Hey guys,

I just wanted your opinion on why I shouldn't get a Sportsman500. Its got some great qualities like ride and power, plus it just plain looks great! Thanks for the advice!

 

Hi, I can't give you reason, not to get one, because I did, and I love it. If you are looking for the faults with them, I can give you a couple.
Obviously, the weight, the belt vent is too low, why they made it so low, and ran all the other vents up another foot, I don't know.
The ebs is effective, but it only works on the rear tires, so it slides down steep hills. That takes a little getting used too. Other than that, I love mine, wish I had bought it too start with. Good Luck to you.

 

LOWGEAR,
I see you to owned a KQ.I did to.I than bought a 99 Sportsman 500cc 4x4 and now own a 2000 Xplorer 400cc 4x4.

I was wondering what you like more on the Sportsman vs the King Quad?Is there anything on the King you like more than on the Sportsman?Which one do you like more in the mud/hills?How do these two quads compare to each other in your opionion?
Bill

 

Hey Bill,
My likes on the Sportsman over the King.
Disc brakes== I can set the parking brake halfway down a steep hill and leave it.. Do that with the King and you'll be chasing it.
The power, the ability to develop momentum quick, when climbing a steep long hill, that you don't have any room, to get a run at.
The ride........ lets just say that Suzuki should address that issue... They are beating people to death, when obviously, it isn't necessary.

Yes, the old King does have some features I miss. It is a submarine, will leave the Sportman behind in the really deep water...
The ebs is more effective on the King, as the Sportsman only drags the rear tires.
I also miss the super-low. The King will tow any-thing the Sportsman will, just maybe not as fast..
As for the mud, the Sportsman is the quick winner, due to the ground clearance.. However, when you get into the really deep muck, and start to stick.. the lighter king can be leaned over on its side easier, compensating for the ruts and digging with the tires on one side.. Its a lot more work to get the Sportsman to grab anything.
Of course, I haven't got a good set of tires for it yet, so it may get better..

Oh yeah, love the brake light on the Sportsman, I don't have as many idiots ramming the back of me now, when we are forced to stop suddenly..

 

LOWGEAR,
Your right,Super Low Range is a hell of a puller,just have to do it slow though.I also found the KQ to be a great swimmer,but no better than the Sportsman.I had a ton of problems with water/debree entering the drums on the KQ if I went and did an afternoon of serious mudding.You dont have to put up with that on the Sportsman w/disk brakes.I have heard of the rear end swinging around on you on a steep hill descend with the Sportsman,however,I have never had it happen to me,not even on a snow pack covered hill.Im headed to the mountains of Virginia on May 3rd,I hope I dont find out than?
Bill

 

Maybe the weight is better distributed on your explorer.. The sportsman is light in the back end. That accounts for most of the sliding sideways. It won't back up any incline in 2wd for the same reason..
If you do experience the sliding out, just bump the gas, and she'll straighten up for a bit, then repeat the process. So far, I've never had it get out of control, all though, I've gotten to the bottom of some hills, a lot faster, than I had intended... The suspension saves me alot there, as
it handles the rough terrain at high speeds pretty good.. If I went down a hill that fast on the old King, there'd be pieces of it and me everywhere.
I need to snorkel the belt intake on her though. That's why the King will walk by it in deep water right now. I can't get it that deep, and keep going. Have to blow the water out of the belt housing, before it will move.
Is there an event in Va. or are you just going?
I've been thinking of going to Tellico again.