I just got the new Sport atv magazine and they did a big test on 700xx thoe I have not read the whole artical they saying pretty much the same as quad that the low end gearing is no all that great (slow to get going) and they were also having issues w/ the engine running propper as in sputtering. They thought that it had something to do w/ the exhaust. They did hower like the top end powerwise of the bike and they thought it would easily reach Hondas projection of 76mph. [img]i/expressions/face-icon-small-cool.gif[/img]

 

Recon,

You're comparing different quads meant for different purposes.

Your premise is flawed.

I'm comparing large bore quads and your comparing something 100 cc's less.

One that note, the 450r's kick those lame-*** 250EX's huh! I mean they suck compared to the 450r. Also, my car sucks at puling a trailer and my truck is MUCH better at it. It's a crazy world.

 

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

Recon,
You're comparing different quads meant for different purposes.
Your premise is flawed.
I'm comparing large bore quads and your comparing something 100 cc's less.</end quote></div>

My comparison is for power/weight ratios, and that is important relative to performance for any machine, regardless of its design or "purpose".....and something some manufacturers obviously just don't seem to understand!

There is a replacement for displacement, and it is engine design. One can't afford here, to think like our father's generation did. These little way "over square" slipper piston designs, are able to milk out way more performance than an old school big bore. Do more with less! Keep it light, and keep that power/weight ratio favorable....it's elementary physics.

Actually, the XX engine is an over square slipper piston design (change your oil often!!!). On paper, this engine should absolutely scream! Clearly Honda has it in a high state of detune.....

 

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


My comparison is for power/weight ratios, and that is important relative to performance for any machine, regardless of its design or "purpose".....and something some manufacturers obviously just don't seem to understand!


There is a replacement for displacement, and it is engine design.</end quote></div>


Since you brought it up...

Also these numbers reflect true weight not dry weight, and I only compared crank horsepower, not wheel horsepower.
(Yes, I know there is different drive line losses for different models, especially the CVT)

So using a power to weight calculator I came up with these numbers for a power-to-weight ratios.



This is the site I used for the numbers, but I'm sure you can do the math on your own: http://www.ajdesigner.com/phph...r_to_weight_ratio.php


I didn't add any 450's or utilities in the graphs, because as I mentioned before, that's not what this thread is about.

 

The 700XX seems like a nice trail quad for sure.

It's not a local option for me though... but a sport IRS is... so I've been looking at the Outlaw IRS along with the usual sport quads and considering the advantages, such as the clearance, protection, traction, and ride quality.