2011's are unvailed... Be honest, what do you think???
#141
![Default](https://atvconnection.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
That is great to hear!! Keeps the folks in Minnesota busy.
I agree, the short warranty is BS!! Can am usually will throw in a 3 year on their spring specials, but their quads are so grossly over priced (up here anyway) that for me, is just not worth it. I can buy an awful lot of goodies for the $2,500 difference between an Outty 400 and a SP 400HO.
I agree, the short warranty is BS!! Can am usually will throw in a 3 year on their spring specials, but their quads are so grossly over priced (up here anyway) that for me, is just not worth it. I can buy an awful lot of goodies for the $2,500 difference between an Outty 400 and a SP 400HO.
#142
![Default](https://atvconnection.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
I don't remember what the housing was made of but it took up half of the floorboard and what you're describing there is what I experienced with the 2011 400 HO, the noise was awful. I was later told the noise I was hearing was normal for that machine and that there wasn't anything wrong with it.
IMO, (which is irrelevant) the 400 is just too small for that big of a machine, but I like that they put the lowrange back. I think a lot of women liked the smaller 400, but the lack of low range created a problem similar to what the Rincon owners have.
The value line is just what it is. Nothing special. They will be phased out sooner or later.
#143
![Default](https://atvconnection.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
It doesn't matter what you say, William is buying the oversized 400 HO. It's what he wants and that's it. We won't hear anything about it for sure until someone gets one and they have their first problem(s).
IMO, (which is irrelevant) the 400 is just too small for that big of a machine, but I like that they put the lowrange back. I think a lot of women liked the smaller 400, but the lack of low range created a problem similar to what the Rincon owners have.
The value line is just what it is. Nothing special. They will be phased out sooner or later.
IMO, (which is irrelevant) the 400 is just too small for that big of a machine, but I like that they put the lowrange back. I think a lot of women liked the smaller 400, but the lack of low range created a problem similar to what the Rincon owners have.
The value line is just what it is. Nothing special. They will be phased out sooner or later.
The only way I would buy the 500HO is if the incentives are too good to resist, otherwise, the 400HO it will be.
#144
![Default](https://atvconnection.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
Anyone know off hand what the difference in the 500 and the 500 HO was? I believe they went to a different cam and bigger carb. The power difference was very noticeable.
The numbers on paper mean something but very little. Many variable including carbs, clutching, timing, etc..but I'm no mechanic.
When the 500 and 500 HO were rather new back in 2000 and 2001, I had a friend with each. I had two 400 2stroke Xplorers which were only a 378cc and I believe a 34mm carb. They were also about 100 lbs. lighter than the sportsmans. The 400 2 strokes (which is much snappier than the 4 stroke) could easily outrun the 500 and be neck and neck with the 500 HO all the way through from 0-60. Just throwing that out there for arguments sake. I really doubt the 400 HO will be even close to the 500 this year, but I've been wrong before.........
The numbers on paper mean something but very little. Many variable including carbs, clutching, timing, etc..but I'm no mechanic.
When the 500 and 500 HO were rather new back in 2000 and 2001, I had a friend with each. I had two 400 2stroke Xplorers which were only a 378cc and I believe a 34mm carb. They were also about 100 lbs. lighter than the sportsmans. The 400 2 strokes (which is much snappier than the 4 stroke) could easily outrun the 500 and be neck and neck with the 500 HO all the way through from 0-60. Just throwing that out there for arguments sake. I really doubt the 400 HO will be even close to the 500 this year, but I've been wrong before.........
#145
![Default](https://atvconnection.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
Anyone know off hand what the difference in the 500 and the 500 HO was? I believe they went to a different cam and bigger carb. The power difference was very noticeable.
The numbers on paper mean something but very little. Many variable including carbs, clutching, timing, etc..but I'm no mechanic.
When the 500 and 500 HO were rather new back in 2000 and 2001, I had a friend with each. I had two 400 2stroke Xplorers which were only a 378cc and I believe a 34mm carb. They were also about 100 lbs. lighter than the sportsmans. The 400 2 strokes (which is much snappier than the 4 stroke) could easily outrun the 500 and be neck and neck with the 500 HO all the way through from 0-60. Just throwing that out there for arguments sake. I really doubt the 400 HO will be even close to the 500 this year, but I've been wrong before.........
The numbers on paper mean something but very little. Many variable including carbs, clutching, timing, etc..but I'm no mechanic.
When the 500 and 500 HO were rather new back in 2000 and 2001, I had a friend with each. I had two 400 2stroke Xplorers which were only a 378cc and I believe a 34mm carb. They were also about 100 lbs. lighter than the sportsmans. The 400 2 strokes (which is much snappier than the 4 stroke) could easily outrun the 500 and be neck and neck with the 500 HO all the way through from 0-60. Just throwing that out there for arguments sake. I really doubt the 400 HO will be even close to the 500 this year, but I've been wrong before.........
#146
#147
![Default](https://atvconnection.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
Won't make a final decision until I hear one run, and test drive it in the bigger chassis.
#150