Pages: 1
Posted by: OhHell
I dont own any of the quads mentioned in the shootout, but I can say I have seen brand bias in mags for years. Anyone that buys or passes on a quad (or bike) because of what a mag said about it has my pity.
All the tests are based on rider opinions. I feel sure the companys have a big role in forming those opinions.
Posted by: JohnO
The reviews of utility quads by a sport quad magazine are a joke. I read some of them back when I was looking for a new quad back in 2002. Jumping ability? Cornering? Give me a break - I'm not buying a 4wd utility quad to go hopping around a prepared dirt track. I'm going where there's no track.
One of the chief complaints I had about my old bear was ground clearance, it kept getting hung up on the rocky sections of my farm. The same would be said of that review's highly placed Honda. It wouldn't get very far on my place.
I've had my 500i for five years. And it's been pretty much bulletproof. Hasn't hung up on rocks yet. That's why I bought it - to go to some seriously rough places. At that, it excels. Sway bar? Get lost - that will impede wheel articulation. The big Cat may not suit everyone, but it sure suits me.
Posted by: Bluethumb
Cat owners know the difference. I'm not going to listen to a guy that spends 90% of his time on a track with a sport quad under him. Put him in the mud, or some very technical terrain, and it'll change his opinion in a rush. I like my cat, and would buy another one in a second.
Posted by: weez440
buckaroo is right on the money with the handling issues. granted you are gonna lose some stability when having a big tall machine but you are gonna gain in alot of other area's. i just put 6 ply tires on my 650 and everything handles great. and i'm with blue i'm not gonna begin to try to compare my dirtbike to my fourwheeler cause they are designed for two different things. the things they fail to mention all the time is cat's highest rack capacity tallest ground clearance diff lock 2 inch receiver mrp rack system and their plain tough durability which woops the bajesus out of every other manufacturor. i love going out in the mudhole with a bunch of different brands and they all look at me as the under dog cause of what they read from some sport rider in a magazine and i'm the one that drives in behind them and push them out of the mudhole.
Posted by: DONECRASHED
Fella's I don't have a dog in this fight, but can tell you that a friend of mine just bought a 650 cat and had 27" swamplites put on it and that is one bad machine. I put about 10 miles on it and it is definetely not as comfortable as my Polaris, but I don't think that it was cat's position to make it super comfy. I think that they spent there time building a quality machine without all of the bells and whistles. That thing hung with me through every hole, creek, and hill. I was indeed impressed with the cat, as a matter of fact I was so impressed that I am looking for a 400 for my wife. So let them bunch of spoiled pansy's talk all of the crap they want about your bike's, because they have no clue as to why we pick our bikes.
Posted by: Chumley
C'mon guys, it's getting a little deep in here.
No 400 Cat will go through more mud than a 660 Grizz with ITP Mudlites. My 650 Cat will not go through more mud than a 660 with Mudlites. I know because I ride with that exact wheeler. Machine for machine, these two are NOT equal. Better riders make a huge difference, but I would bet you a pink slip that the same rider will go through more mud with the 660 Mudlites than any stock AC. Yes, tires ARE that important.
Same goes for your story there Buck, you've got a bunch of yuppie suburbanites bringing their new toy out. They don't have a clue how to ride, and no machine is going to fix that. They are breaking things because they don't know how to ride, not because their other brand machine is made of plastic.
AC's usually get destroyed in these shootouts because handling is almost always a MAJOR gripe. It is a legitimate gripe too, most AC's handle considerably worse than other brands due to the lack of sway bar with 4 wheel independent suspension. The writers spend all their time on sport quads and they don't fully appreciate what AC brings to the table.
Posted by: Chumley
Beating broken down wheelers does not count. They were likely overheating because their owners have not kept the radiators clean, or from lack of proper maintenance. Beating a broken down abused machine does not constitute a blanket statement saying you can go through as much mud as 600 class machines with mud tires. That's like saying I can kick Muhammed Ali's ass therefore I can beat any former heavyweight champion.
Posted by: mudslinginfool
i stopped reading them magazines also. i cant remember what issue it was but a few months ago they said the arctic cat did bad on rocks. it kept bottoming out, come on they have the highest ground clearence, IRS, and plenty of low end power, but the honda made it!! its a bunch of bull. since i bought one in 1998( an ac 300 4x4) every one was impressed. since then ,off the top of my head there have been 10 people that bought one. one of them bought a prowler and a 400 just last week. know one yet has even thought about trading theres in for something new. unless its a bigger ac. several of them 10 guys had previously owned;
brute force 750, now ownes a 500 ac
z400,now owns prowler and 400ac
polaris, now owns a 650 h1
warrior,now owns a 400 ac
kodiak, now owns a 500 ac
and more continue on( i just dont remember what they bought.)
Posted by: buckaroo50
Originally posted by: ArcticKrawler
The new atv rider magazine came out recently with a 400-450 utility shootout. In the test they used Arcit Cat, honda, suzuki, can-am, polaris and yamaha. All 4 testers said the cat came in last in all catagories. It seemed like the main gripe was cornering. I ride a L.E. I will admit it pushes through the corners badly, like it has alot of understeer, but I love my cat. I didnt buy it to power slide in the corners though. But to fail in all catagories is crazy. The reason I bought mine was because of the amount of people bragging about the reliability of their Cat 400 4x4s. It seems like they have alot of satisfied owners. Ive heard talk of Arctic Cats not being in many competitions against other atvs. I just wondered what people thought about the standings.
Utility standings Sport standings
#1 Polaris sportsman 450 #1 Yamaha
#2 Suzuki kingquad 450 #2 Honda
#3 Can-am Outlander 400 #3 Suzuki
#4 Yamaha Grizzly 450 #4 Can-am
#5 Honda Fourtrax Rancher 420 #5 Polaris
#6 Arctic Cat 400 #6 Arctic Cat
You can improve on the handling - I did. The reason that it understeers is because the side walls on the tires are too soft and the spring to stiff (stiff=straight). I set my tires at 8 or 9 lbs in the front (to stop the roll-under) and the 'preload' on the softest setting (to squat and hold in the turn). The rear lbs at 5 and 'preload' on the second to softest. Believe it or not I passed an Eiger in the corner, he could not believe it and neither could I, so we did it again (I passed him).
I have since put 1" spacers on each corner and the thing is like a go-cart. And the articulation has increased. I got 11.5" of travel and still had 1" inch of shock travel left. It probably is a full 12.5"-13" of wheel travel with the spacers. But the wider stance is great for handling the corners and off-camber situations.
Posted by: buckaroo50
Makes you wonder who is writing these articles and even if they know what they are talking about.
I ride with a lot of different people that have different machines. Some with oversized tires, plenty of mods. They have all seen my AC in action and don't dispute a thing. If I get outdone in the rough it generally is by another AC. With my new tires and 1" spacers some of the other AC's are now going to get a run for their money too. Mine isn't fast but I get there. In the rough stuff I usually end up waiting for the others. Only on top end runs on flat dirt roads do I lag behind a little. If I wanted to drag race then a nitrous bottle could suprise a few. And after two years of playing with my suspension and tire pressures I now can run with the best of them in the corners also. So the AC's can handle, it is just a matter of getting the suspension and tires tuned.
Posted by: buckaroo50
Winsted rules - lol....
Posted by: buckaroo50
I think we all have stories that we could tell. I have many that would have you on your backs kicking your feet in the air laughing so hard. I live in Maine and we have a lot of tourist, and on the weekends the trails are just full of them from Mass, NY, Conn, RI, NJ etc. They mostly have top of the line machines with mods. I am always asked if I could show them some trails. After my little smirk and saying to myself 'you asked for it', just follow me. To make a long story short several of them have traded their top of the line "what have you' and now drive 400-500 AC's.
My point being that these guys writing these articles I would just love to run into them on the trail and have them ask me to show them some trails.
I have seen it all, bent A-arms, broken this that and the other, stuck, drowned in water, loss of control and in the ditch, torn off skid plates, flats, reminances of plastic hanging from the machines.
I guess for us that own AC's, we know and the ones that write these articles "don't know jack'. I would just like to take them on a little 30 miles ride someday and see how they act afterwards....
Posted by: buckaroo50
Well I guess we are all liars. However, my neighbor used to race ATV's on the ice. So he is an experienced rider, he has a 660 Griz with 26" mud lights. Maybe I should have him come on here and tell you himself that he can't follow my 400. So the guy that said his 400 outdid some Griz's I believe him because mine can also.
The guys from out of state are not rookies. They ride all over New England. But now, instead of believing an article that they read they have seen real life situations, and have discovered that sometimes it is worse to have too much power than not enough. They have seen first hand the articulation ability of the AC, they have seen first hand the ground clearance etc. etc. etc... And they made a free choice to trade to the 400-500 class AC. They are more interested in riding difficult trails rather that doing 70mph on a Utility quad and they are not much interested in doing wheelies, as they are in the ability to climb a rock and bolder infested hill. And to be able to cross a stream with the water is up to their fenders without the front going in the air (and being swept downstream by the current) like mud running in still water. Or drive into a mud hole with deep ruts and dragging their belly pans and getting stuck. Or to climb a steep hillside covered with pine-needles and have the traction to get to the top. They gave up their 'whoopie, yahoo machines' in lew of a Utility that gets them there and back.
And if I told you that I have had my AC in a 45 degree off-camber situation you would not believe that either (you'd say the AC is too tippy) - but check my pictures and see for yourself. And you show me a Griz that has 11 or 12 inches of wheel travel or articulation and I will eat your hat.
Posted by: buckaroo50
Originally posted by: zitterich246
Chumley vs. Buckaroo round 2, I want a clean fight, no hitting below the belt, remember the big bore thread LOL!!!
Nope, AC's have proven themselves on the trials and in real life situations, regardless of what some of the magazines writers and some others may say. True, the AC is not the best handling right out of the box but with some adjustments that can improve. Just because a machine says 660, doesn't mean it is better it just means it has a bigger motor.
Posted by: buckaroo50
I don't measure quads just by it's ability to run in mud or being used as a submarine. It's ability to run in mud doesn't necesarrily make it a good 'off-road' utility quad, no more than the vehicles at a 'mud-run' would make good 'off-road' vehicles.
If you are going to run mud then yea, a 600-700 class with 28" or 29" tires with 2" mud lugs and maybe a lift kit is the way to go, but that machine would suck as an "off-road" utility quad.
Anyway this is getting off the topic - which was about the writers of these magazine articles and how their ratings seem to always have AC last and the general feelings are that AC's are better than a last place rating and AC has proved itself in the real world as a very capable machine, and a much better machine than some of the machines that were rated higher. For my money if I did not have an AC my second choice would be a Suzuki King-Quad. I would not consider the Honda, Outlander, or Polaris, and behind the King-Quad I would consider a Griz.
Posted by: buckaroo50
Originally posted by: v2rider
Hey Buck, nice pics, but i thought AC had 10" of travel, not 11.5, or an inch more.
Maybe yours does but mine has more - I have 1" spacers on each wheel that gives me more wheel travel. Swing an arc from the pivot point on your A-arm then extend that 1" inch and you will see the difference.
The closer you are to the pivot point the less travel, the further away you are the more travel. take this "<" arrow point and make each side 15 inches long. Measure the distance between the lines 5" away from the point and also 15 inches away from the point. This is how I get more wheel travel.
Posted by: ramman
ive owned my 06 400 cat for 1 year now and i love it at first i found the cat to seem tippy but not now. I just put mudlites on my machine and what a difference 6 ply really help out . These magazines can say what they want but they guys who trail ride and haul stuff know what these machines are capable of and personally i dont find my bike tippy at all i love my cat
Posted by: v2rider
Hey Buck, nice pics, but i thought AC had 10" of travel, not 11.5, or an inch more.
Posted by: Flyfisher
2002 ac 250I 4x4 Love it, my back,butt and wallet love's it 2. after i found this baby(looked at all the models) i knew it would be a great starter,i bought mine to have fun. i was'nt disapointed by any means.i like looking at those magazines just to see the new products, pics,then i turn the page...lol tc all may the trails open soon...good riding to you all.
Posted by: zitterich246
Chumley vs. Buckaroo round 2, I want a clean fight, no hitting below the belt, remember the big bore thread LOL!!!
Posted by: BuckBilly
I say ride what you like and forget what the mags. They can't remember what is fact or science fiction.
Posted by: Juggernaught
arctic cat need to fix there poor handling and tippyness or they will never attract the mainstream buyers.
Posted by: Juggernaught
Magazines are pretty much always biased, I read one about the new fast kawasaki v force coming out and they raved how awesome it was now the same magazine they say its slow and it gets rated much worse than all the new stuff that came out, that goes to show you they just pick new stuff over older stuff.
Posted by: booboobear
they can take there articles and the next time they go take a sh!!t, they can wipe there @sses with it, Ive owned my cat now for over 5 years with only 600 miles on it and I took a 660 grizzly and a 600 grizzly with itp tires down in the minnesota river bottoms with my 400 manual, went up river banks, over trees,over railroad tracks and through the mud better than the grizzlies. So I dont beleive any article I read because I know the truth
Posted by: booboobear
oh yea, I had stock tires on too!
Posted by: booboobear
lol buck, I wouldnt go that far with winsted
Posted by: booboobear
the grizzly 660 was the late 90s and the grizzly 600 was a 02, the problem was when we got into the mud the grizzlies were already to hot and would spit and sputter and would lose the power, same when we went up the banks, if the banks were steep they would do the same thing and lose the power, and back down the hill, the issue here is that they were over heating and yes that is why my cat went through more than they could, I know tires are a big part, but you need the power to turn those tires too, and when the grizzlies are to hot then what do you have? nothing, and they were liquid cooled too. My buddies thought that yamaha put to small of radiators on them. Theres my story and Im sticking to it
Posted by: booboobear
chumley, 1 of those grizzlies is the same year as mine, dont cut the mustard for me, but you take thse newer machines oh yea my cat dont have a chance, but when you get those 2 guys bragging about how big there machines are and they cant do it well then you can see my point on telling about it and me bragging about mine, but remember i have only a 400 to there 600 classes so i will brag and with that I end my story here
Posted by: ArcticKrawler
The new atv rider magazine came out recently with a 400-450 utility shootout. In the test they used Arcit Cat, honda, suzuki, can-am, polaris and yamaha. All 4 testers said the cat came in last in all catagories. It seemed like the main gripe was cornering. I ride a 2006 400 L.E. I will admit it pushes through the corners badly, like it has alot of understeer, but I love my cat. I didnt buy it to power slide in the corners though. But to fail in all catagories is crazy. The reason I bought mine was because of the amount of people bragging about the reliability of their Cat 400 4x4s. It seems like they have alot of satisfied owners. Ive heard talk of Arctic Cats not being in many competitions against other atvs. I just wondered what people thought about the standings.
Utility standings Sport standings
#1 Polaris sportsman 450 #1 Yamaha
#2 Suzuki kingquad 450 #2 Honda
#3 Can-am Outlander 400 #3 Suzuki
#4 Yamaha Grizzly 450 #4 Can-am
#5 Honda Fourtrax Rancher 420 #5 Polaris
#6 Arctic Cat 400 #6 Arctic Cat
Posted by: ArcticKrawler
I'm not one to pick sides, And I wont argue with anyone but... There is absolutly no way a 400 4x4 comes close to a 660 grizzly in thick mud. The 26 ITPs are just icing on the cake. Stock tires and no power are no match to a big bore with mud tires. I live in Indiana and ride alot of along White river bottoms after the floods receed. My 06 400 does great but when you hit the thick mud, and I mean so thick when you winch out you see tire tracks with basically no water, My tires stop spinning. I dont have the power to make it out of the nasty. The cat also runs a little behind on the hills. I would say its my opinion but I would say the best power to weight ratio is going to the grizzly even with out the Itps. I dont know about the older models but the new 660 auto weighs 600 lbs. with 11.8 inches of ground clearence. I started this thread to defend my 400 auto but not in this match up.
Posted by: ArcticKrawler
I'm not one to pick sides, And I wont argue with anyone but... There is absolutly no way a 400 4x4 comes close to a 660 grizzly in thick mud. The 26 ITPs are just icing on the cake. Stock tires and no power are no match to a big bore with mud tires. I live in Indiana and ride alot of along White river bottoms after the floods receed. My 06 400 does great but when you hit the thick mud, and I mean so thick when you winch out you see tire tracks with basically no water, My tires stop spinning. I dont have the power to make it out of the nasty. The cat also runs a little behind on the hills. I would say its my opinion but I would say the best power to weight ratio is going to the grizzly even with out the Itps. I dont know about the older models but the new 660 auto weighs 600 lbs. with 11.8 inches of ground clearence. I started this thread to defend my 400 auto but not in this match up.
Posted by: Junkman673
I've read alot of arcticles and the ACs always do poorly for some reason. All i know is that my ol' beat up AC starts every time and will go everywhere the more expensive /newer atvs that I ride with will go. I like my Cat just fine and I don't give a damn what the big magazines say.
