I'M GOING TO GET A NEW MUD MACHINE. WHAT SHOULD I GET
Jul 4, 2001 | 07:41 PM
#43
Pro Rider
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 281
Likes: 0
Cattass: Your funny. I ride and have ridden the 500 AC's and they yes are torquer engines. But the bike is poorly designed, heavy, slow, and to much of that fatcat's wieght in the rear of the quad. They are not that good in the mud. Compared to the SP/ they are nothing and It would be mostly rider with the difference between your Cat and my Rubicon. Anytime you want to compare then email me huskerweasel@hotmail.com I gladly meet you halfway[img]i/expressions/face-icon-small-smile.gif[/img] (at the border?)
Later,
Scott
Later,
Scott
Jul 4, 2001 | 07:51 PM
#44
Pro Rider
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 281
Likes: 0
Scrammdaddy: Those top ten reasons are exactly why I bought the Rubicon......No where does the SP have any advantage on the Rubicon except the REAR ground clearance and slightly better 4x4 system.. However it is clear YOU havn't ridden a Rubicon. If you had you would have noticed that the Rubicon has full floor boards with intigrated footpegs, is an AUTO/ and a ESP machine. The rest of your points are personaly preference of the rider really. So what was your point other than being totally biased?
Jul 4, 2001 | 07:57 PM
#45
Weekend Warrior
Joined: May 2001
Posts: 8
Likes: 0
<< Scrammdaddy: Those top ten reasons are exactly why I bought the Rubicon......No where does the SP have any advantage on the Rubicon except the REAR ground clearance and slightly better 4x4 system.. However it is clear YOU havn't ridden a Rubicon. If you had you would have noticed that the Rubicon has full floor boards with intigrated footpegs, is an AUTO/ and a ESP machine. The rest of your points are personaly preference of the rider really. So what was your point other than being totally biased? >>
AMEN!
Just talked to a guy today that had a Polaris. Had so many problems with it, he got rid of it and got a Prarie! Also, the salesman at the local shop who sells Honda and Polaris told my friend not to buy a Polaris, because they were falling apart and leaking oil on the showroom floor! (Harleys-R-Us - Lewiston, Maine)
They may be good in the mud, but that sort of American craftsmanship is not worth it!
Jul 4, 2001 | 09:16 PM
#46
Trailblazer
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 26
Likes: 0
I have a 2001 sportsman that smokes,grinds from reverse to forward,creeps along after stopping and with no throttle!!!It has 12 hrs and 120 miles on it.It has alot of power though and rides smooth!SO WHAT!It is probably not common to have so many issues with a new Polairis but man I got screwed.It is so embarrasing when someone asks "hey man is your 4wheeler on fire?"Just follow my smoke baby I'm not far behind it.Or "That must be the new James Bond version,complete with smokescreen shield"BYE BYE BE BACK WITH A HONDA[img]i/expressions/face-icon-small-happy.gif[/img]
Jul 4, 2001 | 11:53 PM
#47
Pro Rider
Joined: Feb 2000
Posts: 1,412
Likes: 0
Alaska Weasel:
Poorly designed? Can you please clarify? I'll agree with you that the 'Cats ARE NOT the fastest machines out there, but that's about it. As for the weight ratio-"too much of that fatcat's weight is in the rear of the quad" -have you ever picked one up? The exact opposite is true-it is much easier to pick up the rear of the 'Cat than the front, so if the "fatcat's" weight is all in the rear, why is this so?
As for the Ruby, I spent a day with one, rode it for a while and absolutely hated the thing. Sure, I'm running 27" 'Claws on my 'Cat, but with no performance mods. I had to tow the damn Ruby up a pretty steep hill, then down through a rather deep mud pit, and up the other side to the top of the road. I thought well, maybe my going through the hole first had tore it up enough that the Ruby couldn't get good enough traction, figured it was my fault. Then, the two girls who were riding my Dad's completely stock 'Cat drove right up, down through and up to the road-right through the mud and ruts I'd just made while TOWING the Ruby. I was "dared" to go through another mud/water hole that was just over the rack deep. In four wheel, low range, walked right through. As I made it look easy, he tried. Tried is key word-got stuck before he even got into the thing. Again, our stock 'Cat made it with the girls driving.
In comparing my 'Cat to the Ruby, even though I'm sitting at close to 750 lbs. with all my gear, then add my 220 lbs., you still can't compare them-he couldn't hang with me in the slightest bit, except for speed, I had to give him that one. Our stock 'Cat however, still walked all over the Ruby, I was really dissappointed in it's performance. We traded half way through the day for a while, I was thoroughly dissappointed. On a steep uphill rutted climb, I made the Ruby 3-wheel, leaving me stranded, while both my 'Cats kept right on going, then turned around and crawled back down. After a few attempts at different angles, I finally made it up the hill, though it was very close. When trying to turn around at the top to go back down, it damn near flipped on me-the suspension is nothing compared to my 'Cats. As for the ride itself, I've broken my back before, and the thing was an absolute torture to ride. After a little over a half hour on the machine, I thought I was going to die. My buddy didn't want to trade back-he loved my 'Cat too much, even though it was definately slower.
I guess my point is I agree with CatSass. And like he said, the 'Cats are not for everyone. Their biggest downfall is the weight/speed issue. They are simply not a very fast machine. Those looking for speed should not even consider a 'Cat. However, if a great, solid machine is what you're looking for, with more torque than anything in the 500cc class range (even more than the 600cc Grizz), for a pure work horse, then yeah, a 'Cat is a great choice. They are very solid, very dependable and tough as hell to boot. As far as the mud goes, I believe the connection main page did a review last year with the '01 'Cat in their mud pit-you know the three machines to ever make it through that hole? The Traxter, the 'Cat and for some reason I think the third was the Magnum-I think I was surprised at the time the SP didn't do it, though I could be backwards on that one. I've heard rumors that the new '02 'Cats have been re-geared, as well as having a slight clutch milling job done on the auto's for a higher top speed. I'd like to see what they do now on a GPS myself, just out of curiousity.
Out of curiosity, have you ever ridden with, or do you know Irichard? He's up your way somewhere, though I haven't heard from him in quite some time now. He and his buddies have a couple 'Cats with huge Vamps if I remember right. Just curious if you've ever ridden with him and how your Ruby faired up there with him.
Anyway, just a few of my own views-found it kind of ironic though as my buddy traded both is Ruby's in the next week for a pair of 'Cats. They'd had a ton of electrical problems, as well as with the tranny too. Since the trade, they've not had a single complaint and we're scheduled to ride in the next couple weeks up at my place.
Best of luck,
Mike
Poorly designed? Can you please clarify? I'll agree with you that the 'Cats ARE NOT the fastest machines out there, but that's about it. As for the weight ratio-"too much of that fatcat's weight is in the rear of the quad" -have you ever picked one up? The exact opposite is true-it is much easier to pick up the rear of the 'Cat than the front, so if the "fatcat's" weight is all in the rear, why is this so?
As for the Ruby, I spent a day with one, rode it for a while and absolutely hated the thing. Sure, I'm running 27" 'Claws on my 'Cat, but with no performance mods. I had to tow the damn Ruby up a pretty steep hill, then down through a rather deep mud pit, and up the other side to the top of the road. I thought well, maybe my going through the hole first had tore it up enough that the Ruby couldn't get good enough traction, figured it was my fault. Then, the two girls who were riding my Dad's completely stock 'Cat drove right up, down through and up to the road-right through the mud and ruts I'd just made while TOWING the Ruby. I was "dared" to go through another mud/water hole that was just over the rack deep. In four wheel, low range, walked right through. As I made it look easy, he tried. Tried is key word-got stuck before he even got into the thing. Again, our stock 'Cat made it with the girls driving.
In comparing my 'Cat to the Ruby, even though I'm sitting at close to 750 lbs. with all my gear, then add my 220 lbs., you still can't compare them-he couldn't hang with me in the slightest bit, except for speed, I had to give him that one. Our stock 'Cat however, still walked all over the Ruby, I was really dissappointed in it's performance. We traded half way through the day for a while, I was thoroughly dissappointed. On a steep uphill rutted climb, I made the Ruby 3-wheel, leaving me stranded, while both my 'Cats kept right on going, then turned around and crawled back down. After a few attempts at different angles, I finally made it up the hill, though it was very close. When trying to turn around at the top to go back down, it damn near flipped on me-the suspension is nothing compared to my 'Cats. As for the ride itself, I've broken my back before, and the thing was an absolute torture to ride. After a little over a half hour on the machine, I thought I was going to die. My buddy didn't want to trade back-he loved my 'Cat too much, even though it was definately slower.
I guess my point is I agree with CatSass. And like he said, the 'Cats are not for everyone. Their biggest downfall is the weight/speed issue. They are simply not a very fast machine. Those looking for speed should not even consider a 'Cat. However, if a great, solid machine is what you're looking for, with more torque than anything in the 500cc class range (even more than the 600cc Grizz), for a pure work horse, then yeah, a 'Cat is a great choice. They are very solid, very dependable and tough as hell to boot. As far as the mud goes, I believe the connection main page did a review last year with the '01 'Cat in their mud pit-you know the three machines to ever make it through that hole? The Traxter, the 'Cat and for some reason I think the third was the Magnum-I think I was surprised at the time the SP didn't do it, though I could be backwards on that one. I've heard rumors that the new '02 'Cats have been re-geared, as well as having a slight clutch milling job done on the auto's for a higher top speed. I'd like to see what they do now on a GPS myself, just out of curiousity.
Out of curiosity, have you ever ridden with, or do you know Irichard? He's up your way somewhere, though I haven't heard from him in quite some time now. He and his buddies have a couple 'Cats with huge Vamps if I remember right. Just curious if you've ever ridden with him and how your Ruby faired up there with him.
Anyway, just a few of my own views-found it kind of ironic though as my buddy traded both is Ruby's in the next week for a pair of 'Cats. They'd had a ton of electrical problems, as well as with the tranny too. Since the trade, they've not had a single complaint and we're scheduled to ride in the next couple weeks up at my place.
Best of luck,
Mike
Jul 5, 2001 | 02:21 AM
#48
Pro Rider
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 281
Likes: 0
Cowboy: I could care less what you and your friend Catsass say. The AC is a good quad, but coming on here with those stories are rediculous. I mean if you points stand true that just with you two there would be Rubicon owners everywhere trading them off for the SUPERIOR AC!!! Last time I looked AC didn't even have more than 10% of the market. Something BIASED there boys? AC's are good, however they are not going to WALK ALL OVER the Rubicon like you guys are claiming. They may win some, but the Rubicon would just as easily win some also. As for your story about the shootout,,,,yeah..You can get anything from shootouts to support any brand. I like AC's but the fit and finish are not as good as Honda,or Yamaha's. As for design problems lets look at the cv joints on the cats, the front grill, the shifter for example...I mean come on? The suspension is better, the front diff is better and the engine is Torquer than the Honda's, I'll give ya that. I don't think the Rubicon is superior, I just know it is not going to suck anywhere as bad as you two claim, thats all. You think other wise good, most of the market knows better.
Jul 5, 2001 | 04:07 AM
#49
Pro Rider
Joined: Feb 2000
Posts: 1,412
Likes: 0
These "stories" are my own personal experience with the machine-real world experience. If they were indeed "stories", hell I'd be amazed if I could pull something that good out of my own ****. I found it funny that Catsass knows a guy who traded a Ruby in to get a 'Cat instead. He's the first one I've heard of other than myself with the two my buddy owned. Notice "past tense", otherwise traded off, and yes, for the '01 model 'Cat. They bought them for use on a farm, and had nothing but troubles with them, were looking for something to replace them with. He knew I had a 'Cat, though had no idea AC even made quads, so we set up the ride. Like I said, whether he drove it, or I did, it just could not go the places my 'Cat did-either one for that matter.
As far as AC's 10% of the market share, most people still don't know AC even makes quads. I get that all time time while out riding-though mostly at the gas stations on the way up, or back. Hey, awesome quad there, what is it? I say it's an Arctic Cat. "Oh really, who makes it?" Honda's been around for ages, and quads aren't their only product-as a result, people know who and what Honda is. AC is relatively new to the quad business-within the last 6-7 years or so, so it's fairly easy to see why they've only got 10% of the market share. However, if you compare dollar for dollar and feature for feature on the Honda's and 'Cats, you simply get more for you money with AC.
When the Ruby was first introduced, all the hype about what an awesome machine it would be and speculation as to features, options, etc., I think Honda really dropped the ball. What did they introduce? Just another prehistoric quad with a fancy new tranny and a pretty little digital display. Sure they upgraded 50cc's to have a 500cc quad instead of the 450 they already had, but come on, they surely could have done better than that! How long has the Ruby been out now? Honda's brand new machine is really nothing impressive. Then, Kawi comes out with the 650 V-Twin, next the 660 Grizz with IRS. Hell, AC even came out with 5 new models with IRS themselves and new auto's as well. Then, there's the "rumored" 700 from Polaris. Granted, AC kept their 500 engine and don't have any real "big-bore" to compete with Kawi, Yammy or Polaris, yet they made several technological advancements on their current lineup. The IRS quads currently have the highest ground clearance of any out there-hell, even the strait axle 'Cats have been bumped to 10.75", which is nearly 2" more than my stock '00 'Cat.
My point with all this "new" stuff-While introducing a new machine is great, Honda should have done something about that 4 wheel drive, and front differential to start with. A selectable 2/4wd is what most people are wanting these days. No need for pure 4wd all the time. What about swapping over to disc breaks for a change? I did like that they had full floorboards on the thing, that was a bonus-or did that cost extra? And, what about diff. lock to replace that crappy 3wd? I don't forsee Honda selling too many more Ruby's with the current availabilty of machines out on the market these days. There are just too many features, qualities and attributes on the new rides that make Honda just another "prehistoric" rig.
Now, you give me better suspension, better front diff. and more torque with the 'Cat, yet fault me for bad design on the cv joints, poor front grill and something about the shifter. You'll have to clarify about the cv joints, I'm confused on that one-a set of stick stoppers and you're good to go, no problems what so ever. Now, add a lift and large meats, yeah, you're looking at steeper angles which could lead to premature wear, but you'll have that with any quad. As for the front grill, I'll give you that one-unless you add a winch. Without the winch, that front grill looks like it could pop out at the first impact with a tree. Yet, with the winch and mounting plate, hell, rock solid. I own an auto, so I won't comment on the shifter as I have no experience with that. So what's left? Speed? OK, you've got that one hands down.
In your original post, you said "the bike is poorly designed, heavy, slow, and to much of that fatcat's wieght in the rear of the quad. They are not that good in the mud. Compared to the SP/ they are nothing and It would be mostly rider with the difference between your Cat and my Rubicon." I have to disagree with that statement, because my experiences prooved otherwise. To top it off, with my back problems, I don't see how anybody can ride that thing in the first place-it's a rock on wheels! The one thing it has over the 'Cat is speed, nothing more. However, for guys like me who work their machines, and spend most of the time in low range, crawling, hauling or towing, speed is irrelevant. And the features available on the 'Cat are what makes that possible-especially when the days are long and hot. That is what makes the 'Cat a good machine for me, and what takes the Ruby out of the running.
I'm sorry if my "stories" have offended you, that was definately not my intent. If your Ruby works wonders for you as my 'Cat does for me, then great, very glad to hear it-we're both very lucky men.
Best of luck- Ride hard, Ride Safe.
Mike
As far as AC's 10% of the market share, most people still don't know AC even makes quads. I get that all time time while out riding-though mostly at the gas stations on the way up, or back. Hey, awesome quad there, what is it? I say it's an Arctic Cat. "Oh really, who makes it?" Honda's been around for ages, and quads aren't their only product-as a result, people know who and what Honda is. AC is relatively new to the quad business-within the last 6-7 years or so, so it's fairly easy to see why they've only got 10% of the market share. However, if you compare dollar for dollar and feature for feature on the Honda's and 'Cats, you simply get more for you money with AC.
When the Ruby was first introduced, all the hype about what an awesome machine it would be and speculation as to features, options, etc., I think Honda really dropped the ball. What did they introduce? Just another prehistoric quad with a fancy new tranny and a pretty little digital display. Sure they upgraded 50cc's to have a 500cc quad instead of the 450 they already had, but come on, they surely could have done better than that! How long has the Ruby been out now? Honda's brand new machine is really nothing impressive. Then, Kawi comes out with the 650 V-Twin, next the 660 Grizz with IRS. Hell, AC even came out with 5 new models with IRS themselves and new auto's as well. Then, there's the "rumored" 700 from Polaris. Granted, AC kept their 500 engine and don't have any real "big-bore" to compete with Kawi, Yammy or Polaris, yet they made several technological advancements on their current lineup. The IRS quads currently have the highest ground clearance of any out there-hell, even the strait axle 'Cats have been bumped to 10.75", which is nearly 2" more than my stock '00 'Cat.
My point with all this "new" stuff-While introducing a new machine is great, Honda should have done something about that 4 wheel drive, and front differential to start with. A selectable 2/4wd is what most people are wanting these days. No need for pure 4wd all the time. What about swapping over to disc breaks for a change? I did like that they had full floorboards on the thing, that was a bonus-or did that cost extra? And, what about diff. lock to replace that crappy 3wd? I don't forsee Honda selling too many more Ruby's with the current availabilty of machines out on the market these days. There are just too many features, qualities and attributes on the new rides that make Honda just another "prehistoric" rig.
Now, you give me better suspension, better front diff. and more torque with the 'Cat, yet fault me for bad design on the cv joints, poor front grill and something about the shifter. You'll have to clarify about the cv joints, I'm confused on that one-a set of stick stoppers and you're good to go, no problems what so ever. Now, add a lift and large meats, yeah, you're looking at steeper angles which could lead to premature wear, but you'll have that with any quad. As for the front grill, I'll give you that one-unless you add a winch. Without the winch, that front grill looks like it could pop out at the first impact with a tree. Yet, with the winch and mounting plate, hell, rock solid. I own an auto, so I won't comment on the shifter as I have no experience with that. So what's left? Speed? OK, you've got that one hands down.
In your original post, you said "the bike is poorly designed, heavy, slow, and to much of that fatcat's wieght in the rear of the quad. They are not that good in the mud. Compared to the SP/ they are nothing and It would be mostly rider with the difference between your Cat and my Rubicon." I have to disagree with that statement, because my experiences prooved otherwise. To top it off, with my back problems, I don't see how anybody can ride that thing in the first place-it's a rock on wheels! The one thing it has over the 'Cat is speed, nothing more. However, for guys like me who work their machines, and spend most of the time in low range, crawling, hauling or towing, speed is irrelevant. And the features available on the 'Cat are what makes that possible-especially when the days are long and hot. That is what makes the 'Cat a good machine for me, and what takes the Ruby out of the running.
I'm sorry if my "stories" have offended you, that was definately not my intent. If your Ruby works wonders for you as my 'Cat does for me, then great, very glad to hear it-we're both very lucky men.
Best of luck- Ride hard, Ride Safe.
Mike
Jul 5, 2001 | 05:12 AM
#50
Pro Rider
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 281
Likes: 0
Cowboy:.........LOL Your post makes my point for me. I give credit where credit is due.. The AC is a good quad,,,better than the Rubicon? I'm not saying it isn't or is. What I am saying is you are both so full of it I could stick a Honda sticker on an AC and you would both dog it. It's called biased my friend. Remember I never have said an AC isn't good in the mud....BUT GREAT...please the SP is great the rest are just good(maybe put the NEW Grizz here, I don't know yet). But your barking up the wrong tree ******* the Rubicon. For one your ripping a quad you obviously not NOTHING about, but thats your problem. However would love to ride with you just to prove you wrong about my prehistoric outdated quad...LOL Maybe next year AC can drop the ball and have the atv of the year........[img]i/expressions/face-icon-small-smile.gif[/img]
In your post you name all these new things coming out....why do you think that all the companies are coming out with bigger quads with more options.....Yeah, can you say it with me.....RUBICON[img]i/expressions/face-icon-small-smile.gif[/img]
PS: Heard about the wreck,,get well man. Glad the sis is ok also, that could have turned more serious in a hurry.
Lata,
Scott
In your post you name all these new things coming out....why do you think that all the companies are coming out with bigger quads with more options.....Yeah, can you say it with me.....RUBICON[img]i/expressions/face-icon-small-smile.gif[/img]
PS: Heard about the wreck,,get well man. Glad the sis is ok also, that could have turned more serious in a hurry.
Lata,
Scott