I'm tired of Honda owners making excuses for Honda abandoning loyal utility riders:

I've heard Honda owners in other posts state that "you don't need all that power", or "a machine that heavy is dangerous". Please....Honda is taking us for granted, and shoving sub-par, under enginereed-- smaller machines down our throats.

Let me tell you why size & power absolutely matters:

I live in Colorado and altitude robs power! At 9000' of elevation you're down approximately 25-30% on HP. I ride regularly between 9000' & 12000'. My Rubicon runs out of steam at above 11000'. I've had to throw it in low and hold on to make it any higher than that. I grew tired of watching Can Am & Polaris owners on the bigger Atv's absolutely blow past me.

Weight helps smooth out the ride. The ride is far-superior on the larger machines. It's like comparing the difference between a Yugo & a Rolls Royce. The bigger quads are much faster on the rocky trails that are out here. Ride a Honda out here all day on these trails and you will be beat up!

I have a vacation coming up in mid-September and have been waiting for Honda to announce their 2009 line up. My plan was if Honda announced a new - improved unit for 09' was to leave my Rubicon at home, and rent a heavier, longer wheelbase unit either from Can Am or Polaris for my vacation. And then after my vacation purchase a new -improved Honda. Long & short of it, I couldn't wait or trust that Honda would come out with a significantly revamped utility quad, so I bought a low hr Can Am long wheelbase 800 Max.

I'm originally from the East Coast which was total Honda country. Got out here three years ago & found that it was all Polaris and Bombardier / Can Am. The reason is: out West, in the mountanous regions you need the larger, more powerful machines.

Come on Honda--support your loyal customers!!! It was painful to have to buy that Can Am but you left me no choice.[img]i/expressions/face-icon-small-disgusted.gif[/img]

2002 Rubicon
2003 400EX
2006 Can Am 800 Max

 

Hon, Yam, Kaw, & Suz have voluntarily tried to hold weight to around 600 lbs as a responsible action for safety. Pol, AC, & Bomb have different priorities. Riders can minimise negative ride effects of lightweight chassis by keeping unsprung weight to a minimum. It is not just the weight of chassis, it is the ratio of sprung to unsprung weight that causes rough ride. Installing big & heavy tires/wheels is one of worst things you can do for suspension performance. The relatively light weight 700 Grizzly has consistantly outperformed Pol, AC, & Bomb in all aspects other than engine power.

 

rangernuts i totally agre with you. i like my rubi but it doesnt compare to the popo in ride, handling, power, or all day comfort..........the best thing about the honda so far is i dont have to work on it as much.... the honda rides like a 3/4 ton dodge truck. the popo rides like caddy.....on the popo the rougher the terrain you just went faster and it was smooooottthhherrr

 

Dont we have this same discussion every other week? Honda has found a market niche and is building bikes to fit that niche, and at the end of the day are selling more bikes then anyone else.

Since the number of "top of the line high horse power" bikes sold accross north america is most likely much much lower then the "middle of the road" bikes, and combined with the fact that there is already quite a few manafacturers selling in the high end marketplace, I'd say it will be awhile before Honda spends $$$ to R&D a bike that most likely not be a high seller...unless they make something so kick *** that everyone would buy the Honda and forget CanAm, Polaris & AC...but thats not likely.

 

<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>Originally posted by: oldturtle

Hon, Yam, Kaw, & Suz have voluntarily tried to hold weight to around 600 lbs as a responsible action for safety. Pol, AC, & Bomb have different priorities. Riders can minimise negative ride effects of lightweight chassis by keeping unsprung weight to a minimum. It is not just the weight of chassis, it is the ratio of sprung to unsprung weight that causes rough ride. Installing big & heavy tires/wheels is one of worst things you can do for suspension performance. The relatively light weight 700 Grizzly has consistantly outperformed Pol, AC, & Bomb in all aspects other than engine power.</end quote></div>

Great post! I've ridden 450 sport machines that ride smooth as silk on the worst trails. It all comes down to suspension and components.....

Yes a heavier machine will have an initial "smoother" feeling to the ride in the first 3" if suspension travel.... but properly tuned suspension is the key and that "tuning" includes the proper tire/wheel choice and everything related to it...

 

It sounds to me like the issue here is fuel-injected machines vs. non-fuel-injected machines (not to mention SRA vs. IRS). You're comparing apples to oranges. The Honda Rubi does not have fuel injection and few quads did back in 2002. I'm sure the Honda Rincon would do just fine in those altitudes. It should also ride nicer than a Rubicon as well since it has the independent rear suspension. You can't really say that Honda has failed to address any of these issues since the release of the Rincon. It sounds to me like you just bought the wrong type of Honda for your riding needs.

FYi... Can-Ams blow by everything anyway so I'm not sure what the gripe was there.

 

<span class="FTHighlightFont"> Hon, Yam, Kaw, & Suz have voluntarily tried to hold weight to around 600 lbs as a responsible action for safety. Pol, AC, & Bomb have different priorities. </span ft>

Yes Pol, AC, & Bomb have different priorities. Their priorities are to offer the public the machines they want. As I see it, not too much difference rolling over a machine on top of you that is 600 vs 750lbs. You're going to get hurt...

Somebody mentioned the Rincon. No low range = no good for climbing <u>steep </u>mountain trails. Not to mention only 680cc. Again, altitude robs MAJOR hp! Once you experience the power loss you will want as much power as you can get.

Give you an example: my Rubicon at:
sea level = 26hp
at 11000' = 17.5hp a 33% loss! That is why people want bigger more powerful machines, especially for the mountains.

My Bomb Max weighs a little over 700lbs w/ fluids, but it has a longer wheelbase and consequently is much more stable and more predictable than my smaller wheelbase 600lb Rubicon. Which is more safe?

Somebody mentioned weight as not being the pivotal factor in ride quality. Sorry guys, virtually every review I have seen has picked the Polaris ride quality # 1, w/ the Bomb a tick behind it at # 2.

Polaris weight approx = 748lbs
Bomb weight just under = 700lbs.

Sport quad ride is completely different (I have a 400ex in my stable). No where near as comfortable as a big sport utility.

Honda is so far behind in this market, I'm afraid they will never catch up. Yah they have the solid axle-- 450 utility market (farm quads), but what fun is that? Let's hope for a vastly improved Rincon for 09'!
Sorry, no Honda blinders here...

 

Honda does have the lowest HP per CC's out there...

 

If you don't keep up with Jones's (atv industry) you will not be #1 (Honda) for long! Just ask GM.

 

<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>I'm originally from the East Coast where Hondas rule</end quote></div> Up here in New England I see many more Polaris machines out on the trails than any other. It's probably about a 3-1 ratio from what I've seen. For me; I like Hondas, but they didn't have a 2 seater (wife doesn't want to drive), didn't have the power or ride (1 bad disc in your back makes for a long day with a bad ride), and didn't have the storage that a Polaris has. The lack of a fully locking front end didn't really make sense to me. Every other major manufacturer has a true AWD or 4WD system. I don't understand Honda???