I KNOW I POSTED THIS EARLIER IN THE YEAR BUT I WAS WONDERING IF ANYONE RODE OR NOW OWNS A NEW ARCITC CAT 366 AND IF SO WHAT DO YOU THINK OF IT?

 

in my opinion its a waste of an atv the thing is ugly and it is soo close in motor size to the 400 why even bother. in my opinion if your looking into a 366 just buy the 400

 

It is my understanding from a local dealer that Kymco is making all of the Arctic Cat engines for the 90 to 366 class bikes, and that Arctic Cat (in addition to Suzuki) make the 400 and above engines. Thus, the logic was they could offer a 366(Kymco) bike for more than a grand cheaper than the 400(Suzuki) and still be close in power.

 

<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>Originally posted by: rango726

in my opinion its a waste of an atv the thing is ugly and it is soo close in motor size to the 400 why even bother. in my opinion if your looking into a 366 just buy the 400</end quote></div>

1. The engine in the '400' is actually only a 376.
2. It's a whopping 100lb heavier.
3. And it sits higher

...bigger is not necessarily better

 

PDMGUY, I wish I could find one, it appears to be just the size my wife wants, but none of the dealers seem to have a clue what I am talking about and I even called Arctic Cat and all they could tell me was to call my dealer.

 

Gater that is why im wondering if anyone has riden this machine or anything yet. I want a quad that isnt huge and has a decent amount of power. I rode my cousins 2004 rancher and that was fine for size. I like the looks of that 366 model. My wife could also ride it on the trails without feeling like it is too big. The price isnt to bad for it either. I know our local atv dealer in WI advertises it on there website for $4699.99. I havent contacted them because im waiting until spring to purchase it.

 

<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>Originally posted by: Grumble69

<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>Originally posted by: rango726



in my opinion its a waste of an atv the thing is ugly and it is soo close in motor size to the 400 why even bother. in my opinion if your looking into a 366 just buy the 400</end quote></div>



1. The engine in the '400' is actually only a 376.

2. It's a whopping 100lb heavier.

3. And it sits higher



...bigger is not necessarily better</end quote></div>
right the engine in the 400 is a 376 making it very close to the 366. why nother. a hundred pounds is nothing imo. my point is why buy a cheap kymco when you can have the 400 for a little more and get 4x4 and diff lock and full gauges etc. ill bet money the 366 doesnt get produced for very long.its a waste of a model and im on 2 different sites and theres not one person who ownes one. or atleast admits to it.

 

From what I'm reading it sounds like it will be the other way around with the 400 getting phased out. Personally I think it looks fine and is a reasonably priced utility 4x4. Good for light duty work and plenty fine for riding around. It all depends what you're going to use it for.

I'm very likely going to get it. I've compared it to other brands of similar size and think it's the best option for what I'll be using it for. It pulls a nice weight. The rear rack can hold a fair amount. And it's got a high ground clearance. I just don't need a bigger ATV.

 

to each his own im not saying its useless im just saying if it were me id just spend the extra $$ for the 400 why not have 3 times as much capability as what you need for very little more. im not trying to sway you by any means i personally couldnt care less what anyone buys i was just trying to point out some very big differences for just a little more$$. and i will have to completely disagree with you on the 400 being phased out. that atv brings in just as much revenue each year for cat as its higher models. the 366 is in its first year and will never out sell the 400. that would be like cat calling it quits all together on trying to take the market on atvs.

 

When you say it has more capability, what are you are referring to? Not trying to be a smart ***, I'm just not getting what you're saying.