Dbl post.

 

I had to edit my last post because I remembered that I only had to change the front brakes. The Original rear brake is still good and looked clean when I inspected it. The rear dust seal and drum seal (that's 2 barriers to debris) have certainly done their jobs of keeping the brake protected. If someone's not getting much life out of their rear brake I assume their seals must need to be replaced or the drum needs to be turned.

The King Quad has suspension travel of 3.9 ft. and 4.9 rear last I checked. Because it's independent you get good articulation that a rear swingarm can't give you. This enables it to keep the tires planted where they'll do the most good. And because it's independent it doesn't need excess travel to offer a smooth ride since each wheel reacts on it's own without transmitting jolts across the whole axle. Add the 5 step preload/height adjustment and you get just the ride you want. I run mine mostly on it's lowest setting for the smooth ride and low center of gravity for off-camber situations. In no way can I see the King Quad's suspension as being outdated.

The King Quad's 3 range subtranny is the cream of the crop. Super-low gearing is what all the serious off-roaders with Landcruisers and Jeeps long for and will go through much $ and effort to have. A quad can benefit with this feature the same as it can benefit from 4wd and a front locker regardless of it's engine size. True, some may never get in situations where super-low is needed. But I frequently encounter situations in the northwest mountains where I want the slow-speed crawl ability and the enormous engine braking that super-low affords. I'd want superlow on any 4wd quad, Yep, High-range for getting up to speed, Low-range for moderate to difficult trail sections, and Super-low for the gnarly, nitty gritty, highly technical, trials type terrain. Outdated? nnnNOT!

I'm glad I bought my King Quad. It's my first Suzuki and my first quad. I had all Honda bikes prior and was considering the Honda 300 4x4. But with a little bit of knowledge about driving off-road in fullsize trucks, I could see that the Suzuki had the features that would be of most benefit. So I nervously bought a brand that I had no prior ownership experience with. Luckily it worked out. The King Quad fits my riding style perfectly, it's reliability has been at least as good as any Honda I've owned, and I never have to think about getting another quad.

Outdated is not the correct adjective to describe the King Quad. To some, it may not have the power or the long travel suspension desired, and that's fine, there's a quad for every type of rider.

Aren't there some 4wd quads that are still fulltime 4wd, single range gearbox, no suspension adjustment, no ft. locker? Those are the type of things that I think put a 4wd quad closer to being outdated.

John

 

I will gladly retract the term "outdated", as the King Quad was and is a fine machine. While my KQ was always reliable, it had reached a point that the maintainence on both the front and rear brakes dictated that it was wiser to put the money in a new ride rather than doing complete rebuild of all three brakes (Rear drum was beyond turning BTW). So I had the brakes shoes changed one more time and sold it to a farmer who would not be putting trail riding stress on the bike - it will probably last him forever.

It sounds like I ride in similar terrain as you and I felt much the same about my KQ. I simply discovered that as much as I loved the KQ that there was something that did most things better. I've owned 4 full size quads and 2 mini's. I took a chance on a non-IRS bike without dif lock. I've ridden the same trails with the different bikes and know that the Eiger that I now ride can do and handle more that the KQ that I used to have.

Now my biggest problem is finding time to ride.

Jaybee

 

No question about it,the KQ is definately an out dated and underpowered machine.The drum brakes WILL allways leak in water/debree after an afternoon of mudding,and there would be no need for all the sub tranny ranges if the KQ had a bigger engine.You might as well be driving a Kensworth with all the gears it has.

Generally speaking,the only person today that would even concider purchasing a KQ,is the first time ATVer who got talked into it by some uneducated salesman,or perhaps a farmer.

For general purposes,there are far to many other ATV choices that are FAR superiour in many area's vs the KQ.The King Quad was a nice machine back in 1987 when it was than refered to a Quad Runner,however,today it is so far outdated,I cant think of many reasons why anyone would want to buy one new?

Bill

 

Jaybee,
I appreciate your reconsideration. That was noble.

John

 

Bill, Bill, Bill...<sigh>

John

 

My friend has a King Quad and it has had nothing but problems. It has been in the shop more than out on the trails.

 

best move you will evr make!!!!!!!!!

 

I don't know if you'll get this for down to read my post, but Arctic Cat is making very reliable (Honda like) atv's that offer way more features than Honda. They do not compare if you look at features offered. AC has SEVEN different models in the 400 class and four in the 500 class that is unbelievable. Eleven different bikes in the 400 and 500 class. You can get lots of info on the Arctic Cat web site, and on the AC forum.[img]i/expressions/face-icon-small-happy.gif[/img]