I am going to buy a 4x4 wheeler in the next week and I'm not sure what to get. A friend of mine is a Honda believer and says none is better for what we do. I must admit his Rancher has taken us thru some woods and mud holes in Maine that I'm not sure I could walk thru. He says get a Rancher or a Foreman, but I found a good deal on an Arctic Cat 400i automatic. I like that it has independent suspension and alot more ground clearance then the Honda's. Which would be a better machine for plowing snow and dragging out deer from choppings? Anyone?

 

The Rancher is a fine machine and I have no doubt that anyone would be totally satisfied with the Honda. However, my trusty "old" 375 exposed the limits of a Rancher on a recent trip to southern Indiana. Remember, my 375 has the ACT suspension, which is excellent, but is disadvantaged to the IRS on the 400 you are looking at. The 375 made it through rocky and off-camber situations much better than the Rancher because it kept its wheels on the ground. Power wasn't an issue for either machine. The Cat also has greater ground clearance and a much better ride over rough stuff. The only advantage the Rancher had was in handling on open trails or dirt roads. But I didn't buy this thing for dirt roads. My mountain bike will do that! The Cat has better rack capacity, range, and room for my 6'5" frame. It's been reliable and as rugged as a P-47 Thunderbolt, as well, which are also hallmarks of the Honda.

The weight of the Cat makes it ideal for plowing snow and dragging deer. Nothing goes over fallen logs like a Cat. They just slide right over on that composite skid plate.

Just my opinions. Again, I have no doubt that anyone would be perfectly happy with the Honda. They have earned their reputation, but it is a much more conservative chassis setup. It would do the job, but I believe the Cat would do it better. The Cat also comes with much better tires now than what I have on my 375, too.

 

Thanks Dan, now I have one more problem. I found 2 Arctic Cats I like. Both are the same price (their used) One is a 2002 AC500 it has 350 miles on it, an electric plow, manual trans. and it's not independent rear suspension. The other is the 2003 AC 400i it has about the same mileage, a plow, plus a windshield (might take that off) automatic trans., and of course the IRS. Both are in great shape. I like the independent suspension that the 400 has but i've heard alot of people prefer the manual trans like the 500 has. Then there is the bigger is better thing. I just want a family 4x4 that my kid and wife can ride but I can also use to hunt and push snow and generally beat the hell out of!!! lol

 

They would both be great machines. What the 500 lacks in ground clearance it will make up for in power. Also, that ACT rear suspension is excellent. It keeps wheels on the ground as well as the IRS. The ACT on my 375 actually rides slightly softer than my 650. They both ride like Cadillacs. The track isn't quite as wide so it won't *feel* quite as stable as the IRS, but in reality, it is very stable. I run both suspensions side by side on the trail, so if the engines were the same, I'd go for the IRS. However, that 500 is pretty nice. The motor in the 500 is the previous generation, so it is bigger on torque and less on high end power than the newer 500, but if you are like me, speed is not the big deal. I rarely get over 30 mph, and even more rarely get over 45mph, even on my 650. I'm usually in the tough stuff running at a crawl.

Maybe the tranny should be your tie breaker. I prefer an auto, but I run with alot of guys that won't have anything but a manual. On a Cat, both are rock solid. I've never had a tranny issue of any kind on either of my automatics. The AC auto has superb engine braking, too.

Don't you love tough choices?

 

I would go with the 400, that will have plent of power for you. if you havent ridden one yet it may suprise you in how much power it has.

 

A 400 has enough power if your a GIRL
A full size man will appreciate the 500 and the 650 is for people who drive corvettes because they are fun - not practicle.
my 2 cents

 

I have the 650 and the same engine as the 400. The 400 has enough power. The 650 is in a league of its own, but I've never had a situation with my 375 where power was insufficient. The 500 would definetly have more low end grunt, but I'm not sure that the old 500 (Pre- 2003) would have anything on the 400 in the upper part of the power band.

 

I would agree that the newer 400i is a better setup. The 2002 year had poor brakes and balljoint recalls and the newer bike has a better suspension, braking system, ground clearance. My dealer sells more 400i ATVs than any other model. He is a implement(John Deere) dealer and farmers use them and abuse them and my dealer tells me they hold up very well. They have a couple with over 4000 miles on them, still running fine! I hope my TRV holds up that well....

 

g0 with the 500 if you get the400 later you,ll say I wish I had a machine with more power the 500 is fantastic don,t bother with the 400 I,ve gone from a 500 to a 650 and don,t regret it one bit[img]i/expressions/face-icon-small-cool.gif[/img]

 

hey i like the canor rack idea, i have a canoe and never thought of that. i'd like to make one for whatever i decide on.