I think the warrior would be better at hill climbs with no start because it is somewhat heavier in the front and has a lot of low-end torque and a broad powerband, The 400 ex on the other hand would be better at hill climbs where there is plenty of room to get going because it will have a higher top speed and the 400ex has a much more mid to top motor than the warriors low-end to mid motor and as long as you keep your weight forward and ride conservatively you will make it up. My warrior on the other hand can make it up every hill i throw at it. the key to hillclimbing is skill and technique, if you know what your doing and don't be lazy when your riding you can climb up most hills, stock for stock the 400ex would be a better hillclimber as long as you keep your weight forward when climbing

 

I have watched both of these quads hill climb both short and long approach to the hill.In my opion they are both about even. I think that you have to look at the quad to meet your style. If you are able work the throttle and clutch with some finesse then I would say the 400 EX is for you. If you are a full throttle rider up the hill I would recommend the Warrior. It amounts to how you put all that power to the ground to wheter or not you get to the top of the hill.

Dan

 

Again, I have both a 2001 Warrior and a 2001 400EX. Both Stock. I realize that the fact I am 6'2" and 220 lbs plays a part but the 400EX is a MUCH better climber overall than the Warrior. I laugh when I read that a Warrior has more or even equal low end torque as a 400EX. Sure the 400EX has a higher top speed, but the low end power is much greater than the low end of a Warrior. But for the average rider, I would recommend the Warrior. I have seen guys that were 275 lbs. climb a hill on a Warrior with ease. But when they run out of power and try to downshift, it lacks the low end to pick up and continue up a hill. The 400EX has the power to continue when a lower gear is needed. as for the front of a 400EX being lighter... Sure, a little lighter, but the front seems more than a little lighter due to the low end power lifting the front of the quad.

 

I have had my 400EX for 3 years now, and I have never flipped it over backwards on a hill. I hate to sound like a braggart, but here is my point: I have climbed hills that others would not even try, and I have never flipped it. Of course there were close calls, but close does not count, you either make it or you don't. I don't believe the 400EX is light on the front end, I think it is closer to perfectly balanced. This is a good thing, it gives you much more control. Usually when you are climbing a hill, you want your front tires to be just "skimming" the surface anyway. This makes sure you are getting maximum power to move forward, which is important on those dead stop hill climbs. In the end, after all the tests, and all the debate, the 400EX is going to manage the better average.

Yep, I can do a clutch dump and not wheelie.

More power is almost always better. More power, without increasing weight, is always better!

I love hillclimbing!!!

 

I also had a Warrior before my 400, and a couple of these posts are right on. The Warrior is definately an inferior machine to the 400EX - including it's ability to hill-climb. If it's a short hill, the Warrior will do fine (the 400ex will do better) - if it's a long hill which requires sustained power, the 400EX will by far outperform the Warrior. And if you are in the dunes.....well....let's just say the Warriors will eventually make it up the hill, but by that time, the 400's have gone back to camp! [img]i/expressions/face-icon-small-happy.gif[/img]

As for the front end coming up, use proper body weight distribution and correct throttle response, and it's not even an issue.

 

I feel strongly that the 400ex is a lot better than the Warrior for climbing hills. I have never ridden a Warrior, but I have talked to Warrior owners who have ridden 400ex's and they say that the Warrior doesn't have near the amount of low-end torgue as the 400ex. In fact I have two friends that own Warriors and like them a lot, but would honestly rather have a 400ex. The reason why they both bought a Warrior over a 400ex is because the Warrior has reverse and the 400ex doesn't. I know they could have bought a 300ex, but they both chose a Warrior instead. The Raptor wasn't quite out on the market when they both made their purchases. Anyway, a Warrior is a nice machine but as for climbing hills, yeah they will go up them, but the 400ex will go up them a lot faster. The 400ex also has better suspension and handling than the Warrior. I like my 400ex a lot and it climbs hills with no problems. I don't know if any of you have ever been to Silver Lake Sand Dunes in Michigan, but I have been there many times and can sit right at the bottom of "Mount Buldy" which is the biggest dune in Silver Lake and put my 400ex in 2nd gear and climb all the way up to the top with half throttle. I have evidence of this as well. I do however, run a pair of sand devil paddles on my quad which help a lot, but as for power, that's a lot of low-end torgue!!!!! At that same hill in Silver Lake, you see a lot of guys that try and get a running start to get up the hill. Some make it some don't. I can make it with no problem starting at the very bottom of the hill with half throttle. It's still fun to go fast up the hill too, but I am just trying to prove a point that the 400ex is an awesome hill climber just like a Raptor or Banshee or DS650. That's not to say that a Warrior is a bad hill climber, remember I have never ridden one and at the same time, I like the Warrior, I think it is a nice reliable quad. A Warrior has enought power to climb big hills just like a 300ex or Blaster. I just think that the 400ex does a better job at it. Thanks.

Fourtracker14

 

Its mostly in the rider, i have climbed many hills with a blaster. Hills that alot of ppl would shy off of in a 400 or a warrior. In fact one such hill i climbed at Daniel Boone natl. forest in livingston Ky. on my way down to ride another quad to the top (i was taking my buddys quads up the hill for them) a 400ex flipped over coming down it dam close to where i was walkin. Me i like my warrior better for climbing but for obvious reasons from the motor to shox to its width its far superior to a stock 400. as far as stock verses stock i dunno it would be a hard decision.

 

I have a grand idea! Before anyone can post about a particular quad, they much first have 20 hours on such a quad. It is so obvious that many of you have never ridden a 400EX or if you have, it was a spin around your house on your daddies 400EX when we was out of town. These claims about a Warrior having better or even similiar power are some of the more ridiculous statements I have heard since my boy telling me his new shoes make him run faster. I have ridden a Warrior, a Mojave and a 400EX extensively and the 400EX rules the three, the Mojave is an amazing second and the Warrior is always wondering there the Mojave and 400EX went. FACT.

 

Freakystone.... it's amazing how big of a jack-@$$ you come off as! You might not be, but dang... you do a heck of a job acting like one in this post!!!
I have a '01 Warrior, and bought it for 2 reasons. 1. It has reverse. 2. For the trail riding I do... it is a better machine for me than ANY other.
This quad is narrow, nimble, and has great power. Does it have better power and suspension than the 400EX? Most people will say definitely not.. I will say it doesn't, but you... you say that the 400EX is FAR SUPERIOR... and that's a FACT. You are full of it!!! Better suspension and power is as much a matter or opinion as it is fact. For me (6'2", 135 lbs.) the Warrior is better than the 400EX. It's power is slower and smoother, which keeps it from being "jumpy" and the suspension fits my riding perfectly. I love to feel every bump, no what I am hitting, where I am going, and I have learned to use every type of bump imaginable to help me get places, or down trails faster. I am not saying I am an awesome rider or the Warrior is a better machine, because you ask about anyone and they will disagree w/ both those statements. Just like I had no problem w/ your posts until you threw that word "FACT" in there. I am one of those guys you see driving my truck down the road, go into a corner and drop the right side tires off the road. You are thinking, "damn this guy needs to learn to stay on the road" when really I am doing this cause the truck drives like it is one rails when you do this. My point is, that not all things seem as clear cut as you think. If I weight 220+ lbs, I would probably have a 400EX or Raptor if I still wanted the reverse, but for my little 135 lbs. the Warrior is PERFECT. Grow up and realize that just cause someone else's opinion isn't the same as yours, that it doesn't mean they are wrong!

 

Kbilly,
Years ago I climbed a LOT of hills on my Blaster that nobody else (Banshee's, 250R's, Warriors) would not even try also.

Of course I didn't care if my quad rolled down the hill by itself, and they all cared about theirs! [img]i/expressions/face-icon-small-smile.gif[/img] I never did really lose it though. I almost always had a way "out". If there wasn't room turn around, I would make sure it was a hill I knew I could make, or have a buddy or two handy to save me!