I'm going to be buying a new ATV in the next month. I have it narrowed down to these two machines.

I have test driven them both, just around a parking lot.

I currently own a 550 arctic cat. I put 27in mud bugs with a aggressive clutch kit it. I REALLY like the low end torque it has.

My main uses for the ATV are:
-hauling big loads of wet firewood (600-1000lbs)
-hunting
- LOTS of deep soggy muskeg
-putting around trails with mud
-trapping- pulling a 300lbs sled through deep snow in -20
-towing a 17ft lund rebel with 50hp 4 stroke into back lakes. Trails are hilly


HONDA

I really like the honda, however I have to concerns

1) The torque sensing 4wd system. I have riden with honda guys before and it seems this system doesn't engage fast enough. With other machines while you are in 4wd, it is always in 4wd. The honda is in 2wd until the system senses it needs to engage in 4wd. To me this is not good, because I don't need to start to get stuck before it get 4wd. THe honda needs to feel slippage in order to go into 4wd. In mud and muskeg this doesn't seem ideal.

2) Im not sure the Honda has the power I need. I will be putting on 27/28 inch wider more agrressive tires. Can the honda turn these easily in muskeg? I'm taking up to the fenders muskeg.

I also haul a lot of weight with my quad. A tub trailer often with 600-1000lbs and I use the quad to haul a 17 foot lund rebel with a heavy 50 hp 4stroke outboard.

Can the honda do all this without a gear reducing kit?

I know the DCT has a low range, but I checked and the gear ration is actually slightly bigger than the old foreman 500 foot shifts.


Yamaha

concerns

1) The ride seems weird to me. The suspension just has too much give. Im told even with it set to the firmest setting it will still feel this way. I am wondering how much torque is lost when in low range and I push the throttle and the suspension just squats before the torque can turn the tires.

2) Is the yamaha as reliable as the honda?

 

Any reason you're leaving AC? Kymco makes some of AC and other brand 4x4's.
They are rock solid!

 

Yes, the Arctic cat was a great machine until I hit 3000kms. Since then it has been nothing but headaches and $. I beleive the quality of some of the AC parts is sub par. It's like they used cheap materials.

I couldn't even begin to list the parts that have been replace on my machine in the last 2000km's. I said to myself last summer after replacing all the bushings, wheel bearings, axles, tie rods, diff seals, u joint, ball joints "well everything has been replaced but the motor and clutch so I should be good". Last week the oil smells like gas and the clutch has been slipping and making some awful noises for 4 or 5 months.

Im not wanting to get into a AC debate lol.. I know the oil in the gas is most likely a clogged air filter or a issue with the fuel injector and I a new belt and rebuilding my clutch would fix everything right up, but I'm not throwing money at this machine anymore. I spent around $2200 last summer on it to get it up to speed and I'm not looking at spending another $1000 when its only worth $3500.

 

That's good to know, I was seriously thinking of getting a new 700 VLX to replace my 2002 AC 400. 400 has been bulletproof for 4,500 miles, my previous AC 500 was awesome for 9,000 miles. I've also been looking, the one that stood out for me was the Can Am with the 570 Rotax, but I still like the Cats. Dealer claims that the Allterras are way better. Arctic Cat 700 Allterra might be a choice, I hate the new front end, though.

 

You know until my AC hit 2500km I told anyone who asked that it a awesome machine and I'd recommend it to anyone.

At that 3k mark, it showed its true colors.

I know all machines have their flaws and problems, but the AC fell apart like a mexican motorcylce.

 

The Rubicon won't have enough power to do some of the things you want. Its still the same 28 hp 475cc single that Honda has been using for years. The Grizzly has a lot more power. The new Hondas have a lot of electronics on them that makes them more expensive to fix if they do need work. Everyone else uses a belt drive cvt system while Honda uses a much more complex dct system. I've come to like my Brute Force, previously owned a Grizzly 660. I'd probably get a new Brute Force 750 if I were to buy new. They're basically the same price as the Grizzly and Rubicon and have slightly more power than the Grizzly and a lot more power than the Rubicon. Long time member Specta bought a new eps Brute Force 750 about 4 years ago and has a put a ton of trouble free miles on his. While maybe he's not using it for heavy work, he has logged several thousand miles requiring only routine maintence. In my opinion, Honda seriously needs to update their entire utility atv lineup. They just don't offer anything that appeals to me, everything is underpowered and slow. And yet costs the same as other brands offering much more performance. A Rubicon shouldn't cost the same as a Grizzly or Brute Force, it should cost a LOT less.

 

"In my opinion, Honda seriously needs to update their entire utility atv lineup. They just don't offer anything that appeals to me, everything is underpowered and slow. And yet costs the same as other brands offering much more performance. A Rubicon shouldn't cost the same as a Grizzly or Brute Force, it should cost a LOT less."

^ *aplause*

__________________

 

I somewhat agree.

Honda's ride has come a long way in the past few years with their IRS.

With honda you pay for engineering and testing imo. I have a lot more confidence in a honda product even with their flaws. You pay for this as well.

In my area its not uncommon to see 20 year old Honda's still running. Lots of farmers and gas well workers are driving a honda with 20,000km's and only had routine maintanence. Yes I understand farm miles are a lot easier on a machine compared to beating it around the trails and mud, but I doubt you'd find many other brands with 20,000 and still running strong.

Yes I'd be really scared if I owned a DCT transmission and it was acting up under warranty. I wouldn't dare touch it even though I'm fairly confident in my abiliities.


I do agree though, Honda's do seem a bit over priced with the tiny engine you get. That's where I don't think the price matches up. They made a step in the right direction with the bigger Rincon engine, but than matched it up with a shitty 3 speed.

 

Honda's refusal to go with a cvt transmission set them apart from everyone else but I don't think it was the right way to go. Its too late to change now. The smaller displacement machines like the Recon are great quads and a decent value. Step up in displacement and options and the price skyrockets. If Honda did make an 800-1000cc twin cylinder quad there's no telling how much it would cost. Nobody would buy it. I also think the older Honda quads were more reliable. They were all air-cooled carb machines. They would run forever. I'm not sure you can say that about them now.

 

Of all the quads I've ridden over the years, the Rincon is the one I hated the most. Non-adjustable shocks that rode like a brick. I hated the 3 speed with a passion. Why they didn't match it up to a five speed is beyond me. The 3 speed transmission's 1st gear is not low enough. Almost every machine I've been on has had some form of engine braking or another. The Rincon's 3 speed going down a hill is exciting when you don't want it to be. I tested it over and over again going downhill. Put it in 1st and let it coast. Didn't really start engaging until about 15 mph. That's way to fast if you're using engine braking on a hill you want to go down slowly.

Long story, short, of the two I'd get the Grizzly.