Yeah Bill, all I am going from is the quads I have had and the ones others I know have had, and they are actually just a mess of 250 fourtrax's and 300 hondas. We've never had anything go wrong with them. The grease fittings are an excellent idea though for a machine with so many moving parts though. The king quad could benefit from them probably if it doesn't have any (I have no idea). What I was thinking with that post is that the grease fitting weren't much of a swaying point. kind of like I don't think that it matters really if a honda 450 is air cooled. Not really any big deal. Liquid cooled quads get hot just the same. Magazines, and people in general make a big deal over minor things, when mainly what I look at is the performance, ride, power, reliability aspects. Then I look at things like stability, turning (though I don't own a great turning quad), and other things like that.

The biggest crap I can think of that gets blown out of proportion is ground clearance. What good is frame to ground on a utility with the rear end hanging down an extra 3 inches lower than the ground clearance figure? My AC hangs down a good bit in the rear, and what pisses me off more is that they changed it up for the 2000 models. I think my quad with stock 26" titans has about the same clearance under the rear end as a 450 honda with stock 25". Even if I go to 27" tires, I will still smack rocks more often than I want. The sportsman 500 is the only quad that gets a true ground clearance figure, because now even honda states its measurement from frame to ground. How in the hell did I get to talking about this?

 

The real question is this: Can the Rubicon handle us? Ah hah. Go home and chew on that one a while.

 

There was a statment by DirtWheels magazine saying a Rancher can reel in a Yamaha Wolverine on the top end! So much for thinking magazines know what there talking about.

 

Here is the ticket on this. The Rubicon will win the magazine shootouts if for no other reason that it is new, and has a new design. Shootouts thrive on innovation, and also totally new designs. Look at the new Kodaik. They loved it. The 400ex won just because it was that good, but I say the Rubicon will win no matter what, just because its new. If you read the Rancher vs. Kodiak (I think, it might have been the Big Bear 400), it seems as if the Yamaha was winning in most of the categories, right up till then end and they just said the Rancher wins. Well, its the newest thing. That is lame. Its like the Truck of the year award. It doesn't matter what it is, if it is new, it will win. You can't sit there and tell me that the Toyota Tundra is a better vehicle than all of the other full size trucks. Also about the Tundra, is it not lame how they brag on its acceleration, even though they compare it to the smallest V8's from Ford, Chevy, and Dodge? This is all off topic, but have you ever looked at the back seat of a Tundra? Its a right angle. Totally uncomfortable. Main point is, the newness concept applies to quads as well.

 

But, the 400EX is still winning shootouts, the 300EX is still undefeated in shootouts, the 450 Foremans never did much in the shootouts (even when they were new), so I think the magazine test riders are influenced when something new comes out, but for them to keep winning the shootouts will tell you a lot about the machines.

About the Motortrend 2000 Truck of the Year, it is a very nice truck. I think it deserved the award, even if they compared it to all of the current trucks. I think the back seat is it's weakest point, everything else is nice on it. That V-8 engine has a lot of power and sounds cool. A lot of the acceleration tests depend on what axle ratio the trucks have, but the latest issue of Motortrend showed the Tundra to out accelerate the Ford F-150 with the 5.4L and the Ram's 5.9L, and only got beat by Chevy's 5.3L Silverado, by a hair. The back seat is just like the '99 F-150's were, bolt upright. In 2000 they changed the angle and have the second best back seat, behind the Chevy, of course.

 

Snow Shark... don't just ride on, read on... If that is so important, you might look at the 125 yard drag race (in high range this time) where the Arctic Cat was like 11.2 seconds, and the Rancher was well over 13 in its runs. The difference in the speed of one quads low range over anothers single range transmission is no substitute for more cc's. The Rancher is a great quad in its class, but its not going to out power any of the 500 class offerings from any manufacturer.

 

I have a 2000 chevy with the nice angled rear seat that you don't mind being stuck sitting in, as well as 285 horses to scream so I am feeling confident here, but I still don't see how the Tundra is a better truck in any way than Ford or Dodge. Its just new. Dodge Ram was truck of the year for a while, but then again, it was the only new full size design. All it had to beat then was the S10's, Rangers, and the Tacoma after Toyota desided to name it instead of just calling it a toyota 4x4. Its fiercest competition was the Dakota to be exact. Ford came out with a new one in 97, they win. Chevy in 99, same result. I always liked the looks of toyota pickups, but get in any foriegn truck, no matter if its top of the line, and you still have a plastic headliner, and cheap looking interior, whereas get in a Silverado, a Lariat or Eddie Bauer, or a Laramie and you are in a whole different ballpark.

Toyota makes a good lasting truck, but they don't make the nicest. Why in the hell am I even talking about this on here anyway. It was just an analogy to new quad in the shootout thing. I'm forgetting it now.

 

Hey Andy I completely agree with you on the truck of the year issue. What is new is what will win, after that issue of Truck Trend I didn't renew my subscription. The other three were better trucks regardless of what the acceleration without a load was. If trucktrend would do some tests that show real truck ability in real conditions the Toyota would fall short. Sorry for the truck talk, back to the atvs. I am sure the Rub. will be nice and if it could out pull the Mag500 I would look at one.

 

I do agree that Motortrend bases their truck/car of the year awards based on what's new or significantly improved, they even state that in the articles. But the Tundra won for a reason. It did go against the 2000 Dodge Dakota Quad Cab however. I drove a Tundra, and it is a cool truck. It is the most carlike, with the quietest engine and interior of all the trucks made. It directly resembles the Ford's interior, and exterior for that matter. I'm pretty sure it has a cloth headliner also. The wood dash on the limited dresses the dash up also.

For more info on the Rubicon, check out the review at offroad.com.

 

Can we make this clear THE TUNDA IS NOT A REAL TRUCK!it is more of a Dakota want to be truck.I like Japanese cars I alway buy a Honda for running around and when I was told that Toytota had a full size truck I jumped in my 97 GMC exstenda cab to look at one and I did not like what I seen when I pulled in the lot and parked right up beside one.The sales man came out and gave me the story how it's easy to park at a mall and drives like a car.I told him I had a 1200lb over head camper and that my truck struggles with it on the hightway and that this truck looks like it would have a harder time yet.I looked inside of the exstended cab Tundra and I could not imagine it sitting 3 across.The salesman came out again with new info saying my camper would not be a promblem because the truck was rated at 1500lb payload but I said I also pull a trailer with my quad on it and before you run in and look up the tow rating I just think this truck would look ridiculous going down the road with my camper and trailer and left it like that.I was impressed with the motor 245hp out of a 285ci which is the same hp as my 350 and I really do hope they make a fullsize truck one day but that day has not come yet.