Let’s be bold and add riding ATVs to that list. Some might say 2-up ATVs have been made obsolete by two-person side-by-sides, but we strongly beg to differ. UTVs have their advantages, and are very fun, but two-passenger ATVs are allowed on more trails, take up less space, usually cost less and can provide a more physically engaging ride, which is important to enthusiasts like us.

It’s worth noting that 2-ups account for about 6.7 percent of the ATV industry – a profitable segment that’s grown in recent years, hence the expanding proliferation of choices now available.

We recently honored the Polaris Sportsman Touring 800 EFI as our 2008 ATV of the Year, but some new competition from Can-Am’s freshened Outlander Max and Arctic Cat’s innovative Cruiser models set the stage for a full-on 2-up comparison test.

Our test team included three couples – one set of friends, some soon-to-be relatives (marriage pending) and a wedded couple that’s logged many miles aboard their 2-up over the past three and a half years. It was a wide array of ATV experience – the perfect crew to dissect and review three unique machines.

We loaded up and drove to the shores of Minnesota’s huge Lake Mille Lacs to ride the Red Top ATV Trail – a typical, wooded public riding area with varied terrain. With a long washboard former rail bed, wide connector trails that wind through the woods and a technical “High Adventure” section, Red Top had the variety needed for a comprehensive investigation.

3rd Place – Polaris Sportsman Touring 800 EFI

With four distinct models, Polaris has a wide selection of 2-up variants serving different audiences. Its X2s have a folding rear seat that transforms into a cargo bed, while the more comfortable Touring models are designed for couples looking to put on serious miles with a larger, plusher fixed rear seat that’s a dramatic improvement in passenger accommodation over the compromising X2.

Based on the old Sportsman chassis, as opposed to the superb, new XP introduced last summer, the Sportsman Touring is available as a 500 or an 800. We wanted to test the best 2-ups available, so we went for the Touring 800, with its powerful twin-cylinder 760cc mill.

Features
As its chassis has been on the market for years, but constantly updated, the Sportsman Touring holds few surprises. That doesn’t mean it’s without great features, though, like a one-wheel drive Versatrac Turf Mode for inconspicuously traversing your yard, abundant storage bins and the Polaris-exclusive Active Descent Control, which provides four-wheel engine braking strong enough to stop a fully loaded quad heading down a mountain trail without using the brakes.

Passenger-centric features include a rear seat that’s reclined back more than the competitors from Arctic Cat and Can-Am, two built-in cup holders, angular “vibration-isolating” handholds and rubber-and-plastic height-adjustable foot rests that also seek to minimize vibration.

Other goodies include on-demand all-wheel drive, a fully independent suspension with MacPherson struts up front and dual A-arms in the rear, a one-inch rear receiver, an attractive painted finish that Polaris says is nine times more scratch resistant than regular plastics and sharp cast aluminum rims. With a price of $9,699, the Sporty was the least expensive machine in the test by a mere $230 vs. the Arctic Cat – but it’s the only machine here without a winch.

From The Backseat
As mentioned, our group was a motley crew of testers – some riding 2-up for the first time, others very familiar riding quads in pairs. Each documented their impressions, rating various aspects of comfort, perceived quality,features and performance. All ratings placed a strong emphasis on passenger comfort and accommodations.

What was the latest and greatest 2-up in 2008 has lost its luster according to our six-person team. Each of our testers unanimously rated the Sportsman Touring as the least comfortable rig for passengers.

All riders cited a cheap feeling backrest that’s reclined too far back and offers little lumbar support. The passenger seat bottom is satisfyingly cushy but its relatively flat shape made it hard to stay put over rough terrain, occasionally bouncing the rear rider forward into the driver’s back – no fun for anyone. The square-edged handholds do the trick, but were singled out for being too close to thighs and too sturdy, transmitting more bumps to the passenger’s arms and shoulders than other, more forgiving hand grips.

The passenger footrests were also the targets of some griping. The beef? They’re too short, with boots hanging off the front, and they lack the metallic serrated pegs that the driver gets. While the rubber reduces vibration, it doesn’t have the much-needed grip to keep the backseat driver properly in place.

Speaking of shaking, our passengers said the rear position of the Polaris was far too bumpy over rough trails – even in the softest spring settings, the rear suspension proved to be too stiff. It’s a roomy platform, though,
and better suited to slower-paced or shorter jaunts, which might be all some users are looking for.

For The Driver
From the driver’s seat, it’s hard to tell there’s even a passenger on-board as the Sportsman easily has enough power and suspension capabilities to handle the added load with full composure.

From a driver’s perspective, the Sportsman is fun to drive and utterly predictable. Active Descent Control makes it especially easy to judiciously regulate speed for the passenger’s comfort, which is a great quality in hilly terrain or on tight woods trails with constant changes in vehicle speed. One tester said the engine braking was too strong for his liking, but it can be turned off with the flip of a switch. A roomy platform allowed plenty of room for both riders to stretch out without being too close for comfort.

Like most Sportsman models, the Touring is smooth riding, offers low-effort steering, a pillow-soft seat and is all sorts of fun once you start exploring the burly engine’s abilities – enough though it was hard to tell the passenger wasn’t sharing in the fun. A quick slap to the back of the helmet made things crystal clear. One passenger eager to switch rides summed the Touring’s rear-seat experience clearest: “I didn’t enjoy it. I was struggling to stay on the entire ride.” As any parent who reluctantly drives a grocery getter knows, passenger comfort and safety is your highest priority when carrying human cargo. We anxiously await an improved 2-up from Polaris based on the XP chassis.

2nd Place – Arctic Cat TRV 700 H1 EFI Cruiser
Everyone was excited to test out the fancy Arctic Cat 700 Cruiser, with its upmarket steel blue metallic paint, attractive aluminum rims, capacious and color-matched rear storage trunk, heated driver and passenger grips and windshield with integrated side-view mirrors that gave it the semblance of a high-class touring motorcycle. In fact, with its standard winch, this may be one of the most luxurious ATVs on the market.

We had hoped to test the 1000 Cruiser model, powered by the Thundercat’s rip-roaring 951cc H2 engine, but we had to take what was available – the 700, with a potent single-cylinder engine we’ve previously commended for its smooth, progressive power. The 700 Cruiser also costs $2,500 less than the 1000 model, so it will likely appeal to a wider audience.

Features
Based on Arctic Cat’s largest TRV (two-rider vehicle) chassis, the lengthened Cruisers have a wheelbase that’s been stretched 8 inches over their single-passenger comrades. This imparts the Cruisers with better handling characteristics and a sense of stability around corners or over uneven terrain – which you’ll undoubtedly encounter on any trail. Cat’s “ride-in” suspension lowers the center of gravity over previous models, while maintaining 11 inches of ground clearance, second to the Can-Am’s foot of clearance.

In addition to the aforementioned niceties, key features include durable automotive-style paint, an electronically locking differential, a built-in 2-inch receiver, a driver’s cup holder and four-wheel dual A-arm independent suspension.

From The Backseat
Curvy handholds and a deluxe rear seat made the Arctic Cat a popular choice for passengers, with one tester calling it the best seat in the test. The grips are less rigid than the others, a nice quality that allows the seat
and handholds to absorb some of the shock for a less tiring ride.

One problem noted by all was that the curvaceous handholds arc in toward the passenger too far in the front, leaving some with bruised thighs. A simple design fix would make the Cat’s backseat nearly flawless.
The rear seat bottom is curved up just slightly, enough to keep everybody in place. Also good, the footrests were large and grippy, crucial for allowing the passenger to stay in place and avoid being jolted into the driver’s back.

For The Driver
Hauling around a passenger is of little consequence for the mighty Cruiser. There’s more body roll than the other machines in turns, but high ground clearance, a stable platform and smooth engine braking make this an easy machine for drivers to supply a tranquil ride. With peppier engines, the Can-Am and Polaris are a bit more fun to aggressively pilot through the woods and on long straight stretches, but the Arctic Cat hits the intended mark: two-person comfort. The Cruiser 1000 undoubtedly has plenty of power for all conditions.

At the first trail break, everybody wanted to check out the smart-looking lockable rear cargo box that’s cavernous by ATV storage standards. Its operation wasn’t up to expectations, with one calling it “flimsy.” Mastering its proper closure and locking was a team effort, but we figured it out and utilized the space for hauling drinks, pens, notebooks, a tire repair kit and extra layers of clothing. All gave Arctic Cat high marks for providing such abundant storage, useful on almost any ride, but the box could use some refinement.

The cool looks of the windshield and side mirrors were also betrayed by poor execution. The plastic windshield vibrated loose several times throughout our test, while the mirrors also came loose and were generally hard to adjust into a useful position. Mostly, we looked at a vibrating reflection of ourselves.

Lastly, the Cruiser’s speedometer also indicated an EFI diagnostic issue, and the machine failed to start briefly. It may be a one-time glitch, but it wasn’t received well by the peanut gallery. We’re still awaiting dealer word on what that was all about.

One could always save some cash with the TRV 700 H1 that comes without the windshield, heated grips and trades the storage box for an optional plastic cargo bed, but the Cruiser would be better in cold weather riding
conditions, with its big shield and heated grips. For summer riding, we removed the rattling, dirt-collecting windshield and mirrors.

Even with a few disconcerting bits like the EFI/speedo issue, the clunky cargo box and the removable, annoying windshield, the Arctic Cat TRV 700 H1 EFI Cruiser is a pleasant machine that’s comfortable for the driver and the passenger, has photogenic good looks and enough storage to really travel off the beaten path.

1st Place – Can-Am Outlander Max 800R EFI XT

From the turn of the theft deterring key to the fancy digital gauges, the comfy seats to the superior handholds, the rumbling exhaust note to the intoxicating power that planted everybody back in their seats, the Can-Am Outlander Max 800R exudes quality and fun.

It’s motivated by the most powerful engine in the test, and one of the strongest in the ATV marketplace, and all but one member of our six-person test team voted the Can-Am the most appealing rig in the group – drivers and passengers.

Features
Its as-tested price just below 11 grand is highest in the group, but ours was a mid-level XT model (as opposed to the opulent LTDs) that’s still decked-out by most anyone’s standards. Less generously equipped models are available for less; they just come without the winch and the fancy wheels.

But we like the snazzy aluminum wheels and always want a winch on a machine that’s far too heavy for manhandling.

Most of what’s good about the Can-Am also makes it unique – a “surrounding spar” frame that helps the Outlander weigh a bit less than the others, a TTI rear suspension that reduces wheel scrub yet provides a sporty and soft ride, a no-brainer automatic locking front differential, a digital security system and that wild, explosive V-twin engine.

The inboard hydraulic discs, while unique, are the machine’s greatest flaws with cheap sounding creaking when pulling hard on the brakes. Previous experience with Can-Am’s four-wheelers of similar design have shown these brakes to be highly susceptible to water – a questionable design call on an all-terrain vehicle, we’d say.

The 2010 model with dual-mode power steering wasn’t available for our test, but would only sweeten the deal in our eyes, as low handlebars and high steering effort are slight Outlander demerits.

From The Backseat
For passengers, the Can-Am has few glaring faults. The grips aren’t heated like the luxuriant Arctic Cat, but they’re curved away from the driver, causing no black-and-blue marks on our passengers’ legs. The rear seat
bottom is curved up to keep the passenger in place, which works great, but one female tester said this seat hump was a bit intrusive. This makes the rear seat an uncomfortable place for men.

A full foot of ground clearance on this machine proves you can have the best of both worlds: a chassis that avoids boulders plus sporty handling with minimal body roll. For one couple, at least, the Can-Am seemed to encourage the occasional power slide on wide-open, smooth trails. In the rougher, rockier sections, the Can-Am provided a smooth ride for both riders, if slightly less forgiving than the Arctic Cat.

“I could ride on this machine all day on smooth trails or the rough terrain,” said one happy camper. “As the passenger, I enjoyed this machine the most.”

For The Driver
Behind the bars of the Outlander, it’s hard to tell there’s even a passenger hanging on back there. Off-camber sections, fast braking, rough trails, steep hills and sharp turns all failed to upset the stable chassis, and the suspension and power were easily up to the task.

If you’re looking to scare the bejesus out of a passenger, this machine has the speed to do it. It also has the poise and polish to bring any passenger on a casual, pleasant ride, though the quick-hitting powerband does make the machine a bit jumpy.

As we know many 2-up owners only ride with a passenger a portion of the time, we like that the Can-Am’s rear seat is removable, and can be replaced with a small storage box. Making the swap couldn’t be easier or faster, in contrast to the Cat’s fussy accessories. They both lock in with a reassuring click, so you can be sure everything is properly secured.

At the end of the day, all but one rated the Can-Am Outlander Max 800R as their favorite ride. Looking at the facts it’s easy to see why: evident quality, a composed chassis, an overachieving engine, a comfortable seat,
proper hand and foot grips and the ability to quickly transfigure between a one- and two-person machine. If you’re riding solo or with a co-pilot, the Can-Am over delivers on expectations, and looks great while doing it. We suspect the addition of power steering and slightly toned down graphics will only improve the Max for 2010 – our new favorite, no-compromises 2-up ATV.

For more articles like this, please visit http://www.atvmagonline.com to get the latest news and info in the ATV industry!

Meet the Candidates
How is one to decide? Polaris makes a strong case for both the mid-size Sportsman 400 H.O. and its full-size 500 H.O. model – the 400 is a new entry level machine with big boy features, while the full-size 500 offers a larger engine and a slight price penalty. With such a narrow difference in fiscal policy (a.k.a. price), the choice seems fairly insignificant.

As you dig in to the specifics, though, you’ll see there are some meaningful differences that must be aired out – namely how the 400 spins the truth and actually packs a 455cc single cylinder engine from the departed Sportsman 450, whereas the 500 meets expectations with a 499cc unit in office for a decade. Looking at dry weights, obesity being a key issue and all, there’s a 91-pound advantage for the 400 – 605 pounds versus 696.

The wheelbases also offer a stark contrast. The 400 is 4.5 inches shorter than the 500, which makes for a more manageable package for less experienced riders, or loading up in a crowded toy hauler. Let’s not get bogged down in contrast – there’s a lot in common here, too. Both rigs have carburetors and liquid cooling, are suspended by MacPherson struts in front and IRS out back, display vital statistics through full instrumentation and divide power with the company’s selectable “true” on-demand all-wheel drive. Sounds even-Steven but we’re nowhere close to naming a front runner.

The Initial Debate
It was time for some face time, a true knock-down-drag-out debate. Forget Iowa, New Hampshire or the Carolinas, we’re outdoorsmen here at ATV Magazine and headed for the snowy trails of northwest Wisconsin to pit the candidates head-to-head.

Just thirty seconds into our trail ride, and with only 2 miles on the odometer, we noticed the four-wheel drive wouldn’t engage on the 400. We were unable to self-diagnose the problem. A tough first debate had now raised some potentially serious character flaws with the red candidate.

Even though our destination was snow-covered and slippery, 4WD wasn’t essential and we continued along the undulating, scenic woods trails. Switching off between the two clearly illustrated a disparity in suspension performance. Our 500 rode like so many Polaris 500 H.O.’s before it – soft. Bumps are absorbed to the point of elimination, for a fatigue-free experience. Credit that to the 500′s ample 8.2 and 9.5 inches of suspension travel, front and rear, compared with 7 and 8 for the 400. Acceleration is moderate, body roll isn’t a concern, controls are where you expect them and it feels like a true-blue, full-size machine.

Bruised, but still fighting, the 400 motored along like the underdog it was – lighter and less bulky. Two testers, tall and taller, both felt comfortable on the downsized ride and appreciated its tossability. The four-hundo still delivers that trademark cushy Polaris ride, but whether it’s firmer dampening rates, different suspension geometry or the shorter wheelbase, there is less rider comfort. Instead, riders get a sportier feel than the 500. Lower fenders and three inches less width for the 400 back up the smaller, playful feel imparted by the lower curb weight.
This round’s a draw.

The Power to Change
Finding a clear victor is easier when it comes to raw power. Polaris says the 500′s mill generates 35.9 peak hp, and 31.1 pound-feet of torque at 5000 revolutions, while the 400′s 29.2 peak hp and 24.6 pound-feet of torque scrambles to catch up.

There’s that weight difference, though, and for that very reason, we pulled out the radar gun and did some acceleration testing – never a bad way to kill some time on a deserted country road.

Less weight and more petite dimensions were not enough for the 400, which was soundly outrun by the faster 500. It took 101 feet for the 400 to hit 30 mph, while the 500 accomplished the same task in less than 90 feet. After putting on several miles, and frequently switching between machines, the numbers weren’t a surprise. They’re both fairly close, and can hang with each other on trails, but the 500 wins the speed voters.

Kitchen Table Issues

More time with the candidates brought out some of the finer points of contention – matters of performance, harshness and tone.

On paper, there’s nothing different with the duo’s braking packages. Both offer single-lever hydraulic discs up front and a hydraulic rear foot brake – traditional single-lever braking. But, then you look at the actual record. Our 400′s braking was noticeably front-loaded, with nearly all of perceived braking force sent to the front wheels. Around slippery corners, it was enough to send the machine into instant understeer. Braking on the 500, on the other hand, is a model of consistency – exactly what you expect, when you expect it, and without the front-heavy bias.

Ergonomics are another battleground for any consumer cross shopping these two. As both of our testers were above the 6-foot mark, we were surprised to feel comfortable with both. The trimmer 400 felt like a 9/10ths scale quad designed for smaller riders, but it’s still spacious enough to appeal to the masses.

With all things being equal, noise, vibration and harshness can make a big difference to fickle comparison shoppers. Why go with one, when another is less irritating? To that end, neither single-cylinder engine is all that high-tech or polished. Since this is a debate, after all, we’d be remiss if we didn’t give it to you straight – the age-old 500 vibrates less, a nod to its years of refinement. While the 400 is not harsh, there is more engine and chassis vibration that makes it to the rider. There’s no landslide here, but the Sportsman 500 is the smoother operator.

Wedge Issues

Moving past the big-ticket questions, there are a few small differences worth mentioning. You never know what’s a deal breaker with pesky issue voters. First up, while it has most of the full-sized features of the 500, the 400 does not have low-range or parking gears.

If you’re shopping for a Polaris Sportsman, you’re probably excited about that storage bin under the front rack – we love the feature and use it every chance we get. A smaller space, combined with service access to the radiator and battery charger plug creates a smaller cubbyhole on the 400. It’s still usable storage, but 500 H.O. buyers can be more of a pack rat up front and they get an additional storage box under the rear rack.

Instrumentation is another area that shows some minor cost cutting on the 400 – its all-digital gauges are not as readable as the digital-and-analog display on the 500. There’s also a pod light on the 500. Hey, this is a campaign, and every little detail counts.

Damage Control

As the sun was setting and the trail reached a dead end, it was time to turn around and head back to the trailhead. We gave it all we had for a powerslide-filled trip back, trying to make the final call on these two opposing rides. The truck’s always a good place to think.

Back at the shop, we decided to dig up some answers on the 400′s faulty 4WD system. Polaris service technicians later poked around, prodded and told us that a snap ring either popped out of its groove in the main gear case, or it was never seated at the assembly line. When the power was transmitted through, it pushed against the snap ring until the pinion gear on the snorkel shaft was no longer making contact – hence, no front-wheel action.

Surely a problem bound to be cast in a harsh light by the media. Not so! ATV Magazine has a proud history of objective reporting. Such driveline problems are rare for any mainstream manufacturer, and we’ll cautiously attribute it to a one-off blunder.

Election Day

Trying to nail down a winner, the media rehashed the same old questions. Who’s the ideal buyer for the smaller 400? Who should go with the larger 500? Is there enough of a difference between them? And, which would us testers go with, if we had to make the call for ourselves?

Our vote? The Sportsman 500 H.O., for its full size, super-plush ride, low range, higher speed, more torque and the fact that a Sportsman 500 has never been priced so low. Whether it’s work or play, and we like both, there are plenty of reasons to justify the extra $400 spent. Store more gear, haul more butt, pull more stuff.

By contrast, those maybe aren’t major compromises for someone who appreciates the simpler operation, more managable dimension and lighter weight of the Sportsman 400 H.O. It may offer more of the important-to-you features than any other quad in its class.

What’s right for you? That’s your call. But if you’re like us, and you’re looking for a full-size worker and a lively trail rider, mark your ballot for the Sportsman 500 H.O.

For more articles like this, please visit http://www.atvmagonline.com to get the latest news and info in the ATV industry!

The majority of this section seemed to either be dark colours or camouflage, but which ever one it may be you need to make sure you have some High-Visibility points so that you can be seen whilst riding at night.

Below are just some of the market leading concepts in the high visibility section.

Arm Bands
It doesn’t take much to cast the mind back to doing your cycling proficiency test at school to remember some of the tips given by the road safety officer about “Being Seen At Night.” The arm band is one of the easiest items to wear and offers great visibility to vehicle approaching from the side – for example when parted at a junction. The costs involved in buying something like this are minimal.

Body Strips
Much like arm bands, the body strip is again easy to wear and gives great visibility from both front and rear. If worn with the arm bands it’s safe to say that you would have extremely high visual impact on traffic coming at you from any angle. Costs, well again these are pretty economical and would cost you no more that about £15-20 depending on the size/manufacturer.

Waist Coats
Now we are not saying that these are the trendy alternative to wearing body belts or arm bands, but they certainly are light weight and can be stored easily under the seat on pretty much any ATV or Quad Bike. With a Velcro fastening system on the front and High Visibility strips and the front and rear, this style of garment is possibly one of the better ways to be seen at night. Costs between £15-20.

Jackets
We all see these day in day out when passing anyone working on the road gangs or building sites. Not only are these High Visibility but they come waterproof too. They have fluorescent stripes on the arms, front and rear panels and even the collar. (depending on manufacturer) These are great for night riding and not only give you a great presence on the road but are very warm and dry. Costs between £35/40 – £100 depending on manufacturer.

To summarize – the levels of visibility offered with these types of apparel vary. The costs agin are very much the same – but how can you place a cost on safety?

These utility ATVs capable of being driven by all four wheels, are able to perform far more tasks than originally anticipated. The addition of accessories including luggage and storage racks and powered winches have also impacted the use of ATVs for business and practical purposes. Engines can range in size with maximum displacement as high as 800cc providing plenty of power for towing, dragging, and other tasks. A reverse gear provides much more versatility than the mono-directional ATVs of earlier years. Shaft drives have replaced chain and sprocket drives on the original sport models. PTO has become an option providing power for those who need to drive external accessories and machinery. With a plethora of options available, the 4×4 utility ATV can be considered a viable off-road vehicle and useful tool rolled into one.

Law enforcement is a fine example of ATV use from a practical standpoint. The police have begun making use of ATVs for patrolling as well as search and rescue. The ability of the ATV to travel off-road in less than perfect road or trail conditions makes the ATV the perfect tool for police in rural areas. In areas where horseback and foot patrol used to be the only option, the ATV can provide a reliable means of travel, and in some cases a much longer range. In a city environment, ATVs play a huge role in crowd control. The ATV has also made beach patrols far easier for enforcement officers. Large areas of sandy beach can be patrolled in a relatively short period of time versus good, old fashioned walking. Firefighters also can reach wooded areas normally off-limits to firetrucks and medical personnel now have a means of assisting and retrieving individuals in need of emergency medical care.

The use of ATVs in agriculture and farm operations is most predominant of all. Small and medium sized farms have made use of ATVs performing tasks previously performed by horses and by good old human power. The application of pesticides has become more efficient due to the availability of ATV-mounted pesticide applicators. The feeding of livestock has become easier using ATVs for hauling and distributing feed. Mowing smaller fields can be more efficient with ATVs over full size tractors especially in areas with limited access.

The relocation of dirt and gravel, a simple task done for a variety of reasons, has been made easier as ATVs can reach areas not accessible by pickup truck or tractor. Seeding is another example of life made easier on the farm by means of atv, an attached ATV spreader can ease the workload associated with seeding crops as well. Tilling can also be accomplished via ATV. A cumbersome tiller attached to a full size tractor may not always work well in areas with limited access or difficult maneuverability.

Anyone who has ever ridden an ATV for recreational purposes knows how gratifying and enjoyable riding can be and it is always interesting to see exciting new roles played by the all terrain vehicle as they continue to emerge year after year. Through the use of new and innovative accessories, larger engines, better suspension and control, we can only imagine where we’ll find an ATV next.