ya, i had to pull a small tree out of the ground with my hawkeye and i creeped up at first to the end of the rope and it did nothing but dig. i havent been in any situation where the tires just did not spin. even on hard gravel in 2wd with brand new tires i can spin the tires.

 

I think most people base their point of view on information they have either learned from past experiences or from past experiences/opinions of others, and for the most part, if your a Sportsman owner, (or most other ATVs for that matter), it is stressed that you always use low range for slow travel or sticky situations and for the most part this IS a necessary practice.
Now when the Polaris engineers come up with a better design that eliminates the need for the low range all together it is understandable that there would be some who just can't accept the idea and are a bit critical in the process!
I constantly put this bike in situations that would test much bigger machines and it just keeps coming! I have never once had a problem with not enough power and those I ride with are constantly amazed at just how capable a quad it is...especially since they gave me some of the same comments that we see here!
I can only say, try it before you knock it!

 

Well put!

 

I've never driven a hawkeye or an '08 400 sportsman, but if what you guys are saying is true, then why not put the same engineering into the large sportsman and just eliminate the low gear option all together? Who here wouldn't love to hit any trail condition and never have to worry about shifting or drivetrain damage?

 

Theres a couple things to look at with the drop of the low range.

First you have a tight belt all the time. The main reason they want you in low range on the fullsize is to keep the engine speed up and inturn keep the clutch speed well above the engagement speed. In high range you end up slipping the belt due to low engagement pressure from the low engine speed. Slipping belt creates heat and burns itself up.

Centrifugal wet clutch, give it some gas, some shoes expand into a drum and create friction to start the bike moving. Honda has done it for many a years and many of there bikes have gone 20 plus years on the original shoes. One way bearing makes for automatic engine braking in addition to the ability to roll start the bike. End result your no longer using the belt as a clutch on the bike,greatly reducing the amount of heat the belt will ever see. (The initial coefficient of friction will always be higher then the friction needed to overcome the rolling resistance).

Overall gearing reduction. It was originaly a smaller bike, and inturn it had to be geared deeper to move its weight with the smaller motor. The 400ho is topping out at speeds of 50 mph, my 450 Sportsman will hit lower 60's wound right out. Thats a 20% reduction in top speed. Theres only a 4% change in tire circumference from a 25 to a 24 and only 13% from a 25 to a 22.

 

Ok so what your saying is...........?????????? What are you saying? HAHAHA! To technical for my tiny brain. [img]i/expressions/face-icon-small-happy.gif[/img]

I say if the engineering is so good then why not make bigger bikes based on the same principle.

 

The new CVT may be a look at the future. With the tracks on my 400HO continually operates in extreme situations and pereforms flawlessly.

If you've never experienced a quad with this set up, open your mind and try it. Don't let others opinions sway you without personal experience, rumours, or old wives tales. Try it for yourself.

Hey McDerry, you're a bit low on your speed estimate on the 400HO. Totally stk, except for "0" toe in on the front, I back out of mine at 63 mph (gps) cause I'm chicken. My Hawkeye, done the same, is all out at 52mph GPS. Good technical info from you, thanks.

 

I have said all along the best thing Polaris could do would be to adapt the tight belt setup to the full sized Sportsman lineup. They could still keep a low range. I hated worrying about being in high or low all the dang time on my Sportsman 600 and I hated the lag on take off in high gear. Both of these problems are eliminated with the tight belt setup.

I liked the new setup so well, I sold the Sportsman and kept the Hawkeye for myself. I had bought the Hawkeye originally for my wife.

 

Yeah, Tennessee, if more people took the time to try the midsized ones before speculating how they would work, there would be a lot of suprises out there. I still really enjoy both bikes in any type of terrain and trail, other than deep mud where I have no experience and can't express a knowledgeable opinion.

I really enjoy the Hawkeye on tight technical rides and at 5-10 mph, all quads seem to become equal.

 

I too think they should use the same system on all the full-sized Sportsmans if it realy does work that great, and I have no reason to doubt you guys. It would eliminate a lot of the weight and extra parts that Sportsmans have had for (20?) years.