How reliable is a Suzuki?I have had one good opinion of it.would like to hear more from others.my brother currently owns a Timberwolf and is thinking about going 4 a 95'280 Quad Runner 4x4.he is tired of having to be pulled out by other 4x4s.he likes the Quad Runner but does not know much about Suzuki reliability.he has heard that they ride rough is this true?

 

Jamie,the Suzuki King Quad 4x4 is a good little work horse and is sufficient enough for light trail riding to.With it's sub tranny's,you can do alot of differant things with that quad,but nothing the best.I owned a 87 KQ,and my bro's 97 KQ stays here at my place.The engine is bullet proof and will take much abuse.One the down side of the KQ is it's very poorly sealed drum brakes,which require a thourgh cleaning after EVERY serious day of riding in the mud..Stay out of heavy mud with this 4x4 and you'll be ok.The stock tires really suck too.My bro's quad is equiped with the Super Swamper Vampires now,WOW,what a differance.The ride is ok at a slower pace,get going fast on a semi rough trail and it does handle and ride rough.The turning radius is one of the worst on the market,something that Suzuki should of changed way back in the 80s when they manufactured this 4x4.I personally like the powerband of the bigger cc 4x4 quads.I ride the 99 Sportsman 500cc 4x4 today from Polaris.No comparison between these two quads in allmost every area,and I'D personally never return to the smaller cc engines again,HUGE power differance.If your used to a Timberwolf,riding the KQ will seem like owning a cadilac.GOOD LUCK---BILL

 

Jamie, I currently own my 2nd Suzuki. The first was an 89 quad Runner. It left the shop brand new and never went back till I flat wore out the slide in the carb. Rather than put a couple of hundred into a new carb, I traded it in in '96 on a new King quad. Ive never had a problem with this one either, the only major expense was for new Bear Track tires recently. By the way, Artic Cat thinks pretty highly of Suzuki engines..that's what they use in their quads.

THE AZ HARD PACKER, calmiller@kachina.net

------------------
save your riding area! join the Blue Ribbon Coalition online @www.sharetrails.org

 

Jamie, I used to ride a 95 Timberwolf, and my best riding buddy rode a 95 King Quad...and still does! It feels much more stable than the timberwolf, but the timberwolf will feel "peppier" in first gear than the King Quad. You can go just about anywhere on the KQ and the independent rear suspension really works well in the rough stuff! I was thinking of buying one myself before I bought my 99 Arctic Cat 500 (which has a Suzuki engine) but I am 6'3" and my legs felt too long to change gears comfortably on the KQ.

To answer your original question, my friend has 1300 miles on his KQ with zero problems.
Well, that's not entirely true...water got into the drum brake on one of our rides and it froze overnight (coldest night of the year) When he got on it the next day, he had it in low range and gassed it...and bent the right rear drive shaft! That engine has really got the torque coupled with that tranny system!! But no engine problems at all!

------------------
Rob Ervin 99' AC500