So, what's all the fuss about?? The 400EX is 25.98 hp and the Z400 is 29.34 hp (stock machines). 3 hp difference isn't exactly an earthshattering performance increase. Even a lightly moded 400EX will make 32 hp.

There just isn't enough difference between these two bikes to make it worth running out and getting a Z, especially if you have an EX that is already all dialed in!! Except for the engines, they are pretty much the same machine. The Z will probably mod up pretty well though, but the average rider (outside this forum) leaves their bikes pretty much stock.

 

I thought the 400ex has 26 HP and the Z400 has 33 HP. I might be wrong though.

 

See- http://www.off-road.com/atv/reviews/...no-report.html

This is at least an objective scientific comparison, vs the "seat of the pants" reviews you get in the magazines. The mags always seem to fall in love with whatever is the latest thing to come out. I think the 33 hp you see quoted some places is "at the shaft", not at the wheels.

 

no it is 33 at wheels and it is a big differance. Its in the same league with raptior and all them the 400ex is in with the weeker quads

 

25 hp < 33 hp, 8hp on an ATV is a BIG difference,

Nice try YZguy, but the 400ex is still the weak one.

 

The 400 ex was ahead of its time, now it is WAY behind. Nice quad, but nowhere near the top anymore. It is easier to correct the falts of any quad out there with a-arms,shocks,etc. But you can not do much with the 400ex motor. 40hp is about the max for any long term engine life. I would say most modded 400's are only putting 33-36 to the ground, and i am not talking bolt ons here. That is the way it is until honda smells the rubber. In hindsight they should have built a liquid cooled 400 when it first came out.

 

YZguy, there is not a HUGE HP differencce there but that's not the whole story. It seems as though there are some very CHEAP and EASY ways to get a few extra ponies out of the Z400. Second, liquid cooled and reverse - gotta love that.

You're right about the offroad . com review that it is probably the most objective review out. They dynoed all 3 quads onthe same dyno - that's important. Notice GT Thunders numbers were higher; different dyno different numbers. offroad . com did a good thing putting all 3 on the same dyno, it gives an honest comparison. You can't compare one dyno for a z400 and a different dyno for a 400ex - it's meaningless.

It is time for Honda to "smell the rubber" [img]i/expressions/face-icon-small-smile.gif[/img] as 14mins said.

 

Guys, how come you can say "no it's 33" when the dyno is right there saying 29?????

The Z is probably a great machine and if I was buying a new machine today, it would certainly be the Z. What I am reacting to is all the hype over a machine that ISN'T REALLY ANYTHING RADICAL! It's just a 400EX knockoff with a better engine! Look at the dynos, no way is the Z (stock machines) going to be faster than the Raptor (but it will certainly handle better). No doubt the Z will mod up nicely and be up there with a stock Raptor, but the 400EX mods up nice too and excedes a stock Z.

 

why do you say it is only a ex with a better motor that is as good as it gets right now the ex handles like its on rails and it only needs a lil more power which the z gave it and with only a pipe and good jetting people have gotton around fourty out of there z's

 

For those of you argueing over horsepower I feel you should check this out: http://www.atvnews.com/output.cfm?id=33571



Maybe the z400 and the x400 handle as good as the 400ex but are they as dependable? Suzuki may have came out with the first quad but where have they been for the last several years? The Z and the X have some reliablity to prove before they can rank above the 400ex in my book.