Today was the first time I have been without my new Xplorer 400cc 4x4.This might **** off some of you Honda guys,but it 's not in the shop because something failed.It is in there for its 20hr inspection ONLY.

I hopped on the 99 Sportsman today because the Xplorer is not done yet.Man,what a comfortable ride this quad offers.I owned it for well over a yr and it's funny that I forgot how well it rode until I was back on it today.Im headed for a very lengthy trailride wk end[poker run] in July,and visions of taking the Sportsman instead of the Xplorer had popped in my head for only a second,all because of it's unmatched ride and comfort.And to tell you how really comfy I think it is,I really think the ride on the Xplorer is pretty good to.But I will certainly be taking the Xplorer on this expedition for sure.For some reason,with over 100 riders in this July's Poker run,I want to make sure im bringing the quickest 4X4 I have.

The Sportsman is one very comfortable 4x4.===Bill

 

I couldn't agree with you more Bill the ride of the sportsman is unmatched, seems I catch a lot of slack every time I mention Honda but in the post where they say the ride on the Rubicon is as close or the same as the Sportsman I just don't have to ride one to know that a solid axle rear end doesn't compare to IRS there is just no comparison as you have seen this and admit it to it on the same brand bike...a solid axle is a solid axle the Rubicon appears to be a nice bike that is possibly carveing the way with that new trans but the solid axle rear end is still 70's technology. Looks like with Polaris with all there different types of bikes would make a 500cc scrambler with high, low and reverse with an IRS whats your views on that Bill C.

 

ATVing,
I have wondered for yrs why the Scrambler does not at least have a low range on it?Polaris is trying to keep the weight down as much as possible on that particular sport quad I think.There are ways Polaris can trim a few extra pounds without it adversely affecting the $$ of their quads to.

The new Rubicon?
I have to admit,I cant wait to ride one.I love the sounds of that new transmission.I have MANY unanswered questions regarding the tranny's performance and longivity that only time will answer.I know Honda likes to keep the weight down on their toys,but they should'nt do it at the expense or comfort of their 4x4 rides.Adding IRS will add weight to the Rubicon.Still,I ask?If this is Honda's 'break thru'' 4x4 quad,than why not at least add disk brakes,IRS,and switchable 2wd-4wd?Whats up with 20 yr old technology?It just makes NO sense to me.Im also hearing some negative feedback on the new differential that the new Honda's have.It is suppose to provide traction to the tire that needs it.I been reading a few things that say it aint working as described by Honda.If im paying 7 grand for this machine,you better beleive it will have the above listed options on it.Why pay more $$ and get less product?Makes no sense to me.====Bill

 

Hey Bill, I read that article in the forum about the Rubicon and what I got out of it was that only the front wheels are capable of transferring power. The rear is always driving. I'll read it again but that's what I got out of the page. Still I think it sounds like a solid machine. I'm glade their cars aren't as good as the quads they build. That might change my life style, if you know what I mean!
Chuck, Suzuki KQ 300, GPS & lunch...

 

From what i have read on the Rubicon it sounds like the trans works very well. It seems to shift great and always be in the proper gear. They say the EBS on it is excelent. They have also said thet it seems very lethargic for a 500cc
quad. Slow acceleration and a top speed in the high 40s low 50s. What bothers me most about it though is the fact that the trans has no servicable parts. If there is a problem all that can be done is replace the unit. With ATV parts costing what they do im guessing you could buy a Yamaha Blaster for the cost of that tranny. Im still trying to figure out why Honda wants to prove that belt trannys are no good for a quad. I understand the problems that Polaris has has with theirs and i dont care for the performance of the Suzuki version ither. Kawasaki dosent seem to have a clue as to whats happening. But the new Yamaha Ultramatics are Awesom performers. I think that all the belt driven trannys need a filter type system on the intake side of their vents.
Bill have you had the chance to ride the new Kodiak and test out the tranny ???? im kind of curious what you Polaris guys think about its performance. Overall i dont think the Rubicon will have much affect on the industry. It has an inovative idea but i dont see it taking off. Belts are just to easy to service and inexpensive to repair.

 

Ecorman,
The Rubicon does indeed sound like a solid machine to me also,but this quad cost 7 grand or more.So at that price,where's the

1.IRS?
2.Switchable 2wd-4wd?
3.Disk brakes?
4.Lockable front Differential?

You will pay around 6200 for a 500cc Sportsman and pay less $$ and receive more quad for your dollar.Im confused,why pay more $$ and receive less quad?

Yama,
I have not personally rode the Kodiak yet.I have rode with a few guys that owned them though.They seem very sporty to me and I like the engine and appearance of this quad.I beleive it is the same moter they have in the Warrior.My wife is sorta itching me for a quad.My sons friend is selling his Kodiak,im going to be taking a look at it real soon,perhaps I'll buy it if the price is right.Is the Kodiak auto trans too?To date,the only thing I dislike about the Kodiak is the limited slip front end.I have witnessed a few of them stuck in serious mud and only one wheel spinning.But if me and the wife ride together,we wont be getting real muddy,so the limited slip will have no affect on my purchase.====Bill

 

I rode a new 2000 blue Kodiak and did not notice any differance in the tranny .Like all snowmobile type trannies you just gas and go not much to compare.I like the bikes selector for foward,low and reverse alot though it worked super smooth.

 

Bill
The 99 Kodiak was a 5 speed with the same engine as the warrior 350cc. The 2000 is 400cc with an auto i that in my opinion is superior in performance to Polaris's auto. My wife rides the Kodiak and likes it alot. She finds the smaller size and fairly light weight easy to manage. I would have to say that if i was in your shoes i would probubly buy the wife an Xplorer 250 4x4.
They are reasonably priced and you already are familiar with Polaris as far as working on them.

 

The Kodiak has never been 350cc. It has always been 400cc engine. The big bear has always been 350cc. The difference between the 99 Kodiak and the 00 Kodiak is air versus liquid cooling. I understand that the engine on the new Kodiak is new from the ground up. Anyway, just wanted to clear up any misunderstanding. I believe that the new Big Bear has taken the old 400cc engine of the previously air-cooled Kodiak.

 

Time for a Honda guy to jump in.

My concern is the price of these toys. My next quad will not be the Rubicon, the reason, is I don't need the fastest of latest quad out there especially at $7,000. One thing to remember is the Rubicon transmission might be the best out there but it is modular. This means if something breaks (out of warrenty) then the WHOLE transmission is replaced, can anyone guess how much this will be? You know it will cost a lot!!.

I know that there are people who have to have the latest & greatest toy out there, thats ok since its there money. This is what the manufactureres are banking on.

Next year, when my wife moves up to my 4WD from her 2WD, I will be looking at the 400' for my new quad. Yes, I will consider Polaris along with Yamaha, & Kawasaki! Now if Polaris would make a Sportsman 400 instead of a 335.

Later