Hello I am going to be a 1st Time buyer of a utility atv.....But do not know which one I should get...So far I have done some homework online and have been looking at the following atv's

1st Pick = Honda 2006 Rubicon -$7000.00
2nd Pick = Bombardier Outlander 800 EFI Max XT -
3rd Pick = Honda 2006 Rancher AT
4th Pick = Bombardier Outlander 400 Max XT

Does the Outlander only an Automatic??? or is it like the Rubicon and Rancher AT were it can be both auto or manual?

Does the Rubicon have the same 4wd kinda system as the Outlander?? were it locks in when it needs to as it starts to slip??

Basically I need to know what each bike will do that the other will not or what features that are the same from bike to bike.

Thanks so so much

 

Good luck with this one, so many choices and many more opinions. Here's mine:

Question 1, the Outlander's transmission is not really comparable to the Hondamatic, preferably the Rubicon (Rancher is a nice light duty trail bike). It is a simple belt CVT, and most everyone that honestly evaluates the two knows the performance trade-off and reliability of a belt do not compare favorably to the belt (not that it will leave you stranded regularly or not work sufficienly). That being said, I will probably own a belt drive too someday if the Hondamatic does not show up on something like the Rincon.

Question 2, the Honda's torque sensing front diff is sufficient for most, but the Outlander's visco-lock is IMO the best all around front differential out there right now. It's there when you need it, without having to turn it on, and not there when you don't need it. Better than a locker, but that doesn't mean the Honda's stinks (kind of the opposite when comparing the transmissions of the two).

If the 2006 Rubi does not have adjustable shocks, I would go for a 2005 as you can buy them in this area for 5999. The only difference I am aware of is the 36mm carb on the 06.

The Outlander has a ton of excellent ideas; spar frame, inboard discs, tank under the seat for a lower CG, TTI Rear, etc. The 400 flies for a 400. Great machine for starters as well as those that don't need to go 70. The 800s [retail] price is just ridiculous....and spending that on a first year machine is risky.

A dealer one mile from house deals Bombardiers. I paid close attention to the shop for months before I bought. They had some issues the first couple years, they seem to have corrected most of them, but he still gets a bit of warranty work (not as much as the American mfg he sold before the Bombardiers). But build quality stilll went to Honda when I was comparing and having experience owning products from both.

Very difficult decision. The warranty is nice on the Outty, but even though it doesn't cost you to get it fixed, it sucks losing the use and having to bring it to the dealer - if it breaks. But Bombardier is still a young company and I just wasn't comfortable with them yet.

 

Personally, I prefer the Rancher package because its smaller size, lighter weight, and nimble handling fits the very tight woods trails I ride on. It looks like you are going for automatic only machines here, correct??? I also prefer a manual transmission (simpler, less expensive, and more reliable than an auto), so that is why I chose the Rancher 350 over the AT. The AT has a reputation for lacking low end power.

If you are considering the Rubicon, you might also want to look at the Foreman 500. Similar machine, but with a manual transmission (you can get electric ESP shifting if you don't want to foot shift). Unlike some other manufacturers, at least Honda keeps the weight low in the frame.

A buddy of mine has the Outlander 400, and I have put in a little saddle time on it. The ride is cush, but compared to my Rancher, it is heavy (TOP HEAVY!), tippy in tight turns, and handles just plain clumsy out on the trail. No thanks, the thing is a death trap in my opinion!

By the way, the Outlander 800 was a DNF (did not finish) at the Vegas to Reno desert endurance race a couple of weeks ago.

 

i have a rancher at and i love it. not just sayin that because i have 1. it will get up n go to be a 400. i hot 54 on the highway the other day with another person on the back, both of us 170 AND in 4wd. it also does great in mud and water. it is for the price and its abbilities, the best out of the 4

 

BigBowler, what are your intended uses and the terrain and types of riding you enjoy?

 

Hey Reconranger, you have to get over your fear of the Hondamatic. I have. If you check this and many other forums, the Hondamatic appears to be more reliable than the ES. While the semi-auto foot shift is simpler and may be more reliable, it is a clunker, every time it shifts. Living in the snow belt, I can tell you that winter boots do not fit under the shifter. One of the deciding factors for me as I ride more in the winter than summer.

I also think the Rancher AT is not a utility quad, as you are looking for. Its a nice light duty trail ATV that can do some utility. You will be more limited in your utility ability with the Rancher.

 

propnut-Of all the automatics, the Hondamatic would certainly be my first choice! But, I can't see spending the extra money for an automatic transmission that I just don't need or even want.

We are sport bike riders at heart, and actually not very fond of utilities! We don't ride utilities the way most folks ride them. To us our utilities are simply "go anywhere sport bikes" that extend our riding range into more extreme terrain. A NECESSARY EVIL if you will, for riding in the mountains when the rocks get to big or the streams get to deep. So, the goal is to want to keep things as small, light, and simple as possible! I even favor the 2wd's because they are lighter than the 4wd's, but sometimes you just can't get by without 4wd, so we will be getting another 4wd Rancher soon. I haven't had time for the project yet, but my next goal is to strip the racks off my utes to make them each 50 pounds lighter.

 

yeah, I hear you.

I was very interested in the Foreman 500 and I could probably live with the boot thing, but for me to get a real OK from the wife it had to be an auto (so she could ride it for 10 minutes every now and then, ugh).

If you like Yamaha's the new Wolverine was a big disappointement

 

2005 Rancher 350 4x4 manual shift here and loving everything about it. No complaints. IMHO, Honda has the build quality covered.

 

BigBowler1,

There are many folks that have responded here whose opinions I really look forward to hearing from.....one of those is PropNut (yes, recon & RG, you guys too!). So really not to start some big thing where everyone starts recommending a quad outside of the 4 you mentioned but 2 were up in the 700-800cc range and I was wondering why the '06 KQ doesn't make the cut for your consideration? It is not a knock at all, I was just wondering.....while I am in your same shoes (except a 500cc would be my absolute minimum) the KQ is def on my list for top consideration with a Honda or two as well. (sorry, the Bomb 800 is too much $ for me).

Just curious....because out of what you named in the larger classes, the KQ is the only one left that is the most updated quad (out of the big atv manufacturers) that has been given almost every modern upgrade but you didn't mention it....how come?