I've been looking pretty hard at the AT know. I've tried to do as much research as I possibly could. About five times know I thought I had the bike I wanted but continue to change my mind. I'm starting to lean towards the AT after punting it for the "lack of low end power" people have complained about. I read an old issue of Dirt Wheels comparing the AT and the Eiger. They said the Eiger had way more power and the AT had no low end at all. Upon reading on the forum I noticed there was a recall on the ECM for the AT that addressed transmission problems. Could it be that the AT used in the shootout had the old ECM? I just can't believe that a bike with 20 more cc's would get smoked. But they also said the Eiger topped out a 62 (give me a break). I guess I'm looking hard at the AT because of reliability and the non-belt. I've got a 84 TRX 200 that has been thru hell and back and still manages to run. My only main concern is the ride. It doens't have to much suspension travel and I would like to get something that rides fairly smooth. I run around on the farm alot thru fields and rough sagebrush pastures. Obviously the IRS is smoother riding, but in my opinion theres just more moving parts to deal with. Basically I'd like something that rides decent and will run a long time with only routine maintainance. Also, it seems Honda's hold there value pretty well and if I wanted to trade up to something bigger hopefully I wouldn't take it up the ... One final thought. I would like to get C Series wheels with mudlites for whatever I get. I'm only going to put 25" on. On the AT will they stick out far enough that you will lose mud protection? That's a drawback I've seen with the AT is that it comes stock with 24" tires. I know there is a ton of info about the AT in here, but I was wondering what people thought about Dirt Wheels shootout if they happened to read it. Will an Eiger really smoke an AT?

 

Well, I just got one and it has more low end power when using ESP mode vs Auto. I am looking into putting 25 in tires on my Rancher AT and cannot see it having that much effect on performance. It is pretty darn plush riding and corners well for a big quad. I prefer the SRA over IRS. Just my opinion, but Hondas have a better reptation for reliability than Suzukis. I also prefer the Honda transmission to belt drive. The tranny on this thing amazes me, it is dang smooth. Ultimately you have to be happy with it, try both out and make the decision that best suits you.

 

The tranny is a big reason why I'm looking into it. Although I've read they are very expensive to replace or work on. I'm not concerned with that though. I take care of my stuff and I don't abuse it. I had a 1999 Banshee that I put alot of hours on and had no major problems.

 

I was wondering if the suspension on the AT is the exact same ans the Rancher 350 or is it a little better? I thought I may have read somewhere that the AT had improved suspension over the 350. From the specs it wouldn't appear so.

 

As you can see on my profile we have a AT rancher with the 25inch mudlites on the Maxlite Mag wheels. They look better than the ITP in their 8-spoke version, and the front wheels do not stick out on the front like the ITP c5 wheels do on the Foreman. The Maxlite are made with a inset on the front like the stock wheels. You stay protected from the mud even in the deep mud. My Foreman on the other hand, will cover you with mud in 4wd with the wide offset of the ITP wheels. Now dont take me wrong, I like the ITP wheels also, but the Maxlite stay under the fenders and look great. The valve stems are deeper into the rim and less likely for a stick to tear them out. The Mudlite tires just cant be beat in my opinion. They are on all 3 of our atv's. The 04 RancherAT that we have is fast as anyone could want, very decent on the low end torque, you can put it in esp and it pulls great, but we hardly have a need to run it in anything except auto mode. We just got back a couple of hours ago from Wayhutta riding trails in the North Carolina mountains. Talk about rough , rocky and steep inclines, its an awesome place to ride. The Rancher AT did an awesome job all day long. As far as the ride, its a honda, non adjustable shocks and kind of bouncy. It is loads better than the Foreman was with stock shocks, but now after a few hours on the new progressive shocks on the Foreman , the ride is about the same as the Rancher. I imagine with the adjustable Progressive shocks on the rancher, you would get about the best ride you are going to find on a straight axle suspension atv. We love our Rancher AT.

 

Doodle, one more thing I forgot to mention, if you want to see the wheels we have on our atv RancherAT go to atvoutfitters.net and check them out. They are the 8 spoke wheel. Good luck.

 

http://forums.atvconnection.com/mess...did/451508.cfm

 

i am happy with my 04. in real time applications it will do almost anything.
if you want to race a brute force across an open field you will get smoked
the new ecm made a big dif, i also jetted mine, hmf and k&n...it'll hold it's own in
trails etc

 

I had the same dilema. I looked at all the 400 class and it came down to the At or Eiger. I liked the at's transmission much better. It didn't feel like a go-cart. I'm not being inflamatory. The Eiger is nice!!! and it is faster than the at and has lighter steering and more ground clearance. If speed is your primary concern, you'd better get the suzuki. However, you can really feel the suzuki cetrifugal clutch engage and I didn't like that much. I bought the Honda because it was actually less expensive and will have honda resale and reliabilty. The dealership here had some 04 leftovers and were really dealing on them. The suzuki dealer here acted like everybody pays MSRP.

Good luck with the decision, it's a tough one. If I wasn't getting auto, I would have definately bought the eiger!!