reconranger, this couldn't possibly mean you are interested in a AT, could you? Or do you want to start picking it apart too, or just the hydrostatic transmission, like the Rubicon. Comparing them against the old reliable "mechanical ATV's."

"Severaly of you posted over the last few weeks that you bought the AT. You should have had some time to put some miles on by now. Have we gotten an update from you yet??? Tell us about it!

I am particularly interested in comparisons with the bikes directly below and above it in the Honda lineup--Rancher 350 and Rubicon."

lol

 

Hey MarcoPol,

In a side-by-side comparison they are both great bikes, but if handling is a concern then the AT smokes the Kodiak. The first thing I noticed about the AT was that it feels like you're riding on rails. It stays planted during tight maneuvering and has more mid-range throttle response to kick the rear-end around if you're trying to power out of something. When I just go out riding around my house, there is a rain retention area behind my house that I play in. My Kodiak has a tendency to tip over on three wheels when climbing out at an angle, whereas the AT stays on all fours with no hint of tipping. I'm no riding expert by any means, but I really like the way the AT rides better because the handling is so tight and responsive.
Just a side note to mention. Don't be fooled by the ground clearance numbers you see in Yamaha and Honda literature. I think the Kodiak says it has 10.8 inches and the AT has around 7 or 8. The Kodiak is measured at its highest point between the front "A" arms. The AT is measured under the rear differential. They both measure the same at the differential.
The differences the Kodiak has that some (most) would consider advantages would be the locker front end and the disk brakes. So far, I haven't found anything the AT wouldn't cross that the Kodiak needed the locker for now that I've learned how to "feather" the front brake to switch the pulling wheel. And for the disks, I realize disks are far superior with stopping power. But, cover those things with mud and I'll take the drums anyday.
In all honesty, I sold the Kodiak a few days ago. Couldn't justify keeping both of them since I really preferred to ride the Honda. My buddy I mentioned earlier that has the 700 Polaris Mud Monster was really riding me hard about buying a mid-sized ATV. He changed his mind after riding it. He can't get over how easy it is to handle and how fun it is to drive.
ENIGMA206

 

You have to drive the Honda Auto to appreciate it and you have to drive it in all conditions for about an hour. I am one of those "Simple is better" people and I was wowed by the slickness and driveablity of the auto. I have yet to try out the 3 speed version in the Rancher AT and I was wondering if there was any difference between the Rubicon 5 speed and the Rancher/Rincon 3 speed?

 

Spectra-These Honda autos are bikes that I am trying really hard to like! But, any machine you go out into the wilderness on has to be 100%, 100% of the time!! The bike I would really like to see is a MANUAL TRANS RANCHER 400. Honda says the AT transmission is MUCH IMPROVED over the Rubicon, so I am holding out some hope for this new bike!! We will see what story time has to tell.

In the end, I will probably just get another Rancher 350 4X4. More displacement is always nice, but a 350 is all I really NEED. Simple is just going to fail less often than complex. That's just the way of nature.

 

Honduki,

What is the 3-speed version of the AT? I haven't seen this yet. Is it 3 gears in auto? I assumed since mine has 5 gears in ESP mode that it used the same gears in auto. Is this incorrect?

Thanks, ENIGMA206

 

Enigma 206,

Thanks for the info. I am very happy with my Hondas but was looking at the Kodiak because they are discounting them a lot $$$ and of the higher ground clearance and suspension travel. Of course this would equate to higher GC and prone to the "tippy" feeling you felt when you went riding.

How is the Rancher AT in the automatic mode not the ESP going dowhill?? Is there a lot of engine braking. My Rubicon is so great it needs gas to get it moving downhill.

Thanks,

Marco Polo

Rubicon 500
Recon 250
Breeze 125 (soon to be replaced with new 4X4)
XR50

 

Hey Marco,

The thing I like best about my AT is the engine braking. The AT will crawl down a steep shale covered hill doing 3 mph. It's amazing, almost to simple.
The AT is a blast in auto, even better in ESP mode.

 

reconranger, you are correct, the manual is going to fail less, I knew that when we bought what we did. I do like the auto in the Rubicon (which is why we bought it), and I was willing to take that chance. To date we have not been let down. I have ridden a new AT and was very impressed with it. Maybe you should have one Rancher 4-wd non-ES, and one new AT? Then you will have one to back up the other.

Be careful, the trans in both the Rubicon and AT are addicting.

 

Marcopolo,

You're gonna have to take Yoda's comments on AT engine braking. The highest point around here is climbing over a fire ant hill. Don't get to use engine braking much. I won't get to use it until going hunting in Missouri in November.
As far as the ground clearance goes, you might want to take a ruler to the dealer to measure the distance from the ground to the bottom of the differential. The Yamaha might be higher, but I bet its less than a half an inch.
By the way, check out the skid plates. Honda...steel. Yamaha...plastic.

ENIGMA

 

I had heard they Rincon and the Rancher AT were a 3 speed version of the Rubicon tranny. If they are the same thing as the Rubi then I would be on a Rancher AT like a fat kid on a smarty! I ride in really rough, hilly terrain and it is ultra sweet to hit the mud in Auto and pin the gas to the bars. I was very impressed with the engine breaking in ESP mode. If you didn't tell someone that they were riding an auto bike I don't think they could tell. It is still fun to let off before you shift to get a bit of the snap but I think it is the best of all world when you you have the 2X4 shift available.