I'm considering a grizzly 350 IRS and Grizzly (Kodiak) 450. I can get a great deal on either of these and I'm wondering how they would compare on trails to big bores. My buds have 650's and bigger but use thiers for work and plowing too. Can I expect these to keep up on rutted wet trails, hills, sand, light mud and rocks? I don't plan on hauling anything heavy, maybe dragging a deer out. My concern with the 350 is that it's an air cooled with no low range, but it does have a locking front diff. Does anyone use low range on trails or is it mostly for hauling stuff? I like the thought of the smaller quads because they are lighter and narrower. I realize they wouldn't compare in drags and high speed fire roads and such. Does anyone ride their smaller quads with the big boys and what are the results?

 

I ride my Eiger 400 in the company of my brothers' Prairie 650. For trail riding, there is no real issue - I have no problem staying with him (and he has no problem staying with me [img]i/expressions/face-icon-small-wink.gif[/img] ). Once we hit an open firetrail or road it's a different story - if he wants to blast it down the road there is little I can do but follow his dust. But overall, 350 to 450 cc's is more that up to trailriding and will not slow anybody down.

Two comments:

1. Low range is a good thing. I've had many times where I would have been stuck in deep mud without low range. I've used low range a few times on really steep hills, but in most cases it was a 'just in case' type of thing and I could have pulled it in high first gear.
2. The physical size of most mid-range quads is exactly the same as the big-bores. While the 250 class machines are about 7/8ths the size of the big quads, the 400 class for the most part weigh the close to and are about the same size as the big boys.

Jaybee

 

Low range is a more necessary feature than a front locker in my opinion. I would first rule out the quads that don't have low range, and then see which ones that are left that are the best bargain.