Help my dad pick a new big-bore.
Aug 1, 2005 | 09:16 PM
#31
Elite Pro Rider
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 5,190
Likes: 0
Help my dad pick a new big-bore.
Originally posted by: Master400
They didn't come out with a Sportsman 700 until 2003! HA HA Polaris atvs are way overbuilt. That is why they weigh too much. They have one of the best rides on any atvs execpt for my Grizzly it has the best ride period. When are they going to stop getter bigger and bigger making atvs! Won't don't they just make a 1000 cc atv and make it cost over $10.000.00. HA HA Or you could just buy a new truck for that! Polaris Rangers cost more than some new trucks. I can't see how that is possible but they R.I.P people off selling ATVS. Either stupid or rich people buy the biggest and best just to show off.
They didn't come out with a Sportsman 700 until 2003! HA HA Polaris atvs are way overbuilt. That is why they weigh too much. They have one of the best rides on any atvs execpt for my Grizzly it has the best ride period. When are they going to stop getter bigger and bigger making atvs! Won't don't they just make a 1000 cc atv and make it cost over $10.000.00. HA HA Or you could just buy a new truck for that! Polaris Rangers cost more than some new trucks. I can't see how that is possible but they R.I.P people off selling ATVS. Either stupid or rich people buy the biggest and best just to show off.
Aug 1, 2005 | 09:22 PM
#32
Elite Pro Rider
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 5,190
Likes: 0
Help my dad pick a new big-bore.
Originally posted by: Master400
I agree I think 660cc is the biggest you can make for a single cylinder anymore and it vibrates too much. I still think the Grizzly 660 is every bit as powerful as the King Quad 700.Yamaha started the big bores period. . If the Grizzly was 700 cc and had fuel injection that would be a different story. That would be on equal ground then and still would win. Goodbye King Quad. I agree that the King Quad is a great atv with a slight delay in acceleration and bad shifting and reverse. It's pretty much the same size as my Grizzly 660 but my Grizzly 660 has 2 inches more ground clearance and holds 1 gallon more of gas. I wish my Grizzly 660 had fuel injection. But with every atv there is something about that is not perfect. No atv will ever be perfect but they will come close.
I agree I think 660cc is the biggest you can make for a single cylinder anymore and it vibrates too much. I still think the Grizzly 660 is every bit as powerful as the King Quad 700.Yamaha started the big bores period. . If the Grizzly was 700 cc and had fuel injection that would be a different story. That would be on equal ground then and still would win. Goodbye King Quad. I agree that the King Quad is a great atv with a slight delay in acceleration and bad shifting and reverse. It's pretty much the same size as my Grizzly 660 but my Grizzly 660 has 2 inches more ground clearance and holds 1 gallon more of gas. I wish my Grizzly 660 had fuel injection. But with every atv there is something about that is not perfect. No atv will ever be perfect but they will come close.
Yamaha started the big bores period. ....WTF... thats not even tru not only stupid..
polaris sportsman was the first bigbor utility quad ever made... and dont give me no **** about how bad they are. ride what you got and dont tell other people there quad is no good cuz you dont like it.
Aug 1, 2005 | 11:20 PM
#33
Trailblazer
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 54
Likes: 0
Help my dad pick a new big-bore.
Yamaha was the first big bore with the Grizzly 600 in 1998. Anything over 500 cc is a big bore. The Grizzly 600 wasn't very good too much vibration and overheating. But the Grizzly 660 is on a much grander scale. There is no problems at all everthing is near perfect not too big or not too small.
Aug 2, 2005 | 12:03 AM
#35
Pro Rider
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 1,073
Likes: 0
Help my dad pick a new big-bore.
wow, i hope u guys never meet eachother in person kuz u'd rip eachothers heads of. lol. does it really matter which quad was the first big bore to ever come out? i mean, its not like ur buying the first big bore ever made.... ur buying the new and improved versions. its all opinions. some people think sportsmans r great, and sum people think grizzlys are great, and sum people think that they both suk. its not a big deal u just gotta find out which quads u prefer by going out and looking at them or riding them.
Aug 2, 2005 | 05:32 AM
#36
Pro Rider
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 1,448
Likes: 0
Help my dad pick a new big-bore.
Originally posted by: RedGoblin
Yes, it is a dead issue. Suzuki recalled their old ECMs and put in different ones that put a limiter on the reverse, no matter how much you try to abuse it. So even if you have the out-of-date reverse parts, there's a limit on how much abuse you can put them through because of a new ECM. Of course Suzuki is not going to fix it until it breaks. Imagine you own a shop and someone comes to you and says "Do something about this because other people have had it break and I don't want mine to!
Yes, it is a dead issue. Suzuki recalled their old ECMs and put in different ones that put a limiter on the reverse, no matter how much you try to abuse it. So even if you have the out-of-date reverse parts, there's a limit on how much abuse you can put them through because of a new ECM. Of course Suzuki is not going to fix it until it breaks. Imagine you own a shop and someone comes to you and says "Do something about this because other people have had it break and I don't want mine to!
No, it is far from a dead issue. People who are buying old stock or buying a used atv need to be aware of it.
The crippling of the reverse does nothing to solve the problem. There have been people who have blown the reverse after getting the new ECM. The design of the gear is defective and all the dicking around with the ECM hasn't changed the fact.
Suzuki should have fixed the defect and not sold the defective ones they had in the pipeline to unsuspecting consumers. They should have done the right thing and recalled all of the bikes with the defective gear and replaced it with the redesigned one. Instead they listened to their lawyers and accountants and decided to screw folks that unknowingly plunked down thousands of dollars on a machine with a known and acknowledged defect that Suzuki refuses to fix.
Vehicle manufacturers find defects in their products all the time. I had several vehicles that have had to have things replaced because a defective part even though it hadn't actually gone bad yet. I had one car that had the entire engine replaced due to a possible internal defect. It ran fine and I had no problems with it but the engine was replaced anyway.
Is the current KQ a good ATV? Yes and if I were to buy an atv at this moment I may very well buy a KQ.
Would I buy one with a "bad" vin? Absolutely not. Knowingly doing so would be stupid.
Do I trust Suzuki to do the right thing if something else crops up in the future? No. and that certainly gives me second thoughts about buying one.
Aug 3, 2005 | 08:25 AM
#39
Pro Rider
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 1,448
Likes: 0
Help my dad pick a new big-bore.
Originally posted by: RedGoblin
Do you know what it takes for the reverse to go out?
Do you know what it takes for the reverse to go out?
The bottom line is that Suzuki has knowingly sold machines with defective reverse gears and they refuse to fix them unless they break. That fact in indisputable.
Contrast that with Kawasaki who just recalled their Brute Force line to have the defective steering components replaced:
BF recall
Aug 3, 2005 | 12:59 PM
#40
Pro Rider
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 859
Likes: 0
Help my dad pick a new big-bore.
If the Grizzly was 700 cc and had fuel injection that would be a different story.
All these years and the Grizz is still competitive and holding its value. Can't say that about all brands/models. If it didn't have a belt I would have one. I just may accept the belt and get one for my next ATV (keeping my current ride too)
And I agree with the Captain, Suzuki knowingly selling an ATV with a band-aided design flaw help me take the KQ off the list of possible ATVs when I bought.