Kagey, you're right with the farming stuff, also on skidstears the hydraulics like going out. Did you read the efficiency of that hydramechanical transmission though? When it's in full reduction mode, it transfers 87% of the power out and when the input and output speeds are the same, it is at 98%. That is a lot better than a belt driven quad, cause I know they lose quite a bit of power through the belt assembly.

[This message has been edited by rooster (edited 11-10-1999).]

 

I look at it this way. Consider a brandless quad your building yourself. You have access to the (thsi based on qualities not actual parts so bear with me)parts bin of all the brands.

I would definitely pick Honda's reliability, ease of maintanence and weight advantage. Then I would take Polaris' suspension, 4wd system, ground clearance,comfort, engine, and power. In my book if Polaris could steal Honda's reliability it would be the perfect quad. Honda would need polaris' 4wd system, suspension, power, comfort, and ground clearance.


Glenn

 

Glenn,
You are the man. I believe you are exactly right. Maybe you should build a Honda-Polaris cross, a Ponda,or something.
BushHog
'99 Sportsman 335

 

Ya! A Ponda FourSportsman ES!

 

I'm drawing the blue prints now...

 

One thing that bothers me about comparing "specs" is when those being compared are those given by the manufacturers, even when they're meaningless, and without regard to whether they are accurate or not. For example, look at the manufacturers' specifications for ground clearance under the Sportsman 500 and Suzuki 500. In both of these cases, the figure given is often not measured from the ground to the lowest point on the chassis, it's to a higher point. Shoot, why not just measure all the way to the handlebars? If you're going to lie, why not lie big! And when you see the more accurate 11" figure for the Sportsman, that's pretty accurate, but only when there's no rider or cargo on board! Just how important is ground clearance without a rider? Why boast about a figure that's meaningless... unless you are purposefully trying to mislead people? Quads like the Magnum 500, with a straight rear axle, lose hardly any clearance at all when a rider climbs on. You may lose a little due to tire bulge, but that's about it.

Rack capacities? Towing capacities? Oh what ignorant people we have in our midst!! As far as I'm concerend, the manufacturers advertising the heaviest rack and towing capacities are those with the cheapest (and most ignorant) lawyers!

I towed my 6400 lb, van with a Kawasaki 220, and it didn't hurt it a bit! Does that mean Kawasaki is wrong to advertise its towing capacity so low? Due to its combination of torque, reliability, and low price, the little Bayou 220 is extremely popular with low-budget drag racers, for towing their race cars from the finish line back to the pits. Most of these cars weigh at least 1500 lbs., and many weigth nmore than twice that.

And then look at the advertised weights. How many advertised weights are accurate, and who are the most and least accurate? I'm not even going to bore you with the facts... go weigh them yourself... we did.

In other words, advertised figures are far short of reality, in more cases than not!

Claims of great Polaris reliability are a joke! I feel certain that the majority of them are not junk that breaks down every ride, and I can easily understand the confusion among Polaris riders whose machines have been reliable. Most of the Polaris riders I ride with have reliable machines. But the 80-90% that are fine do not change the facts of the 10-20% that have numerous problems. I don't always believe the praise heaped upon various machines by the magazines, because the publishers often find it necessary to cater to their advertisers. But since they have nothing to gain by reporting problems and break-downs, I find those reports easier to believe. And so far, I have seen no reports saying that the quad being tested broke down or had an outright failure, except for several Polaris machines. I've seen no complaints from magazine testers about breakdowns and overall reliability, except in reference to Polaris. And in three years of riding ATV's, I've seen no quads actually break down on the trail and require towing (not counting tire & chain failures, or out-of-gas problems) except Polaris (and one Kawasaki whose owner forgot to tighten the carburetor clamps). Yes, the majority of them do seem fine, but the fact remains that the least reliable brand of all is still the Polaris.

Even in the Owner Surveys, as published in the magazines, the #1 complaint from Polaris owners always seems to be the lack of reliability. In the Sportsman 500 survey, 56% of the owners had to take their machines in for one or more repairs. 56%!! Over half!

Polaris produced something else that really pissed me off, too. I think they had around four or five different brochures displaying their brand new 1997 models (I bought my first 4x4 in late 1996, so I first looked at the 1997 models). In one of the two I had, they went to great lengths on one page to convince the reader that chain drive was far superior to shaft drive. But then on the page describing the Sportsman (their only shaft drive model that year, I believe), they went to equally great lengths to say that shaft drive was much superior to chain drive! Now, I'd have really appreciated their honest explanation of the benefits of each system over the other, since that, after all, would be the truth. Each system does have its advantages and disadvantages. But I found it extremely insulting (and telling!) that one page told the consumer one thing, while another page in the same brochure said exactly the opposite! That's when I knew beyond all doubt that Polaris was NOT to be trusted!

There's so much bragging about top speed, even though the bragging seems very questionable when the magazines report top speeds that don't support the wild claims from owners. But in what kind of "4x4 terrain" can you do even 40 mph? Most of our all-day rides in rough terrain average less than 15 mph! Why is it important to have a top speed greater than you can use? Frankly, I won't say there are no exceptions, but generally speaking, I have to grin and bear it (or not!) when I hear people bragging about the high HP of their ATV(s). Any off-roader who knows anything about racing knows that that handling is far more important than having excess horsepower. The Honda 400EX has less than 30 HP, and the Honda 300EX has barely over 20, yet they are still two of the fastest four or five ATV's you can buy for woods riding! They handle! The Honda Foreman 450 has way less horsepower than the Sportsman 500, but on tight trails in the woods, they have no problem staying with or outrunning the bigger, higher horsepower machine. And right in between is the Magnum 500, which I firmly believe to be faster than the Sportsman 500 with equal riders. That silly rear suspension (which is NOT totally independent!), 10" rear wheels, and 750 lbs. may add to one's comfort, but it becomes a wallowing pig when you try to take corners fast. And it's even worse when 4WD is engaged, giving the rider a locked front end!

Tall ground clearance? Sure it's fine when you're riding over tall rocks and stumps on flat ground, but it works against you when you ride on steep side-hills. Yeah yeah yeah... I've heard all the claims about how they are just as stable as any other. But that's nothing but talk! I've been there and seen it when bikes like Sportsmans and Grizzlies rool over sideways where low-slung quads (especially the Polaris Scramblers) just grunt right along.

Thanks, but no thanks. You can have your tall 500 and 600cc machines. I'll even grant you your mud-hole superiority. I'm fully convinced that there are places your quad can go that mine can't, but there are plenty of places my quad (even my little "underpowered" Honda 300 4x4) can go that your big 500 or 600cc machine with its belt drive tranny can't go. And I'm still waiting for someone to prove that theory wrong.

If you care more about top speed and mud capability, and you're willing to accept the maintenance requirements of a Polaris, then by all means consider one. If you consider reliability and handling more important, then consider a Honda. We all make our own choices... and then live with them. I sure had to. I made a bad choice with a 1998 Suzuki 500. I liked the engine so much, I thought I could live with the rest of it. But I was wrong. Its handling, squealing brakes, and poor design in other areas finally beat some sense into me, and I had to dump it after only seven months. So now I've had one Yamaha, one Suzuki, and three Kawasakis, and the biggest lesson I've learned from them, and from watching other riders and other machines on the trails, is that Honda offers the best combination of the features I consider most important. You, however, have to consider YOUR priorities, and find the most satisfying combination of features that YOU want. And if that's a Polaris, then go for it! And if you'll pull me from the mud holes I can't get through, I'll tow your broken machine home at the end of the day.

Gordon Banks
Huntsville, AL
2000 Honda XR400R
1999 Honda 450ES
1997 Honda 300 4x4
1947 Body (w/optional extra padding)

 

Gordon:never seen anybody who knew so much,only didn't know what he was talking about.Your refer to that silly independant suspention,what is silly about keeping your tires on the ground as long as you can.Isn't traction the name of the game.Thats the reason polaris has that silly AWD that makes the wheels dig-in when you need them,not spin like that wonderful,limited slip used by others.You refer to AWD around fast corners,locking the front end.If you knew half what you pretend to, you would know that Awd is only engaged, when the back wheels are loosing traction.Traveling down gravel road going around corner, at high speed that others can achive,doesn't mean the wheels are locked,maybe they ought to put a 2wd button on it DUUUH!!!get your facts straight.isn't it funny if you don't have it, and others do,and you settle for less,then it's not really important.Speed, ground clearance ,silly suspention,that gives a superior ride,more horses,I really feel bad now that I even considered all these things when I bought my POLARSIS 500sp.In fact all 5 of them soon to be # 6.Roll over side ways come on!!!Get real if you can't ride better than that stay home where you belong.Where is this place, that your going that I can't,surely not through the woods the scrub brush and rocks that you can't clear because of low ground clearance.Allready we have desided that it's not the mud hole you couldn't get through because of that wonderful LIMITED SLIP front end.Surely it isn't on the good trails that you can't keep up with the mighty 500& 600's.Gee I guess I missed something in there some where.But I'm sure with all your wisdom(how ever missguided)you will have an answer.Please inlitten me, to what is bad about belt drive,silly me I figured that since they used to make POLARIS,only belt drive at time,with superior pulling powers.Go into thier own class at ATV pulls,of course with all of three years experience,that was before your time.Wonder with all it's faults the other manufactors are trying to copy it,the missguided fools.Ask KAGEY,a ATV MECHANIC which ATV he works on mostly.Of course he is only a mechanic,what would he know.I've yet to be, or see any polaris pulled from the woods.Hell you couldn't get where,I go if I did need some help.Get real.Thats the problem here some YA-hoo thinks he knows all, that don't know JACK S#%@ trying to tell everyone all about it,at least know what your talking about first. Later COB

5 soon to be 6 sp500's
400 2 stroke
425 magnum
6 polaris snowmobiles
1 junk ski-doo
am older than you

[This message has been edited by corncob2 (edited 11-17-1999).]

[This message has been edited by corncob2 (edited 11-17-1999).]

[This message has been edited by corncob2 (edited 11-17-1999).]

[This message has been edited by corncob2 (edited 11-17-1999).]

 

Where do I begin?

First of all, I agree that there should be some uniformity when measuring ground clearance. Even if each manufacturer measurers from the same place, who's to say that they dont put 35 lbs. of air in the tires, thats surely good for an inch or two.

And who has not exceeded the rack capicity for their bike? or for that matter towing capicity?

Whats wrong with belt drive???? Do you even need to ask? If it is so grest, why did Polaris come out with a Manual?

And one more thing, I believe this web site is here for us to verse our opinions, NOT FOR TELLING SOMEONE THAT THET DONT KNOW JACK ____. I think if you need to defend your quad, whatever quad it may be, then you have doubts about it yourself. Someone could tell me my quad is the biggest piece of crap in the world and I'll just smile, because I know and I don't have to lower myself to their level.

Gordon, I strongly urge you to not respond to this immaturity. I know I do not need to tell you that though.

 

First off, ground clearance is measured by the lowest point on your entire chassis. For axample, the tallest stump you could drive over without touching it. This is increased by tires on solid-axled machines. High Center is the tallest point in between your wheels. Example, the tallest pile of dirt you can drive over without gettng hung up on your chassis. This is increased by tires, suspension, HighLifter kits, etc.

Back in my 4wd days, I rode a 3004x4 and my pal drove a Polaris Scrambler 400. One day we were riding in the snow. He would pretty much ride circles around me. Until his front drive chain broke, and I had to tow him home. That thing wouldn't move on the ice in 2wd from all the weight over the front wheel.

Another time we were riding with some other guys in a swamp. A Magnum 400 was kick my a$$ all over the place, until it got it's belt wet in about 2 feet of water, and didn't move. We had to get a truck down there to pull the damn thing out. Then he had to race up and down the road for 10 minutes to dry the thing out.

We also had to stop and wait for the Scrambler to cool down every 15 minutes on a long ride once. We got into some peat mossy mud on the way home, and his radiator got full of that crap. That "awesome" Polaris cooling system wouldn't work, and his machine kept overheating.

He also forgot one of the 27 grease zircs on his Scrambler. There went a swingarm bushing.

Yeah, those Polaris's are real nice. For a while.

Incidentally, I sold my 3004x4, and he sold his Scrambler about the time time. I got $4000 for mine, and he got $3400 for his, even after paying more in the first place. Same year, same miles, same beatings.

 

But his butt doesn`t hurt as much as yours, and I`m sure he had a better ride that you.

------------------
Sylvain Belec 400 scrambler - 225 moto4