I would appreciate anyones help in telling me pro's and con's on the subject of either machine. Mostly they would be ridden on the steep trails of NW Pa. I am particularly interested in durabilty, dependability, and costs to maintain. Have concerns about water and mud, confused about the two different suspensions, and type of 4 wheel drive. I would like to thank anyone who will respond with any useful information that will be used to make a decision that needed to purchase two new ones in the next week. Thanks to all, ForrestMk!

 

Well, I might as well start the argument. When I started looking for a new utility machine. I rode both quads. Now, this is purely my opinion. I found the Polaris very comfortable. I also found it heavy and hard to manipulate. (if I were to be riding it in tight woods). I've heard many,many bad experiences about their reliability. I'm not a Polaris basher, either, I own a 99 Sport and love it. It was also $600 dollars more than the Kodiak where I shopped. The sportsman is quite faster than the Kodiak, more powerful too, but it is 100 cc's larger.The kodiak,on the other hand, was sleek,easily manipulated, and very powerful. It too, was very comfortable. It's a lot smaller than the Sportsman, but I'm 6' tall and 210 lbs. and it fit me perfect. It has "parking' gear which I wasn't sure about at first, but fell in love with. You can switch from 2-4 wheel drive at the touch of a button. Again, in no way am I a Polaris basher, I loved both machines, I personally found the Yamaha fit my needs a little better. By the way, it's a lot better on hills

 

The Kodiak sounds like it MIGHT be better for you. It is a little sportier, turns sharper, and is smaller. All these add up to a better woods tight woods quad (Trust me I found out to day by trying to follow a Honda 300 2x4 in the woods on my Arctic Cat 500. It was ALOT easier for him.) If you were looking for a great ride, a great mudder, and alot of power then the 500 would be better for you.

The Sportsman will be alittle more costly to own, because it will burn more gas, need more grease, and they have more things to break.

Arctic Cat 500, The Big Sh... No, the Big Cat

 

Surprizes me how many things people have to say and have no idea what they are saying.The use of gas,my 500 runs between 20 and 22 miles per gallon,if I rode hard all weekend I would have hard time using $10.00 worth.The grease boy,it costs a couple of bucks a tube,you can only grease your quad 2 or 3 times for one tube,can see why that would be good reason not to buy polaris.Sure it's only 100cc's,but what would you want less.power,and go 30 miles an hr vs 55plus.Have had quite a few polaris,own 500sp's and a425 magnum,am buying 00 500sp in spring.Get what ever makes you happy,just make sure if you get some advice,make sure they know what they are talking about.The grease costs to much,give me a break!!!!The independant suspention has no equal,has a tight turning radius handles good on the trails and the woods.Ride the MTN's all the time have off camber,plus rocks and climbing,can't beat the 500sp.
Later COB

[This message has been edited by corncob2 (edited 10-25-1999).]

 

If you are considering riding
"two up" with any degree of
regularity, the SP500 is a MUCH better
choice than the Kodiak.
I would urge you to take a look at the
new AC500 auto.
I am getting a Mag425 Polaris this week
and will add either a SP500 or Cat auto
in the next month or two.
The Kodiak may be a little better in tight turns in the woods. The SP500 is an
awesome tool with a ride that is unequaled.
The maintainence question is a none issue
between the Kodiak and SP500. The zerks are
NOT A BIG DEAL.

 

That is still more fuel and grease than the Kodiak requires. My Arctic Cat 500 makes about 24 mpgs and it is only a few cc's smaller and about 40 lbs lighter so I think a 401cc motor in a 140 lbs lighter quad should make more mpg.

He simpily asked which would cost more to maintain and I anwsered. I never said those cost were worth not getting the 500.

You talk about me having no idea yet you say the kodiak only goes 30 mph. Were did you get your info? Test and owners have said that they do 50+mph.

You talk about how 100cc makes a big difference in power yet in other post comparing the Sportsman to the Grizz you say 100 cc doesn't make a big differece. PLEASE make up your mind.

I think he better ride both then make his decision, But I still think the Kodiak MIGHT be better for him.

Arctic Cat 500, Nany Nany Bo Bo

 

Evensen,

This may surprises you but I don't think the Arctic Cat-o-matic is for him. I think it is a little to wide, heavy, and to hard to steer for woods riding. I think the Arctic Cat would make a better mudder and rock climber than the Kodiak though.

Arctic Cat 500, Na man, na

 

As the aothor of a prior post named
"Buying a Kodiak Instead" I am slightly
embarrassed to continue to comment...
However- the Cat auto is lighter than
the SP500. The Cat claims more torque than
the Griz. The Kodiak is a super one person
machine. I only got to drive one for 30 min or so on packed dirt. It was light handling
and very nice but felt cramped compared to
the SP500.
The Cat auto seems ideal for my needs and
I think is a real contender to the SP500.
Maybe the Kodiak is a better comparison to
the Magnum 425 or Magnum 500?
My wife is 107 lbs and strong. Our Magnum425
will be perfect as her full time ride.
I am 240 and 6'1" I think the Cat auto
or SP500 is the ride for me.

 

The review of the new Cat says that the new
real 4WD system makes it easier to steer.
And I do know how to spell author.. sorry.

 

This post should not die away.
The SP 500 is superior in features
and performance. I am more and more a believer that the need for repair
issue with Polaris is sour grapes
from owners of other quads jealous
of the innovation and features offered
on Polaris machines.