If you buy the honda the 450 is a killer work machine,and honda has really droped the price on it since the rubicon and rincon came out.In utah you can pick one up for 5500 out the door. when you say working on a farm it reminds me of a picture of a grizzly with one of those 25gal crop dusters on the rear rack boy talk about rear end sag.The same duster on a foreman hardly even sags the rear end.One thing polaris dose that I like on there irs is make the shocks ajustable so you can stiffen them up for work. The only thing about my old forman was the ruff ride but for around the farm that shouldent matter.

 

I was looking specifically for a work oriented atv when I bought my Foreman, and I wanted rock solid reliability, and I think belts belong on pants.. now that I've wound the Polaris' folks springs a little tighter, let me say I'm just poking fun at you, at least about the pants bit.

Seriously, the 400 really surprised me with it's capabilities. I was wondering if it would have enough power to haul both myself and the GF over a rough logging trail. No problem at all. We regularly hook up the trailer the atv normally rides on, load it with fencing gear (posts, rails, barbed wire, tools, you name it), load ourselves and a lunch on board, and head off to do a day of fencing. I'd guess the total weight would be in the vicinity of 350 pounds on the bike itself, plus a towed weight approaching 800 pounds. That's going across fields that are soft in the spring and fall, and rough from hoofprints and rocks. Again, no problems. The 400 (last year available is 2003) has a super low first gear for slow work, or heavy hauling, great bottom end torque, relatively low centre of gravity for side-hill work (something I've grown quite fond of on rough trails too) It does have shortcomings, I'll admit that. You have to shift gears.. the hardship is terrible..lol. The suspension is short travel, and stiff. Nice cushy seat though. I don't think it'll do 60 mph.. I don't need to go that fast. Something else to consider, 850 pounds tow rating is a number, leaning toward the safe side. If I recall, there are maybe 2 ATVs that are designed for carrying more than 1 person. How many of us carry double? Enough said about numbers.

I agree that the Rincon and Rubicon aren't suited for work particularly well, it's why I chose the 400. If I could have found a 350 Rancher (US model) , or even a 450 Foreman for what I paid for the 400 Foreman I probably would have bought one, but I didn't.

As a trail machine, I'd rate the 400 Foreman quite a way below the Rincon, Rubicon, and most other newer ATV's. As a working machine that also can do a variety of things reasonably well, I'd rate it number one on the market.

 

A point to consider. The Foreman 450 is only $300 MSRP more than the 400. For the little bit of extra money, you get a bigger engine, selectable 2wd/4wd, new limited slip front diff., and a little more suspension!

 

What you say about the IRS makes sense. Afterall, the hitch attacment is on the axel assembly .. for a solid axel, that means the axel is carrying the weight of the trailer tongue all across the memeber. On an IRS system, the side axes are indpendent of the differential where the hitch is attached and therefore the tongue weight actually compresses the suspension.

 

Absolutely right Rhino! It seems very few people know this. Although IRS is currently the 'rage', it's not always best for all uses. IRS squats under load, scrubs tires during compression and rebound, is known to be less stable (twitchy) at high speed, and slides much less readily (if that;s important to you). Lots more moving parts, CV's, etc. Think about what you need and make your own decision based on those facts. Solid rear axle is what you want for heavy work. I wouldn't be a bit surprised 2-3 years from now if solid rear axle is again back in favor. These manufacturers have to keep you buying every 2 - 3 years.. Now it''s IRS, next solid, next IRS, etc.

Of all the manufacturers, for some reason it seems that the Polaris owners are the most rabid in promoting their brand of machine. Whether or not it's the right machine for the person or not. Not that it's wrong, but it always seems that way. Personally I think all the machines these days are very good, but they usually excell in one thing or the other.

One thing I can tell you ... when someone tells you something like ' there's only one machine for you and that's XYZ machine', stay far away from that advice. I think a lot of the Polaris owners are touchy and self promoting because there's so much Polaris bashing in the industry in general, and they feel that they have to defend their purchase. I'm not saying it's right or wrong, it just seems that way. The only thing I don't like about the Polaris is the EBS, other than that, I think it;s a great machine ... I almost bought one.

REV

 

I think it's a plot amongst polaris owners to flood the market with quads like their own .. that way when things start to go wrong there's an ample supply of quads for spare parts [img]i/expressions/face-icon-small-shocked.gif[/img] JUST KIDDING ..

I personally like the polaris quads. They always seem to be very powerful for the displacement when compared to other atv brands .. Take the pred. for instance (I know, this is a utility quad post) which can hang with a Raptor / DS650 which are 160CC's bigger ...

Just proof that size doesn't matter that much I guess [img]i/expressions/face-icon-small-happy.gif[/img] LOL

Again tho .. with respect to the IRS system and heavy loading, the last posts make total sense.

 

Don't forget that you all say the Polaris since its IRS can't pull loads real well!!! I HIGHLY suggest you all go to the Atv pulls and see which ones usually win!!! POLARIS!! I own all Yamaha and definately love their machines!!!! But I can definately admit the Polaris quads will out-pull any yamaha or Honda or Kawi, ALL in stock form ANYDAY!!! Though the Bombardiers can definately hold there on as well!

 

I for one have found that my ACT suspension on my AC500 is very strong, and seems to be the best mix between IRS and single shock swingarm. I for one have no real interest in IRS until they get a lot better than they are now. In my opinion they still need to do a lot of geometry work to eliminate the extreme tire scrubbing and squatting that is so prevalent in the industry today.

So far, the only IRS that kind of makes sense to me is the one on the Bombardier Outlander. It's A-arms are independent front to rear rather than ACROSS the vehicle, as in the current crop if IRS's. This eliminates all tire scrubbing, and squat is also minimized. The current race between manufacturers for ground clearance numbers and suspension travel will change very soon I think. I think we're going to see a change to that (Bombardiers Outlanders) design in the next few years, and then all these guys who are extolling the current IRS systems are gonna have to sell their machines and get the new and improved IRS.

If you haven't seen it, check out the suspension on the Outlander. It makes a whole lot more sense than the lateral IRS's, except of course it's biggest downfall is that it doesn't look like a little Hummer from the rear, whidh is what everyone seems to want. LOL

REVHIGH !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

Hey Rhino,

Have you seen the suspension on the Outlander?? What do you think??? I'd be interested in your opinion. I never ridden one, but it sure looked like a good idea. Have you been on one?

REV

 

I thought the Bomb IRS looked like it might work. Not sure how it would have a lack of gc though.

I never heard the 10X tire wear claim, but I know that the others cause scrubbing. I think over the next couple years IRS will be refined to the point that it will be state of the art. And that doesn't mean chasing big clearance or articulation numbers. But then the marketing geniuses will decide that they're not reliable or something and switch back to swing arm. Gotta find some reason to make people buy every 3 years right??

REV