You know, what intrigued me most was how they altered the rear A arms. That shows they were really focusing on handling issues rather than just slapping a big motor in a machine with cranked up IRS with big ground clearance numbers like Kawasaki did the the Brute Force. The rear swept A arms remind one of the Can-Am/Bombardier approach to their utility machines. It should really show some quite noticeable benefits as far as handling goes.

I would have liked to have seen them punch that motor up to at least 750 and preferably 800 but 700 will do I guess. Fuel injection is a huge step forward.

I don't know what to think about the power steering. On one hand I see this as being another level of complexity - something else to go wrong. Then again some of these machines are getting sort of hard to turn. What happens though when this system has teething problems? How does it fail? Does it lock up the steering? does it rip the steering from your hands? Can it cause unwanted steering movements? I'd like to know more about the system before I bought one.

I'll definitely have another ATV to add to my consideration list when I go to buy a machine this fall. The Outlander 800, the Suzuki 700, the AC big bore and now the new Grizzly. Thanks Yamaha.

 

Your kidding right!!! power to weight ratio of the Outty 800 is about 10lbs per Hp's
power to weight ratio of a Grizz 700 is 13lbs per Hp.....that 30% less power to weight ratio!

 

Whats the power of the Grizz 700? If its based off the raptor engine then once you put an exhaust a filter out on it will scream.

 

I'm not just bashing BRP. But it seems that they want to throw in there 800cc B.S. ! ! ! I dont even own a Yamaha. But I will tell you this. I bet Yamaha put a real frame under the Grizz. and not a piece of crap like BRP did there outy's! That frame sux. So until they put something under that 800cc power plant. I will stick with kawi, suz, honda, ac, or yamaha.

 

Grizz 700fi its supose to have 46 hp's@ 600 lbs, brp 650 has 54hp@ 649lbs, brp 800 has 62hp @ 639 lbs, BF750 has 50 hp's@ 604lbs.........Come on Yamaha, yes you make a great product, but do you have to lie about "having the best-Power to weight ratio"

 

Like the one rep told us when you have a lousy frame, lousy springs and no protection what good is a quad. Other than power the new Grizzly is way better than any atv on the market. Yamaha doesn't need power to sell. Look at any sales figures. The best selling bigbore is the Grizzly and will maintain that lead with the current model.

 

Like i said I didn't say one was better than the other. I happen to like and ride Yamaha, but explain to me why they have to lie about power!

It would be like Polaris saying the sportsman was the lightest utility on the market! hmmm I don't think so!

 

Does anyone know the actual HP power numbers are?? I highly doubt it as the reps don't even know or if they do there not telling.

 

"Here's a list i've been compliling for a LONG time (some may be off a little, but most i have checked with more than one source):

Arctic Cat (suzuki engines, except the kawi-powered V2, and arctic cat's own H1):
500: (2003 and up have slightly detuned Vinson engine): 32hp @7000rpm, 34 lb-ft torque at 3500rpm (pre-03 had 28/30.5)
300: 14hp
650 V2: (close to prarie 650)

Bombardier (Rotax engines):
Outty 800: 62hp @ ? rpm, 52tq @ 5500rpm
Quest 650: 42hp
Outty 400: 28hp

Outy 650: 52 hp

Honda:

Rincon 680 Efi 42hp
Rincon 650: 39hp
Foreman 450: 24hp
TRX 300: 16hp
400EX: 27hp
300EX: 21hp
TRX450R: 42hp (questionable)

Kawaski:
BF750: 51hp
Prarie 700: 46hp
Prarie 650: 42hp
V-Force 700: 51hp

Polaris:
SP700: 45hp
SP500: 30hp
SP500 HO: 38hp (same as scrambler 500)
SP800: 55hp/50tq

Suzuki:
KQ700: 49hp
KQ300: 14hp
LT500: 53hp
Eiger 400: 25hp
Vinson 500: 34hp

Yamaha:
Grizz 660: 42hp/35tq
Warrior/Wolverine 350: 18hp

These are brake hp ratings (BHP) from the factory... there will some variances from quad to quad (usually within 1-2 hp/tq of the above ratings). Hope this helps someone out there....

 

This is what Yamaha says;
Most powerful Grizzly ever: 686cc liquid-cooled, four-stroke engine and light weight add up to the best power-to-weight ratio of any utility model in the industry.
This could be correct. Yamaha did not say they have the highest peak horsepower to weight ratio as assumed by readers. By saying "the best power to weight" Yamaha could be talking about power to weight across a broad spectrum of RPM rather than only peak numbers. High horse power motors often have less power at lower RPM where most of the time is spent.
In any case, this little question is sure not enough to keep the lid on my bank account.