We all have opinions or some try to validate their purchase of a certain brand. But this topic isn't comparing apples to oranges, stock machine vs a reworked race machine that has been beefed up. It doesn't prove anything and how durabile they are. It just shows that he was real lucky and they worked hard to get it going again. Yes... I must admit I assuming things. I don't know to what degree of frame re-enforcing went on. Other than everything I read on the interent and ATV magazines. (If you want proof look for yourself, I don't have the time and I really don't care that much.) But I seen various post here and on other forums about problems people have had with damaged frames. batteries coming loose, and other various small problems I see mentioned like clearance and front shock issues and this is just from normal riding.

We don't know how much work was put into getting it back into the race. I'm sure they did a lot more than The had to replace the subframe, fuel cell, add mismatched shocks. I'm sure they did a lot of other extra work too, but those were the key points that they needed fixed or at least mentioned. Well that quad was pretty messed up in my opinion. The team worked hard to get it functional again. But once again it doesn't show how tough the machine is. Show me other multiple cases where the same thing happened and what the results were. Is there some studies done on this? Has a ATV magazine done test of plowing trucks into quads to see how tough they are?

As for what I drive it's not a Outty. I have a Sportsman 500 H.O. but as soon as I sell it I will be getting a Can-Am 800. I weighed the pro's and cons and I still I'm will to spend to cash on it. So it's not that I'm biased or bashing the brand. I'm just a realist. I see the big picture and not wearing my brand loyality blinders. But this topic isn't really one that pertains to what a person drives or if they actually own one. So I don't have a Can-Am in my garage at this moment. But it doesn't change my personal opinion on that this accident doesn't show how tough a certain brand is. As mentioned I like the Outlander, but this case doesn't prove how stong they are. It just proves how a little bit of luck, skill and teamwork will get you.


http://carcino.gen.nz/images/image.p...?cb=1115204527

 

Glad to see you're not using all your virtual ink just to bash Outys. Be sure and let us know when you get yours.

The clearance and shock issues you quote are not durability issues, that's the way they come from the factory. (BTW, I don't know anybody with shock issues, just front springs.) And the fact that CanAm won't step up on the GC clearance lies that they continue to advertise (12") puts them way down my list of credible companies. Guys out here are spending a lot of their own money to make the Outy what CanAm claims it is to start with. CanAm makes a good quad, but not a good friend. That said, I'm keeping mine, cause it beats what else is out there, but sure as hell not brand loyalty. CanAm as a company reeks.

The frame issues you have heard about have all turned out to be guys running into trees, houses, jumps, and trying to get CanAm to fix their bent frames on warranty. There is not a single proven frame failure I know of that is the result of normal riding.

About your stand on reliability or durability, you're presuming and assuming way too much to have anything to argue for or against.

BTW, a spring company is working on a relatively inexpensive front spring option that will take away my only real complaint, and that is the big <u>12" ground clearance CanAm lie</u>, <u>12" ground clearance CanAm lie</u>.........

Seriously, let us know when you get yours and what you think of it. I would buy another one in a heartbeat. We'll help you all we can on maintenance, etc.