No Rancher AT anymore for 08!

I'm no fan of automatics anyway, and when there are superb manual trannies in the Rancher linueup already, I never did see what the point was......

 

I'm not a big fan of automatics either, but some people love them, so I think it's too bad to not have the choice.

On the other hand, I wonder if that means Honda has a machine in the works to fill that niche... say a 420 auto or something...

 

The AT is a really good quad. But at the price it was selling there were better options. Now you can get a closeout AT for the price of a new Rancher.

The auto is a great feature with ESP option, the on the fly 4X4 feature is better, and GPS is useful to many. While the new Rancher is much faster, it is not lighter, it is wider, and the engine has yet to prove itself. For me and some others the AT is a better choice at the same price. For others, the more powerful new Rancher will be better.

I bet the new Rancher will prove to be the most popular quad of all time, but the AT is easier to use with more features.

 

I do know that Honda's marketing research indicates that the demand among aging baby boomers is for automatics, and that is most likely where this machine came from. Guess maybe the sales ultimately didn't match the research???? In the end, the price difference compared to the manual Rancher, probably killed the automatic.

There is an old editorial from one of the magazines about the "dumbing down of the sport", and the whole trend toward automatics just fuels this drive. In the old days, everybody who rode a quad had precious motorcycle experience, so shifting a manual was not big deal, indeed it was viewed with delight. Now, anybody's great grandmother thinks they are qualified to ride an 800 pound big bore automatic, but there are still some of us purists left out there.....

 

the 400at was hondas worst atv made. no power at all, many problems with the system.

 

Reconrancher, I think you have a point. I think there are a lot of people out there who would only consider an automatic transmission.

Personally I think shifting is part of the fun of riding. I'd actually like to see the sport clutch system on some of 4x4's so you could choose between automatic clutch or hand clutch.

 

<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>Originally posted by: JeffinTD

Reconrancher, I think you have a point. I think there are a lot of people out there who would only consider an automatic transmission.



Personally I think shifting is part of the fun of riding. I'd actually like to see the sport clutch system on some of 4x4's so you could choose between automatic clutch or hand clutch.</end quote></div>I agree 100%!!

 

The market always gets rid of the "weak" machines. You make quality & people buy it. The Rancher 350 & Foreman are great examples of that. I owned a rancher 400 AT for 6 months. Sold it because I couldn't stand spending over $5000 on a machine with no power, low-end tranny problems, & no ground clearance.

 

Hello advocate here. A good friend of mine has an AT and has'nt had a bit of trouble out of it. He drags logs up and down mountains with ease. Before I bought my rubicon I took his AT to West VA several times and rode on every type of trail and road out there without a problem at all. All in all I think it's a great midsize machine. I think a 420 AT would be a really good machine. As for automatics verses full clutches, I like both I used to ride a Mohave and had a blast on that bike, but with age my riding style has changed and so did my idea of what I need in a four wheeler. I wanted something for long rides, through all kinds of terain and have the ability haul camping gear or just enough stuff for a twelve hour ride, so i decide to go with the rubi for the tranny options. Don't get me wrong one of these days I'm going to hav a 400 ex sitting next to the Rubi, for the shorter raising he!! kind or rides.