Can anyone tell me the pros and cons of the 450? I'm probably going to get one withing 4 or 5 days.

 

Not a lot of cons that I know of unless you want to say its a "narrow yamaha". Should be pretty good all around. Has the edge on most in its class with the locking differential alone.

 

Not many cons I can think of either. I love mine!

 

i love mine, only thing wrong with mine was a poop battery from the factory but that isnt a yamaha part! otherwise I love it!!!

 

Buy it! and Buy it now before the $200,00 rebate is over (12/31/2003).

My wife and I each have a 2000 Kodiak. I have absolutely loved these ATV's. I decided to sell mine and get one of the new 450's. I picked up a brand new 2004 Camo Kodiak last week and rode it for the first time this weekend here's my first impressions.

Pros:
Power - Quick acceleration, plenty enough power for me. (and I'm no lightweight!)

Diff-lock - This alone is worth the price of admission. I never had to winch out of anything. I'd have to winch my old Kodiak at least once per ride. I followed a guy on a 2000 Kody that had very aggressive mud tires and went everywhere he did. There were even a couple of spots where he had trouble cuz only one front wheel was spinning, I just eased on through!

Brakes - the thing stops on a dime. I never realized I had a bad habit of hitting the foot brake by accident until I got this bike.

Tires - They don't look impressive, in fact the ones on the 2000 look more aggressive, but looks can be decieving as they performed excellently in the mud and gave a smooth ride on the hard-pack

Guages - Easy to read day and night. It's nice to have a clock right there on the panel. And I love the lights that let you know your in high or low range (2000 kody didn't have them).

Transmission - It's the same transmission I've enjoyed for four years in my old Kody's. It has always performed absolutely flawlessly. It's always in the right "gear" for the situation.

Handling - Handles just like the older Kodiaks, which is a good thing! IMHO it is the best compromise between a sport and utlity quad.

Con's:
I like the seat on the 2000's better. The 2004 has an ugly label on the back of the seat (part of the seat, cannot be removed) and the cover has a kind of pebble texture to it as opposed to the smooth texture of the 2000's. Of course niether of these things affect the comfort, it's just that that's the only thing I can find about the bike that I do not like.


I could have bought any four wheeler I wanted (yes even a Grizzly) and I went back to the Kodiak. I prefer the smaller size and the solid rear axle over the larger IRS quads.

 

i bought a 2003 kodiak 400 and i hate it, but thats just my opinion.
see my review "worst purchase ever LEMON"
best of luck.
p.s. call yamaha and tell them you already bought it and have only had it a day and don't like it (make up some problem story) see how you're dealt with before you buy one. you'd be suprised how poor their customer service is and scared they are to back their product.

 

Am I the only one who thinks their Kodiak 450 is uncomfortable to sit on and/or ride at low speeds, especially down hill. The seat is not level and leans you forward unless you sit at the very front, then if you are 6' tall your knees are on the fenders. It seems to jar my arms and shoulders because of the forward lean.

Other than this, I love it.

 

Yes the shape of the seat does cause you to sit at the front of the seat. I am 6'3" and have noticed that my knee will sometimes be up against the shift lever. It's not a big deal but it is noticeable. The biggest weakness of the stock machine would have to be the tires. They have very flexible sidewalls which exaggerate the alleged tippiness of the machine. I have badland xtr radials on mine and a friend has 25" mudlites on his. Both tires made a noticeable improvement in the handling. In 2003 when Yamaha introduced the 450 they made a slight change to the frame that makes it slightly wider than the 2002 and older 400 kodiak. The machine is still a couple of inches narrower than many quads in its class. With its low center of gravity I am comfortable with its stability and find that the slightly smaller overall size can be a real advantage in tight woods riding.

 

I agree w/ dbare on the tires; but overall, the best mix of features, power and value for my needs. I looked at them all in the 400-500cc range before forking over the cheese. With the differential lock, low range, and 2500lb warn winch I have a great hunting, mudding, ****** out your buddy 4-wheeler. But if I want to I can hit 55mph on a dirt road and run with most utilities. Also with the ultramatic trans. it is so easy to ride when crawling over downed trees or down steep hills and still very responsive to throttle input when you need to get on down the trail. As far as the tires go they seem to have soft side walls that seem to "fold over" when in a hard braking turn or when turning sharply going either up or down on a steep grade......but!!!! don't let the very adequate, but less than perfect stock tires turn you away, this is a great ride. [img]i/expressions/face-icon-small-happy.gif[/img]

 

For the price I paid for my 2003 Kodiak, I'm not really impressed. I finanaced the bike, and ended up paying $12 800 in total over 5 years.

- My speedometer cable broke at 800km
- My foot wels are cracked all to garbage
- handle bars are loose, steering is very loose
- the thing leaks gear oil all over the place and I'm told this is "normal"
- the gas line switch fell off completely so switching to reserve gas is almost impossible
- the 4WD light flickers like mad when I'm in 4WD
- the front brakes sqweel like crazy

I have friends with other model bikes, Honda, and they have had ZERO problems and their bikes are upwards of 4 and 5 years old with 5 times the KM's on them........ Yamaha has taken a turn for the worse with their 4 wheelers, this is the truth!!!