I am considering trading my Grizzly for the new 2000 Cat 500 Auto. I have a 98 Grizzly with 1100 miles on it and I have had some issues with it, however I use it as a tractor more than anything. I pull up firewood, pull loaded trailers, pull my brush cutter, do landscaping, etc, etc.

My main issue is that under the heavy loads I subject it to it gets HOT, real HOT. I used to get oil temp lights until the dealer installed a new cooling fan and switched it over to YamaLube 4R synthetic blend and no oil temp light since, however it still gets hot, and begins to sputter until I let it cool off.

The likes of the Cat are;
Suspension - Semi-indepedent, smooth ride
Brakes - Disks all around, no drums
Auto Clutch - Proven on snowmobiles for years
Engine - Suzuki proven torque monster
Cooling - Liquid = Not HOT, but heavier

The dislikes of the Cat are;
Tires - downsized from 26" to 25" for 2000
2WD/4WD - lever is cable operated, you must stop, can't engage on the fly
Engine - 100cc smaller, claims higher torque

I don't know, I may hold out for a possibly liquid cooled Grizzly for 2001 model year. I have to make a decision soon though as I need to purchase a winch and snow blade for something before winter. My new house has 650' of driveway. I would hate to buy a whole for the Grizzly and then trade over to the Cat in six months. I will refuse to pay full retail for the Cat this fall if they are going to be on a limited release. I will wait.

The Suzuki 500 equiliviant maybe a nice alternative as well, but no semi-independent suspension, and no disk brakes, other than that I have to say the pretty close to being twins. I have to see who will have the earliest availability and best pricing.

I eagerly await your thoughts, and opinions.

Allen L. Grooms

P.S. A maintence free Polaris Magnum 500 would be exactly the ticket if there was such a thing.

 

I really can't tell you much about the automatic other than the shared features with the regular 500. If it is anywhere the same, it would be perfect for the chores that you listed. It is really tuned for that low end pulling power. I don't know much about the automatic though. I personally would recomend a manual shift transmission for someone that would be doing a lot of towing. It would hold up better I believe, but as far as automatics go, I doubt the AC would be lesser than any others. From what I can see from the ride review on the suzuki automatic(Same tranny), it looks like they have about the best auto tranny available. The frame and racks of the bike seem to be Honda quality. At least mine give me that impression. Built tough and built to last. The engine has plenty of power, low range can move the White House to San Fransisco. As far as the ride, I don't think it is that much different from the Grizzly. The springs seem heavier to carry more weight. The semi-independant rear end is better than the swingaxle on the Griz though. It will keep all four tires on the ground much better than the Griz, 450es & S, or any other regular straight axle bike for that matter. Extremely stable in uneven terrain. As for the 4wd/2wd selector, I havn't seen it yet. It sounds pretty crappy to me. They should have gotten a bit more techical if you ask me. Still, its an option that I don't have but would like to. The tires are now 25", but that is still the same as stockers on any other big bike made. They are Titan 489's however, and are very good stock tires. Probably my pick over any other stock tire. They will steer much easier than the 495's on my 500. Unless I was mud riding or just liked the look of the 495's better, i would go with the 498's. As for hot running, the AC will still get pretty hot, but I doubt it will be near as hot as the air cooled 600 gets. It will get hot a lot easier during the first 150 miles. Slow low gear high RPM riding will make anything hot. The brakes are first class, and the automatic has that hydraulic footbrake that Robert and I will both try to get rigged up on our 99 500's. As for speed, its faster than most, though not near as quick as a Griz. The Cat is heavier than most at 647lbs, but the weight is distributed evenly and it stays on all four extremely well in steep situations. For some reason, the automatic holds a half gallon more gas. I guess cause the big engines drink it quicker, but the 2wd feature might help gas mileage some.
In contrast with the Suzuki Automatic, I think the brakes and suspension are enough to give AC the advantage. Still, the entire setup of the AC seems better built than the suzuki. Not like the suzuki is built poorly, but I think the Arctic Cat is a little more solid. When I got mine, I pictured it as a Honda with a faster, more powerful engine; hydraulic disc brakes, and lot better suspension. So far, I've been right. Good luck with your decision.

------------------
Andy Bassham *(1999 Arctic Cat 500 4x4, 1989 Honda 300)*

 

I don't think Yamaha will make the Grizzly liquid cool untill they totaly redesign it. I have never riden a Grizzly, so I can't compare it to my 500, but I must tell you the Arctic Cat gets pretty hot. I have never in 425 miles had the water or oil light come on.

If you do work this is the quad for you. It has the highest rack capacities, the best brakes, the best factory tires (except when compared to the 99 model), and the best motor of any quad. I think the reliability is better than Honda. Why? Look at when the Foreman 400's and the 400ex's came out. A lotof owners were having problems with them. Now, ask any Arctic Cat owner if they have had any trouble besides rolling down hills or trouble with the steering being to hard.

I see you hate maintence. I wish my 500 had something for me to do while I set ther for 10 minites warming it up (I do it because I heard it lowers the wear or parts). I wish I could pull out a grease gun a grease a few things like the front A-arms, U-joints, and tie-rods.

I think that Andy was right when he talked about the low-range. I only use it for pulling a dead 3/4 ton ( it weighs about 8000 lbs with everthing we have on it) truck around my yard.

I do THINK that Andy was wrong about a couple things. Like the ride being close to the Grizzlies and the weight distribution (Front to rear) thing. First of all, I THINK the the Arctic Cat will ride 2 or 3 times better than the Grizzly. Second of all, I THINK the Arctic Cat has about 60 percent (or more) of it's weight over the front wheels. I found the rear considerably lighter when I picked it up.

P.S The 2000 Suzuki 500 4x4 has 5.9 inches
of travel on it Semi-Independent Rear
Suspension.

------------------
Arctic Cat 500, Not your average Kitty, The New King Of the Jungle

 

Cool dude. Sorry if I offended you.

I thought you meant the Quad by-it-self. The only ditch that I have not been able to climb was one shaped like (. A 450es tried to climb it also but he couldn't either.

------------------
Arctic Cat 500, Not your average Kitty, The New King Of the Jungle

 

Robert, I'm looking at the engine being the bulk of the weight. It sits pretty much in the center of the quad. There is more stuff up front than in the rear, but with a rider, it equals the total quad weight more evenly front to rear. This shouldn't be compared to a grizzly which is very evenly distributed as well. Mainly, the king quad, AC300, and Sportsmans are the ones that look heavy in the rear due to the rearward mounting of the engine. The AC is very balanced. If it were so heavy up front, it would have a greater tendancy to endo going down steep hills. What I'm saying is the weight is balanced so it does both up and down great.

Now about the suspension. I have ridden a grizzly and I rode it and a sportsman back to back. You could tell the difference easily. Now the difference wasn't that much with the arctic cat. The AC is better, due to a little more wheel travel overal, but the difference isn't like night and day. The AC has fairly stiff springs for a heavier payload, and the suspension will not squat bad under a heavy load. This also helps its stability vs. a polaris which seems to have a bit more flex in the springs. A polaris with less wheel travel will have a cushier ride than an Arctic Cat with 7.2" front and rear. That is the polaris meal ticket. Awesome ride on all of their machines. The grizzly isn't sprung real soft either, but what I am saying is the long wheel travel on the AC doesn't equal soft plushy ride all by itself. It does have a good ride though. You won't bottom it out unless you really try. As for the ride, I am talking about the shocks, not the semi-independant rear end. Go fast over rocks and the regular straight axle bike will bounce around a little bit more than a semi-idependant will.

All in all what my point was, the AC has a better ride than the Grizzly, but not enough diiference for that to be the reason for my decision.

------------------
Andy Bassham *(1999 Arctic Cat 500 4x4, 1989 Honda 300)*

 

I'm not offended at all. What I was just telling the guy was that the difference in ride comfort between the two bikes isn't enough alone to be a deciding factor between the Griz and Cat. You can obviously see which one I preffered. I was trying to give him an unbiased opinion. Didn't want to give him the picture that I was saying "get an Arctic Cat because I have one". I would pick the AC for stability as well, and for hill climbing. I know that the limited slip kinda gives it a slight disadvantage to those that can turn both fronts equally, but as far as limited slip 4x4's go, I would prefer what I have. The semi-independant rear for the purpose of stability rather than just ride comfort would be enough to sway me from a griz or 450. I didn't realize how effective it was until I rode it in rugged terrain. After riding the 300 honda in the same situations(which has the same rear setup obviously as a 450), it was easy to make up my mind that the AC was the superior setup. I like riding behind it on another bike in creekbeds and watching that axle tilt as it goes over big rocks.

------------------
Andy Bassham *(1999 Arctic Cat 500 4x4, 1989 Honda 300)*

 

I went to an expo Sunday. There where more Arctic Cats than any thing else. I did get a chance to sit on a Grizzly and the new QuadMaster. The Grizzly is a good bit wider at the trans. This made it less comfortable. There where no Arctic Cat auto's so I could not compare it to a Grizzly. I didn't like the Grizzly's hard seat (compared to the Cat)
I did like how the shifter worked on the Grizzly, very smooth. I didn't know how to shift it so I didn't try (do press the foot brake or is it one of the hand brakes.

------------------
Arctic Cat 500, Not your average Kitty, The New King Of the Jungle

 

Rob,

So what did you think of the AC's twin, the Suzuki Quad-Master it should be pretty similiar to the AC Auto in most respects.

You are correct in that the Grizzly is pretty thick around the transmission. On the floorboards there is not much room for wide feet as the transmission takes up the first few inches on each side.

Another little thing about the Grizzly that makes me crazy is the fact that they attach the extended fender flares with whimpy little plastic 1/2 turn screws that break off. It's not a big deal, just replace them with real metal bolts and nuts, but really, plastic fender screws on whats supposed to be The TANK of the ATV world.

Thanks for the info thus far. I can assume that it is safe to say that the AC's get pretty hot also based on the posting just below this one about burnt legs, so maybe the Grizzy isn't such a bad deal after all.

Thanks Allen L. Grooms
98 Grizzly

 

I don't realy like Suzuki quads, but I do like Suzuki motors (wonder why). Although,if I had to pick between the Grizz and the QuadMaster I would pick the Suzuki. I absolutely loved the 4wd/2wd lever on the Suzuki. It works great, very very smooth. I also like the transmission alot better. It is narrower, from what I hear it is quieter, and has a better construction. Another big factor is the fact that the Grizzly has less tourque than the Suzuki.

About the cheap screws. Which would you rather replace a $0.50 screw or a $50 (I don't know what it cost) fender flare.

About the A.C heat thing. The reason there is so much heat at the Left/Rear fender is because one of the Arctic Cat engineers forgot to put some reflective tape on the plastic where the exhast runs. I will admit that my 500 runs hot for a Luquid cooled bike but I don't think it runs as hot as the Grizz, but I have yet to ride one so I cood be wrong.

------------------
Arctic Cat 500, Not your average Kitty, The New King Of the Jungle

 

I haven't seen one yet, but it looks like the transmission case on the AC automatic sticks out on the right side rather than the left like all other automatics. Am I right? Just noticed it in the brochure.

------------------
Andy Bassham *(1999 Arctic Cat 500 4x4, 1989 Honda 300)*