Pages: 1
Posted by: Andy Bassham
I would get the IRS. The 400i is probably the best all around value you can get in a 4x4. Has all the things the 500 has, just a bit less power. And of course, it has plenty of power compared to its class. I don't think there is a better bike in the 350-450 class.
Posted by: Andy Bassham
No joke. Totally good info above me here on all accounts. Though the ACT will articulate a lot (a lot more than a Grizzly 660 will with its anti-sway bar still on), its not going to articulate more than Arctic Cat's IRS models, and its also going to have less body roll than their IRS models as well. So good and bad. But not to any extreme to make either a poor choice. Power to the ground is a weak argument too, because even if there is a difference in the two, its not enough that would make a big enough difference to matter.
The ACT models are quite good (though I prefer the IRS). They are far and away superior to anybody elses standard swingarm rear end, and unlike the old 97-00 models, they have the drain bolt to the rear end tucked away so they don't smack rocks.
Posted by: Andy Bassham
I owned an ACT 500 for 3 years. 99 model with no differential lock. I've owned a IRS with a locker for 3 1/2 years. There is no comparison on which is going to get stuck first, and there is no comparison between having a locker and not having it. That one tire not spinning on a limited slip is in fact the ONE TIRE YOU NEED TO SPIN. Differential lock is night and day over limited slip. It is worth the money to anyone who ever actually uses 4wd.
You will bottom out the rear differential and high center with an ACT before you will ever high center an IRS. Albeit my IRS was a yamaha, I've ridden my Brother in laws 500i several times as well. I stick by every statement I made, which most of them are in agreement with Bear's statements.
As far as ride, there isn't much difference between the ACT and IRS, but there is in fact some. For towing purposes, I would prefer the ACT because it will not squat the rear end down on you under tongue weight.
The ACT is a swingaxle rather than a swingarm (sounds the same, but this is what they were always called). Everyone is aware it has side to side articulation, and it works better than any other straight axle quad there is when you are talking about keeping all 4 on the ground.
The main thing you will give up from an ACT to an IRS is ground clearance. I don't see any rear axles on an ACT ever breaking unless you wreck. The front axles will break just as easily as the IRS quad will.
If I'm only towing (which how many people ever are), I take the ACT. For anything else ever, I take the IRS with the locker option. I'll take traction and ground clearance any day of the week. Basically the reason why I sold my ACT 500 and got an IRS Grizzly.
Posted by: Andy Bassham
I chimed in a long time ago. This was my second chime.
Posted by: Andy Bassham
I know this has little bearing at all for this, but I would buy whatever I wanted and not pay that much attention to resale.
But then again, I generally buy a quad with the intent of owning it for a long time, and the resale factor would probably apply more to those that like to get something new every year or 6 months in the case of a lot of people on this forum. My family has had 5 different quads since 1985. I've seen people on the forum who have had 6-7 different quads in the past 4 years.
I think this guy had a good point with spending 2 years with the options he wanted. If you get say $300 more out of an auto on resale than a manual, thats great and all, but $300 isn't that big of a deal anyway. Not even enough to buy a set of mud tires really. You can piss of that much real quick on options. And as for resale between 2 models of an AC, I think that the resale argument would be better suited if you were comparing two different manufacturers instead. Like any AC will sell for less than a Honda will down the line. However it is, resale value doesn't really come to mind for me when buying a quad. I'm looking for features I want.
Posted by: ttaylor
For ground clearence and less body roll yes it is worth it. for better articulation of the suspension the ACT is still the best. So, if you're riding slower over rough terrain then get the ACT if your just trail riding and want to sport around the IRS will have less body roll. The ride is great on either machine. I actually think the ACT has a softer ride, but it is a very subtle difference.
Posted by: ttaylor
Quote
Quote
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by: bkcntyxplr
Oh ya... you guys ever hear of getting the clutch spring changed for elevation? The dealer told me that because of the loss of HP at our elevations it is a good idea to change the clutch a bit. The way he described it made sense to me, but Im not an expert. You guys ever hear of this? Thanks
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
As far as I have been able to find out there are no differen springs for a manual 400 cat. Would be nice but like I say, I live at sea level. less than 150 feet and ride to 6 to 7,000 feet every year several times. So a clutch spring change wouldn't make much senseQuote
The clutch spring would be for the CVT automatic transmissions and not the manual.
Posted by: KSmicrorancher
I got my cat in 2000 because where I ride I needed more ground clearance than what the other brands offered back then. Now the irs offers even more. Cool!! When my 2000 is ready to be put out to pasture (which could be some time) I'll definitely get the independent rear suspension.
Posted by: DanW
Quote
Originally posted by: mudblaster
like i said you get the cat stuck its stuck.
and ya i followed grizleys also with my cat and and with my honda.
and 99% of getting through it is how agressive you are.
some mud holes you can just put through and others you need a little attitude.
i have had both quads and unless you are always riding where you need that much ground clearance its not nessary.
mine had 14 1/2" at the bottem of the hitch. (3 beer cans) and ill put the pic in my page if you care to look at it.
it might take a few hours to get it approved but it will be there.
and i hardly ever needed it and when i did it was because i was trying to get through a spot where everone else went around and it realy wasent nessary to go into it in the first place.
my honda gos everywhere my irs did and it has just over 10" of ground clearence with the lift kit and 26" tires.
and so what if i rub going over a log or feel it drag once in a while i still go the same places everyone alse dose.
when i first got my honda it felt small and i wasnt to sure about it but after i put the lift kit and tires on it i actully liked it better.
it just a matter of preferance not my quad is better then your quad.
Guys, I have both. The IRS won't get stuck as quickly, but the difference isn't as great as has been stated here. I'd say its about a 10% difference, not counting the locker on the 650. That takes it to a whole different level.
I have put both machines on an articulation ramp, and believe it or not, the ACT has the edge, even when my 650's shocks are on the softest setting. On paper, the ACT has less travel, but on the ramp, it has a slight edge. Overall, I'd give the advantage to the IRS, but not by a huge margin. I have no doubt about this: The ACT is by far the best solid rear axle rig out there. Nothing else even comes close, and I've ridden along side all of them. Through the rocks, the ACT is better than any IRS I've ridden with except the other Cats.
The ACT may be the best value out there. If it had the locker on the front, the difference would be even less.
Just my 2c worth. I've run them side by side for over a year now. I love them both. I believe ARctic Cat is #1 when it comes to suspension design. One more thing: The ACT has a slightly smoother ride, too.
Posted by: mountainclimber
ACT is the same ride with less ground clearence. The ACT spinns the tires more.
Posted by: Bluethumb
If you guys have ever ridden behind an ACT equipped bike, you'd understand. The ONLY thing you're giving away to an IRS equipped bike is a bit of GC. Ride is just as good. I don't know where you got the idea that it spins the tires more, it doesn't. It is, without a doubt, the best "straight axle" rear end on the market. The ACT is a four link design, it has probably 2X the wheel articulation of any other bike out there and keeps the tires on the ground as good as any IRS bike. As far as hitting the rear end, I very rarely do. You won't be disappointed in the ACT, try it first, you'll save yourself a bit of money and have as good a ride.
Posted by: Bluethumb
Another thing to take a look at is the reliability of the ACT, I see lots of points on here for IRS, nothing about broken axles though. The ACT speaks for itself, ever since its' introduction it has been bulletproof, with virtually no maintenance. You have 1 less CV to worry about as well. As for dragging it on rocks, that's why there's a skid plate under it, I'd rather drag that than an A arm any day. I guess it's all preference, I'm just giving an opinion. Diff lock to me isn't worth the money, and it's not as effective as people would lead you to believe. If you're in that deep, 1 more tire is probably not going to have the traction required to pull 700 pounds of bike up to harder ground, start reaching for the winch cable...
Posted by: Bluethumb
Bear, I guess no matter what I scribe down here, you're going to have an answer to counteract it. we can argue back and forth about all the conditions we "could" encounter in this big wide world. Opinions are just that, opinions. I personally know people that have had the ACT for a number of years, and never so much as looked at it the entire time. The machine I'm referring to is a '96 Bearcat 454, that has seen more abuse in its short life than your machine will see before you die. That bike is the sole reason I bought AC, and that rear end in particular.
I still don't buy into the locker theory, I have seen a 650 stuck with the locker engaged and going nowhere, and I drove past him. It's all in the tires, the provide the grip, not the locker. So I may have to winch out sooner than you, no biggie, gives me time to think about where I am and if I should be there.
In closing, the beauty of the ACT is that it keeps the tires on the ground when going over obstructions. Adjust the springs, and it'll do just as good as an IRS. I see you own a 400i with the locker, and like your machine, that's apparent. I guess we both like them equally, and in touting the virtues of each we're getting nowhere. I say we're at a draw.
Posted by: mudblaster
OK i'll try to make some sence of it for you bear.
the irs shspention will dig you down and when you try to rock from side to side it digs deeper and next thing you know your high centered.
the act suspention wont keep digging down and when you rock it back and forth most times you can get it through or unstuck fairly easy by having a few guys lift it out of its ruts.
you get that irs stuck and its stuck and there aint a man tall enuff to lift it out of the ruts it makes.
and its a lot harder to pull out of the mud because its hung up in the middle with 4 great big holes that the tires dug.
i had my cat stuck a few times and i have had my honda stuck a bit less but the honda comes out of the mud way easyer then the cat ever did.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
on saterday i was out riding with some friends and there was 5 hondas and 2 cats a 05 400 and a 04 650 and a 660 raptor and one 650 preire and i watched my friend with the 650 try to go up this snow packed hill and he got about a75 feet up it and he had to back down and turn around.
my other friend with an 04 400 honda went past his mark and about a hundred feet it past then he had to turn around.
my point is the irs digs down for traction where as the sra dont.
Posted by: mudblaster
like i said you get the cat stuck its stuck.
and ya i followed grizleys also with my cat and and with my honda.
and 99% of getting through it is how agressive you are.
some mud holes you can just put through and others you need a little attitude.
i have had both quads and unless you are always riding where you need that much ground clearance its not nessary.
mine had 14 1/2" at the bottem of the hitch. (3 beer cans) and ill put the pic in my page if you care to look at it.
it might take a few hours to get it approved but it will be there.
and i hardly ever needed it and when i did it was because i was trying to get through a spot where everone else went around and it realy wasent nessary to go into it in the first place.
my honda gos everywhere my irs did and it has just over 10" of ground clearence with the lift kit and 26" tires.
and so what if i rub going over a log or feel it drag once in a while i still go the same places everyone alse dose.
when i first got my honda it felt small and i wasnt to sure about it but after i put the lift kit and tires on it i actully liked it better.
it just a matter of preferance not my quad is better then your quad.
Posted by: mudblaster
thats why i only got $7250 CDN for my quad when i traded it in and it was 1 year old
with 28" gators hand and thumb warmers windsheild and a winch.
witch cost me when i got it was over $10,000 CDN befor taxes.
the quad it self was $8600 plus taxes then tires over $600 and winch $600 installed windshield $160 and everything else that was on it.
great resale.
ya ok.
Posted by: mudblaster
you say irs has a better resale.
but you also say its 500 dollers more and you only get about that in trade so how is the reasale better.
you pay 500 more and you get 500 more when you trade it in.
higher resale on a quad you pay a higher price for.
my point i was trying to say by saying ya right to a higher resale was it realy isent because you pay more to start with so your not realy getting any more for your trade.
and hi andy i was wondering when you were going to chime in.
Posted by: mudblaster
exactly
when i got my cat the plan was to ride it for three to five years then sell or trade.
but i sold it after a year and as far as im concernd i took a beating on it.
and i dont plan to get rid of this one that soon.
i can afford to live in my truck.
because thats what the wife said i'll be doing if i come home with another quad.
Posted by: liquidplumber
Hey Nova flip a coin you will love either one
Enjoy
Posted by: peteyz24
the irs is sooo nice and comfy to ride, and clears big rocks or stumps without them hitting underneath from the added ground clearance. So in my opinion its worth it
Posted by: swampyjunior
I have ridden both an ACT and I own an FIS machine. I could not tell the difference in ride comfort. I also did not notice the extra width of the machines. The only thing I did notice was the ground clearence. I kept smashing that darn rear axle into everything going down a rocky beach.
I used a 400ACT and my 400FIS to haul building materials (8ft 2x6's and gear) about 25miles down a roacky beach and up some hills on a trail. All I can say is go with ground clearence. Both machines had about the same weight (approx 50 - 8ft 2x6 plus gear) and the ACT could not go over the same rocks the FIS was.
My preference would be to go with ground clearence, Auto or Manual tranny is your choice, Adjust the shocks to your liking, and replace the stock tires with a good 6-ply tire.
SJ
Posted by: NovaSS
I getting ready to buy a 400 manual to go along with my yamaha ( no brand loyality here) The dealer only has the IRS in stock so I havent had a chance to drive the live axle version. Is the extra money for the IRS worth it??
Posted by: Bear4570
Quote
Originally posted by: ttaylor
For ground clearence and less body roll yes it is worth it. for better articulation of the suspension the ACT is still the best. So, if you're riding slower over rough terrain then get the ACT if your just trail riding and want to sport around the IRS will have less body roll. The ride is great on either machine. I actually think the ACT has a softer ride, but it is a very subtle difference.
This makes no sense, the suspension can't articulate better in the rear with the ACT because the axle is one solid peice, so for rough terrain it is useless when compared to the IRS as the rear wheels will track independently over things where the ACT can't. Why would the ACT have more body roll than the IRS, it should have less as the solid axle acts as an anti-roll bar. Doesn't matter, go with the IRS , real race cars and off road vehicles don't have solid axles.
Posted by: Bear4570
Quote
Originally posted by: aksafari
Except for the Suzuki Eiger, that is...
hr>
Having never seen horsepower figures for either engine and just looking at the difference in carbs, I would guess, and that is an educated guess, that the AC would have more power with the larger carb. The two engines have different carbs and exhausts systems, so probably not the same horsepower.
Posted by: Bear4570
Quote
Originally posted by: bkcntyxplr
Why would the ACT spin tires more? You would actually think the FIS would spin more (Im not an expert, I dont know..just thinking it through in my head). I also like the idea of being over 3 inches narrower with the ACT than with the FIS.
The ACT system would be more apt to kick a tire loose as with the solid axle it would be easier to get the inside tire, in a turn off the ground making the other tire have to hold all the power. The IRS tends to keep both tires planted as the wheels and tires are independent and they will follow the ground contour seperately and body roll does not cause the inside tire on a turn to lift.
Posted by: Bear4570
Quote
Originally posted by: Bluethumb
If you guys have ever ridden behind an ACT equipped bike, you'd understand. The ONLY thing you're giving away to an IRS equipped bike is a bit of GC. Ride is just as good. I don't know where you got the idea that it spins the tires more, it doesn't. It is, without a doubt, the best "straight axle" rear end on the market. The ACT is a four link design, it has probably 2X the wheel articulation of any other bike out there and keeps the tires on the ground as good as any IRS bike. As far as hitting the rear end, I very rarely do. You won't be disappointed in the ACT, try it first, you'll save yourself a bit of money and have
as good a ride.
A bit of ground clearance? That's like saying an Implala has a bit less ground clearance than a Jeep. It's a world of difference. No arguement that the ACT system is better than the swing arm systems, but for ground clearance the IRS is king by so much that there is no straight axle comparision possible.
Posted by: Bear4570
Quote
Originally posted by: ArcticBrat
I hear people with IRS complain about broken axle's. How does the ACT straight axle rearend hold up? I've never herd of anyone with a problem.
You haven't heard about any 2005 400's breaking axles and you won't except from the craziers out there. The 2005's have the same axles as the 650's and if you break an axle with the 400 engine it will be spelled "abuse".
Posted by: Bear4570
Quote
Originally posted by: bkcntyxplr
Oh ya... you guys ever hear of getting the clutch spring changed for elevation? The dealer told me that because of the loss of HP at our elevations it is a good idea to change the clutch a bit. The way he described it made sense to me, but Im not an expert. You guys ever hear of this? Thanks
As far as I have been able to find out there are no differen springs for a manual 400 cat. Would be nice but like I say, I live at sea level. less than 150 feet and ride to 6 to 7,000 feet every year several times. So a clutch spring change wouldn't make much sense.
Posted by: Bear4570
Quote
Originally posted by: bkcntyxplr
I just talked to a dealer here in Montana about getting an AC 400. Im still torn between the ACT and the FIS. Mainly because I hear that the ACT handles better with a heavey load (Quartered elk), and it is 45" wide compared to 47.5". I also hear that it doesnt have as much body role. And you can get it in a manual trans. which I think Id rather have.
But the ACT doesnt come with Front Diff lock where the FIS does. The shocks on the FIS are adjustable, and an automatic trans. would probably be better for resale. And is 2.5 inches differences in width really that big of a deal?
Im also hearing that the tire options are better with the FIS (as far as tire size goes) because of the way the shocks angle.
Man o' man, what to do - what to do.
I thought the width difference was in the fender flairs, because both machines have the same front suspension. I have never heard from anyone who owns one that when taking out heavy loads the was a handling problem. The locker is well worth it if you travel nasty country.
Posted by: Bear4570
Quote
Originally posted by: Bluethumb
Another thing to take a look at is the reliability of the ACT, I see lots of points on here for IRS, nothing about broken axles though. The ACT speaks for itself, ever since its' introduction it has been bulletproof, with virtually no maintenance. You have 1 less CV to worry about as well. As for dragging it on rocks, that's why there's a skid plate under it, I'd rather drag that than an A arm any day. I guess it's all preference, I'm just giving an opinion. Diff lock to me isn't worth the money, and it's not as effective as people would lead you to believe. If you're in that deep, 1 more tire is probably not going to have the traction required to pull 700 pounds of bike up to harder ground, start reaching for the winch cable...
If your rear axle is being lifted by an obstruction the at least one of the tires has to come off the ground. Not a good deal when trying to climb a slick or steep hill. Actually the ACT has the same maintenance requirements as an IRS as CV joints really don't need lubing during normal life expectancy. You have to change the lube in the ACT axle the same as the IRS needs to change the diff lube. The differential lock can be a life saver in a real tractionless situation, I know as I've used it already. Was stopped and stuck on a snowy and muddy hill side as the 4X4 wouldn't go any farther. I flipped the locker on and drove on up the hill. Way better than trying to turn around or backing down. The locker does make a major difference. It's like having 2 wheel drive plus 3 wheel drive (no locker) and real 4 wheel drive with the locker.
Posted by: Bear4570
Quote
Originally posted by: ttaylor
Quote
Quote
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by: bkcntyxplr
Oh ya... you guys ever hear of getting the clutch spring changed for elevation? The dealer told me that because of the loss of HP at our elevations it is a good idea to change the clutch a bit. The way he described it made sense to me, but Im not an expert. You guys ever hear of this? Thanks
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
As far as I have been able to find out there are no differen springs for a manual 400 cat. Would be nice but like I say, I live at sea level. less than 150 feet and ride to 6 to 7,000 feet every year several times. So a clutch spring change wouldn't make much senseQuote
The clutch spring would be for the CVT automatic transmissions and not the manual.
I am aware of that. I was being a smart s$$ and forgot the
Posted by: Bear4570
Quote
Originally posted by: Bluethumb
Bear, I guess no matter what I scribe down here, you're going to have an answer to counteract it. we can argue back and forth about all the conditions we "could" encounter in this big wide world. Opinions are just that, opinions. I personally know people that have had the ACT for a number of years, and never so much as looked at it the entire time. The machine I'm referring to is a '96 Bearcat 454, that has seen more abuse in its short life than your machine will see before you die. That bike is the sole reason I bought AC, and that rear end in particular.
I still don't buy into the locker theory, I have seen a 650 stuck with the locker engaged and going nowhere, and I drove past him. It's all in the tires, the provide the grip, not the locker. So I may have to winch out sooner than you, no biggie, gives me time to think about where I am and if I should be there.
In closing, the beauty of the ACT is that it keeps the tires on the ground when going over obstructions. Adjust the springs, and it'll do just as good as an IRS. I see you own a 400i with the locker, and like your machine, that's apparent. I guess we both like them equally, and in touting the virtues of each we're getting nowhere. I say we're at a draw.
If you don't change your differential lube you are a neglectfull owner and the SPCA will come and take your kitty away. However the rear end lube (differential) need to be changed and you will be lucky only so long. When it does break it will very expensive. I always hold as suspect quotes about "I know someone who did........" As to getting stuck. First don't run in 4X4 until you need it. 2X4 always untill you get stuck, then 4X4 to get out. If you get stuck with the 4X4 use the locker to get out. If you get stuck with 4X4 locker you are a towed. just like anyone else. Usually if you get stuck it was operator error, you know, you should have been smart enough to not go there. Any machine can get stuck, I saw an M1A1 tank stuck once, he did have to work at it though. As to the Act keeping the wheel on the ground better than IRS does make any sense. If the whell are tied together with a rigid axle if on moves up or down it will effect the other. If an IRS wheel goes up the other one just follows the ground it is on and doesn't change because of the other side, it's called independent for a reason. As to the draw I guess we can agree to that, but I bet I could get you hung up on your ACT if you followed me on some of our solid axle eating trails.
Posted by: Bear4570
Quote
Originally posted by: mudblaster
OK i'll try to make some sence of it for you bear.
the irs shspention will dig you down and when you try to rock from side to side it digs deeper and next thing you know your high centered.
the act suspention wont keep digging down and when you rock it back and forth most times you can get it through or unstuck fairly easy by having a few guys lift it out of its ruts.
you get that irs stuck and its stuck and there aint a man tall enuff to lift it out of the ruts it makes.
and its a lot harder to pull out of the mud because its hung up in the middle with 4 great big holes that the tires dug.
i had my cat stuck a few times and i have had my honda stuck a bit less but the honda comes out of the mud way easyer then the cat ever did.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
on saterday i was out riding with some friends and there was 5 hondas and 2 cats a 05 400 and a 04 650 and a 660 raptor and one 650 preire and i watched my friend with the 650 try to go up this snow packed hill and he got about a75 feet up it and he had to back down and turn around.
my other friend with an 04 400 honda went past his mark and about a hundred feet it past then he had to turn around.
my point is the irs digs down for traction where as the sra dont.
First off the ACT has to high center sooner as the axle is lower than the skid plate. You high center on the lowest part of the rig. Secondly, I don't have to dance with the IRS as it just keeps on truckin' at least mine does. I have been stuck twice with the 400 and both times nobody else even tried the hole. I have followed a Griz with mudlites and went where he went and nobody else followed, IRS or Swing axle or ACT. The reason an ACT or a swing arm won't dig down is it's high center on the rear axle. Are you physics impaired or something? Your logic to defy the laws of physics and I can tell you if your theory tries to slap physics in the face, you better rework your theory or physics will kick you butt. IRS can dig down farther than an ACT because it has more ground clearenceand doesn't high center as soon, but only a dummy just keeps hammering the throttle if he's moving down and not moving forward.
Posted by: Catterman
I too would go with the IRS, my dad has the 2000 Cat 500 with ACT, and that is a great suspension too. IRS is just a lot better. I think it is only a few hundred dollars more, and in 5 years you will be glad you went with it.
Posted by: greencat650
Yes, get the Independent, if I want to sport it around I just tighten up my rear springs! Handles like a dream!
Posted by: MrTommy
Swampy, are you suggesting changing the stock radials for 6-ply because of strength? Or why? Other than the less-than-super-agressive tread pattern of the Carlisle Badlands, I like the ride the radials give, and in my area mud is of absolutely no concern.
Posted by: MrTommy
I think the locking diff really comes into play if one of your front wheels is off the ground (which probably happens more than we think), and the open diff lets the free wheel do the spinning. This is aggravating at best, possibly dangerous at worst. I'd love to have a locking diff but I'm not buying a new machine just to get it. I'll live with my 'old' 04 model.
Posted by: MrTommy
Jimja, your comment on debt is right on. I don't know how we got away from what our folks did (pay cash for everything) but there's a guy on the radio preaching just that. His name is Dave Ramsey and he's on from 11am/2pm pst. I found him on satellite radio.
The Cats my wife and I have now (the 04's) will probably be the first, last, and only ones we get. They do everything we want, go everywhere we try to go, and they're paid for. What more can you ask for? And I just got two solar battery 'maintainers' off eBay to keep the batteries charged while we wait for the snow to melt from out front of the gate to the back yard. We got hammered with snow for about a week and even my pick-up got stuck behind the gate (because the snow was too high to open the gate, not because the pick-up couldn't handle the snow...).
Oh, and to keep 'on topic', we love our IRS models - ha.
Posted by: aksafari
Except for the Suzuki Eiger, that is...
Posted by: tta583
I have an 01 ACT but ride with 3 folks on AC FIS machines. I will say I have never spent a considerable amount of time on the FIS machines. Here are MY seat of the pants views and thoughts:
For where we ride I have never had a problem with GC. They do have more, and I will say we have crossed things where I have slid on the belly of my quad.
I have never felt what I would call "body roll". Believe me, I have pushed the thing through some corners nailed!
I have never seen one of the FIS machines body roll.
Riding on another quad and viewing mine from the rear I can see where the ACT shines. It keeps a lot of the bumps out of your tail.
Riding bedind the FIS macines I can see where they shine as well as I watch the suspension articulate and the rider sit nice and comfy.
You almost have to really watch both a ACT or a FIS to see what they are doing for you.
All that said, I decided on a couple of occasions to pass up good deals on newer FIS quads. It all came back to one thing I like about the ACT quads the FIS machines don't have, a tad narrower track width. Very often I seem to find myself in situations where I am navigating between trees or something or other and I catch myself thinking that my FIS buddies will have problems becasue of their width. I will admit that there is not much foundation to my argument as, when it is all said and done, they are still right behind me.
Brent
Posted by: catrep
Proven fact, side by side the ACT will out run the FIS. Way? Less drag going through a straight axle. Ask any engineer, anytime you send power through a bend (CV joint is less then u-joint) it robs power. ACT will also be more maintaince free, no CV boots to service, less moving parts.
FIS will offer a better ride, is more adjustable, more ground clearence. As in most things there are pros and cons, you have to determine what it most important to you. Other nice features on the FIS are; receiver hitch,shift on the fly 4WD, digital dash, front diff lock,MRP speedrack,and automatic choke. (Based on 2005 specs.) You get the 2yr warranty either way. Good Luck
Posted by: JimJa
I won't get into the fray about which is better; IRS or ACT, but no one has commented on resale. I bought both my machines on e-bay. Both were "unused," a couple of years old at the time of my purchase. The first one was a shot in the dark as I had never owned an ATV. I ended up with an AC and liked that AC so well I wanted another.
As I shopped for the second bike, there was one, clear fact that stood out; resale of machines with IRS is significantly higher than those with ACT. At least several hundred dollars and more, depending upon the age of the machine.
Given both sides of the IRS/ACT issue feel so strongly, if Nova doesn't have a clear idea of which type he wants, at a minimum resale should at least be considered.
Jim
Posted by: JimJa
Mudblaster,
A basic truth is that mods and add-ons are important...but only to you. A dealer isn't going to give you much, if anything, for them. Don't believe that - just do some MAJOR engine mods and see what the dealer gives you when you trade. I'm not saying you shouldn't do them. Just have realistic expectations of your ability to retrieve the money you spend. Like I said. Those mods and add-ons are only important to you.
The dealer is only looking at what he can get for your bike when he sells it. Remember, he has ALL his profit tied up in your trade. If he can't sell it, he's holding the bag and he's not about to do that and stay in business. If you take that deal just to get the machine you want, well, after it's done you feel a little bit used. The dealer gives you wholesale and sells your trade retail for that year and model - with a little wiggle room for himself. The more mods and add-ons, the fewer people want that machine. Fact of life.
Even more so are the Honda dealers. They know they have a product with a reputation second to none and people will pay top dollar for their product. You won't get them to budge. There are exceptions of course, but by and large it's the way it works. I've been through this - I'm an old fart and I've been there, done that.
We were debating the merits of ACT vs. IRS. I noted that the prices bidded on Ebay were significantly higher for IRS. Ebay is retail. Your Honda dealer gave you wholesale. Could have you gotten a higher price on Ebay for your AC? Probably. Would it have been as timely? Of course not. Would have it been worth the hassle? Well, only you can decide.
Bear is almost my age and can vouch for the fact that in the end it's not how much money you make, it's reducing your overhead.
Posted by: JimJa
As Andy said, "I chimed in once and this is my second chime." And my last. I don't want to beat this dead horse forever.
As long as you know exactly what you are getting into with mods and frequent trading please continue to do so. But as Andy said, there are lots of folks out there trading often, too often from a money standpoint. I know people that put a lot of money in add-ons and mods that are outraged when a prospective buyer won't give them anything for all that money they just spent. If you trade often, lots of mods are probably just not worth it. The longer you keep your bike the less impact those mods will have just because the bike isn't worth as much anymore.
Prior to my retirement (at age 53) I tought fiscal management to new, young employees. Personal debt is a hot botton with me. I hate to see people get into money problems because debt is so easy to take on and so difficult to get out from under. Remember if you are 25 or so, that $5 of interest you are paying now could be $1000 in the bank at retirement. Debt will determine your future and how long you work. If you happen to trade often and are rolling debt from your existing machine into your new machine, please, please reconsider.
As I said - It's not about how much money you make, it's about overhead. Mudblaster, I had to laugh at your comment about living in your truck. I bought a '95 Mustang Cobra 2-top (convertible with a factory removable hard top - only 499 made) w/out telling my wife. I almost had to live in it to keep peace in the family - it was ugly. Finally sold it 18 months later - made $3K. I got tired of "hearing about it."
Jim
Posted by: ArcticBrat
I hear people with IRS complain about broken axle's. How does the ACT straight axle rearend hold up? I've never herd of anyone with a problem.
Posted by: bkcntyxplr
Why would the ACT spin tires more? You would actually think the FIS would spin more (Im not an expert, I dont know..just thinking it through in my head). I also like the idea of being over 3 inches narrower with the ACT than with the FIS.
Posted by: bkcntyxplr
I just talked to a dealer here in Montana about getting an AC 400. Im still torn between the ACT and the FIS. Mainly because I hear that the ACT handles better with a heavey load (Quartered elk), and it is 45" wide compared to 47.5". I also hear that it doesnt have as much body role. And you can get it in a manual trans. which I think Id rather have.
But the ACT doesnt come with Front Diff lock where the FIS does. The shocks on the FIS are adjustable, and an automatic trans. would probably be better for resale. And is 2.5 inches differences in width really that big of a deal?
Im also hearing that the tire options are better with the FIS (as far as tire size goes) because of the way the shocks angle.
Man o' man, what to do - what to do.
Posted by: bkcntyxplr
Oh ya... you guys ever hear of getting the clutch spring changed for elevation? The dealer told me that because of the loss of HP at our elevations it is a good idea to change the clutch a bit. The way he described it made sense to me, but Im not an expert. You guys ever hear of this? Thanks
Posted by: bkcntyxplr
JimJa,
Amen partner. Im not near your age, but I can say that you are speaking words of wisdom. You just can't equate resale numbers with trade in numbers. Apples and oranges.
I just bought (tonight) an AC 400I Automatic. I dang near bought a AC 400 ACT manual, but thought better of it when I thought about resale down the line. It was only a 500 dollar difference for me between the two, and I figure Id get somewhere around there or more when I resale.
I'll be using mine for fun/hunting in the Mountains of Montana. I bow hunt for Elk and that is the primary reason I bought it. We'll see how things turn out come Sep. Until then it's a toy! (I mean boy! hahaha)
Posted by: bkcntyxplr
"Id get somewhere around there or more when I resale. "
Is what I said. And further.... An item that depreciates means that it loses value as time goes on. How much value it loses depends on the demand for that item when it is resold. The more demand means the less the depreciation.
It all depends on how much someone want to pay you for it down the road. It is always a gamble. But I think I have a better chance at making more on resale with options that are more popular. Will I make all of my money back? Good chance. Even if I only get 300 dollars more than if it were the ACT with a Manual that means that I spent two years with the options that I prefered and really only paid 200 for them. Either way it's worth it to me. And who knows...Maybe a quad equipped like this will resale really well. I stand a better chance of winning than losing.
Posted by: bkcntyxplr
Good thing I got a utility ATV because I wanted the low end torque, and get anywhere attitude rather than the dry my eyes out speed. lol dont take that the wrong way catrep....just funin with ya.
You make some good points. The BIGGEST reason I got the FIS is because of the diff. locker. If the ACT had it I would most likely have gone that way. Why? Simply because I can't help but think that it would handle a heavy load better, and the maintenance/chance of malfuntion issue. How often will I have a heavy enough load to make a difference? Hopefully at least once a year!! (Elk)
Oh well...when they make the PERFECT ATV for me, it won't be the PERFECT ATV for my neighbor. I think we can all agree and rest easier knowing that as long as it's a Cat...it's all that matters.
