Why is it that anytime an argument starts between polaris and honda owners the polaris owners go straight to the suspension. Honda designs their utility atv's for utility right? If I'm wrong just say so. And the solid rear axle is superior for keeping clearance and a keeping the bike pretty close to being parallel to the ground. And thats great for utility right? And thats what honda made it for. Anybody that wants to argue that they aren't made for utility might want to go check the books again.
Which leads to my next point. The sportsmans are under a category named "premium rec./utility" its right there on there site. www.polarisindustries.com. So it looks like sportmans are under a slightly different category, or atleast made for 2 reasons. They want to try to make a good recreational machine, and combine it with a good utility machine. Thats why they have IRS, for the recreation. The IRS is good for that, but when it comes to utility it just isn't as good as the solid rear axle.
The companies designed and made the quads for what they were intended for, the honda, a great utility machine, and the polaris, a cross between rec. and utility. They both work like the companies want them to, thats why honda doesn't have IRS right now. Some people really rely on that rear axle of theirs for their work, Just ask some people that work on farms and ranches and what-not.
So I guess what Im trying to say is how can people, (mostly polaris fans) say a honda should add IRS so they could be as good as polaris, when they are the way they are supposed to be?
Sorry for the long post.

-Chris

2000 Foreman ES

 

The IRS is a much more smoother riding suspension than sraight axle .When ATVs first came out people just wanted a machine that can go anywhere but now at the hight prices they ask for them people exspect to go anywhere but in COMFORT!
I do not see what you mean about the IRS no good for working I work the bike hard with no promblem,when we go fishing and there is some large heavy trailer to drag in for miles I always get volunteered by the rest of the group.LOL

 

I never said that the IRS didn't work for utility. I know it works, I've seen it, but I've also seen the foreman's work. I simply stated that IRS isn't as good for utility work as the solid rear axle. Did you read my post or just skim through real quick to find things you could argue about?

-Chris
2000 Foreman ES

 

I think it is a small percentage of utility bikes that pull a heavy load around all day long and do nothing else and if it came to a decision between a smooth ride and super high tongue weight capacity a nice ride would win out.

 

All I'm saying is that both companies designed the quads for what they are intended for. Polaris is going for the majority of sales by making a cross between a recreational bike and a utility. And Honda is still making a quad for people that need a well built utility bike. I never brought up who is offering a bike that could fit the majority of the market. But since YOU brought it up, I bet that few percent is praising honda for their great utility quads.
I like polaris, infact I would really like to have a sportsman, so i'm not saying that they aren't good quads. I'm saying that the companies probably had different targets for who they wanted to make the quads for. And no matter what other excuses you want to put up in this post, the fact still stands, Honda makes a better utility quad, and thats what this post is about.

 

Other than the Sportsman model, Polaris has the same straight axle set up as every other bike does.

 

I sold my 1999 SP500 and bought a Rubicon. I think the Rubicon is perfect for the kind of work and riding I do. I like the ride and handling better than the SP500. One could argue all day about suspension and never get anywhere. What do you like? You're the one who has to ride the machine.
After all, as much as we all pay for our atv's, they all better be pretty dang good.

 

Chris, I agree with you on most of your post. But one thing stood out in your post. Here is your quote.

"And the solid rear axle is superior for keeping clearance and a keeping the bike pretty close to being parallel to the ground."

What was that about clearence? The second biggest reason for the IRS besides ride quality is clearence. Everyone will agree that an IRS, even the King Quads, has more clearence under the rear then a solid axle.

But for the most part, I do agree with you. Although I will say that I think the Ruby will be a great recreational machine.

 

the utility ones might be a little soother but we have a trailblazer and it is overly stiff! it makes it ride and handle pretty bad. any body know how to make suspension softer on the front? later

 

Lurch77,
Clearance on the IRS vs the solid rear axle.
Put weight on them and see what happens.