Let's see,rpm limiter when in real 4 wheel drive going forward,rpm limiter when in reverse with no override and rear drive shafts that break with real tires sounds like some real competition all right.

 

well, I, for one, have ridden BOTH and seen the race. My local Polaris shop just got in it's first SP700 and held a major opening event last Saturday. One of the features was a race between these 2 "extreme bigbores" The Kawie is definately the fastest off the line. The SP700 begins to gain it back as soon as the powerband hits on it(about the 15-20 mph range). After this surge, it overtook the Prairie at about the 40 yard mark and never looked back. It was ahead by 2-3 lengths after the 1/4.

 

ExtremeMudman,
You sure know your stuff. You are exactly right. The sportsman 700 can be beaten in the very beginning of a race, after that, it just pulls ahead. I know that for a fact and it seems that you do also. Have a good day!

 

<< well, I, for one, have ridden BOTH and seen the race. My local Polaris shop just got in it's first SP700 and held a major opening event last Saturday. One of the features was a race between these 2 &quot;extreme bigbores&quot; The Kawie is definately the fastest off the line. The SP700 begins to gain it back as soon as the powerband hits on it(about the 15-20 mph range). After this surge, it overtook the Prairie at about the 40 yard mark and never looked back. It was ahead by 2-3 lengths after the 1/4. >>



There it is again. Could someone please explain to me what an &quot;Extreme bigbore&quot; is. I know that both the Kawasaki 650 and the Polaris 700 aren't, but if they are then a whole lot of other machines have to be thrown into the &quot;Bigbore&quot; mix. Examples would be, Kaw 400's, Big Bear, Kodiak, AC 400 &amp; 500 and the list goes on. The past definiton has been a single cylinder of greater than 500 cc's constituted a &quot;bigbore&quot;. Now it seems that if you had a 4 cylinder engine of 600 cc's that would be considered a &quot;bigbore&quot;. Somebody explain this, please.

 

A 600cc 4-cylinder can't be a big-bore by definition: it has a small bore! Take a look at the size of a piston out of a 600-class sportbike. They're TINY in comparison to all but the smallest pistons found in ATVs (read: anything under 200ccs). In fact, looking at these specs... The Yamaha Raptor has about the same size bore and stroke as the Ford 4L V6 (ex. '02 Ford Explorer). 100mm by 84mm.
So, to answer your question. In my opinion, &quot;big bore&quot; is anything that has more than twice the displacement (in liters) as the number of cylinders of the engine. A 500cc single, 1L twin, 2L four, 3L six, 4L eight. Granted, that makes a lot of things &quot;big bores&quot; in my book, but that's just what I, personally, go by.

And, PrairieDust, why in the name of all things powerful would you want an AUTOMATIC revving above 8500-9000RPM anyway? That's about the point where an automatic begins to really lose its efficiency, so having an engine attached to an automatic transmission that's revving to 12 grand would probably put less power to the ground than an engine that redlines around 7,000, even if the high-revver made several more horsepower.

Granted... if you attach a 5-speed to the high-revver, it'd be a different story...

 

So, the Polaris 700 is not a big Bore and neither is the Kawasaki 650 then. But then again, maybe the 700 performance wise will be a &quot;Big&quot; bore to ride.

 

I would have thought that they had something better than that old 680cc sled engine. That's the same motor that was talked about two years ago when they gave a pair of them to the National Parks Service to test. The gutless wonder. The reason they did that is because no else wanted them. As I understand it, those sleds could get to about 45 mph tops. That takes sledding back into the early days with those speeds. Heck I once had a Ski-Doo with a 368cc opposed twin that would go 60 mph in 1968.

But of course the Polaris &quot;ATV Wizards&quot; think it's good enough for an atv. They also need to get away from Rick Mast and Richard Petty and Petty Racing with their advertising. These guys are losers and has-beens that have not come close to winning &quot;anything&quot; in a long, long time. They have a tough time even qualifying anymore. The King was great &quot;in his day&quot;, but that has long past. What the hell does he know about atv's anyway . . . only thing he knows is how to spell Polaris since it's on the checks tht keep coming his way. I hope he runs for governor or mayor or something so he gets out of racing.

&quot;What have you done for us hard core riders lately Polaris? . . . not much!&quot;
That's why many of us have had enough of your lack of suport.

The Polaris 700 will be very limited build for 2002 and fully introduced in 2003 just like they did with the Scram 500HO. They want to see if all works or not. I'm predicting that it will be given the atv &quot;utility slug of the year&quot; for it meager performance and extreme weight. It will eventually be sold as a garden tractor by Gravely for medium duty yard work.

Reminds me of the '71 Ski-Doo TNT &quot;Silver Bullet&quot; that was dubbed the &quot;Lead Bullet&quot; for it's heavy weight and lack of performance compared to the competition.

Just figure out the hp to weight ratio of this new 700 SP500 . . . it's not very good when compared to the others. The numbers don't lie.

Have a great day . . .

Jack
www.godigital-design.com/schultzmotorsports

 

Extrememudman

I too drove the sp700, but don't you think it would be better for the 700 to have a little bit more low end. For these big sport/utility you would think the low end would be used more then the top end. Mostly when bigger tires and mud holes or even plowing the driveway is what these atv will be used for. If I get snow like I did last year, I need low end to push those banks back. And it seemed to me the 700 took a little time to get going, I don't want to have to take a 40 yard run at the snow banks to push it back or get a running head start when a mudhole comes up. I just think for a motor thats is to have tons of torque should utilize it a bit better.

 

Ge4x4, I definately see what you are saying. It is NOT geared low enough in low. It looks like there will need to be some tinkering with the clutch to solve this problem. I would have to see how it turned my Outlaws in comparison to the HO before I would be positive that it is just now &quot;How&quot; the power is delivered instead of a lack thereof. I think the reason that you were unimpressed with the 700 was because you were expecting a different power delivery. The power delivery is completely different than the HO. The HO is the punch, front end raise and rear end sink screamer to about 30-40mph. This is the opposite of the 700. It pulls harder the faster you get up to. The power delivery is definately lower on the HO, but top end this thing is FASSSTTTT.

I look for a &quot;perfected&quot; version of this quad to come out next year.

 

To Campy,
HUH????