i wasn't aware that the rancher had cogs to replace becauase it is shaft drive.
how can you call the rancher 3 wheel drive when it slings mud form ALL FOUR WHEELS going trough the mud?
i'll admit it the polaris machines do have a better 4x4 system. i would have bought a sp500 or mag500 had they not weighed as much as a M1A1 tank.....until they can shave about 150lbs off their weight i'll keep my rancher.

ps i rode the polaris sp335 and the smaller mag (don't remeber if it was 425 or 335) but they both felt weaker than the rancher. especially the sp335. it was a really nice quad but felt underpowered for the weight.

 

I wish Polaris could take the credit for the for the auto transmission but it has been on snowmachines since the ealy 1960's and all the bug have been out of them long before any ATV where even thought about.I see old junk late 60's and early 70's snowmachines laying all over the place and the only part that you can count on that still functions is their pulley transmissions system.

 

I believe the auto on the Rubicon is a derrivation from the early sixties. I did not know snowmobiles had been around as Tim mentioned.

 

Yeah but Polaris and all automatics are gutless the sport 400 and the scrambler 500 are ridiculously s-l-o-w.... be honest they sound like outboard motors and my 99 Warrior was as fast as a sport 400 stock.Now it eats anything Polaris ever built.At least Yamaha and Honda offer a machine for all tastes and abilities. Polaris are for slow paced low concentration level riders.

this is just my opinion and i'm sure it will draw some objections



97 CT Banshee
99 Warrior
89 250R

 

ODIN IF YOU ARE HAVING SHIFTING PROBLEMS ADJUST YOUR CLUTCH IT IS TO TIGHT THIS WILL VERIFY. NEXT TIME IT WONT SHIFT TRY REVING IT UP THEN SHIFTING. MINE WORKS FLAWLESSLY AND I HAVE NO BATTERY POWER BECAUSE IM STILL WAITING FOR THE RECALL. TRY IT YOU SEE A DIFFERENCE.

 

HOLD ON I DIDNT EVEN FINISH READING YOUR POST AND YOU GOT SOMETHING WRONG THE POLARIS IS LOCKED FRONT END WHETHER IN 2WD OR 4WD STEERING DIFFERENCE ISNT ANY BETTER IN 2WD.

 

Well for starters what you are seeing on the rancher slinging mud is the wheels alternating in the mud just like the artic cat does it is actually pulling as described in one of the other forums all 4 wheels as long as it does not get into a bind and then you go back to 3 WHEEL DRIVE NOT 4 WHEEL DRIVE and as far as the system on the polaris the front wheels do not engage into 4 WHEEL DRIVE until the rear loses traction then the front end engages into TRUE 4 WHEEL DRIVE NOT 3 WHEEL DRIVE LIKE THE YAMAHAS. It is true the other bikes the smaller ones under 500cc are underpowered but far as the weight of the sportsman it actually helps you in the mud get more traction if you don't believe this put somebody on the back of your bike and see if it don't pull better. I just don't see fellows why honda doesn't put a 2 to 4 wheel drive lever on there bikes so you could run lockers when you need them. One of the post on here made a point they had no idea what they were talking about and you could tell they had never rode a polaris from the statement that they stay in all 4 wheel drive all the time which is not true because the front wheels do not engage till the rear wheels start slipping which really makes the 500cc sportsman a pretty easily steered bike for its size. Doesn't sound like yamaha is putting its perfection on to much with a system like this on the polaris or is the state of art air cooled on the Grizzly some more yamaha perfection...

My friends want me to ride with them just to pull them out...

 

i agree that the extra weight will help pull better. but in the event that the quad rolled top of you the rancher is much easier to kick off....the sportsmen and magnum quads are not junk by any means. the rancher just fit my needs a little better

 

Wow, interesting debate. Personally I like to shift. I've owned sleds for years, and cvts are the only way to fly on a snow machine. On a 4x4 quad, in my opinion they are certainly not the best choice. 1) they are not in the right "gear" all the time as some people claim, all engines have a power band, two strokes narrow, four strokes wide in most cases. If you understand that a cvts' "gear" ratio is determined by engine rpm, then explain how an sp500 (not to pick on Polaris') is in the right gear cruising at say 20 mph. Lets say the engines power band is between 3000 and 5500 rpm, but at 20 mph the engine is only running at say 2400 rpm. Right gear you say? These rpm ranges are figurative, but trust me at many rpm ranges a cvt is not in the right "gear". 2) they are not the best choice in their present incarnation(the Rubicon should be much better)for deep water crossings. Never mind 3 wheel drive, a belt driven quad with a wet belt is NO WHEEL DRIVE. I know auto fans, you never had a wet belt, and I've never been stuck with my three wheel drive. Next. 3) Ergos', all the cvt equipped quads I've ridden had lousy ergos, trannys are way to wide. I understand that Yamahas are fairly narrow, so are probably much better in this department. Oh well I've ragged on the auto boys enough, if you ride a auto, I hope you like it, thats all that counts. P.S. Atving, whats the matter, Arctic Cats not the best anymore? Gee what happened?

 

whether 2wd or 4wd the polaris front wheels always travel at the same speed posi so think about it and dont argue ! polaris sucks and thats the bottom line!