|
|
Post by geeves on Apr 8, 2009 21:29:56 GMT 11
Ive seen a Mu with rear wheels over a meter off the ground and the fronts anouther 1.5 meters above that. The drive repeated this 3 times as did anouther Mu but not as high. The video clip was here for a while. The Land cruiser could do this maybe but the Zook would bend.
|
|
|
|
Post by jjcarenthusiast on Apr 9, 2009 0:18:08 GMT 11
so it had a 2 wheeling? so what's the catch if the zook would bend? did the mu had lockers? could the mu still go through that without lockers?
|
|
|
|
Post by geeves on Apr 9, 2009 7:35:11 GMT 11
Neither had lockers. It was a short vertical climb of about 4 meters high with a long approach and flat run out at the top. Only way up was take a run at it. Stop half way and you would probably rolled backwards off the bank. Had to be doing 20 - 30kph at the bottom to make it
Doubt that the zukes doors would open after a landing like that
|
|
|
|
Post by mulover on Apr 9, 2009 11:13:57 GMT 11
Once you get out and about and learn how to drive it and what it does you will like it even more. The weight is not an issue, i like having a bit of mass as i have seen a zuk go full steam into a bog and stop dead, where as the mu plowed through it because of the greater mass.
On the other hand i have driven past my mate how sunk on peat bog in his swb safari!!!!
|
|
|
|
Post by geeves on Apr 9, 2009 15:46:00 GMT 11
Reality is 4wding is 80% technique 20% vehicle. The top comp guys could take a road tyred lwb patrol or 80 series cruser also on road tyres places we could never take there comp truck
|
|
|
|
Post by jjcarenthusiast on Apr 9, 2009 22:37:04 GMT 11
ok i understand, MU has more build quality than those of the zuks, that's what you mean sir  oh i think i have to take it offroad, i like offroad but never had a chance to drive the MU through it. i mean yes but only light "trail" on the road to our farm. thanks  and i also agree that it is more on the rider, not on the ride. |
|
|
|
Post by geeves on Apr 13, 2009 14:01:24 GMT 11
Quality isnt just strength. The zuks are a quality vehicle. Its just that they are also lightweight which comes at a cost to strength.
|
|
|
|
Post by mulover on Apr 14, 2009 11:17:51 GMT 11
Alot of the weight of a mu is in its chassis, it is not as big in shape as a safari's for example, but is probably 1 and a half times as thick. I have heard of a mu that rolled about 30 times sideways down a hill and my mate towed it out on its wheels, chassis was still pretty straight considering.
As geeves said, you can have a top quality vechile, but it may not be designed for what you want to do with it.
|
|
|
|
Post by geeves on Apr 14, 2009 12:02:55 GMT 11
If you want to see what can be done with a zuk. look at this www.project-tinfoil.co.nz/The end result is very capable and keeps up with the big boys but he had lots of breakages on the way including a see through motor when he accidentally left the nitrous on. The reason it was called project tin foil was that the first weld blew a hole through the chassis and there mig was on the lowest setting |
|
and i also agree that it is more on the rider, not on the ride.