i agree the day u have to choose a belt driven atv ill quit riding i tride pulling a full hay wagon with a polaris sportmans 500 HO it sat there and just squeeled. i got out my honda rancher 500 it pulled it with no problem at all.

 

Hmmm, where did you find this one of a kind "500" Rancher?

 

There just moving away from shifting on a Utility ATVs, Its like buying a brand new 4x4 truck ,no one buys the stick version any longer. The bigest advantage is when your in the deep stuff you can keep your feet out and up,but you also can do that with a Honda ES system also. Get half way through a deep section and find out you need your reverse! not fun.

 

Did you try putting the sportsman in Low? Not sure what a full hay wagon weighs, but I've pulled enough weight behind my sportsman, that the tongue weight on it had the suspension flattened ... and it still hauled it with no troubles up hill.

 

>>>>>>>>>>>>&g t;>>>>>>>

LMAO!!!!

 

here I post figures that show the CVT is not always more efficient and I get ignorance. If I'm wrong about this, please post some facts so I can come to the correct conclusion.

Looks to me that today's ATV CVT is a low cost transmission for people that have no choice as their favorite ATV only has a CVT, lazy drivers, or people that don't know how to properly use a manual. You can't get an ATV with a CVT like cars right now. There is only one shift point with ATV CVTs, one mode. They are kind of rudimentry and simple, just like their performance. Have it your way, but don't twist the facts to justify your CVT. Today's modern (automobile) CVTs mimic manuals and that's part of why they are gaining widespread acceptance, the other part being efficiency at part throttle (MPG). A CVT that shifts like a manual, so it performs for the driver, not fuel mileage at part throttle or compensation for lack of driver effort/skill.

 

You talk of getting ignorance in response to your post and then go post some ignorance of your own.

Just because someone opts for CVT on their quad doesn't make them lazy. It's merely a simple alternative for someone who wants it. Some people don't want to be bothered with shifting their ATV in the same way they don't want to be shifting in their cars. For myself, I love a manual, but I also thouroughly enjoy the CVT on my Polaris as well.

Is it more efficient than a manual transmission? I doubt it.

Does it perform when asked to? Yes it does, at least in my experience. Its performance comes from always being "in the right gear" so to speak, but that same thing makes the quads less fuel efficient.

My Polaris gets far far far worse milage than my old Warrior. Yes it has more HP, and is way heavier, but it's not as fast as the old Warrior. Very nearly as quick though.

And yes, the CVT belt drive is low cost, and very simple. What's wrong with low cost and simple? And why is it that people's favourite quad (as you put it) has CVT? Probably because the lower cost CVT allows the manufacturer to put on features that people like while keeping the cost "reasonable". Most people like features, it's human nature to want the most/best (descriptors being subjective quantities).

In any event, on the day that all ATV's become belt driven (can't honestly see that happening in my life time), I'll be well used to them, and not averse to them to the point where it will force me to give up a sport/recreation activity that I love, unlike Hondaracer and MotoF .. AND on the bright side .. when MotoF gives up riding it's one less thing for people to worry about (i.e. getting killed by a fool flying drunk on his ATV)

 

Low cost? Why do all the most expensive Utilities use them?(700s & 800s)

Lazy ? Everyone pick Auto when buying $40,000 4x4 trucks not because there lazy but because shifting in a annoyance.

I think because ATVs are getting more powerful belt is the way to go. The weight stays down and snowmobiles proved the belt drive can handle over 100hp easily. Gear driven can handle high HP also but the gear box has to be beef up like a heavy street bike tranny to do it.

 

yes, I should have included other groups such as people that don't mind a simple CVT (unlike all the ones coming out in cars now). It sounds like you would prefer the one you have now to a modern CVT that you can choose auto or sport modes. But prefer a current ATV CVT for driving performance it not a valid argument. This was my point. Not to say that they suck, if you look back I do not trash talk it.

please, margin - ever hear of that?

and you know they detuned the Maxima to use the CVT?

and I just cant get over that bulge from the belt case taking up my foot space.

PS, my truck has a 5 speed. looked all over for 5 speed and rubber floor. it is a truck after all.

 

Actually I prefer a manual, but wanted something my wife could ride as well as she's not fussy on manual for a 4 wheeler, though she drives my car which is a manual .. go figure. Having said that, I still love the polaris, CVT and all ...

For an ATV I don't see the need myself for a multi-mode CVT system, although in other posts re: CVT's I've been quite clear that I wished there was a way to force the CVT into a "higher gear" for slower trail riding. Really my one and only beef with CVTs on ATVs (acronym overload here) is the fact that they keep the engine revving high, thus destroying fuel economy. The very best fuel economy I've gotten on my Polaris is about 20mpg lower than the worst economy I had on my old Warrior.