Polaris Discussions about Polaris ATVs.

Trail Blazer vs. Warrior

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old May 20, 2001 | 06:15 PM
  #1  
OsageTrailsRider's Avatar
Thread Starter
|
Weekend Warrior
Joined: May 2001
Posts: 6
Likes: 0
Default

I'm in the market for a new quad, now this is only my second, i've been riding for 4 years now, and i am 17, I am also 6'@' tall and 200lbs, I want a quad that can handle my weight better than my Moto4, I also want something that will keep up w/my buddies both on the trail and track. Its between the Trailblazer, and Yamaha Warrior, I was also thinking about the Scrambler 400, whats the pros and cons of all these quads
Thanx
 
Reply
Old May 21, 2001 | 12:50 AM
  #2  
325TrailBoss's Avatar
Range Rover
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 126
Likes: 0
Default

I would not even consider getting the trailblazer. Go for the Warrior and last the Scrambler. I have rode all of which you have mentioned. I own a 2000 Trailboss and it was my first quad. Now I'm stuck with a quad that is slower than all of my friends and handles like a tank. I prefer to ride my wifes Kawasaki 220 Bayou over my Polaris. Don't get me wrong I have not had any trouble with it but I regret buying it.
I would go with the Warrior, it's lighter, smaller, has a higher top speed, and is better in tight situations. I like the speed of the Scrambler but that is it. Also go look at a Kawasaki Mojave you might like it.
Go ride all of them and see for yourself. I wish I would have.

2000 Polaris Trailboss
~DG alloy bumper (for a 400 scrambler)
~K&N jet kit with filter.
~RCR green spring & air box modification
~Oneal handle bars with Scott grips
~removed the rack
~removed rear mud flaps
~removed the front mud flaps
~still a tank
~and it is for sale
2001 Kawasaki 220 Bayou
~Removed the racks
~K&N power kit and Cobra exhaust on the way
~like it better than the Trailboss
 
Reply
Old May 21, 2001 | 01:00 AM
  #3  
exprider's Avatar
Range Rover
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 113
Likes: 0
Default

DONT GET THE TRAILBLAZER, THEY ARE FOR BEGINNERS.. I RODE ONE A MY 80 110 ATC THREE WHEELER HAD MORE POWER. GO BLUE AND GET THE YAMAHA WARRIOR, GREAT BIKE GOOD SUSPENSION, YOU WILL FIT BETTER ON IT, PLUS YOU CAN SPANK ALL THE 300EX BUTT YOU WANT.
 
Reply
Old May 22, 2001 | 02:06 PM
  #4  
Mudd's Avatar
Range Rover
Joined: Feb 2000
Posts: 100
Likes: 0
Default

How much do you want to spend?
 
Reply
Old May 22, 2001 | 02:34 PM
  #5  
JoshCVBz's Avatar
Pro Rider
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 1,658
Likes: 0
Default

Just a comment on 335TrailBoss's post. I may be missreading your post, but you say that the Warrior has a higher top speed. Do you mean higher top speed than any of the quads listed or just the Trail Blazer? Because if you are saying that it is faster than a Scrambler then it's not true. I have a '98 Sport 400, and my friend has a 2000 Yamaha Warrior (both stock). My sport can get him on take off as well as top end. I've got him probably by 5mph or so.

OsageTrailsRider, I think you should test ride all of the quads you are thinking about getting so you know for yourself. I have driven a Warrior, and a Scrambler (Sport), but I have never driven the trail blazer. Personally I like my Sport better because of the 2 stroke power (and it's upgrade friendly), the auto trans, and the ride. However, it is a big 4-wheeler, and the heaviness of it is it's major downfall. Although I have no trouble keeping up on the trails. Don't get me wrong, both are good machines...It all comes down to rider preference. My buddy prefers his Warrior, and I prefer my sport. I've got pictures of both at my webpage below. Good luck.

-Josh
 
Reply
Old May 22, 2001 | 05:50 PM
  #6  
JoshCVBz's Avatar
Pro Rider
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 1,658
Likes: 0
Default

Oh I forgot to give my opinion...

If you do a lot of open trail riding, where you have plenty of room to move around I would choose:

1. Polaris Scrambler 400
2. Yamaha Warrior
3. Polaris Trail Blazer

If you do a lot of tight trail riding then I would probably choose:

1. Yamaha Warrior
2. Polaris Scrambler
3. Polaris Trailblazer

The Warrior is narrower than the Scrambler, and I think it seems to turn sharper. It is pretty nice when you are up in the woods weaving between trees. However, as soon as you get out of there I'd rather have the Scrambler.

For Moto-X Tracks:

1. Yamaha Warrior
2. Polaris Scrambler
3. Polaris Trailblazer

In my opinion, none of these bikes are a GREAT moto-x choice, but the Warrior is the lightest and it would probably give you the least amount of trouble. You're still missing that low-end and midrange "snap" of the 2 stroke though.

One other thing that I can say, is if you buy a Warrior you will be replacing the factory tires instantly because they are pretty useless. I guess the Scrambler ones aren't too bad though (for factory tires).

Also, I do a combination of open trail rides, as well as tight trail rides, as well as hard pack wide open runs. My personal choice would be the Scrambler if you asked me a million times. I can tell you though that up steep hills the Warrior seems to take them a little easier, but I still doesn't think that I could call it faster.

Oh well, I guess I'll stop rambling now. You must know somebody with one of these quads...go try it out. Later.

-Josh
 
Reply
Old May 23, 2001 | 03:36 PM
  #7  
325TrailBoss's Avatar
Range Rover
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 126
Likes: 0
Default

Here Piranha, 3 guys I know have the 98 Warrior, 97 Sport, and 2000 400 Scrambler. On Blacktop the warrior gets the jump on the sport but at about 200ft its even. For some reason the sport will take the scrambler by a little with the same weight rider. In dirt it is the Sport winning by a little.
 
Reply
Old May 23, 2001 | 04:09 PM
  #8  
JoshCVBz's Avatar
Pro Rider
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 1,658
Likes: 0
Default

Hey Boss,

Yeah, my friends Warrior can stay with me for about 75 ft. or so (maybe a little more on dirt) but after that it get's worse for the Yamaha. Add a clutch spring to the Polaris and it would make a big difference I'm sure. I do have to say that for a 350 four stroke the Warrior is quite impressive (and for being basically a 12 year old design).

That's weird why the Sport is faster than the Scrambler...maybe there was some added weight somewhere else on the quad (does the concentric drive add a few pounds?).

Well catch ya later!

-Josh
 
Reply
Old May 23, 2001 | 06:02 PM
  #9  
TheQuadfather's Avatar
Pro Rider
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 1,630
Likes: 0
Default

Even though the Warrior is one of Yamahas infamous "way outdated quads that we haven't changed in 13 years", it is the better overall quad for the moderately experienced rider. It is also $2000 more.
 
Reply
Old May 23, 2001 | 07:45 PM
  #10  
ox's Avatar
ox
Pro Rider
Joined: Feb 2000
Posts: 258
Likes: 0
Default

Osage;

Buy the Warrior for sure! Yeah, like hey said up top - Go blue!

IT JUST SO HAPPENS - that I have a "blue" '97 Warrior for sale. HA! I replaced it with a Scrambler 4WD 400.

From seat of the pants, I would say they feel pretty much the same power/weight. If you like to "air 'm out a bit" get the Yammi. I like no shifting this year!

I feel the Scrambler turns just fine. Easier than Yammi when going slow / tight manuvers for sure. At 40mph it may be diff. In the driveway or whatever, the Pol turns MUCH shorter. But not something I would reguard high in decision as neither is a problem.

Seriously, My Yammi is for sale, VERY clean. E-mail if interested. I am 3 1/2 hours east of Chicago (guess what kind of pizza we have here. LOL!). I had to move up to 4WD reason for selling.

I guess it's decision time (no not bowflex!). Do ya feel like shifting, punk? Well, do ya? LOL!

Yunno, I had to come back and edit this. That is not meant in ill reguards "punk". It's a quote from Dirty Harry (aboot 17 years ago actually). Kinda forgot that 17 year old thing. Sorry! Just trying to liven things up a bit.
 
Reply



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:40 PM.