 



 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top