Camoplast Tatou and Tatou Original

Two products wore the name

The Tatou name covers two distinct track systems, not one system across a long span. They are documented separately, their parts are catalogued separately, and only the later of the two has a serial family behind it. Documentation you find for one does not describe the other, and a parts list for one will not serve the other.

The later one is the TATOU 4Sgeneration — the name the serial reference records against it, and the direct ancestor of a system still sold today. The earlier one is distinguished in the parts index by the word Original after the family name. That is the whole of the naming distinction, it is easy to miss on a screen, and the two products do not share a single diagram group between them.

What the serial reference knows

The published serial reference files 3family codes under the later product’s name. A prefix on its own will not separate the two generations: the model-year segment that follows it is what does, and that decode is on a 6622 serial is ambiguous.

Read the last column across the rows and an asymmetry falls out. One family carries a second, later product name after the Tatou one — the name changes and the family code does not, which is the ambiguity the 6622 page exists to handle. The other 2 families stop at the Tatou name with no successor recorded at all. So the answer to “what did my system become” depends on which family it is in, and for some of them the reference records no successor.

2 of the families above are filed against side-by-sides rather than quads. They are listed because they are part of the same naming story; nothing here is a fitment claim about a side-by-side.

The earlier system is not in it

No family in the reference is recorded under a name carrying the word Original, and the earliest model year anywhere in the reference, in any family, for any product, is 2009. So an owner of the earlier system is holding hardware that predates the lookup: no prefix to match, no model-year segment to resolve, no family row to land on. That does not make it undocumented. It is documented rather well, somewhere else and under a different key.

The earlier system lives in the parts index, not the serial tool

The parts-diagram index is organised by the model year of the track systemrather than of the quad — a distinction that catches people and is covered on older quads. Under that index the earlier product has its own diagram sets, one set per track model year, read 2026-09-26.

The useful part is not that the diagrams exist. It is that the way they are split tells you which questions actually change the parts — the index is a list of the distinctions the people who had to stock them thought mattered:

Three things are readable straight off that list, and all three are about what to establish before ringing anybody.

• The front is common and the rear is not. One front group covers everything; the rear splits four ways. If a front component is the problem, the platform and the suspension type may not matter. If a rear component is the problem, both do.
• Suspension type is a hard fork at the rear— rigid against independent — on the side-by-side groups. Establishing which one a machine has is not optional, and it is a property of the vehicle rather than of the track system.
• There is a model-year boundary inside the rear groups, with an earlier side and a later side. Same product, same name, same platform, same suspension type, different diagram. The year of the system is what selects between them.

One further detail, and it explains why this product is so hard to find. Every one of those groups carries no vehicle-type value at all in the index, read 2026-09-26— not quad, not side-by-side, empty. The later product’s groups are typed. The practical effect is that any view filtered by platform drops the earlier product entirely: it is not excluded, it is unclassified, and unclassified and absent look identical from the outside. Do not conclude from an empty filtered list that nothing exists for the system — ask for it by name and track model year.

There is no specification sheet for either generation

We looked for a manufacturer specification for this line on 2026-09-26and did not reach one: no track width, no ground coverage, no unit weight, no speed figure, no application list for either generation. Figures for front and rear track width do circulate, inside parts descriptions written downstream of the manufacturer rather than by it and with no citation beside them. If a width or a weight is quoted to you for one of these systems, ask where it came from — the later product’s descendant is a current system with published figures, and those figures do not describe hardware from the previous decade.

If you need dimensions for a set that is in front of you, measure them. What to measure on an unbadged system, and what each measurement does and does not settle, is on an unmarked system in a barn.

No row in the application catalogue read 2026-09-26is published under either Tatou name or under the earlier brand. Neither generation is a current product, so “which quads does it fit” has no published answer from anybody. The question that does have an answer is the other one — which parts does the system on this machine take — and that is what the diagram index is for.

The brand on the frame is not the brand on the current catalogue

The earlier brand name was replaced by the current one, and the changeover does not fall where most people assume: inside one family in the serial reference the recorded brand changes in one model year and the recorded product name changes in a different one. That boundary, and the fact that a manufacturer document exists carrying the older brand on its cover and the newer name in its title, are set out on a 6622 serial is ambiguous.

The consequence for recognition: a decal reading the older brand tells you the era and does not tell you the product, because both products were sold under it. A decal reading the newer brand does not rule out the older product being underneath it, because the brand changed while a product name carried on. The badge narrows the era; the diagram groups and the system’s own model year narrow the product.

The conversion hardware is still filed under the old name

One place the old name is still load-bearing, and it is the place it costs money. The suspension-conversion hardware still catalogued for this family runs to 2entries whose own titles still carry the Tatou name — independent to rigid and rigid to independent— matched against family 6622, in the model-year band 2007–2009.

So the hardware that changes a rear axle from one type to the other is catalogued under the name on your frame, while the serial reference has moved on to the successor name. Which name you search decides whether you find it. If the vehicle’s rear suspension does not match the system on it, search the name on the frame rather than the successor’s.

The year band on those entries and the years the serial reference publishes for the same family do not cover the same ground, and that mismatch is the 6622 page’ssubject. It matters here as a warning: matching hardware by name alone, without the system’s model year, is how the wrong conversion kit gets ordered.

What to record before you call

Everything below is on the machine or measurable beside it, and none of it requires knowing what the system is called — the name is what you are trying to establish, so it cannot be an input.

• Photograph the frame decal and the serial plate rather than reading them out. A photograph cannot transpose a character, and on this line the difference between the two products may be one word on a decal.
• Photograph the rear assembly from behind, square on. The rear is where the diagrams fork four ways; the front is where they do not.
• Establish whether the vehicle’s rear axle is rigid or independent. This is a property of the quad, not of the track system, and it is what conversion hardware is selected against.
• The model year of the track system, if anything on it states one.Not the quad’s year. The index is keyed on the system’s year, and on this line there is a model-year boundary inside the rear groups.
• Whether it is fitted with double wheels. That is an option with its own diagram groups at both ends, so it changes which list a parts desk should be reading from.

If the decals are gone entirely and there is nothing to photograph but hardware, an unmarked system in a barn is the page for that situation, and it starts from measurements rather than from names.

How the order actually gets placed

Parts for either generation are ordered against an exploded diagram, and the diagram is selected by the system’s own model year and assembly group — not by the quad’s year and not by the family name on its own. Both generations have diagram sets, under separate names, and telling a parts desk which one you have is the whole of the work this page describes.

So the request is three things in one sentence: the generation, the track model year, and the assembly group — front, quad rear, or one of the four side-by-side rear groups. Send the photographs rather than a name you have retyped, and say whether the vehicle’s rear axle is rigid or independent. Neither generation is a current product, so a diagram tells you a part was catalogued, not that one is on a shelf; ask about the part and the diagram in the same breath.

One limit on the diagram index. Its entries are Camso and Camoplast-era systems; a competing manufacturer’s systems have no per-year diagrams in it at all, read 2026-09-26. If the system on the machine turns out not to be from this family, the index will not help and the page that covers what is left is older quads.