Honda Discussions about Honda ATVs.

IndependantRearSusp. ????

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
  #21  
Old 08-31-2000, 11:49 AM
Lurch77's Avatar
Pro Rider
Join Date: Dec 1999
Posts: 1,337
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Alaska,
All I was pointing out was that IRS does, and can have its place off road, even on raceing vehicles. If IRS is not that great then why would so many people use it? "OF course, they no nothing."

I will not argue that a solid axle is great. I would have nothing else under my trusty Dodge outside. They are for the most part stronger, and cheap and easy to mod/upgrade.

I just hate seeing people jumping to conclusions about IRS. Someone has to start somewhere, right? If Henry Ford had not started playing with fuel and compression, we would not have the internal combustion engine, right? Or at least we would not have had it as soon.
I also remember when the first mountain bicycle was made. People said the fat tire were ugly, and even more so, heavy. They said it would not work out well and would just be a fad. Well, now there a millions of these bike out there. That was my whole point. Someone has to start somewhere. Eventually technology catches up.
 
  #22  
Old 08-31-2000, 05:51 PM
Motorhead's Avatar
Pro Rider
Join Date: Mar 2000
Posts: 458
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Well, basically the only thing keeping the Sport400 out of the Sport/Ute class is the fact that it doesn't have racks. It's 4wd, and weighs quite a bit more than most other sport quads, and therefore doesn't have the nimble handling that most other sport quads have. Consider the 400ex, 300ex, 250R, Raptor, Banshee, Warrior, Blaster, LT250R Quadracer, Quadrunner, they all are very similar in weight, suspension, 2wd, clutch-operated manual tranny, etc. The Sport400 just doesn't fit the envelope very well, because it's significantly heavier, 4wd, automatic tranny, IRS, etc. It has more in common with Sport/Ute quads than the sports (about the only thing that differes is like I said, no racks). You joked about throwing a snow-plow on it, when in reality you could actually use it for plowing snow fairly effectively. On the other had, ANY other sport quad would be useless for plowing snow. So, still consider it a 'true' sport quad?
 
  #23  
Old 08-31-2000, 07:13 PM
ledebuhr1's Avatar
Pro Rider
Join Date: Oct 1999
Posts: 739
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

i dont know what alaskaweasel is talking about. the hummer is not a jeep they are two different machines. the millitary switch to hummers a long time ago. remember seeing them in desert storm? they are much more stable and have more ground clearance that a jeep. if they were "death traps" like he says then i dont think they would use them like they still do. ive seen lots of millitary hummers in tan and dark green but not one jeep. IRS deffinatly cost and weights more but if properly engineered it can be far superior to solid axel, just ask any automotive engineer.

later
jon
 
  #24  
Old 08-31-2000, 10:49 PM
Xplor's Avatar
Pro Rider
Join Date: Mar 2000
Posts: 2,002
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

I just love posts like this! There is only one word that is relevant here: IGNORANCE

Anything that is "new" or "non-conventional" will always be shunned upon by ignorant people. Open-minded people are the ones that make things evolve.

Don't even try to convince a 400ex rider that our Scrambler 4x4's and 2x4's are sport quads. They are in the "no way!" category to them. Our quads can not turn in the woods, they weigh a ton, they are automatics...(thats the best one)

If IRS and Polaris sports quads were not in demand thay would not be here!

Ignorance at work again...too bad.
 
  #25  
Old 08-31-2000, 11:43 PM
Motorhead's Avatar
Pro Rider
Join Date: Mar 2000
Posts: 458
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

"If IRS and Polaris sports quads were not in demand thay would not be here!"

Nobody is saying they're not in demand, they just don't fit the normal idea of a sport quad, which is a lightweight, nimble quad. Compare them to any sport quad on the market, do they really fit in that class?
 
  #26  
Old 09-01-2000, 12:55 AM
Lurch77's Avatar
Pro Rider
Join Date: Dec 1999
Posts: 1,337
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

"It's 4wd, and weighs quite a bit more than most other sport quads, and therefore doesn't have the nimble handling that most other sport quads have."

The Sport 400 does not have 4wd.

"Consider the 400ex, 300ex, 250R, Raptor, Banshee, Warrior, Blaster, LT250R Quadracer, Quadrunner, they all are very similar in weight, suspension, 2wd, clutch-operated manual tranny, etc."

Many of the machine listed above I would consider high performance, not sport. The average ride can not ride a Banshee or LT as easily as a 300EX. I do not consider the Polaris a high performance machine, and therefore do not compare it to the likes of a Banshee, LT, or Raptor. It is a Sport quad, plain and simple, not high performance.

"The Sport400 just doesn't fit the envelope very well, because it's significantly heavier, 4wd, automatic tranny, IRS, etc.

Again, it is not a 4wd, and the Sport 400 does NOT have IRS.

"So, still consider it a 'true' sport quad?"

Yes I do. I will admit that it is not the best in its class, but it is still a sport quad.
 
  #27  
Old 09-01-2000, 03:14 AM
Motorhead's Avatar
Pro Rider
Join Date: Mar 2000
Posts: 458
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Sorry, I was somewhat misinformed. I was assuming we were talking about sports (scrambler?) in general, which you CAN get 4x4, or 2x4 (both are quite heavy), and I was totally off on the IRS, I just assumed it must have it because of the Polaris guys sticking up for it and bringing the Sport in to the conversation... So that makes me wonder.. what WAS the point of bringing up the Sport in a IRS discussion?
 
  #28  
Old 09-01-2000, 03:46 AM
alaskaweasel's Avatar
Pro Rider
Join Date: May 2000
Posts: 281
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

ledebuhr1: I never said a Hummer was a jeep. But what i was saying was a Jeep with IRS on it is a even bigger death trap then a SOLID axle. Maybe brain dead that is why they come with a solid axle instead of IRS. Oh, and HOW much wider is a Hummer than a JEEP. Atleast a foot if not more, Maybe to make it more stable due to using IRS on it. Last point to you is if IRS is so much better, than why is it, old solid axle trucks, suv's, and Jeeps do better than the new Chevy's,Fords, etc... Why is it that trucks have Solid axles on the back still to this day. Why does no one make a IRS truck, Semi, etc.. that hauls more, or doesn't loose it's ground clearance as much when loaded as a solid axle. This argument that the SP500 doesn't loose it's clearance or doesn't loose more performance than a solid axle set up under loads is stupid. It is simple, if you Polaris people believe that, then by all means keep buying Polaris, cause next year I will come out with my own fully IRS truck for you all. It should sale like HOT CAKES.
 
  #29  
Old 09-01-2000, 09:11 AM
ledebuhr1's Avatar
Pro Rider
Join Date: Oct 1999
Posts: 739
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

alaska

look at the mercedes Ml320, the BMW X5, the ford excape, 2002 ford explorer. all these macines have IRS. the reason IRS is not put on a pickup is cost and weight.it cost signifitally more to engineer a IRS system than a solid axel. if air shock were put on a pickup with IRS that would increase air pressure when more weight was applied this would eliminate the problem of loosing ground clearance.

later
jon
 
  #30  
Old 09-01-2000, 09:48 AM
sAyIt_fmf's Avatar
Pro Rider
Join Date: Nov 1999
Posts: 1,538
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Andy: Your right about the corvette....But have you ever seen a corvette jump?
 



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:04 AM.