My take on subject is that testers always place high trail speed/handling above all else when it comes to the final ratings. This has nothing to do about being able to handle testers abuse. So I do not believe that 4xZuk gets it. The Honda Ranchers are without question the most reliable and most desirable for the family farmer who just wants the thing to start in every imaginable weather condition and run out to the mail box for many years. Yet the Rancher will always be slammed because it cannot keep up with the Eiger in the hills and because it doesn't have hi/lo and diff lock when it makes no difference to the farmer. The Arctic Cats are usually the best ride for the mud and for most rough terrain situations like rocks and logs and are absolutely the champ in heavy duty work and hunting situations. Yet the testers ignore these reasons for making the purchase decision in lieu of racing performance. Honda and Arctic Cat owners in particular but also Polaris owners have every reason to be especially proud of their rides and the performance they provide relative to their needs. But the moto rags will never give enough credit to the important reasons we actually make a selection. The testers will down play serious defects in the new models because they are swept up in the hype of new model. They will make a huge deal out of tiny differences and yet overlook totally the important reasons we make our choices. So I don't buy into idea that race speed testing is either necessary to test the durability of new machines or even relative to our purchase decision. The moto rags are loosing large portion of potential subscribers because of the desire to appear cutting edge when this is not the point for most of us.

 

if they wanna test reliability you won't be beating a machine by just trail riding even fastpace trail riding lets put some weight to these utilities and go play in some hardcore mud. put 29.5 in tires on all of them and break them let us know what is the best utility not the best sport/utility out there. i say get rid of the sport riders who test them and go with guys like most of us that actually use out utilities to the best of their abilities and beyond.

 

I myself don't have big tires on my traxter XT as it rides rough enough, so I needed a radial to keep the ride okay. But I have worked it hard in mud, water, snow, and pulling trailers full of items, last year went opening for trout and pulled about 12-1500lbs of weight, 14 ft boat, motor, camping gear for 4, gas, booze, food and of course the trailer, pulled it about 30 miles 1 way on fire roads up and down steep hills and straight up into the mountain where only ATV's could go into a lake. So work, that was probably the hardest this machine has worked, also pulled some logs out of a gully for the father, dragging them up the hill, never had 1 issue with this machine. I have roughly 5000 miles on it and have not even changed the break pads yet, probably getting close though.

I wonder how the up and coming big bores will do with this kind of work in the long haul. I have had this machine since 03. Maybe others can give some insight onto real Utility.

 

2 450 kodiaks, honda forman 500, artic cat 400 all tried getting up a steep bank after dropping into a narrow creek...Neither 450 would make it over the crest due to the short wheelbase and less ground clearance......all quads have there downfall, but I didn't try my kodiak with the new 26" tires yet.....yet to come

 

I agree....too much emphasise on speed

I wouldnt buy a pick up truck based on the fact that it can do 0 to 60 mph in less seconds than another......nor would I buy a mountain bike because the gearing lets me achieve a higher speed ( meaning I would take a fragile highway street bicycle on rough trails ). Testers talk about how the speed of this or that model puts a smile ear to ear on his face and thats why he picked it as #1. Bet you he wouldn't be smiling if he had to walk 10 miles out of the bush because his ECM unit broke, or his tie rod broke or whatever .


I also agree about the hype of a new model. A new model comes out and its the best thing since sliced bread. They never mention the stuff that goes wrong in the first production year....Some of these are serious problems....tie rods breaking, ECM units, reverse breaking, bad handling in off cambers ( never run into THIS in the bush do ya? .....The bike is unstable driving sideways on a hill, but boy oh boy it'll do 66 mph ), maintenance issues, etc


Whats the sense of having the best, most comfortable riding, best performing ATV if it constantly breaks down or has known prolems....they neglect to mention this lots of time

They should also have dependability reviews on existing models....ones that have been out for a few years. I ride by myself 99% of the time. I want something dependable and simple.

Anyway ....Im at work and I just heard theres leftovers from a pot luck lunch in the department down the hall...

Ill add more later

 

Some good points being made here.

While it isn't the be all and end all things like 0-60 or whatever the ATV equivalent is and a few sheer performance comparisons between machines are useful. Useful data mind you not the basis for which is superior and which is not. What those numbers are good for is for getting a general guide on how the power compares between machines. The good thing about these sorts of tests is that they are for the most part objective. One is indeed faster than another and one is indeed slower than another all things like rider weight and the like being equal. Handling and other things are subjective. It is opinion for the most part.

Now, what I would like to see is more testing being done with weight on racks. Perhaps in two different stages. One light, one at full rack limit. Also some mud work. Not necessarily the crazy competition mud bog stuff but the normal mud you would encounter in normal work and trail conditions. The stuff that would get you stuck. Then some deep water like one would encounter when fording a stream or creek. Seat height water. Also some hill climb and side hill performance tests. These could be done on an actual test rig to determine side roll point and front and real roll points with and without rider first and then move on to real world testing. These tests should also be done with and without rack loads. Then some pulling tests of some sort. Now if you really wanted to make things even you should put the same make and model of tire on each machine during the test. After all that would be the best way to determine the true performance of each machine. Tires are a HUGE variable when it comes to a test.

That would be a good start to real utility testing. Sure better than "we rode atv A around and it was really fast and it seemed to handle pretty good certainly better than atv B".

 

So what your saying is bomb is better in every department than the other atv's? Bomb is a great quad, but besides power, isnt any better in anything else than the other quads, in my opinion. Or mabey thats not what your saying, and im just being bias. lol

 

Most mags said they would have picked the Outlander as the overall winner even if it did not have that motor.

 

I am not trying to convince anyone of anything, do your research, test ride them and buy what you like best. I mainly just get a kick out of fokes who try and run the Outy down by saying they are not good in the mud or they are not good at pulling things when there was one of the largest open mud and pulling competitons in the contry, held just a few weeks ago that was dominated by an Outy 800. As far as racks go IMO its allot cheaper to mod the racks than the motor or suspension to make a machine like you may want it to be like. Now if you are into lifting them, then the Outy is not your best choice.

 

After reading this thread (and patiently waiting on things to unfold) I have a few comments/questions/quips to throw in. Honestly, what do you all think would be the benchmark, be-all, end-all Ute test. All categories. EVERYTHING. What does it take to be KING o' the hill? You guys want to bust the speed freak in us. Do you want a bunch of Pu$$ies testing these things? A comment about 0-60 times being used to gauge power was spot-on. Plus, there are a bunch of folks that ride these things (myself included) as the ultimate quad! Sport power and performance, yet the ability to kick 'er into 4x and motor through the crud. Hey, and BONUS, I can even throw a cooler and camping equiptment on the racks and head out to Bum-Fu-k for a weekend! So fellas-what are you guys looking for as the ULTIMATE test? You've got an "ear" w/ an inside line. Spell it out. Thanks, in advance, for your input: good and pi$$ed off!