How much can the diesel really tow? i saw the website say the thing can tow 1,050ib, but i bit it can tow more than that.

 

Tow ratings are determined by the weakest link, i.e. braking. Sure it can pull more, the trick is getting that heavy load to stop.

 

yeah atv's can pull a lot more than what they are rated for, but it is extremely dangerous to do so because a huge load will just push ur machine around and you won be able to stop it. I've pulled a feeder wagon that when loaded weighed around 4000lb. its not too bad untill u gotta turn or stop lol

 

I'm curious on the mileage to a gallon/tank of fuel as well as top end. I've heard thirty miles per hour and I've heard equivalent to a 400... so I'm just trying to get my own facts straight.

 

Top end sucks, 30-35 is about right. If you are thinking about trail riding with this thing, I would rethink that plan. It's a big ***, heavy tank, and I don't think it pulls any better than the 700 gas.

 

I believe it was Diesel Power Mag that tested it. They strapped on a 1 ton Dodge to it and pulled it around with ease, then they started to use the breaks on the Dodge, The ATV didn't even bog down according to the review. When i bought my 650 i asked the dealer about it, and he said they strapped a diesel to a 700 gas, end to end. The diesel pulled the 700 gas backwards when all four tires were spinning forward. This was on pavement, and nothing broke on either machine, which i thought was a good testement to the strength of the A cat.

 

They obviously didn't use the brakes much on that Dodge, likely just enough to turn the tail lights on. Not only am I a skeptic, but I've also ridden the 700D and 700EFI by side. I was not impressed in the slightest. Sure the 700D pulled fine, good low end power (comparitively), but the 700EFIkicked it's *** in everything. To say the 700D is sluggish is an understatement, I mean REALLY an understatement.

We had the single bottom plow on both machines, both pulled it fine, but when the ground got hard we had the throttle pinned on the 700D, it just lugged down and pulled through it. Contrary, when the 700EFI lugged down, we just gave it more throttle and the thing picked up speed, easily pulling through.

To anyone that thinks the 700D is Arctic Cat's answer to the Duramax Chevy, think again. It is a naturally aspirated diesel with no advantage in displacement. I'm not kidding when I say a AC300 could beat it in a race. I'm well aware that diesel's aren't for racing, but the 700D offered me no real pulling advantage over the 700EFI either.

 

I think the aftermarket should come out with a turbo for it. I bet that would wake it up a bit.

 

The AC diesel is a great machine and was primarily designed for the military. It is a fuel saver that can pull a load. It was not designed to be fast or have much hp. The military values fuel at $400 a gallon outside the USA and thus fuel savings is the reason. Roush Industries markets the diesel AC to the military and helped develop it.

In the US we think Duramax or Cummins truck diesels. This is not the same. Those are turbo with very high boost to give high hp. The Arctic Cat diesel is more like a 1979 Massey or Ford tractor -- alot of grunt without the turbo boost for hp.

Want an ATV that will last forever in construction or farm use -- get the diesel. Want a play toy that can go fast or slow and loves mud or sand -- get the gasser. The diesel and gas Cat's have their purpose -- they just are not exactly the same.

 

Although slow I think the A Cat diesel was a great idea. Like roamerr said, it is purpose built. I think it could be a real work horse. Although I still think a turbodiesel would be sweet, but that much torque would need such strong parts that it would have to be very heavy and big. I bet a turbodiesel would have more torque then the thundercat, much more.