Honda is excited to announce that many of their 2015 models will be boasting Independent Rear Suspension, not the least of which being their Rubicon series:

First Look: 2015 Honda Rubicon to Boast IRS | ATVConnection.com

 

Adjustable rear shocks. Wow! All kidding aside I don't know if the Rubicon had them before but the Rancher and Rincon I rode in Utah didn't. Not good when you are around 340.

 

There is no separate Rubicon and Foreman now. Its called the "Foreman Rubicon" they just offer the Foremans 5 speed or the old Rubicon tranny now in the same ATV.

Honda dropped the more powerful 32hp Rubicon 499cc motor and only offers the Foreman 28hp 475cc now, which is a step backwards to me.

Takes Honda to think IRS, Hydraulic rear disc brake and diff lock is a major breakthrough, our 1996 Sportsman had all that ,it more of a, lets try to catch up.
They just have to ditch the ohv motors and catch up on the HP now.

 

The separation is in the suspension. The foremans are SRA and all manual shift- either esp or foot shift. The rubicon is only available in irs and gets a auto option along with nicer cosmetics. Honda is going to sell a ton of them. I'll wait and see if they change the rincon for 2016. If not then this may be my next ute machine

 

Maybe the Rincon will get the 475 as well. Why de-nut the Rubicon?

 

Wrong. I already told you it was always the Foreman Rubicon, look it up. The Foreman is still offered and detailed in a link I posted in the other thread in post 6. Again here, last on the page. 2015 Honda ATV Lineup Unveiled And as I also already told you, and is detailed in the articles, videos, and dealer I talked to, it's not the old automatic transmission. It is now an automatic shifting 5 speed gear transmission (plus low). 5 gears, not a cvt with infinite speeds (or 5 selectable ratios) like the old transmission.

 

My atv purchase plan changed last year due to events (well, big tractor quit and costs several times what a new atv costs so I put the purchase on hold). Polaris/Can-am/Suzuki dealer is useless according to everyone, leaving me with Yamaha/Honda in the town I'd consider going to.

I look at this from a different point of view. I live in ranch country, I don't know anyone that rides primarily recreationally except for kids. They buy atvs mostly as a purpose tool, to check cows, pivots, haul out feed, etc. 0-60 time is irrelevant beyond say chasing cows at low speeds. Within a 15 mile radius there are no towns, I've been either to or by 99% of the households, rough guess well over 3/4 have at least one atv, and yes Honda is the main brand, BY FAR. And many people are converting to the side by sides for some reason.

The bigger "problems" on the old model from my view were the brakes and the diff. lock. I kind of always suspected the lower tow rating was ~possibly because of the brakes/stopping power, could be wrong. But the fact that the new tow rating is increased with an old motor makes me believe it a bit more.

So, this atv and the Foreman seem to have always focused more on those of us that use them to work first, trail ride second, instead of the other way around. Not saying the belt drive atvs aren't capable of work as well. I've spent a lot of time in the last year on a '12 700 Grizzly, checking some of my cousins' pivots and helping with their cows, and that is still my personal feeling after getting a little used to that. Using it for work I found myself wanting to have the ability to choose gears most of the time, seems like the thing is always revving higher and noisier than it should at lower speeds. Plenty of power but you have to push the thing to notice it. I'd probably use low range all the time if I had it.

As for using the smaller motor, well, it was already there, cheaper than designing a new one, and not that much of a difference. Also, real world will tell the truth, but Honda also says better fuel economy than the old model. Important for work use, but I don't know why they don't include a bigger tank as well for less fillups.

So, for those of us that work, if it can actually do the work well and reliably, why is more HP needed? And if the atv is not aimed primarily at trail riders like most other manufacturers, why -constantly- get on Honda to change, when there are many other choices?

I'd ask the following questions. Honda motors vs. other. How does the torque compare at lower rpms? Also, how does the fuel efficiency compare?

I'm considering the old Rubicon, new one, and probably a 550 Grizzly. The gear thing is a big deal for me personally though, I'd think it would be handy to lock it in "gear" while checking cows, fence, spraying, etc. and even moreso after riding a Grizzly for many hours on several days. It would take a long time to get used to the Grizzly compared to the old gear Hondas I had (250cc did everything and was strong enough for anything I needed, including dragging logs around, etc.). A person could pull around little things in the yard barely off idle. I have not been on a modern Honda so my opinion may change after working with one for a while.

This new trans. looks like it might be ok. The old one was expensive, but if it was super reliable like they are, what difference does the replacement cost make except many miles down the line? Plus when it has a feature NONE of the others have, a smooth CVT for shiftless operation, and 5 "simulated" gears for when useful.

 

OK I get it the Foreman still gets the SRA.
The Rubicon is now a IRS Foreman basically.

My first sport is snowmobiles so to me I find all ATVs easy on gas. 100 miles on 5 gallons of gas is as good as I would need on a ATV and even my 500H.O can do that.

Snowmobiles are like speed boats , if gas is a concern then your in the wrong hobby.

All motors have great low end torque for work when you put them in low range.

The 475 ohv makes 28hp while the new 427cc ohc Can-Am outlander makes 38hp and once the outlander is in low range it will pull anything the foreman will, its just gear ratios.


But the Foreman/Rubicon is not keeping up to the 427 Outlander or 550 Grizzly when its time to play with a hp deficient is to big.

Why not just chose a ATV that can do both worlds, work or play time acceration and speed.

Dealerships are almost pointless now with online shopping. I never even think to buy something from my dealer they just can,t touch online prices.

 

Your points of view are seeing these as toys basically. My point of view is seeing them as pieces of equipment like all of my other stuff. No recreation involved. Reliability, less maintenance, less tinkering, less time filling up, are bigger factors. The next person will have different, needs/wants. Doesn't matter, to each their own. I just wonder if you don't like Honda, at least they apparently don't make something in the utility ATV section that you want, why are you in the Honda section? Some of us want work first play second (or none) machines. I wouldn't go into the sport atv section and complain about their towing capacities for example. Different target audience. Or at least people that look at Honda know what to expect as compared to other brands. And enough people must choose them or they wouldn't keep making them.

With gas usage, it's simply nice to not have to fill up very often (which is why bigger tanks would be nice), timesaver, ability to leave it sit out on a field for a few days without hauling out gas, etc. I wouldn't care as much if it was a slight hog if it had a bigger tank. Fuel consumption of one of these from a $ standpoint is inconsequential. There are days I burn through 50 gallons + of diesel when haying, so not much of an impact. The other part is minimum bulk fuel delivery is 150 gallons I believe here, which is too much to have sitting around for the only piece of equipment besides lawn stuff that uses gas. I don't burn through much road gas either, so it would sit for long periods of time. So, dedicated tank would be needed for fuel on trips to town. 30 miles if I only need groceries, which I NEVER go to that town, 60 miles closest if I need supplies, because I would never run to town for only gas. Less gas usage, smaller tank to get by with, and less possibility of running out if I don't get to town for a few weeks.

The HP and going fast arguments you keep making are only important to those that are concerned about it. Like I said before, if it can pull something well at moderate speeds, low speeds, doesn't matter at all. I'd pick lower HP with more (or as much) grunt in the lower rpm band any. That's my opinion, and yours is clear, for your requirements.

I guess with a nice dealer it's easier to have someone to speak to if need be. Plus warranty work, or if I don't have time to work on it myself, I have enough other equipment to fix, something that's easy to get to town, sometimes might have them work on it.

The more I think about how the 700 Grizzly acts when using it like some of what I'd do, don't think I'd look at the 550 much. Kinda thinking I need gears or a gear like feature for some uses. Like I said, would take a lot of getting used to. I'm not concerned about the belt reliability though, just the way the machines work/behave. Better ride isn't important, I had 3 wheelers and I never thought they were too rough except for the front wheel with no shocks sometimes.

 

I appreciate that you guys aren't getting into name calling and that kind of thing. Good balanced arguments on both sides. -Moderator.