I receive workcover email alert updates. Notable is the recording and reporting of the relative high frequency of quad bike incidents and fatalities.

The aim is to improve safety going forward as you would expect Workcover to state. From my perpspective the bikes would need re-designing for this to occur. Most people I know who ride motorbikes off-road and on-road including quad bikes say the biggest issue with quad bikes is that they aren’t stable around inclines and will roll over easily.

Seems to me the design needs tweaking , is it possible to that though ie improve the design shape to improve safety whilst riding over uneven terrain?

monkey skipper said:

I receive workcover email alert updates. Notable is the recording and reporting of the relative high frequency of quad bike incidents and fatalities.

The aim is to improve safety going forward as you would expect Workcover to state. From my perpspective the bikes would need re-designing for this to occur. Most people I know who ride motorbikes off-road and on-road including quad bikes say the biggest issue with quad bikes is that they aren’t stable around inclines and will roll over easily.

Seems to me the design needs tweaking , is it possible to that though ie improve the design shape to improve safety whilst riding over uneven terrain?

I’d expect that if the front wheels were made larger than the back stability would be improved. From my experience with them their stability is compromised as soon the revs rise beyond torque centre and into the power band range. Offsetting the turn rate of the front wheels would at least allow some mechanical variability of power distribution.

monkey skipper said:

I receive workcover email alert updates. Notable is the recording and reporting of the relative high frequency of quad bike incidents and fatalities.

The aim is to improve safety going forward as you would expect Workcover to state. From my perpspective the bikes would need re-designing for this to occur. Most people I know who ride motorbikes off-road and on-road including quad bikes say the biggest issue with quad bikes is that they aren’t stable around inclines and will roll over easily.

Seems to me the design needs tweaking , is it possible to that though ie improve the design shape to improve safety whilst riding over uneven terrain?

A skyhook. Rider training would be the most important.

roughbarked said:

monkey skipper said:

I receive workcover email alert updates. Notable is the recording and reporting of the relative high frequency of quad bike incidents and fatalities.

The aim is to improve safety going forward as you would expect Workcover to state. From my perpspective the bikes would need re-designing for this to occur. Most people I know who ride motorbikes off-road and on-road including quad bikes say the biggest issue with quad bikes is that they aren’t stable around inclines and will roll over easily.

Seems to me the design needs tweaking , is it possible to that though ie improve the design shape to improve safety whilst riding over uneven terrain?

The redesign has been done. The range of ATVs is quite extensive.

A skyhook. Rider training would be the most important.

monkey skipper said:

Seems to me the design needs tweaking , is it possible to that though ie improve the design shape to improve safety whilst riding over uneven terrain?

Lower the centre of gravity, widen the track a bit. Better rider/driver training.

Spiny Norman said:

monkey skipper said:

Seems to me the design needs tweaking , is it possible to that though ie improve the design shape to improve safety whilst riding over uneven terrain?

Lower the centre of gravity, widen the track a bit. Better rider/driver training.

Our fire brigade group bought a Polaris ATV rather than a quad bike. Safer & a bit more load capacity. We have a 150 litre tank & a high pressure pump on it.

Spiny Norman said:

monkey skipper said:

Seems to me the design needs tweaking , is it possible to that though ie improve the design shape to improve safety whilst riding over uneven terrain?

Lower the centre of gravity, widen the track a bit. Better rider/driver training.

Equipment such as sprayers etc designed for ag bikes are a shocking design.
100+kg directly over the rear wheel, it doesn’t take much of an incline to put that mass behind the rear wheel and they go over fairly easily after that

(my mate’s old man got sued over a quad bike death for that reason, but they still make that design)

They need a lot of clearance, + travel in the suspension, + big soft tyres, so this makes ‘em fairly high (puts lot of the weight up high – centre of gravity blah blah)

Wheels aren’t very far part, for going between narrow spaces, putting in trailers too, whatever

I saw a chap onetime over at mount ***** had a spray pack on the back, mighta been ~50L unit, spraying on the side of the mount, bike and all had tipped over.

And then there’s the speed of these machines, I mean they have big engines.

Bit of a toy in many ways, and i’m not sure some people are interested in forces and geometry distracting from the joy of the toy.

Commonsense is not transferable.

Quad bikes have morphed into farm machinery. They could probably do with a grounds up design to make them suitable for the man on the land, compared to sports riders.

I would suggest a modest flat four diesel, weight is down low, power characterises are better and diesel is a common fuel on the land. The vehicle could do with smaller tyres than the usual quad bikes, and those wheels pushed out to the absolute extremities. Fuel tank (with pump) and battery down as low as possible probably behind the engine or under the seat.

Biggest change it should be designed so at most of the agricultural equipment attaches to the machine by a trailer and a pto. This would mean heavy containers of pesticide etc would be mounted low on a trailer and with a gymbal coupling the trailer will roll over, not the passenger part. And the rollover frame needs to be triangulated and light, again to keep the weight down low, but also if the bike is not carry hundreds of kilos of gear it needn’t be as strong.

And lastly some form of four or six wheel drive with counter steering and counter braking to control yaw etc via computer.

AwesomeO said:

Quad bikes have morphed into farm machinery. They could probably do with a grounds up design to make them suitable for the man on the land, compared to sports riders.

I would suggest a modest flat four diesel, weight is down low, power characterises are better and diesel is a common fuel on the land. The vehicle could do with smaller tyres than the usual quad bikes, and those wheels pushed out to the absolute extremities. Fuel tank (with pump) and battery down as low as possible probably behind the engine or under the seat.

Biggest change it should be designed so at most of the agricultural equipment attaches to the machine by a trailer and a pto. This would mean heavy containers of pesticide etc would be mounted low on a trailer and with a gymbal coupling the trailer will roll over, not the passenger part. And the rollover frame needs to be triangulated and light, again to keep the weight down low, but also if the bike is not carry hundreds of kilos of gear it needn’t be as strong.

And lastly some form of four or six wheel drive with counter steering and counter braking to control yaw etc via computer.

this is all depending on use.

we had a small 70cc trike that could be thrown on the back of the ute by 1 person and dropped in a paddock, that way when you were working the paddock on a tractor/harvester, you could run off on the bike for errands/smoko/milking time without having to slowly drive the tractor/etc back.

anything bigger wouldn’t have been suitable

monkey skipper said:

Notable is the recording and reporting of the relative high frequency of quad bike incidents and fatalities.

Most people I know who ride motorbikes off-road and on-road including quad bikes say the biggest issue with quad bikes is that they aren’t stable around inclines and will roll over easily.

Seems to me the design needs tweaking, is it possible to that though ie improve the design shape to improve safety whilst riding over uneven terrain?

My nephew was hurt in a quad bike accident back in the early 1980s, for exactly that reason, roll-over on steep terrain.

There seems to be a fundamental problem with quad bikes that makes redesign difficult. A car protects occupants in a roll-over by containing them within a rigid cage. A motorbike protects occupants in a roll-over by throwing them clear. In a quad bike the occupant is thrown out only far enough to be crushed by the quad bike landing on top of them.

If I was looking for a quad bike, I’d be looking for one with seatbelts and a single overhead roll bar. Something like this but with bigger wheels.

stumpy_seahorse said:

AwesomeO said:

Quad bikes have morphed into farm machinery. They could probably do with a grounds up design to make them suitable for the man on the land, compared to sports riders.

I would suggest a modest flat four diesel, weight is down low, power characterises are better and diesel is a common fuel on the land. The vehicle could do with smaller tyres than the usual quad bikes, and those wheels pushed out to the absolute extremities. Fuel tank (with pump) and battery down as low as possible probably behind the engine or under the seat.

Biggest change it should be designed so at most of the agricultural equipment attaches to the machine by a trailer and a pto. This would mean heavy containers of pesticide etc would be mounted low on a trailer and with a gymbal coupling the trailer will roll over, not the passenger part. And the rollover frame needs to be triangulated and light, again to keep the weight down low, but also if the bike is not carry hundreds of kilos of gear it needn’t be as strong.

And lastly some form of four or six wheel drive with counter steering and counter braking to control yaw etc via computer.

this is all depending on use.

we had a small 70cc trike that could be thrown on the back of the ute by 1 person and dropped in a paddock, that way when you were working the paddock on a tractor/harvester, you could run off on the bike for errands/smoko/milking time without having to slowly drive the tractor/etc back.

anything bigger wouldn’t have been suitable

Honda moonbike? Yeah, not really the same thing.

I should have also mentioned is there a breakdown on injuries and deaths. Ie how many belong to the workers/farmers and how many belong to the visiting townies who go as fast as they can over the most challenging terrain.

AwesomeO said:

stumpy_seahorse said:

AwesomeO said:

Quad bikes have morphed into farm machinery. They could probably do with a grounds up design to make them suitable for the man on the land, compared to sports riders.

I would suggest a modest flat four diesel, weight is down low, power characterises are better and diesel is a common fuel on the land. The vehicle could do with smaller tyres than the usual quad bikes, and those wheels pushed out to the absolute extremities. Fuel tank (with pump) and battery down as low as possible probably behind the engine or under the seat.

Biggest change it should be designed so at most of the agricultural equipment attaches to the machine by a trailer and a pto. This would mean heavy containers of pesticide etc would be mounted low on a trailer and with a gymbal coupling the trailer will roll over, not the passenger part. And the rollover frame needs to be triangulated and light, again to keep the weight down low, but also if the bike is not carry hundreds of kilos of gear it needn’t be as strong.

And lastly some form of four or six wheel drive with counter steering and counter braking to control yaw etc via computer.

this is all depending on use.

we had a small 70cc trike that could be thrown on the back of the ute by 1 person and dropped in a paddock, that way when you were working the paddock on a tractor/harvester, you could run off on the bike for errands/smoko/milking time without having to slowly drive the tractor/etc back.

anything bigger wouldn’t have been suitable

Honda moonbike? Yeah, not really the same thing.

I should have also mentioned is there a breakdown on injuries and deaths. Ie how many belong to the workers/farmers and how many belong to the visiting townies who go as fast as they can over the most challenging terrain.

single wire fencelines used to be the trap for visiting townies :P

mollwollfumble said:

monkey skipper said:

Notable is the recording and reporting of the relative high frequency of quad bike incidents and fatalities.

Most people I know who ride motorbikes off-road and on-road including quad bikes say the biggest issue with quad bikes is that they aren’t stable around inclines and will roll over easily.

Seems to me the design needs tweaking, is it possible to that though ie improve the design shape to improve safety whilst riding over uneven terrain?

My nephew was hurt in a quad bike accident back in the early 1980s, for exactly that reason, roll-over on steep terrain.

There seems to be a fundamental problem with quad bikes that makes redesign difficult. A car protects occupants in a roll-over by containing them within a rigid cage. A motorbike protects occupants in a roll-over by throwing them clear. In a quad bike the occupant is thrown out only far enough to be crushed by the quad bike landing on top of them.

If I was looking for a quad bike, I’d be looking for one with seatbelts and a single overhead roll bar. Something like this but with bigger wheels.

needs cupholders

stumpy_seahorse said:

AwesomeO said:

Quad bikes have morphed into farm machinery. They could probably do with a grounds up design to make them suitable for the man on the land, compared to sports riders.

I would suggest a modest flat four diesel, weight is down low, power characterises are better and diesel is a common fuel on the land. The vehicle could do with smaller tyres than the usual quad bikes, and those wheels pushed out to the absolute extremities. Fuel tank (with pump) and battery down as low as possible probably behind the engine or under the seat.

Biggest change it should be designed so at most of the agricultural equipment attaches to the machine by a trailer and a pto. This would mean heavy containers of pesticide etc would be mounted low on a trailer and with a gymbal coupling the trailer will roll over, not the passenger part. And the rollover frame needs to be triangulated and light, again to keep the weight down low, but also if the bike is not carry hundreds of kilos of gear it needn’t be as strong.

And lastly some form of four or six wheel drive with counter steering and counter braking to control yaw etc via computer.

this is all depending on use.

we had a small 70cc trike that could be thrown on the back of the ute by 1 person and dropped in a paddock, that way when you were working the paddock on a tractor/harvester, you could run off on the bike for errands/smoko/milking time without having to slowly drive the tractor/etc back.

anything bigger wouldn’t have been suitable

Quad bikes commonly drive along tracks made by 4WD vehicles, which means with their narrower wheelbase, they have one wheel in the track and the other, usually on much higher ground between the tracks. In bush areas and erosion zones this is very unstable and dangerous, therefore if the wheelbase width was similar to 4WDs, it would be much safer, more comfortable, plus make the vehicle more stable.

AwesomeO said:

stumpy_seahorse said:

AwesomeO said:

Quad bikes have morphed into farm machinery. They could probably do with a grounds up design to make them suitable for the man on the land, compared to sports riders.

I would suggest a modest flat four diesel, weight is down low, power characterises are better and diesel is a common fuel on the land. The vehicle could do with smaller tyres than the usual quad bikes, and those wheels pushed out to the absolute extremities. Fuel tank (with pump) and battery down as low as possible probably behind the engine or under the seat.

Biggest change it should be designed so at most of the agricultural equipment attaches to the machine by a trailer and a pto. This would mean heavy containers of pesticide etc would be mounted low on a trailer and with a gymbal coupling the trailer will roll over, not the passenger part. And the rollover frame needs to be triangulated and light, again to keep the weight down low, but also if the bike is not carry hundreds of kilos of gear it needn’t be as strong.

And lastly some form of four or six wheel drive with counter steering and counter braking to control yaw etc via computer.

this is all depending on use.

we had a small 70cc trike that could be thrown on the back of the ute by 1 person and dropped in a paddock, that way when you were working the paddock on a tractor/harvester, you could run off on the bike for errands/smoko/milking time without having to slowly drive the tractor/etc back.

anything bigger wouldn’t have been suitable

Honda moonbike? Yeah, not really the same thing.

I should have also mentioned is there a breakdown on injuries and deaths. Ie how many belong to the workers/farmers and how many belong to the visiting townies who go as fast as they can over the most challenging terrain.

Out ‘ere it’s usually the farmers kids that die/get maimed by them.

poikilotherm said:

AwesomeO said:

stumpy_seahorse said:

this is all depending on use.

we had a small 70cc trike that could be thrown on the back of the ute by 1 person and dropped in a paddock, that way when you were working the paddock on a tractor/harvester, you could run off on the bike for errands/smoko/milking time without having to slowly drive the tractor/etc back.

anything bigger wouldn’t have been suitable

Honda moonbike? Yeah, not really the same thing.

I should have also mentioned is there a breakdown on injuries and deaths. Ie how many belong to the workers/farmers and how many belong to the visiting townies who go as fast as they can over the most challenging terrain.

Out ‘ere it’s usually the farmers kids that die/get maimed by them.

Not surprising, put a kid on a bike and the first thing they do is see how fast they can go, how high they can jump and how tight they can drift.

AwesomeO said:

poikilotherm said:

AwesomeO said:

Honda moonbike? Yeah, not really the same thing.

I should have also mentioned is there a breakdown on injuries and deaths. Ie how many belong to the workers/farmers and how many belong to the visiting townies who go as fast as they can over the most challenging terrain.

Out ‘ere it’s usually the farmers kids that die/get maimed by them.

Not surprising, put a kid on a bike and the first thing they do is see how fast they can go, how high they can jump and how tight they can drift.

then they learn how to panel beat and weld after finding a tree, how to pull down and rebuilt a motor after finding a dam and how to use a fence strainer after finding the fenceline…

PermeateFree said:

stumpy_seahorse said:

AwesomeO said:

Quad bikes have morphed into farm machinery. They could probably do with a grounds up design to make them suitable for the man on the land, compared to sports riders.

I would suggest a modest flat four diesel, weight is down low, power characterises are better and diesel is a common fuel on the land. The vehicle could do with smaller tyres than the usual quad bikes, and those wheels pushed out to the absolute extremities. Fuel tank (with pump) and battery down as low as possible probably behind the engine or under the seat.

Biggest change it should be designed so at most of the agricultural equipment attaches to the machine by a trailer and a pto. This would mean heavy containers of pesticide etc would be mounted low on a trailer and with a gymbal coupling the trailer will roll over, not the passenger part. And the rollover frame needs to be triangulated and light, again to keep the weight down low, but also if the bike is not carry hundreds of kilos of gear it needn’t be as strong.

And lastly some form of four or six wheel drive with counter steering and counter braking to control yaw etc via computer.

this is all depending on use.

we had a small 70cc trike that could be thrown on the back of the ute by 1 person and dropped in a paddock, that way when you were working the paddock on a tractor/harvester, you could run off on the bike for errands/smoko/milking time without having to slowly drive the tractor/etc back.

anything bigger wouldn’t have been suitable

Quad bikes commonly drive along tracks made by 4WD vehicles, which means with their narrower wheelbase, they have one wheel in the track and the other, usually on much higher ground between the tracks. In bush areas and erosion zones this is very unstable and dangerous, therefore if the wheelbase width was similar to 4WDs, it would be much safer, more comfortable, plus make the vehicle more stable.

Width between wheels is wheel track. ( I think you mean this)

Wheel base is the distance between front and rear axles.

Michael V said:

PermeateFree said:

stumpy_seahorse said:

this is all depending on use.

we had a small 70cc trike that could be thrown on the back of the ute by 1 person and dropped in a paddock, that way when you were working the paddock on a tractor/harvester, you could run off on the bike for errands/smoko/milking time without having to slowly drive the tractor/etc back.

anything bigger wouldn’t have been suitable

Quad bikes commonly drive along tracks made by 4WD vehicles, which means with their narrower wheelbase, they have one wheel in the track and the other, usually on much higher ground between the tracks. In bush areas and erosion zones this is very unstable and dangerous, therefore if the wheelbase width was similar to 4WDs, it would be much safer, more comfortable, plus make the vehicle more stable.

Width between wheels is wheel track. ( I think you mean this)

Wheel base is the distance between front and rear axles.

Thanks MV, I stand corrected.

PermeateFree said:

Michael V said:

PermeateFree said:

Quad bikes commonly drive along tracks made by 4WD vehicles, which means with their narrower wheelbase, they have one wheel in the track and the other, usually on much higher ground between the tracks. In bush areas and erosion zones this is very unstable and dangerous, therefore if the wheelbase width was similar to 4WDs, it would be much safer, more comfortable, plus make the vehicle more stable.

Width between wheels is wheel track. ( I think you mean this)

Wheel base is the distance between front and rear axles.

Thanks MV, I stand corrected.

Appreciate the feedback.

:)

Some of the kept height about the design is to see ahead, I mean you could hang the weight down lower at the expense of ground clearance (and/or suspension travel), but you’d not be able to see a dip in the ground or rock in the grass ahead.

Four wheels tends to maybe incline some to think a quad more stable than two wheels, which they are as far as you don’t need (lean perhaps too) put your feet down to hold the machine upright.

Probably not much safer than a horse, maybe even worse.

Been for some nasty falls off horses, motorbikes too, tipped me buggy over a few times too, though latter had roll bar, was slightly wider than a quad, and centre of gravity, seating an all was kept lower.

stumpy_seahorse said:

AwesomeO said:

poikilotherm said:

Out ‘ere it’s usually the farmers kids that die/get maimed by them.

Not surprising, put a kid on a bike and the first thing they do is see how fast they can go, how high they can jump and how tight they can drift.

then they learn how to panel beat and weld after finding a tree, how to pull down and rebuilt a motor after finding a dam and how to use a fence strainer after finding the fenceline…

or for some, just how to push up daisies.

poikilotherm said:

stumpy_seahorse said:

AwesomeO said:

Not surprising, put a kid on a bike and the first thing they do is see how fast they can go, how high they can jump and how tight they can drift.

then they learn how to panel beat and weld after finding a tree, how to pull down and rebuilt a motor after finding a dam and how to use a fence strainer after finding the fenceline…

or for some, just how to push up daisies.

yeah, surprised we survived at times..

did some stupidly dangerous things, but escaped it with the occasional broken bone

stumpy_seahorse said:

poikilotherm said:

stumpy_seahorse said:

then they learn how to panel beat and weld after finding a tree, how to pull down and rebuilt a motor after finding a dam and how to use a fence strainer after finding the fenceline…

or for some, just how to push up daisies.

yeah, surprised we survived at times..

did some stupidly dangerous things, but escaped it with the occasional broken bone

You didn’t even then think it was a warning?

PermeateFree said:

stumpy_seahorse said:

poikilotherm said:

or for some, just how to push up daisies.

yeah, surprised we survived at times..

did some stupidly dangerous things, but escaped it with the occasional broken bone

You didn’t even then think it was a warning?

my broken bones were more from mundane clumsiness than doing stupid stuff.

sure cousin broke her nose driving the quadbike into a tree and another broke his ankle jumping off the tray of the ute after a rabbit, but mine were more tripped over in the haystack or hit a greasy patch riding a BMX down a hill.

things like bonnet sliding and attempting to skip it across a dam or dukes of hazzarding over the creek never really threw up any ‘life lesson’ injuries

stumpy_seahorse said:

PermeateFree said:

stumpy_seahorse said:

yeah, surprised we survived at times..

did some stupidly dangerous things, but escaped it with the occasional broken bone

You didn’t even then think it was a warning?

my broken bones were more from mundane clumsiness than doing stupid stuff.

sure cousin broke her nose driving the quadbike into a tree and another broke his ankle jumping off the tray of the ute after a rabbit, but mine were more tripped over in the haystack or hit a greasy patch riding a BMX down a hill.

things like bonnet sliding and attempting to skip it across a dam or dukes of hazzarding over the creek never really threw up any ‘life lesson’ injuries

From my perspective you seem to be a bit of an adrenaline junky, coupled with a degree of recklessness. I think most males have this, but some take it a little further with unfortunate consequences.

When I was on the bus coming home…I thought about the rover where by the wheels lift independently over terrain in order not to tip over. They used the biomechanics of cockroaches for the design iirc.

monkey skipper said:

When I was on the bus coming home…I thought about the rover where by the wheels lift independently over terrain in order not to tip over. They used the biomechanics of cockroaches for the design iirc.

and a speed limit of 13mph as it was determined that a collision at a speed greater than that could damage the space suit.