Been looking at new quads and I keep coming back to Arctic Cat. The problem is there are so many choices, which is nice, but it sure makes it tough to make a decision [img]i/expressions/face-icon-small-smile.gif[/img]

I like the idea of independant suspension("I&quot for ride comfort, but is it any better than the ACT for articulation? How about side hilling with the "I", is it more prone to tipping? I've heard that when sidehilling with an independnat machine, it's more prone to roll because the up hill suspension pushes out while the down hill suspension collapses down. Is there any truth to this?

Not sure about this but it seems the ACT is the best of both worlds, no squating while hauling heavy loads or sidehilling, but it acts like a live axle when rock crawling etc.. Is this correct?

I like the idea of an auto trans for the ease of operation, but I worry about durability, noise, slipping, etc.. Also not sure about the rocker shifter, what do you Arctic Cat guys think of it?

If I do decide to get an auto cat with the ACT, is the 500 worth $1000.00 more than the 375? I know the old saying, "no replacement for displacement" are probably well spoken words, but money has to factor into the decision, right?

How's the mud protection on the 2002's? Looks like the front tires extend out beyond the fenders. Would I get covered?

One last thing, what's up with the cheezy @$$ storage box and the new rear mounted seat latch on the Cats? Thanks for any info.

 

not sure i can help but it sounds like you have a good bike so you know what your doing like you said lots of good bikes bigdcred has a 500 you cant slow it down i have a 250 great ride i think i would go with ride if i dident use it for alot of work but you cant beat the power ive had 6 people on the 500 going up hills and trails bearly a grunt dont really like auto too much noise
[img]i/expressions/face-icon-small-happy.gif[/img]

 

I don't have a lot of experiance on the "i" suspension because, as far as I know, they aren't even out yet. But I rode both the "i" and the "act" models at a local gamefair and could not tell any difference in ride. I could tell a HUGE difference between both these ATV's and what the competition (Yamaha and Bombardier were there as well) offered. I had to slow to about 5mph on the "belgian road" on the others and could do at least 15 on the cats without fear of toppling.

As far as I can tell, the only real advantage in the "i" model is the additional inch and a half of clearance. Oh, and I think they come with slightly larger stock rears.

I bought the 400. The 500 was more power than I needed, and from what I've read, there is not a significant difference in performance for what I would be using the ATV for (trail riding). If I was doing heavy work, I'd have bought the 500. I would have bought the 375, except it's not available with a shiftable transmission and I LIKE to shift.

This is my first ATV, but I've ridden (is that a word?) on others and, while the rocker shifter takes a moment to get used to, it works rather well. You can convert it to a standard toe shifter for something like $15 (part available from Arctic Cat).

On my trips through the wet sticky mud, very little has made it's way past the fenders and on to me, let alone the top of the ATV. The "chocolate milk" mud (as my son calls it), however, is another story. But even then, I pick up WAY less than I expected, mostly through the gratings on the floorboards (Hmmm...maybe I should put some plastic down there?).

One thing I will mention, while I believe the Arctic Cats have an edge on torque and comfort over their competitors, they do so at the cost of speed. I've been on a 2000 Kodiak and it's unquestionably a faster machine.

For a few picts of my cat in action (more will be added later, when I teach my son to focus), go here.

 

I rode the 2002 375 a couple of weeks ago and let me tell you, it is a nice machine. Compared to the Rancher (I used a 2000 Rancher this summer on a 4 day, 300 mile trip), the 375 may be geared a little lower for more torque and less speed (although it is really difficult to be certain of this as the Rancher is not an auto). The auto tranny is nice on the 375, but it seems the engine is constantly revving high. The ACT is remarkable. Compared to the Rancher's punishing straigth axle, this semi-suspension setup will feel like you're floating on air. I couldn't get over how forgiving it was. The seat is more comfortable too. As for power, just like the Rancher, the 375 has more than enough power to master anything you throw at it. I wouldn't worry about it being a smaller bore than the 500 because it is slightly lighter and the bore is actually larger than Arctic Cat's 400 (376cc compared too 371cc). The only bad thing about the 375 that I can think of is that it only comes in auto [img]i/expressions/face-icon-small-sad.gif[/img] Other than that it is a good machine and definately worth a look.

To sum up, I think the ACT is just as good as the i (although I haven't driven a fully independant machine), and it is likely more stable and more durable. I'm getting a 500 ACT, but if the 375 came in manual transmission, it would be a tough decision. Me, I like to shift.

 

Icecat's review of the 375 is very acturate. The 375 has more than enough power but it down shifts alittle too much/fast with stock tires. It feels like you are over reving it when you get on it hard. maybe with larger tires this will get better. It is a damn good bike tho. Better riding than the older models, better looking, better rack, hard as hell to over heat (30-40 minutes idleing before the fan kicked on for a few seconds then went off and didn't come on for another 5 minutes-- and we shut it down after that), and easy steering.

About the seat latch, I don't know what the hell the engineers were smokeing, but it is HORRIBLE. COMPLETELY HORRIBLE. The seat latch on the TBX is much better.

About the storage box, the fact that it COMPLETELY SUCKS is nothing new. It has alwas sucked and will continue to untill it is replaced with something better.

The Foot brake is another thing that REALLY needs some inproving. Arctic Cat engineers completely doubfounded me when they went back to the old cable operated foot brake. Damn does that thing suck.They really need to do something about there "emergency back up brake." It is useless in it's current state if you ask me.

 

I would get the 500i manual shift if it were me.No belt to worry about in water. For rough trails IRS and 10 inchs of shock travel plus 12 inchs ground clearance. This thing is sounding so good I might sell my H.O. and buy one.[img]i/expressions/face-icon-small-happy.gif[/img]

 

The i model is going to give you straight through ground clearance with no rear differential to snag on rocks and what not. As far as articulation, there is a picture in the review on this site that has the rear end on a rock. Articulation seems to be massive on the i model. Looks like a winner.

 

UtahRancherRider,
My dad owns the Polaris Sportsmans and I have ridden them a lot. The fully independent suspension is really nice. Side hilling isn't a problem with the proper body english. The only down side is the fact that as you put weight on them they loose ground clearance. I have hauled out spike bull elk on the rear rack and the independent suspension handled it fine. Although the ground clearence dropped to about 8". I haven't had any elk on my 400 yet. I hope this will happen in a couple of weeks. [img]i/expressions/face-icon-small-happy.gif[/img] [img]i/expressions/face-icon-small-happy.gif[/img]
The ACT does articulate better than the independent (Polaris). The Polaris has an anti-roll bar so it will lift the wheel off the ground before the ACT does. The ride on both are very nice and smooth. I have not been able to really tell the difference in ride comfort.
The heel toe shifter takes about a days riding to get used to. but once you do it's really no big deal. I actually like it because I generally ride with boots and I would hate to try and fit them between the shifter and floorboard. It is ackward at first and takes a concious effort to remember which way to shift.
Manual vs Auto is really a personal preference. the best thing to do is get both out on the trail and ride. There isn't anywhere that either could or couldn't go. the hold back on the auto is excellent. My 400 is great, usually I can just stick it in third or fourth gear and leave it there for trail riding. As long as I am not starting from a dead stop going up hill then it takes off just fine in third gear. I have done as much as 200 miles in one day (14 hours) and I didn't get tired of shifting. But I try and leave it in one gear. If you do what the dealers suggest I doubt you will ever burn a belt. You just want to keep the clutch engaged fully. Plus the auto's are highly tuneable.
I faced the same question with the money. I feel that I made the correct choice for me. I haven't wished for more power yet. the 400 has got me everywhere I have wanted to be. The fuel economy is great. I get around 75 miles before I hit reserve. I have been over 100 miles and still haven't ran out of gas. (I'm sure I was really close) [img]i/expressions/face-icon-small-smile.gif[/img] For me I was able to get some rack bags to help dress up the quad for a lot less then the 500.
Like someone else said that most of the mud actuall comes up through the floorboards. Some rubber or plastic will stop that. I am not sure on the 2002. I have only been riding with one and he didn't seem to get muddy anymore than the rest of us.
Good luck with your choice. If you would like, I would be glad to meet you somewhere and let you ride my 400. It's only the 2001 but it will give a feel for the ACT and the power of the 400.

 

I'll second the testimony to the power of the 400. Yesturday I took a trail through the woods on mine only to discover after 100' or so that it wasn't a trail after all. Since my neice was behind me on my son's Sportsman 90, I didn't really have the option of backing up. So I MADE a trail by running down a few trees and got out the other side just fine. The only problem we had was when the 90 got hung up and, in running over a log, rear ended the Cat messing up the 90's front plastic pretty bad (my fault, I should have parked farther ahead).

I should note here that I do NOT approve of leaving the trail and trampling the woods. The area I was riding in is scheduled to be developed in a year, so all these woods will be gone soon anyway. The Arctic Cat went through this area like a bulldozer, however, never skipping a beat. And I never had a problem with clearance on it (the ACT model has 10.25", though I am sure it's less measured under the "pumpkin&quot.

 

Andy: What review?? I could not find one.. unless you are talking about their general review of the 2002s. I find ATVconnection doesn't do much of anything anymore. they do some stuff but before (a year and a half ago) they used to have real reviews and shoot outs and such all the time. now everything is old and stale!

Does anyone know why this is?