Mulling this one over in the AC forum. Engine in the rear seems like its going to make the front end light. Thats my opinion, though maybe I'm wrong and everyone else is right. Anyone see this as a better hillclimbing quad than other designs? Seems like with all the weight in the rear it would make the front end light and make it more prone to flipping over backwards.

Also, anyone agree that a 300AC will outpull any other quad tail to tail? I don't.

Just looking for nonbiased opinions to see if I'm stupid or not, because I'm being told that the 250 and 300 AC quads are unbelievable hillclimbers. Better than their ACT 500's and stuff. (the ones that have all the weight up front) I disagree, though of course I don't own either (and never will, because why??), so my opinion carries no weight.

 

yea i noticed the same thing when i rode the 250 not too long ago... it climbed great, the front did want to come up a little but it shot right up everything i threw at it... it climbed almost as good as my 4wd Xplorer 400....

 

My recon is easier to get the front end up on a hill than my brother ac 250. beleive it or not, the ac feels more planted than my recon; of course the irs and 550+ pounds help that out