SilverBear,

I'm sure you have already mentioned this somewhere on the 'board' . . . .

Since you have taken the Sway-bars off, have you noticed any negative factors in the ride/handling?

I realize Yamaha puts them on for a reason.
I also realize the principles in action that give increase articulation without the sway-bar.

I was just wondering about the handling without them.

PSS. I finally test rode a Grizzly this past weekend. We went on a 60 mile ride out to a glacier near here (Knick Glacier). It was -5 deg. F plus wind-chill, so it's handwarmers were a great addition.
The Grizzly handled exceptionally well. I expected some time to get used to the machine's characteristics. Especially since I am used to riding a King Quad. I tell you, it was like a kid in a candy store! I think my teeth are still 'frost-bit' from smiling so much [img]i/expressions/face-icon-small-happy.gif[/img]
The machine went from 20 mph to 55mph in seconds! It also handled well on the trails, and went places in 2WD where other machines were straining to go in 4WD.
I can see where Hand-warmers, a thumb-warmer, and 27" 589Titans would make an awesome machine.

 

I know i am going to sound like a complete idiot, but what do the sway bars do, and what do you gain by taking them off?

 

FORGET YAMAWHATEVER AND KAWASUCKY get a Polaris Sportsmen 500 H.O. and i garuntee that you will be SOOOOO happy with it. Slap some 27" Bi's-and Tri's on it, and go show everyone who is king of the mud.

 

The sway bar kind of stabilizes the ammount of independant travel in the rear so that the quad doesn't lean in too far to one side. By taking it off, you gain more independant wheel travel.

Basically, with it off, you can drive a rear tire up on a concrete block and all four tires will be on the ground because the suspension on that side squats up. With the "anti-sway bar" (correct terminology actually, though I always say sway bar) on, the wheels don't have as much travel, and it really feels a lot more like a swingarm quad than an IRS quad.

 

Are there any long term afferts to doing this, i mean they must put them on for a reason. At least i would think so beacuse i know they would leave off as much as possible to save themselves money.

 

I can't think of anyone here who did it before I did. That was near the end of August. Thats as long term as you can get right now, and I've seen no ill effects. I guess we will wait and see, cause I'm not putting it back on. I will definitely let anyone know if some problem ever occurs though.

 

Hay Andy, does your Grizz ride a little smoother over rough ground now than it did with the sway bar on? my grizz rides great,but the IRS seems to work its best at higher speeds, but at slower speeds it rides more like a solid axle ATV, but i mostly drive slow over fallen trees and washed out hill sides and i would love to have it work more like a ARCtic cat 500i IRS. ONe more Question did you change the original settings on the shocks after your removed the sway bar?

 

Andy, have you ever ridden the Prairie 650? It keeps coming up in these discussions about stability because it really does have a low center of gravity compared to most other 4X4 quads, and it makes a difference. It is the way they balanced it also by moving the gas tank down and to the rear and the 90 degree V twin engine puts its weight lower than a single cylinder (according to Kawasaki's ATV product manager, Jim Williams---Dirtwheels, April 2001). All this sounds like hype, but there must be something to it because one of the first things I noticed when I rode it was how far over (sideways) it could tilt without wanting to roll over. It was very noticeable over my Prairie 400. I rode it like that on purpose and felt fully in control (and I'm no great rider). I assume that is what Oldman Wheeler is talking about when he mentioned sidehill stability. I don't know how to explain it any better than that, but if you ride it, you'll know what I mean.

 

I know what he meant about the stability and the center of gravity. If there was a way to measure it, I think that you would probably find a difference, but not very much of one. Ever ride an Arctic Cat? They define stability.

Every quad has a tilted motor of some sort. The gas tank would be the Prairies biggest play towards a lower center of gravity, but at the same time it adds weight to the rear and also to one side. Albeit not very much weight, but some. Nothing that would bother me I don't figure. No, I haven't ridden one. I have ridden quads that are a lot lower to the ground than that though, and they have no advantage over the grizzly on account that they were straight axle quads that got a tire in the air on any uneven surface. Basically, with this, you don't want to get a tire running over a root on the uphill side if you know what I mean.

I can understand all about the low center of gravity on the prairie, but it is not the great difference that some make it out to be. Its good advertising used as ammo in a search to prove one quad better than the other. Same as that "Utility- Grizzly" crap I talked about. Just how could a grizzly be a better work quad? The only thing I could knock on a grizzly's stability is its narrow width in stock form. Thats an obvious with any Yamaha quad. They are all narrow. Compare the Prairie to a Honda or a Bombardier, or even try an Arctic Cat and you would be hard pressed to notice any difference. That "low center of gravity" plug is used by everyone, and the difference between the vast majority is miniscule.


About the sway bar. I didn't really notice any major difference in ride quality one way or the other. I tightened the front shocks up to the 4th notch and the rear to the third notch. Rear needs to go a bit stiffer for landing after small jumps and stuff though. It will rub if you hit hard at the third setting. I moved the front settings stiffer because of the added weight of the winch.


Just to note:
I didn't pick the Grizzly over the Prairie because I thought the Prairie was a piece of crap by any means. I saw them side by side for the first time each, and walked away thinking the Prairie was the better constructed of the two. I got the Grizzly cause I said for two years that my next bike was definitely going to have IRS. I can straddle stuff in the middle of the road that straight axles would have to go around, or slow down and drive over with a tire. I have good wheel articulation that keeps all four on the ground in places that a straight axle would give you that "oops I crapped my pants" feeling. (believe me, I've been there with straight axle quads) In other words, the semi-independant of the AC made me a believer in this, and a fully independant quad gives you that plus the clearance the AC couldn't give. That was my reason. I didn't get it cause I thought the locker was better (though I prefer it for my tastes), nor did I think the Grizzly was faster. Both were automatic, and I didn't want that but there was no choice. The cheap plastic on the Grizz could be replaced with aftermarket stuff down the line too, and that was my main gripe against it. The weak plastic underbody.

Basically, the Grizzly had everything I wanted except a manual transmission. The Kawasaki didn't have IRS. That was the difference. If they had put the IRS on the quad, I probably would have bought a Prairie before they even introduced the new Grizzly.

As far as stability, I've never sat on a more stable quad than the Arctic Cat 500. At least until I put the wide tires and ITP rims on the 660. Now they are pretty close to even. I still give the nod to the AC though, but just by a cats hair.

Man, I don't even own one anymore and I'm still plugging for Arctic Cat. Too bad the 500i wasn't a 650i with a locker.

 

Andy, where did you get that rack exstention on back of your Grizz. I would like to get one in front and on back.