So I am getting ready to get a AC I just cant decided if I want the 400 or is the 500 worth the extra money. I want the manual, unless there are definite drawbacks.

I have read that there is more after market stuff available for the 500, but am curious if there is any real power/speed gains in the stock model over the 400.

Second are the changes in 04 worth paying a little more for then the 03

 

oh yea, i read that the 03 400 manual has problems backing up due to no low reverse. Does the 500 have the same problem and is it fixed in 04

Thanks

 

i will try to help a little. I love my manual, like the autos too but i would take my manual anyday. Only drawback i find is that when you are in mud and try to shift up you lose a lot of momentum, however throw it in low gear before entering the mud and you will have enough power in third gear to still spin the tires clean so you dont' have to worry about shifting while in the thick stuff. as for the aftermarket stuff I have no idea, my bike is completely stock for the exception of the brushguard. As time goes on more companys will start developing aftermarket products for ALL arctic cat bikes. Acceleration and top speed are very close, maybe not worth the extra money, but one thing that I think is worth the price difference is that the 500s are air and liquid cooled. That makes me feel a lot more secure while riding on a hot day. The last thing is about the 2004s, the differences are little to say the least. I believe that the only differences are: a 2" hitch, which you can easily place a ball on the 2003: a digital tach, which would be very nice to have: 1 inch more of ground clearance, which is easily made up on a 2003 with a bigger tire: and i think it can tow 10 more pounds. All in all I would say save a buck and buy a 2003. Maybe if the styling changed and it had a lot more power I would maybe buy a new one too, but I will stick to my 2003. Hope this helps a little, I am sure that someone will disagree with me but everyone like their own thing. Glad to hear that you are buying a cat!! you will love whatever year you get, I am sure of it!!!

 

i don't know about the backing up thing! sorry

 

I've been on both - on the high end of engine speed, the 400 isn't that much less powerful. On the low end, the 500 really shines, never a weak spot, never a lack of power, whereas you have to be sure to keep engine speed up on the 400. Both will go pretty much the same places, the 500 just feels a lot more relaxed - seems like the 400 has to work harder. Also keep in mind the 400 is air cooled, 500 is water cooled. If you've ever been steam cleaned after hitting a creek with an air cooled engine, you can appreciate that. If you're looking at 04 models, the 500 gets nicer instruments, though I sorta like my 02 500i's plain instruments and manual everything. 600 miles, and nothing has broken.

My 500 is a manual shift - excellent choice. Give the rocker shifter some time, I hated it when I first rode, now I love it. Sure is nice when you have big boots on.

The reverse/low range thing: on the 400's, hi/lo/reverse are on a lever on the fender. On the 500's, reverse is on the fender, hi/lo is on a little lever down by the gearshift, which allows you to select hi/reverse or lo/reverse. If you can work that itty bitty hi/lo shift lever on the 500 - it's a finger buster. For the most part, I don't recall having to shift to lo to use reverse, though it's a nice option to have.

 

Thanks that helps, I will probably end up going with the 500. I didnt know the liquid cooled bit. But I do like that idea.

 

I would definitly go with with the 500.One thing that luvthemud being new on the 500 is it has a automatic chock.I dont know if that will be a good thing or not.I have a 02 400i and it does work alot harder than the 500.If I were to do it again I would get the 500iWorking harder will lead to more engine wear and such,go with the 500 and you wont be sorry.Oh and I believe they did fix the low reverse problem in the 400.

Vince