I don't see any advantage of making there own engine. The R&D and manufatoring cost would be very high. Polaris isn't as big as Honda or Yamaha. If you find a great motor and can use it to be competative, I see no reason to try and make your own. Plus the KTM's have a very good rep for quality and dependability, plus there light and fast, was a very good move on Polaris part. I think if they tried there own, it would be put down by everyone before it would hit the market.

 

Or atleast design a better one and have it built to their specs by Fuji or whoever. Does Polaris manufacture any of their own motors or are they all subcontracted out?

 

They build there twins only. The Fugi's are good rec motors, but are to heavy for racing. 30lbs is a lot of weight between the Fugi and the KTM.

 

Actualy Suzuki owns Fugi industrial engines. I think the KTM was a great idea. Now I just wish KTM would get theres out a little sooner, I cant wait!

and ss97 I see you are right on the cutting edge with your Arctic Cat I meen Suzuki DAMN I meen Kawasuki 400. Dude get a clue and stop being so biased about somthing you dont know about.

 

i have to agree with you on that... its also cheaper to buy an engine then to manafacture your own, thus why GM and Ford uses engines built by other companies then directly FORD or GM

 

actually im pretty sure toyota owns FUJI and they bought this from GM in the later 2005 season, and FUJI owns subaru, and subaru owns Iszu who was the designer of the mighty duramax which now is in your silverado trucks, and speaking of silverado, the GM company owns 20% of suzuki, and sence GM was struggling with their money Nissan owns stock in GM now to this day

 

I'm not bashing, I'm trying to point out that the machine needs improvement to be considered on par with the SRA machines. It was stated that the Outlaw would dominate the XC circuit last year, and not people are saying with the new engine that it will dominate Baja and etc.....

My seat time on the Outlaw was done with an open mind, I do not hate IRS. But the fact is as you yourself stated you cannot ride them the same. My entire argument is based on that. All I've said is that coming off years of a SRA riding the difference at times is too great to overcome what slight advantage they have. The rear ends are just way too heavy for aggressive sport riding IMO, but that probably won't bother some people.

You seem to think that SRA machine slam you around or something. But if you know how to ride one the landings are just as soft and smooth.

The facts are what they are, by configuration alone IRS is going to be different and there are advantages and disadvantages. What I'm pointing out are my personal experiences with the Outlaw. I had enough seat time to get a real feeling for the machine and I've said before that overall it was a fun machine to ride. But when I pushed it too hard (as hard as I can push my z400) it started to bite back and things got very sketchy at times. It simply did no react to terrain in a predictable manner when gas was applied and the rear end swapped around in a bad way. It did not like to launch off jump and while landings were smooth, gas-on landings resulted in odd lurches off to the side.

Of course I take off fast as you suggest I don't. But you are missing my point here. If you come into a slow corner on a SRA machine, on exit you punched the gas sending the machine sidways as you enter a straight. On a SRA quad you can still be sideways, while you are going straight. The machine goes where it is steered NOT to whichever rear wheel is getting more traction. It's called drifting, or sliding, and you can have the machine totally sideways and still going straight. With the IRS that does not happen the same way. The rear wheels hook in and PUSH the machine no matter where the front wheels are pointing. On a UTE with IRS you don't notice this because the front end is heavy and planted. On the Outlaw the power makes the front end light and the front tires just get pushed around by the power in the rear.

I'm not trying to get all into IRS bashing or something. I'm trying to point out to people the short sided look. The guy who's Outlaw I was riding was selling it, he had come off riding a Raptor 660 and a TRX450r that he owned prior. He was selling the Outlaw because he hated it and could not get used to it. He went on to tell me for an hour that he wasted his money because he thought he was going to be able to get used to it. After 6-months he was not used to it and was selling it to buy a Raptor700. This is also a guy who races XC and has been to Baja twice so he has some knowledge in the sport.

It is all personal. If you can make an IRS machine work like a SRA, more power to you. I personally hated it and did not like the overall feeling of the ride. It felt unstable and unpredictable to me, but that is MY personal opinion.

 

What is that supposed to mean? I know enough about it to make the statements I made, I've ridden one enough to know a few things. If my opinion is so clueless why would you even respond to it?

So what you are saying is that the Outlaw is so advanced that my z400 riding stupidity cannot even comprehend it's greatness? The Outlaw is like some futuristic machine that maybe I'm too old to "get it", is that what you are trying to insinuate with your astute observation? Well you might be right than, maybe I just don't get it. It is too far out there for me so I will just shut up about it now............

 

You have to a open mind and sense of adventure to see the advantage, It good that everybody has a opinion, It makes the world go around and I don't think Suzuki or Toyota owns Fuji I read somewhere that subaru owns Fuji and Polaris has stock in Fuji, My dealership told me that Polaris owns Fuji but I don't believe that.

 

Toyota owns 20% of Subaru, and Subaru is part of Fuji Motors. So in effect everyone is right.


Toyota owns:
-Daihatsu (~51%)
-Fuji Heavy Industries -- Subaru (Toyota owns ~20%. Toyota bought this from GM in late 2005. )
-Isuzu (5.9%, announced 7 Nov. 2006)
-Lexus
-Scion
-Toyota