Pages: 1
Posted by: Andy Bassham
The flagship title basically covers the creature comforts. A Silverado LT with an automatic transmission would take the flagship nod over a comprably equipped Chevrolet with a stick shift. Basically the same principle here.
In other words, the biggest with all the options.
Posted by: Andy Bassham
Flagship has nothing to do with performance. Its just a status type thing. The Diesel cost more than the regular Sportsman, but its not the flagship either. A Raptor will outrun a Grizz, but its not the flagship. When speaking of cars, the Corvette itself is the flagship sportscar for Chevrolet. Options on it has nothing to do with it. That may contradict my silverado statement some, but with that model, we are talking top of the line vs. Work Truck. There isn't really a crappy corvette by my standards (not saying a work truck is crappy by any means).
Take a Buick Park Avenue vs. a Roadmaster 8 years ago. The Roadmaster is the bigger car (built on the same frame as a Chevy Caprice Classic), but the Park Avenue was their top of the line luxury sedan.
This is lame, why am I even bothering here. Who the heck cares really.
Posted by: Andy Bassham
Seems me and Boner are looking at this the same way, even though we both ride Manual 500's. That would basically say that our opinion on the Flagship idea has nothing to do with what ride we prefer.
A question, before the Rubicon, was the 450s or 450ES honda's flagship model? Hmmm... a new twist. I would say that the 450 in general was the flagship. Now if it had the same differences that the Rancher lineup has, then you might be able to find a difference. A manual rancher has no speedometer assembly and lacks floorboards, where the electric shift has both. That would make one the more preferred over the two in terms of extras.
Posted by: minehunter
I don't think you can wrong with any of the ones that you have listed. I ride with lots of people that have polaris' and they haven't had a lick of problems, same for honda, Yamaha. I dearly love my 500 autocat though. For ride and power the Cat and the Polaris are the way to go. Cost puts the ball squarely in the Cats corner. (lowest cost of all the big displacement machines)It also to my way of thinking has the next best four wheel drive system behind Polaris. That is my prejudiced .02 cents worth.
Posted by: BONER
Cowboy,
I have to correct you on a few things. I don't believe the Auto has the same output numbers as the manual, not even BEFORE it goes threw the trans. I think Arctic Cat did like Honda and Yamaha did, they went for a broader torque band cause of the CVT trans. If you noticed this, Arctic Cat only claims 31 ft lbs of torque on the manual, not the auto. Also, there are aleast 2-- probaly 3 bikes with more torque, but none of them are listed here. The ones I KNOW have more torque are the Banshee(37 ft lbs), Ds 460(42 ft lbs), and PROBALY the Raptor. Not sure on the Raptor, but I bet it is.
I disagree with you on the Kodiak. Cause it's liquid cooled, I think it makes a MUCH better worker. I PROVED that liquid cooling is better for working than an a SMALLER(Big Bear 350) air cooled motor saturday, now put a larger air cooled motor vs a smaller liquid cooled motor and which one you think will be sitting on the side cooling off first. now if you think there was more of a strain on the air cooled motor cause of the cc's I think u are wrong, the pulling I was doing could have been done by a go cart, but it was the steady above idle running that made the air cooled motor over heat.
I also like the Kodiak for it's brakes, better at stoping those heavy loads. I also think that dual a-arms are tougher than struts.
I don't like the Sportsman's plastic racks, and there is no Polaris owner that can tell me they are good for someone who does hard work. Cause ALOT of Sportsmans that come in to my freind's Polaris shop hav chiped off peices of plastic from the racks-- mostly the rears.
The Rubicon is a nice bike, but that plastic front bumper would last me 2 hours tops. Another thing are those 10 lbs capacity(sarcastic) floorboards. I also don't like the front differential that looks like it should fit a Powerwheels truck, it's small. Smaller than the Trx 300. Overall I like the bike. For someone who works it I think they will like it.
Posted by: BONER
girthyguy,
I've already produced rear wheel dyno runs that suport my the fact that the Manual put more power to the ground than the auto, but I will look in to the out put of the motors.
I will say that in my recent Arctic Cat PRIDE this is what I found:
[b][quote] At 493cc with four-valve overhead cam producing 30.6 ft.-lbs. of torque at 3500 rpms, it's unmatched in pulling power and work output. The transmission is five-speed constant-mesh with high/low range and reverse on the 500 Manual. The 500 Automatic features the Duramatic, continuosly variable belt-driven system with high/low range. Both models feature front differerntials with selectable 2wd/4wd.[/quote][/b]
You can read this in a few ways. It kinda seems like both bike put out the same torque, but why would Arctic Cat not list there flagship model first? Maybe it was intented to decive buyers into thinking that the Auto was not detuned for the transmissio. Of course maybe they just decided to place the manual first cause they wanted to save the best for last(NOT IMO, I think the Manual is better than the auto personally).
Posted by: BONER
No, the Suzuki has less of a compression ratio than the Arctic Cat there fore it makes slighly less power.
Posted by: BONER
Cowboy,
I think I am the one that owes you an appology. After rereading my post I found that it could be interperted that I was trying to belittle you, but I would like you let you know that I wasn't and wanted to appologize if you read it as I was.
About the sport quads. The Banshee is a 347cc twin cylinder 2-stroke, the Ds650 is a 653cc DOHC single cylinder 4-stroke, as is the Raptor 660 except the Raptor has a 1mm longer stroke which add's 7cc's to give it a true 660cc's.
I got a question about the Kodiak and Grizzly. When the Kodiak flipped, was it the same driver that drove the Grizzly up in the spot where the Kodiak fliped??? Or could it have been a more experinced trail guide that rode it up?
Posted by: BONER
Well comparing a utility ATV to a Performace car is alittle differnent. The Performance car is made to perform, and the 6 speed is the top performer so thats why it's the flagship model.
The Cat is more of a trail riding/work bike. For trail riding the auto is known to be superior(most people seem to fell this way) to a manual shift for comfort.
Also, have you noticed that the Automatic seems to get all the changes first? Like fuel tank, brakes, carb, 2wd, etc. Thats what normally happens to the flagship model, at least that how I have seen it.
Posted by: cowboy
Eaaicf:
Minehunter is right on the money. I bought a pair of '00 AC 500 Auto's back in April as well, and soon found out they could be worked harder than I ever imagined. My original intent was for hunting, and some light work up at our property, mostly carrying gear around, towing a small trailer with fence mending supplies. After hooking up to a few various logs of different sizes, I was quickly amazed at the power of the 'Cat in low range, 4wd. To sum it up in one word: Unstoppable, period.
TexasCat mentioned in another post that AC's were built for work first, then play. He's right. Since learning my 'Cat and how it operates, I've been amazed at what it can do, and would venture to say that I probably tend to work my Auto harder than most people would ever think possible out of an atv. As a result, I know you won't have any trouble at all plowing snow, or various other chores that may arise. In fact, should you go with the 'Cat, I'd bet you'll soon be looking for jobs to put up against it, just to see what it's capable of.
If you're interested, I have a few pictures posted at the link below of a couple different working conditions. The snow pictures aren't very clear, but you can see in a couple of them that I am towing our suburban up a hill in some deep snow. I had towed both the suburban and trailer hooked together 4 times, then the suburban by itself once. Later, I had to winch the rig back up on the road, after sliding over the edge. There is also a picture of breaking through over 2' of snow, then dragging logs back out, of which I then strip down and build bed frames, tables, other things out of at home. That picture of my 'Cat hooked to the logs was the last load I had, and consequently, the smallest. I always seem to forget about taking pictures till the end of the day, or after I've already done the most amount of work, towed the largest loads, etc., but those should give you an idea.
Since power is your concern for plowing, please note that I am doing all the following chores, pulling 27" tires as well-not only a full 2" taller, but 2" wider in the rear compared to stock tires. I only mention this because usually installing larger tires will offset the power ratio, leaving a lugging vehicle in some circumstances, or a feeling of "less" power than with stock tires. With the high torque of the 'Cat at 31 ft/lbs (most of any atv on the market, even more than the 600 Grizz), this is not a problem, as you can see.
Since you mentioned the Kodiak, and Grizz, in my opinion between those two machines, I'd take the Grizz. My old boss purchased a pair of '01 Kodiaks, and while they are excellent machines, I think they are more of a SPORT/Utility than a full Utility machine. Granted, they will be able to plow snow, I just feel the larger machine has the edge when it comes to real work.
As for what should you look for in a machine, find one that fits you the best. I think that is key, among all other aspects or qualities in a machine. You can have the newest, biggest, fanciest thing on the market, but if you don't feel comfortable on it, it's worthless to you. I didn't even know AC made quads when I was first looking to buy, and was seriously considering a Honda 450ES, and the SP500. The Honda was a nice machine, but just didn't fit me right. The SP was nice as well, but I'm kind of old fashioned in a sense, that I didn't trust the needed rear wheel slippage for the 4 wd to engage, and the price was well over a thousand dollars more than the AC -which I had just learned about.
Ride a 'Cat, you'll see what I mean. Very smooth ride, the rear swing axle is second to none-awesome setup both for work, and ride. Other things to consider-2/4wd selective, disc breaks, large gas tank, suspension travel, ground clearance, rack capacities, towing capacities and like I said, comfort.
Well, since I've probably bored you to death by now, I think I'll close this "sales brochure". heh heh. Best of luck in the decision, you really can't go wrong with either. Naturally, my option is the 'Cat, but between the machines you listed, I'd probably rule out the Kodiak, just because I believe bigger is better for work. That leaves three 500 cc machines, and the 600 Grizz to choose from.
Again, best of luck with the decision,
Mike
Posted by: cowboy
Boner:
You're probably right on the numbers for the Auto vs. Manual. I know the manual is stated at 31 ft/lbs., and I'm sure the auto would be slightly less, due to the automatic transmission. And, my mistake, I had said "all atv's on the market", when I should have said "all utility atv's". Sorry about that one. Yeah, the sport bikes do have higher numbers, but one question here - I don't know anything about the sport bikes, which one, or are all of those 2-strokes? Anyway, to my knowledge, the Manual 'Cat still has the highest torque of any Utility Quad. Please correct me if I'm wrong on that one, that was the last I'd heard.
As for the Kodiak, man, I think we're going to have to agree to disagree. Like I said, the Kodiak is an excellent machine for what it was designed for. I just believe I'd take the bigger Grizz instead for real work. Yeah, the disc breaks all around are nice -Why did they put drums on the rear of the Grizz anyway? I hate to say this again, but out of all the quads that were up elk hunting this season, I really wasn't impressed with the Kodiak for hauling and towing purposes. It seemed to struggle a little more towing firewood back to camp. Keep in mind though all machines had both racks filled with gear. Not sure what kind of weight he was carrying, but by towing some smaller logs up hill back to camp, he was struggling quite a bit. The Grizz, in the same circumstances was clearly the better machine.
And, I've said before my boss has a pair of '01 Kodiaks. He went elk hunting down in Utah this year with his Dad and Brother, all three tagged out. He had his two Kodiaks, along with two Grizzlies for the Guide, and his Dad -not sure what year they were. Anyway, after hauling out the first elk, they had to quarter it for the machine to handle the load. He said coming up out of one of the valley's was rather difficult, and on the second trip, he even rolled the machine, as it was too top heavy. The Grizz had to finish the job, as well as get the last remaining animal. These were big elk -two trophy 6x6's, and one 6x7, so they had some good weight to them. After the trip when I was speaking to them about it, I asked how his new quads performed. He said they were excellent on the trail, but for the various work they did, the Grizz was clearly the choice.
Now, from what I've seen of the machine, and what he has told me of his accounts with both, I still think I'd take the Grizz over the Kodiak for pure work. If I was doing more trail riding or pleasure type riding, then I'd take the Kodiak, as I think it really shines in that department. I think I agree with all your other statements, I just have my own opinions on the Grizz/Kodiak department. My choice still stands though for this situation, the AC 500 is a great machine, very tough to beat for working purposes.
Anyway that's just my own opinion, take it for what it's worth.
Take care, -Did you figure out that rear snorkel idea yet?
Mike
Posted by: cowboy
Boner:
Hey, thanks man, I appreciate that. Also, thanks for clearing up the thing about the sport bikes there, like I said, I don't know Jack about those things. They're really not high on my list of interests, so I don't study up on them much-at all really.
As for the Kodiak/Grizz rider, that's the funny part. See, like I said, my boss had just bought the two Kodiaks, and had never ridden an atv ever in his life. He snowmobiles a lot, used to jet ski quite a bit, but never rode an atv. Anyway, he rode in along with his brother, dad and the guide. Now, apparhently when they went to pick up the animals, Jeff tried to drive up and out of the area, but was worried he'd get into trouble at one point on the hill. So, the guide took over, and the bike did roll in that same spot Jeff was worried about. So, they loaded up the animal on the Grizz, and the guide again, drove up and made it out. Now, as I wasn't there, I don't know what the hill looked like, or if a different route was taken, exactly what the circumstances were. Jeff said it was in the same place, but I've gone up a lot of hills that just by sliding over a couple inches, meant the difference of actually making it, or having to back down. And, in those circumstances, from a spectators view down below, it might look as if you were going up the same route, when indeed you were a few inches over. Who knows. Anyway, the guide ran both machines up, but the Kodiak rolled, the Grizz didn't.
What seemed even more interesting, was that at this point, they switched machines entirely, so Jeff and Bill (brothers) rode out with the elk on the Grizzlies, and George (dad) and the guide took the Kodiaks the long way around-an easier route. I can understand this, as George is somewhere around 70 years old or so, and doesn't like that more technically challenging terrain.
Anyway, hope clears it up,
Thanks again,
Mike
Posted by: girthyguy
Boner I have to disagree with you. That auto and the man, both put out the same trq numbers check out AC's sight and click on the auto and then click on comparison. it says the auto puts out 31lbs. Yes at the wheels it will most likely put out less then the manual.
matty
Posted by: girthyguy
Boner
why do you say the auto is the flagship. I wouldnt say its the flagship. I say the 500 itself is the flagship. The engines put out the same numbers. They are not going to detune the auto, why would they. It would make no sence. And personaly why look at dyno numbers just for the peak numbers. You should look for a flat curve.the flatter the curve usually is better.
matty
Posted by: girthyguy
No offence here, but just because its more expensive and has all of the options doesnt meen its the flagship model. For instance the corvette coupe (besides the zo6 version) the one with the 6speed is considered the flagship over the auto (wich by the way cost more) because the 6 speed flat out, out performs the auto. So if you look at it like me, performance wise, the manuel would be the flagship.
matty
Posted by: girthyguy
well the cat is made to perform too. You say its a trail machine/ worker. Well the only way the manuel is lags to the auto is if the rider doesnt know how to shift. But as a trail rider the I see the manuel on top. Its a litter narrower around the engine so its a little more comfy, When going tight techinal trails you have more throttle control. It sucks up less power then the auto. As far as work goes what can you say, you have gears with manuel. I know, i know the auto holds up. But with the manuel you have better crompession braking, You can leave it in any gear an use the peak power. Where as the auto should do this, but only if the clutches are properly tuned. And they most likely are not. So as you see, the only thing the auto has over the manuel is ease of use. But if a person know how to ride a manuel, the auto is a step down compared tomanuel. But in all reality for the average owner, the auto will out perform the manuel. Just do to the fact they will not be able make the correct shifts, at the right time. Sorry for this, im starting to sound like one of those babies over at the polaris forum. No offense to Polaris owners, buut all they do there is tear into each other.
matty
Posted by: mudking2
Cowboy,
Doesn't the suzuki q'runner 500 have the same amount of power as the artic cat 500 manual?
Posted by: Eaaicf
I am in the market for an ATV and need it for plowing snow and for fun, both of which are equally important. I am also looking at the Honda Rubicon, Yamaha Grizzly and Kodiak and the Polaris Sportsman 500HO. What can you Arctic Cat guys tell me about this new machine? I have read great reviews. Also, reliability is a major factor for me and I have also heard that Polaris does not have a very reliable record. I want to make sure I get the right ATV so your help on this subject is greatly appreciated. Also, what else should I be looking for in an ATV? Thank you all for your input.
