the polaris people have some nice quads i said some the only one you hear about going bad is the sportsman if you spend that much money on somthing you should take care of it so it dont mess up i know there will be probablems anyway i am a proud owner of a polaris and i will do any thing you will do except really deep mud (dont like mud) i will out climb you and out run you if i was you i would bye the mamnum find i good dealer

------------------
99 500 scrambler with hotseat pipe and clutch dg bumper soon to have pistons and air box mod 93 yamaha t-wolve with a broken taillight soon to be fixed tailight is now fixed now need to fix headlight



[This message has been edited by atvbbs (edited 08-28-1999).]

 

owning a 98 SP500 myself and having a buddy with a 99 grizzly, and in the past, owning many atvs & having much flight time logged on said atvs,i can tell you that the sportsman is the baddest atv ever made. it will out do all others "hands down". i am not making trouble,only stating facts.if you don't think so,then you've never owned one. i agree with BIG AL & Talon400 about rice quad owners going to Japan to ride.however, as hinted to before, polaris four-stroke engines are made by Fuji Heavy Industries.Does'nt sound very U.S.A does it? but everyone knows how reliable "rice-burners" are.right? anyway my sportsman has 700 mi. on it and the brakes are like new. and it will absolutely trounce a grizzly.just ask my buddy,he will be trading up soon. SPORTSMAN

 

My local Honda dealer won't even take polaris's in on trade. We were looking at skidoos mxz600 and the guy asks if we have anything to trade. we say no. But i do have a indy500 sled. he says we don't take polaris selds in on trade. i said to him well what about quads? no we don't take any polaris product in on trade. he said they are not worth the hassle of selling them to people and having them breakdown and then the people who bought them will be upset. bottom line he said polaris doesn't make a quality product. say what u want about your sportman 500 trounces my grizzly. you the one who has to buy 1 extra sportsman500 jsut so u can have parts to keep one running. my freind has a 94 sportsman 400 and the thing is the biggest pile of crap. Anyways what did u mean by your sportsman trounces a grizzly? what with oil or something when yours blows up. I have owned polaris before and have had no luck with them at all. it seems u have to replace every part on them. so i guess your at the polaris dealer right now getting parts.

 

YOUR DEALER SUCKS!!

 

As far as a honda dealer not taking polaris products in on trade......B.S. As far trounce, what i mean is ALL WHEEL DRIVE,ON DEMAND FWD,FULLY INDEPENDENT SUSPENSION,5.25gal. GAS TANK,LIQUID COOLED,DRY SUMP LUBERICATED, TWO 27w AND ONE 60w HEADLIGHTS. And the fact that it takes every bit of that 100cc "advantage" you have just to keep up with a SPORTSMAN that is almost 100lbs. heavier.IF you don't believe that.Just find you a long stretch of road and a sportsman and see for yourself. Besides all that, everyone knows that it's "THE KING OF 4X4's".

 

The sportsman will outperform anything else in my honest opinion. Its fast, stable, comfortable, handles well, turns sharp, has good torque, and a good 4wd system.

The sportsman will out perform anything else on the market..... WHEN IT IS NOT BROKEN DOWN.

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

 

Gordon wrote:
Oh Dave! Really now! I am very disappointed in you for such a cheap shot when you know the truth about that story!

I had too....But Gordon, maybe, just maybe that clamp and hose is a design defect from Kawasaki...



[This message has been edited by Dave Iskierka (edited 08-23-1999).]

 

Dave Iskierka,

Re your post to Gordon Banks about the case being “closed” because he witnessed a Kawasaki being towed after being rendered hors de combat during the Quads-On-The-Rocks outing:

In terms of reliability, I think you’re attempting to equate apples and oranges in this instance. Having followed Gordon’s posts on the reliability issue for nearly three years now, it is plainly obvious that when Gordon talks about reliability and quality, he is talking about initial quality and initial reliability. When he refers to machines breaking down and stranding the rider, he is referring to brand new, or nearly brand new, machines expiring because of major defects in manufacturing technique and manufacturing quality control. (I believe this assumption is confirmed by Gordon’s follow-up post wherein he cites the incidence of repair and return-to-dealer statistics from the ATV Magazine survey).

The kind of mechanical failure that side-lined Tree Farmer’s 10-year old ’89 Kawasaki Bayou 300 during QOTR was nothing more than simple wear and tear along with some lax operator level maintenance. A loose hose clamp on a 10-year old machine, a not uncommon occurrence on even a 1-year old machine, that allows the carburetor to be jarred loose from its mount is hardly the same as the kind of major manufacturing defect Gordon speaks of which stops a new quad in its tracks.

As Tree Farmer notes in his follow-up post, it’s quite possible he could have affected a field repair on the carburetor hose clamp, and avoided the ignominy of being towed back to camp, if he had been given sufficient time. But the day was hot. Both temperature and humidity were in the mid 90s, the persistent drought in the East caused the air to be filled with a fine choking dust most of the time. The cloud of gnats and mosquitoes that enveloped you, if you stood still for even a few seconds, was unbearable. We had already ridden nearly 30 miles that day and we knew that camp was only about a mile distant, so a tow was a (nearly) painless way to end the day.

I know this from first-hand observation. Hell, I was there! (My apologies to Elmer Keith.) I was the “tow truck” driver. While I didn’t force Tree Farmer to accept a tow at gunpoint, I did make it plain there was no way I could abandon a friend and riding companion to his fate just because I was personally uncomfortable, (even though he more than once suggested we go on without him). Still my patience had its limits, and I implored him frequently (like about every two minutes) to allow me to tow him out of there. He finally agreed, and the tow back to camp took about 15 minutes.

Comparing major manufacturing defects in new machines to the effects of wear and tear on old machines, is like comparing apples and oranges. It simply is not a valid comparison. To suggest otherwise, is semantic sleight-of-hand, and is especially disingenuous when, as Gordon points out in his follow-up post, you knew the truth about the breakdown as of 7-19 when the QOTR after-action report email was sent out.

Army Man

 

Lighten up, it was all in jest I think even Gordon realized that.

 

My PERSONAL OPINION is that the majority can not be wrong. Before buying my last quad, I visited many dealers and one repair shop that does not promote any one brand. Thay said that "If I purchased a Polaris that I would be seeing a lot more of them than most other bikes" - keep in mind that I did not say that and I personally have not had the pleasure to ride a Polaris. Between that visit and this forum I had ruled out Polaris. I do give them a lot of credit for applying new ideas and maybe in a few more years they will improve their product, but until then I have to go with a "Old Technology" Honda (450ES that is, I guess that does have a bunch of new technology)