The initial reviews of the Z are pretty favorable. It seems to me that it is a 400EX knock-off, with a better engine (and at the same price!). I think "savy" buyers are going to chose it over the EX, and it should make a significant dent in EX sales. On the other hand, a lot of buyers aren't that well informed. People will buy WHATEVER is on the dealers floor when they show up!! I live about 10 min. for Chaparral (a HUGE dealership and mail order company), so I am in there all the time. They can get in 50 bikes of any kind (except utilities which don't sell out here), and they are all gone within several days. I mean, people are even still buying Warriors (when there are so many better bikes for the money!!).

Anyway, seems like Honda is going to have to step up to the plate, and counter Z. It is even more of a threat to them than the Raptor has been, because it is in the EX price range. I hope this increased competition lights a fire under Hondas a$$.

 

I guess we have to wait and see what the Z400 REALLY does. Things tend to get hyped up pretty good when they are released. It takes a while to see what they are really made of and how they perform. Either way, Suzuki came out with a machine that should put some much needed competition into the 400cc Sport ATV market.

What kills me is all of the "bench racing" going on over this quad (like all the rest before it) already.

 

"...I mean, people are even still buying Warriors (when there are so many better bikes for the money!!)..."

Yeah, God forbid someone buy a quad for something other than wide-open racing! LOL!!! When faced with the dilema of wanting reverse (which I do) the 400EX suddenly loses it's appeal. A true Honda fan would turn to the 300EX, but when you take into account the Warrior's extra 70cc and 6-speed tranny (vs. the 300EX's 5-speed) all for only $200.00 more, the choice becomes even more grey. The 300EX is a great choice, don't get me wrong, but don't act so surprised that people still like the Warrior. It is an extremely versatile quad. It's not great at anything, but it is good at almost everything. I trail ride, hill climb, jump, go through the mud, ride at wide open throttle, and just about anything else that my friends are doing, all with satisfaction from the Warrior. Pop a hitch on the axle and you can even pull a trailer with it's great low-end torque and good transmission. You could do the same with the 300EX, but it is smaller and has a smaller engine. Why is it such a shock that the Warrior still sells? Does it **** you off that much? If the Warrior is so inferior than you should be happy because more people are buying quads that you can beat, right? After all, noone's aloud to just buy a quad to have a good time on! Everyone is required to be competitive and race/roost at every given chance! My Warrior is BONE STOCK and I'm proud of it! I get my a$$ kicked, and I kick some a$$. Buy either way I have a great time riding and that's what counts. There are a lot of people who share my view and the Warrior would be a great choice for them, even if it is 15 years old!

 

Y Warrior-I wasn't trying to start anything here. In fact, this was a "Honda bashing" post (by a Honda rider!), NOT a "Warrior bashing" post. But still, you started it, so.......

I was riding a Warrior before some of the kids in this forum were born!!! So, I speak with much authority. Most of my friends still have their old Warriors they bought a dozen years ago, and they still love them. We trade off bikes all the time, so I rode one as recently as last weekend (and I DO appreciate the Warriors low end grunt). But, by comparison to current design bikes, it is just the old dog that needs to be retired.

In a way, the Warrior is to much and not enough. It's to big and heavy to be a substitute for a 300 class bike (it's just plain inapropriate for smaller riders, and even large beginners find it intimidating), and it doesn't have the suspension, handling, and/or power of a 400 class performance bike either (and it's even bigger and heavier than the 400 class bikes too!!!). I would pick a 2X4 Rancher (500 lb utility that ALREADY comes with a hitch) before I would pick a Warrior. The bike just doesn't have a niche!.

One of the points of my post is that uninformed people will buy anything. I sure wish someone had told me to "GET THE 250R INSTEAD OF THE WARRIOR", but alas, I was uninformed at that point and had to learn by trial and error. This is one of the purposes of having a forum. So those of us who have learned from experience, can pass that knowledge on to others so they won't repeat our mistakes!!! If you experience with the Warrior has been good, well pass that along too, and let the readers decide.

 

The point of my post was to say that the Warrior DOES have a niche! It fills a very valuable and overlooked niche! It's a lot like the new Pontiac Vibe/Toyota Matrix. It is a bit sporty, a bit utility, easy to drive but not boring for seasoned riders, it has reverse, etc. No, it is not purpose-built like the 400EX and THAT'S WHY I LIKE IT! I'd love to have a Banshee, but I don't just ride wide open or on the track, I also like going through the woods and conquering technical climbs. The Banshee CAN do those things too but it lacks the low-end torque that the Warrior (4-stroke) has to do it slowly and with confidence. So what options do I have considering my wide variety of riding conditions? Either buy two or three purpose-built machines (400EX for track, Rincon for mud, 300EX for woods) or find one machine that can do pretty much all of those things fairly well and doesn't feel out of place anywhere you take it. That's why I like the Warrior. Yamaha's biggest problem with the Warrior's placement is that they try to compare it to everything, which is not a good idea. When you compare a versatile machine to a purpose-built machine using the guidelines of the purpose-built machine, the versatile machine will always lose because it is not the "winner" in ANY catagory. But, it is a contender in every catagory! What I'm trying to say is, the Warrior gives you the freedom of participating in just about every riding situation. You may not win the checkered flag, but you didn't warm the bench either! I would hate to have a quad that I had to leave behind because it was not made to do the type of riding I chose to do on a particular day.

 

<< I guess we have to wait and see what the Z400 REALLY does. Things tend to get hyped up pretty good when they are released. It takes a while to see what they are really made of and how they perform. Either way, Suzuki came out with a machine that should put some much needed competition into the 400cc Sport ATV market.

What kills me is all of the &quot;bench racing&quot; going on over this quad (like all the rest before it) already. >>



I agree. Wait till it has been out a while till you start making judgments.
Remember all of the hype about the Raptor making around 50+ HP before it came out?

I'm not Bashing the Suzuki, or Raptor here so don't get me wrong.

I have learned from experience to wait for the product to come out for awhile, let everyone ELSE buy it first, find out what flaws are there (if any), and THEN make an informed decision/judgement.[img]i/expressions/face-icon-small-wink.gif[/img]

 

I don't think I would buy the first production year of any bike. Let someone else work the bugs out, and then benefit from their experience. The Z is competition for other manufacturers, and competition is good!!!

 

It's all good stuff. I remember when the 400ex came out... it was pretty cool and at the top of the 4 stroke game. There hadn't been a new sport ATV since the 300ex from any manufacturer.

Then came the DS650.. Whoa, 650cc and BIG. Fast too... Very unique.

Then came the Raptor... Closer to the 400ex in size but more powerful AND it had reverse.

Then the Cannondales... 440cc of fuel injected high performance with good handling and an all aluminum frame. Faster than a Raptor but no reverse though.

Now the z400. Kinda like a 400ex with reverse and something for the Suzuki fans to cheer for.

All things considered the last few years have been good for the sport/high performance ATV rider.

 

reverse is not need. why would someone not buy a quad without reverse. I use to ride trails all the time before i got into mx racing and never need it. All of the top gncc guys use 250r's.

 

I agree I had reverse for a while and it was more of a neat luxury than any sort of necessity. I don't have reverse now and I don't miss it at all and I don't race.