Like I said I ride with a 500 Foreman and 420 Rancher and we switch ATVs all the time and I would not trade,both hondas ride rougher,have less traction with there 3x4 set up and are slower and much less powerful,then my Polaris even though I weigh over 100 lb more at that!

 

polaris bikes have power and their true 4x4.. but you cant keep them out of the shop long enough to use it!

 

A shop would stave to death if they were relying on me for business.

 

we didnt always takew ours to the shop, we worked on it ourselves too, like when it would break down on the trail! but i wont turn this thread into a polaris bash....

 

Neither of my Polaris machines have ever been off the trail because of breakdowns. They both have had one recall, but never have I had to sit home because my quad was broke. My Kawi did die on the trail once... the spark plug cap broke in two and fell off.

I don't ride much in the mud, and have never tossed a matress anywhere but in the trash, but I am a redneck.

I won't turn this into a Honda bash. I've ridden Rincons, Rubicons, and a Rancher 420 that was really impressive. If I wasn't a HP junky, I'd likely have bought a Rincon.. Really impressive handling. If I had to vote, get a Rancher 420. The one I rode was a basic 4wd, but it was pretty sweet. Surprising power from a 450 class machine, and nice handling. The ride was a bit rough for me, though... Bad back, need the Polaris ride.

Hey Reconranger.. no offense taken. Some of us like the big heavy quads. Some don't... if we all rode the same thing it would be boring. There'd be nothing to argue about.

 

I'm impressed with your luck with a polaris. I'd have one if it would stay together. My daddy had a 2-stroke sportsman (bad fast). It just broke down all the time. Anyway, he bought a Foreman and put 5800 miles on it in rough mountains in a years time. Very dependable but it's wore out now. He sold it and bought a new 400 Suzuki and has 1500 miles on it in around 4 months and it's like a new one. 3000 dollars difference from a suzuki to a honda and these days it's hard for me to find any faults with a zuki!

 

I know some Popo's are poo. Enough people have endless problems with their machines that I think a fair number of production runs are done after the liquid lunch up in MN. I have a friend who had a SP400.. 04 I think.. what a POS. Every time we went riding something broke on it. He dumped it for a SP700 that was about flawless. The QC at Polaris is more suspect than any other ATV company. Perhaps I am lucky.

 

I've been riding a 420 4x4 for a couple of years now, and I run 26" Mud-Lites most of the time. For exclusively trail type rides, I'll re-mount the factory tires. Yes the 26" tires do rob a bit of quickness, but in deep ruts and thick Louisiana mud, they take me most anywhere other bikes might wonder. SRA is the limiting factor on my bike.

I ride with a large group, and there are many brands represented in our group. A lot of Honda's (Foreman's, Ranchers, and Recons) an AC, a Suzuki or two, and a few Polaris bikes (my son's included).

The IRS bikes will go thru deeper ruts, and those with large displacement engines can really blast some rooster tails, but that's not my cup of tea. I bought a bike to ride, to go where ever I want, dependably and comfortably.

Here's my take on the Foreman vs. Rancher thing.....ReconRanger is spot on. The Foreman is a work quad and the Rancher is a play quad. Yes, either will do the other's job, but not as well. The Foreman is more powerful, larger and wider, and it rides as such. The Rancher is shorter and narrower, but is more nimble and quick.

For pure muddin', Id go with a IRS bike like Polaris or Suzuki.

For tough work, I'd choose a Foreman.

For all-purpose use, ie. trails, some work, some mud, just ridin', I get the Rancher.

Here's my Rancher 420 4x4 with 26" Mud-Lites;
http://i60.photobucket.com/albums/h1...f/IMG_1049.jpg
http://i60.photobucket.com/albums/h1...f/IMG_0895.jpg

 

well the debate is over, i picked up a rancher420 today. i love it so far.

papachuck, how much difference is it really between stock tires and the 26s? i really would like to get a set of 26s but may just go with 25s if it will kill my power

 

With the 26" tires, there is a bit of a power drop, especially in 2nd gear at lower speeds. But it is just that, a bit. Yes the bike is more fun with the stock tires, steering is much easier, but I can go thru much more with the Mud-Lites. I kept the original set, and put them on when I'm not going to be anywhere near deep mud. If you don't plan on getting into deep stuff, I'd go with a 24" or 25" tire with a moderate tread like BearClaws. Or just keep the factory tires and wear them out first. I must say, I like having the spare set handy.