Pages: 1
Posted by: LotusPosition
The Outlander seems to have a lot of performance innovations. I have read many good reviews.
But, damn is that thing ugly. I'd be afraid of it trying to mount my wife's tupperware.
Posted by: Specta
It seems like Customfabandweld was looking for a quad for his wife. I am sure if he was interested in "fast" he would just get her a Prairie 650 and dust all your other ATVs.
I hear nothing but good about the outlander, "best in class" isn't Mdog? I think the looks have some to be desired too, but that doesn&39;t change the fact it is a good quad.
Lots of nice quads in the 400 class, make sure she gets to ride them all. I would hate to buy something for my wife she didn't like or wasn't comfortable on.
Posted by: Mdog
We have 9 in our group now, mine bieng the first in the US. One guy had a P650 and traded it for a Outlander because it handled better but he does miss the power. Your wife will love the way it rides(smooth and stabile), while not a 650 in the power dept. it will smoke every 400-450 out there!
We have aproximately 15,000 miles total on the 9 Outlanders with only a few problems that were all covered under warranty.
4 needed the swingarms greased.
1 voltage regulator.
2 needed front struts.
Highly recommended.
Posted by: Mdog
Looks like every magizine must be wrong, EVERY mag says the the Outlander is quicker and faster than all the 400-450s and most 500s. My Outlander does 64mph(speedo reading), did notice when fully broken in that it goes better also the throttle stop on some are set in to far(throttle isn't fully opened). Drivers weight and ability can make a big difference.
I test rode the Eiger auto before purchasing the Outlander, it was my second choice because of its overall good performance and value.
Most of the riders in our group race motocross and only know one speed, wide open!!! Trails, hillclimbs, mud, snow and ice its an all out race between us. This is where the Outlander really shines, it out powers and out handles other in its class. The guy who sold his P-650 said he can go faster in most places (Forget about the smooth open areas) on the Outlander because of its ride and handling.
Personally I think the Outlander is one of the best looking ATVs made, did you ever see a yellow XT or the tan/green combo. Looks are subjective anyway, either love it or hate it.
Customfab knowing your wife is on a very stabile smooth riding ATV will be reasuring for you. Good luck.
Posted by: powerstroke01
Haha i agree with everyone that the outlander ROCKS...
However, stay away from 2ft diameter logs when going 25mph.....
Posted by: powerstroke01
I can see it now....
dreamland/
You guys will have a couple of sportquads strapped to your front and rear racks.. One little bump and OOPPS "tipping over"..
They broke yet george?
No. Still hanging on!
Gawdanget!!
/dreamland
Posted by: Customfabandweld
Please chime in on your likes and dislikes. I am considering this for the wife. She likes the Prairie, but I'm afraid she'll hurt herself!
Posted by: Customfabandweld
Thanks! I will buy one, just not sure when. I would like to find a used one, but no one is selling them used!
Posted by: Customfabandweld
Thanks for all the replys! Hey Hippyhunter, I already have a P650, and it's just not right for my wife. It needs to be ridden by an experienced rider because of the power and handling characteristics, and she is a beginner. I am trying to talk the wife into getting it this weekend, before we go to Utah to ride next weekend. Maybe you guys with experience can clue me in on the right things to say to her to talk her into it!
Posted by: Customfabandweld
Murphy's law strikes again! I went down to the dealer today to make a deal on the Outlander, and he sold it this weekHe was asking $5299. I called another dealer, and he was asking $6200!! He said his shipping and setup fee was $800, yeah right. I guess I will keep searching...
Posted by: Customfabandweld
When do the '05's come out. I would probably wait until then to get a good deal. What is a good price for an '04?
Posted by: Doctorturbo
I don't own one but I have read a lot about them from the people that own them.
Some of the problems are:
#1. The older ones had voltage regulator problems.
#2. A few people had, strut problems, and I do mean very few.
#3. A lot of poeple complain about a clunking in the drivetrain.
Other than these few problems, there has been pages of praise for these quads. Even the people that has had these problems say they would have bought them again. I think that says a lot!!!!
Posted by: Catterman
It does seem to be a very good quad from what I can tell, however you guys are right, those racks are a joke.
Posted by: Catterman
Quote
Originally posted by: aksafari
This article talks about the 400s in detail
http://www.atvtv.com/Test_Info_results.html
Good stuff
Interesting article, however very very subjective. How does the Arctic Cat rank 7th out of 8 in the "Utility" catagory???? And the 8th place machine is the Sportsman! Last time I checked I could fit more on my racks then any other 400, and nothing beats the 12 inches of ground clearance. Isn't that "Utility"?
Posted by: Catterman
Quote
Originally posted by: aksafari
How come you can fit more on your racks than any other 400?
Are they that much larger?
My friend's 500 doesn't have bigger racks than my Eiger.
I am not refering to the size of the racks, but the rack capacity. The Arctic Cat can hold more weight.
Posted by: Catterman
Quote
Originally posted by: aksafari
But why would the capacity be more? It doesn't look like my friend's racks are stronger than mine. Do you think that your racks are ACTUALLY stronger, or Suzuki just rates theirs lower for liability reasons? Remember, Suzuki is really gun-shy about lawsuits, that's why they were out of the sport quad biz for so long, even though they were 'the first on four wheels'.
It'd be interesting to actually test the racks to failure. I wonder what the true capacities would turn out to be.
I do not know why the capacity is more, maybe it has to do with the suspension or brakes. All I know is if you look at the stats it is higher on the Arctic Cat. Plus, the Arctic Cats have the MRP racks, once again, more "Utility" That was the only point I was trying to make... UTILITY
Suzuki isn't the only one "gun-shy" about lawsuits. That is every company. And remember Suzuki OWNS 25% of Arctic Cat, so if they are really gun-shy about lawsuits I am sure that would go for Arctic Cat as well.
Posted by: Hippyhunter
GO With the P-650 or 700.
Posted by: aksafari
I rode with a guy on an Outlander 400 (2003) at the dunes this weekend, and there certainly was no 'smoking' my Eiger. He had about 2psi in the tires, I was running at 1psi, and we were dead even. Mine's a manual, his is an automatic.
He said his top speed is 55, mine's about 1-2 mph better. SO, what exactly are you saying when you say "it will smoke every 400-450 out there"?
Also, I'd have to say that the Outlander is one of the ugliest quads I've ever seen. Even my wife said ,"from here, that quad looks weird. it looks kind of cheap."
And she's not one to say things like that usually.
But, it seemed to run and handle good. Nice speedometer, but didn't like the plastic racks. I think the factory tires might have even been worse than mine, if that's possible.
Seemed to have nice adjustable variable rate shocks. I thought the trailing arm IRS was interesting, but I still don't like the idea of CV joints in the rear. And the CV boots are VERY exposed on that quad.
Posted by: aksafari
64 is a HELL of a lot faster than 55. Wonder why yours is so much faster than the guy's 2003 I was riding with last weekend?
How come the 400cc Shootout in whatever magazine that was in said the Eiger was the fastest? I think there's something "wrong" with your Outlander that makes it so much faster. Wish the same thing was
"wrong" with mine.
Posted by: aksafari
This article talks about the 400s in detail
http://www.atvtv.com/Test_Info_results.html
Good stuff
Posted by: aksafari
Quote
Originally posted by: Catterman
Quote
Originally posted by: aksafari
This article talks about the 400s in detail
http://www.atvtv.com/Test_Info_results.html
Good stuff
Interesting article, however very very subjective. How does the Arctic Cat rank 7th out of 8 in the "Utility" catagory???? And the 8th place machine is the Sportsman! Last time I checked I could fit more on my racks then any other 400, and nothing beats the 12 inches of ground clearance. Isn't that "Utility"?
How come you can fit more on your racks than any other 400?
Are they that much larger?
My friend's 500 doesn't have bigger racks than my Eiger.
Posted by: aksafari
But why would the capacity be more? It doesn't look like my friend's racks are stronger than mine. Do you think that your racks are ACTUALLY stronger, or Suzuki just rates theirs lower for liability reasons? Remember, Suzuki is really gun-shy about lawsuits, that's why they were out of the sport quad biz for so long, even though they were 'the first on four wheels'.
It'd be interesting to actually test the racks to failure. I wonder what the true capacities would turn out to be.
Posted by: aksafari
Quote
Originally posted by: Catterman
Quote
Originally posted by: aksafari
But why would the capacity be more? It doesn't look like my friend's racks are stronger than mine. Do you think that your racks are ACTUALLY stronger, or Suzuki just rates theirs lower for liability reasons? Remember, Suzuki is really gun-shy about lawsuits, that's why they were out of the sport quad biz for so long, even though they were 'the first on four wheels'.
It'd be interesting to actually test the racks to failure. I wonder what the true capacities would turn out to be.
I do not know why the capacity is more, maybe it has to do with the suspension or brakes. All I know is if you look at the stats it is higher on the Arctic Cat. Plus, the Arctic Cats have the MRP racks, once again, more "Utility" That was the only point I was trying to make... UTILITY
Suzuki isn't the only one "gun-shy" about lawsuits. That is every company. And remember Suzuki OWNS 25% of Arctic Cat, so if they are really gun-shy about lawsuits I am sure that would go for Arctic Cat as well.
Hey man, I'm not knocking your Cat.
Just wondering if the 'numbers' are meaningful or just marketing.
From what I've seen on my friend Jasson's '03 AC 500, the racks just don't look that much stronger.
I don't think Yamaha is as worried about lawsuits as Suzuki. They don't seem to bothered to have a largest sport quad line-up of the major manufacturers. I'd be willing to bet WAY more people have been hurt on Banshees than Quadracers, but they weren't the ones that got sued. Trial lawyer bastards!! Or stupid, non-helmet wearing people...
