mY BROTHER AND I both have 2004 Outlander 330 4 x 4's with about 500 miles total between the two and no problems, they make the MAgnums we had look they were about 20 years old. The are great well built/solid quads. The Sportsman was a nice quad in 96 but its time for a huge change and diet. Look like the 2005 are basicaly the same. By the way, I got a liquid cooled IRS quad for 5109.50 OTD that will top out around 52-54 mph and get about 26 mpg, I dont think that can be beat. And one more thing it took Polaris about 15 years to make a decent ATV, Bombardier has done it in about 5!

 

This thread went no-where fast. MINE IS BETTER THAN YOURS! nanee nanee boo boo

 

A REV rider calling the Fusion ugly? The Fusion looks awesome in person, especially in black. Looks just like the F-117A. [img]i/expressions/face-icon-small-smile.gif[/img]

 

I went riding with my friend with the 2004.5 sp500 again yesterday.
I really like the sportsman steering.
The sp500 has much more power than my Outlander.
It jumps well.
The shifter works very nice compared to my Outlander.
Also, the turning radius on the sp500 is 6 inches SHORTER than my Outlander.
So far he hasn't had any problems with it.

I had $1,700 of damage at 10 hours from a screw coming out of the starter cover and wasting both pulleys. It was covered.

Have you ever heard the saying, "shoulda got a sportsman"?

 

Jeff....I see you are from Michigan, what dealer did you buy from? I like the way my outlander steers, very easy. I have a freind with a 2000 RSE and his top speed is hardly more than my 330. I cant see a 500 HO beating you by much and so what if it does, its a 500. My brother inlaw has a 2004 Yellow 500 HO, its a nice ATV, nothing special. After spending some time on the Outlander the Sportsman starts to look dated, especialy the IRS and it sure likes to make squeaks and ratles, not to mention the Polaris brake nosie. Also the handlebars seem narrow on the Polaris. Maybe its just me being pro ski-doo. Any way, I had a 2000 MAgnum and a 2004 Magnum and think that this Outlander is a way better bulit quad than those. I think the biggest problem with the outlander is its a 400, Bombardier should have come out with a 500 version first. The sheep dont care that its fast and powerful, they just look at the 400 decal and are missing out. [img]i/expressions/face-icon-small-happy.gif[/img]

 

look whos talking about Polaris bashing. Whats it say at the top of the page? Isnt there a forum for Bombardiers?

 

I like the looks of the Sportsman line myself. If it got hit with the same ugly stick as the outlander, I would have to look elsewhere. I must not be alone in this thinking, just look at the sales records.

 

I mentioned the power of the sportsman 500 because all the magazines are saying the 2 quads are a tie in the power and drag race department. It's not true. I think it's fine for a 400 and not a big deal.

I think it also comes down to how a quad feels to a particular rider. I know what I like when I feel it. As you can see in my signature file that preference changes quite often.

Have a nice day.

 

the outlander 400HO does make 32Nm and that is more then some 500's i've seen the specs of. however my 97 prarie 400 makes 32.3Nm big whoop same power so don't say they are more powerful. they do however have the power to weight ratio on me. they are nice bikes and have nice technology thats confuses most other ATV manufactorers who have never seen the like. using the frame as a skidplate, using inboard disc brakes, and their new suspension are all different then anything anyone saw before. however only time will tell if these new designs will be successful. however since Bombardier is the newest ATV manufactorer i give them high rankings for coming out with a good platform and then jumping in and designing all new products.

anyway thats my .02