Will Can am Have something like the Pro R?

Stock hp is pretty impressive and that E85 tunes really wakes up the car. 

 
onanysunday said:
It would be interesting to run that thing on a Mustang or Dynojet dyno vs the hub dyno. 
Click to expand...
Yeah.  Problem I see is offroad tires really hate dynos and there are lots of variables on inflation pressure, tread pattern, tire weight, etc, that would make tuning hard.  

Dynoing a street car on a 248c and Dynapack, I've "lost" 5-10%.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
JEHC on RDC mapped the suspension out:

https://www.race-dezert.com/forum/threads/speed-pre-order.133318/post-2185397

image.png

Interesting numbers.  Front bumpsteer appears minimal, and rear appears biased to toe in for stability. Rear track width reduces by 10" at full extension, front 8" (again, of little impact since a fully extended suspension has no load to do anything with), and less than an inch at full bump (where it matters) for both F/R.    The reverse camber curve on the front suspension is interesting, and I assumed it would be the major drawback to the lobster claw design.  The long UCA will make for positive camber gain on compression, though it's VERY slight (0.044*) rather than the typical negative gain you usually see with a shorter UCA.  This means that the front will progressively lose grip as it rolls onto the tread corner.

But, given the non-parallel control arms, this means this is the first UTV that doesn't have a wonky-ass (technical term) roll center:

CanAm-10-1024x835.png


Which means that the lack of camber gain isn't super consequential given the thing has barely any body roll (double duty for this picture). I am surprised that they were able to keep front bumpsteer to a minimum with ackerman steering given all of the new concepts above.  That's a lot of time spent in CAD there. 

There's so much to balance on a UTV as far as suspension design, there's no real "right" answer.  This is why I hate it when someone critiques a particular suspension design as "wrong".  

 



Huh.  

But, apparently there's a Maverick R and Maverick Max filed for 2025 with CARB.

 
Sean at Weddle took apart the DCT transmission.  Said Can Am has some high end badass stuff in there. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Rockwood said:
JEHC on RDC mapped the suspension out:

https://www.race-dezert.com/forum/threads/speed-pre-order.133318/post-2185397

View attachment 110360

Interesting numbers.  Front bumpsteer appears minimal, and rear appears biased to toe in for stability. Rear track width reduces by 10" at full extension, front 8" (again, of little impact since a fully extended suspension has no load to do anything with), and less than an inch at full bump (where it matters) for both F/R.    The reverse camber curve on the front suspension is interesting, and I assumed it would be the major drawback to the lobster claw design.  The long UCA will make for positive camber gain on compression, though it's VERY slight (0.044*) rather than the typical negative gain you usually see with a shorter UCA.  This means that the front will progressively lose grip as it rolls onto the tread corner.

But, given the non-parallel control arms, this means this is the first UTV that doesn't have a wonky-ass (technical term) roll center:



Which means that the lack of camber gain isn't super consequential given the thing has barely any body roll (double duty for this picture). I am surprised that they were able to keep front bumpsteer to a minimum with ackerman steering given all of the new concepts above.  That's a lot of time spent in CAD there. 

There's so much to balance on a UTV as far as suspension design, there's no real "right" answer.  This is why I hate it when someone critiques a particular suspension design as "wrong".  
Click to expand...
An explanation I can understand.  LOL!

 
I need to figure out a way to have my words get posted to all of the forums with one click. I am sure there is a way, but I'm a nuts and bolts guy. 

Yes. It's a very nice gearbox.

Yes, people are going to be mad when it comes time to change a rear R&P. Hopefully Can-Am allows people like me to buy R&P sets for these. Otherwise we will add a new part to our lineup. 

 
NIKAL said:

I thought this was just going to be a cool video. Did not see that coming.

Freeze framing it, it was the inner pivot that ripped out. Crazy! Have not seen that before.
View attachment 128493
Click to expand...
Damn. I thought the first landing was what was gonna cause it, took a couple fore it let go.

megadesertdiesel said:
The Mav R looks badass with 34” paddles.

View attachment 128497
Click to expand...
Damn. Amazing what these SxSs can get away with, tire size wise. Buggies need this/that/the other ultra high priced shit to deal with it, and still fail without a lot of maintenance. A lot to be said for OE engineering.
 
Aftermarket opportunity right there @NIKAL

Looks super cool, but at what size do they start taking away from the power. @Rockwood

I had 35s on a 22RE 91' Toyota and the IRS suspension never failed me....but we also weren't winning any races lol.
 
Crusty said:
Aftermarket opportunity right there @NIKAL

Looks super cool, but at what size do they start taking away from the power. @Rockwood

I had 35s on a 22RE 91' Toyota and the IRS suspension never failed me....but we also weren't winning any races lol.
Click to expand...
Honestly without knowing if the chassis tab broke or if the bolt sheared. It’s hard to say if anything is needed? Might just be a fluke deal? Heck the guy runs that car pretty darn hard, as seen in the first 3 rollers his jumped.
 
My .02 Owning 3 DD cars and buying a 2025 Pro R I think it’s the best of both worlds the Pro R fits my bill just right only because being street legal in AZ and being able to dune with it.
 
madweazl said:
Th

This was the deciding factor in my decision to go with the Pro R a few months back. Other than front ball joints (fixed with limit straps), there just weren't any common failures. Over 300 miles in Glamis this past week and it was flawless (knock on wood).
Click to expand...
Great meeting you and your car looks great and it’s a rocket.
 
madweazl said:
Th

This was the deciding factor in my decision to go with the Pro R a few months back. Other than front ball joints (fixed with limit straps), there just weren't any common failures. Over 300 miles in Glamis this past week and it was flawless (knock on wood).
Click to expand...
It’s a bummer since the MavR is the first golf cart to make me contemplate switching. I assume they’ll get the supply chain sorted, but man, what a disaster.

I wonder if the updated part is the only thing they’re making and not communicating it well?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top