2009 Budget Utility 4x4 Comparison

Test Riders: Johnny Jovanovic, Dale Batson, Brad Skelton, Mark Batson, Jorge Cuartas

With penny pinching on just about everyone's mind, we set out to evaluate seven comparable machines that cost less than six grand. While the small-bore utility 4x4 market may not be the most exciting, it's certainly one of the most viable. Weeks of testing yielded surprising results, a newfound respect for the small-bore 4x4 segment and, most importantly, an understanding of the vast differences between these seven units and how they like to be ridden.

The machines we selected all had three things in common: a price under $6K, a cc range between 350 and 455, and 4WD. The seven finalists were (alphabetically) the Arctic Cat 366, Honda Rancher 4x4 (TRX420FPM), Kawasaki Prairie 360 4x4, Kymco MXU 375 IRS 4x4, Polaris Sportsman 400 H.O., Suzuki KingQuad 400AS and Yamaha Grizzly 350 Auto 4x4 IRS. We summoned our expert test rider team, and outfitted them with the latest over-the-boot-style riding gear by Answer, Fly, Four, Moose, MSR, Shift and Thor, which not only functioned well, but looked amazing.

With machines, gear and riders lined up the only logistical hurdle would be finding a proving ground on which to conduct our testing. Luckily for us, the Broad River Adventure Park (BRAP) in Carlton, Georgia, volunteered to host us. BRAP's new owners put the entire 2000 acres (which includes 85-plus miles of trails and four MX courses) at our disposal and threw in a couple of its plush cabins to boot (www.broadriveradventurepark.com). We set up two "official" test loops with varying conditions; the first was comprised of high-speed trails, off-camber turns, a strip of power line roads and fairly untechnical obstacles. The second loop was low speed and highly technical, through tight woods, water crossings, two steep and muddy hillclimbs, log crossings, steep off-cambered descents into tight creek beds and in and out of various mudholes. We also included a third "unofficial" utility course (parking lot) where we towed, stacked, pushed and pulled just about anything we could get our hands on. Every machine spent countless time in our test loops and on the trails leading to and from them.

If The Shoe Fits...
While all of our machines shared common DNA, it was quickly apparent that they were vastly different animals. Some excelled at work, others yearned to play. We'll give you our assessment (compiled from the opinions of six test riders and various rec riders we encountered along the way) of where each shines and brief evaluations of the basics (ergonomics, brakes, steering and stability, suspension and power), but it's ultimately up to you to decide which shoe best fits your needs.

Arctic Cat 366
At first glance, the Arctic Cat 366 is probably the oddest looking of the bunch. With an ape-hanger bar and buglike round headlights, the 366 looks like a moon rover and certainly stands out (in a good way).

Ergonomically speaking, the Cat is average sized when compared to the other machines. The instrument cluster is filled with useful info (digital displays of clock/hourmeter, mode button, set/reset button, odometer/tripmeter, gear position, speedometer, drive select, high beam, battery condition, temperature and oil pressure), but the aforementioned ape-hanger handlebar was a bit awkward to get used to. All of the controls are easily reachable and well-thought-out with the exception of the nonexistent handlebar-mounted rear brakes. The floorboards are roomy, and the majority of the motor is hidden from view via easily removable plastic sidepanels. The seat is soft and comfortable, but the tank width makes you feel a bit bow-legged while seated. The racks are top-notch, but the only real storage is under the seat in an unsealed compartment (which was the case for nearly all the other units we tested). The 2-inch hitch receiver is great when in work mode, but for serious mud play it tends to hang up on obstacles.

Braking duties are handled by a left-hand-actuated front brake and right-foot-operated rear brake. Overall, the brakes were OK, but the lack of a right-hand brake lever takes away from the overall brake performance. We hate to harp on this, but not having a rear brake lever on the bar really is a mark against it, which the 366 shared with various other machines in this comparison. To its credit, though, the 366 was predictable when stopping at any speed.

At low speeds and through technical terrain, the Cat feels right at home and works well. At anything over medium speed, the steering leaves quite a bit to be desired. Among the seven units tested, the Cat's steering ranked second lowest by our crew and was easily the worst feature of the machine. With that said, under the previously mentioned low-speed conditions the 366's steering isn't nearly as big of an issue.

The suspension suffers from much of the same woes as the steering. In other words, the lower the speed, the better it performs. For utilitarian applications, the shocks were fine, and when towing or loaded with equipment, they actually worked really well.

Power, 4WD and ground clearance all pretty much go hand in hand and play off of each other. The Arctic Cat is adequately powered in dry conditions, but within minutes of introducing the 366 to water, the belt began slipping and the power was effectively robbed. Despite having 10 inches of ground clearance, the Cat continually got stuck in mud sections. The hitch was partially to blame as it high-centered us constantly, but belt slippage was the bigger culprit. Overall, just like most felines, the Arctic Cat has an aversion to water.

Would the Arctic Cat 366 be our first choice for high-speed trail riding? Not really. Then again, that's not exactly what this machine is designed for (just like we wouldn't expect a 450 sport quad to handle farm chores), and overall the 366 performed adequately in low-speed, dry working conditions, which are probably more in line with its intended use.

Honda Rancher 4x4 with Power Steering (TRX420FPM)
The Honda Rancher is one of those machines which is almost impossible to perform an unbiased test on simply because just about everyone has owned one (or something very much like it) at one time or another.

The Rancher's instruments are right where you'd expect them to be and seemed to be laid out logically. There are LCD digital readouts for gear position, speedometer, odometer, resettable tripmeter and hourmeter, as well as indicator lights for reverse, neutral, oil temperature, fuel injection and 4WD. The reverse is activated by pushing a button on the front brake lever, while simultaneously shifting with your foot, which seems like way more work than the other machines we tested. The Rancher was the only foot-shifted machine in the bunch, resulting in mixed reviews from our test crew. While some preferred the ability to pick their own shift points, others viewed it as unnecessary and burdensome. The seat is comfortable as are the bar position and the overall feel of the machine. The Rancher was one of two machines with a storage compartment not under the seat, which is a big plus in our book.

The Honda's brakes performed flawlessly at just about any speed, and inspired confidence in our test crew. The inclusion of a rear brake lever on the handlebar certainly didn't hurt. Overall there were no complaints whatsoever about the Rancher's ability to stop when asked to.

The power steering is a great feature on the Honda and was really well-received by all who rode it. The machine will go wherever you point it, with minimal effort. The benefits of the power steering were noticeable in the lower-speed, technical sections and tight woods, as well as at high speed when blasting out of corners. The power steering definitely gives the Rancher an edge in the steering department, yet our test riders were split down the middle as to whether they'd trade power steering for automatic shifting.

Everything that the Honda does well was nearly overshadowed by the harshness of the suspension. At just about any speed, the Rancher tended to both bounce and beat you to death. The only setting in which it seemed adequately stiff was in full-on work conditions (towing, hauling, etc.). The shocks are the only thing that would keep you from flying at a high rate of speed, as every other aspect (steering, brakes, power) of the machine seems comfortable pushing boundaries.

Outside of the power steering, the most noticeable difference between the Rancher and its competitors is the power. The combination of high displacement (420cc) and manual shifting make for an extremely powerful-feeling package. Despite having one of the lowest ground clearances in the bunch, the Honda held its own in the mud; any sign of traction loss was easily remedied by a push of the throttle. The power was immediately apparent while in work mode, as the Rancher towed and hauled more, with less effort, than just about any other machine. Speedwise, the Rancher flat out hauls; unfortunately, the shocks hinder its full potential.

As a whole, the Honda Rancher 420 is a solid package. The power steering and power delivery are top-notch, while the shocks left a lot to be desired. As a workhorse, it's nearly unbeatable, but at speed it's a bit too rough for our taste.

Manually shifting was a chore to some of us, while others didn't seem to mind it at all. We were split right down the middle on the subject and resorted to conducting an impromptu survey of just about every rider we encountered while testing, and just like our test crew, it was 50-50 as to whether they'd prefer auto shifting or power steering.

Kawasaki Prairie 360 4x4
The Kawasaki Prairie 360 4x4 was surprising on many levels. At first glance, the white plastic and 1970s Chevy look of the front end left a bit to be desired. Upon further inspection, though, Kawi's attention to detail in all other departments won us over.

Maybe I'm just nitpicky (Editor's Note: Yes, you are), but I just don't understand why Kawasaki would make anything other than bright green plastic; it's one of the coolest-looking colors on the market, yet it's not available for the Prairie. With that rant out of the way, outside of color preferences, the Kawasaki is a very well-thought-out machine; from the instruments to the seat height and floorboards, everyone instantly felt at home on the Prairie. The instrument cluster itself is basic, and analog, but adequate. The standout feature ergonomically speaking (or generally for that matter) was the little yellow lever on the handlebar; the variable front differential control allows you to fine-tune the amount of torque delivered to the front wheels simply by pulling on the yellow lever. To be honest, the diff-lock pretty much stole the show in a variety of settings for us, and the Kawasaki was the only unit in our test to offer this feature. The Prairie's layout was comfortable as a whole, though the seat was a little wide for some tastes. The only complaint would be lack of storage compartments.

The brakes functioned great throughout testing and were never a concern. The rear brake lever on the bar was a plus in our books. In all actuality, the same could be said for the steering, shocks and handling. Everything just seemed to work well all the way across the board. The use of a rear axle adds a nice degree of slide-ability and just adds to the all-around fun feel of the package. Every obstacle was handled with relative ease to the point where we were barely slowing down under any conditions. As anti-climactic as it may sound, the Prairie is pretty damn good all the way around. It didn't necessarily do anything in spectacular, jaw-dropping fashion; it just didn't do anything badly at all.

Powerwise, the 362cc SOHC engine ran as strong as you would expect it to. It was comparable to everything else in the class, with the exception of the Rancher (which has a 60cc advantage). The 4WD worked great and nearly got us in trouble when it breezed through the mud section of our course and constantly left us looking for deeper challenges. Towing, hauling and general pack-mule activities were handled fairly easily. The matte black, slightly textured powdercoat finish on the racks actually helps keep items in place while hauling them.

As an overall package, the Kawasaki Prairie 360 4x4 would be well suited for just about any application. Outside of not being Kawasaki green, we couldn't really find any major deficits or flaws to speak of. The steering, stopping and suspension package (aka overall handling) work together well enough to make the Prairie enjoyable to ride at any speed. The 360cc motor has enough grunt to conquer most challenges or chores (within reason, of course), and the diff-lock makes the displacement deficit nearly unnoticeable when in sticky situations.

Kymco MXU 375 IRS 4x4
The Kymco MXU 375 is a machine that's almost easy to overlook; after all, it's a newer Taiwanese brand with a short history here in the United States. Once it caught our eye, though, we quickly realized this was no knock-off and was quite well put together. The MXU is, in fact, a great-looking machine, and the fit and finish was comparable to everything else in this comparison.

Ergonomically, the 375 is on par with the rest of this bunch. The seat, floorboards and controls all work well together for a comfortable feel when seated or standing. The Kymco's handlebar is a bit ape-hanger-ish but still relatively neutral feeling. The instrumentation includes a digital speedometer, odometer and tripmeter, which is pretty impressive considering the MXU 375 is literally hundreds less than any other machine here. The seat is comfortable and plush, and the overall fit and finish of the unit is solid.

Braking duties on the Kymco are handled by a foot-actuated rear brake and handlebar-mounted front brake; unfortunately, the lack of a handlebar-mounted rear brake has us scratching our heads and was once again a big issue with the test crew. An odd and somewhat disconcerting feeling we noticed was the loss of pressure in the front brake lever while applying the rear brakes. Despite the lack of rear brake levers and perceived pressure loss while stopping, the MXU stops surprisingly well.

Steering on the MXU was downright scary. The front end suffers from serious bumpsteer and darted unpredictably at most speeds. The steering issues were such that it was hard to attack the test loops with any kind of speed or confidence. At low speeds and while in work mode these issues were a lot less obvious.

The suspension on the MXU is actually quite good and is the saving grace of the handling package. The 7 inches of travel soaked up all of the stuff we inadvertently hit (thanks to the bumpsteer) with ease.

Powerwise, the MXU is pretty good. It had enough get-up-and-go to keep things fun, and the delivery of the power itself was quite nice. The sole issue we had was belt slippage when wet; outside of that the only other power-robbing issue was the hitch receiver. Much like the Arctic Cat 366, the MXU's hitch constantly got us hung up and high-centered. In utility work mode, the MXU was fine, and the hitch was a huge plus in our books. In utilitarian settings, the 375 felt right at home and towed, hauled and labored with the best of them.

As a whole, the Taiwanese Kymco MXU 375 was surprising. For starters, to be 100 percent honest, the quality startled us all. Not that we had low expectations, but the MXU exceeded our expectations and crushed our preconceived notions that only the Big Four (plus Polaris, KTM, Arctic Cat and Can-Am) have an ability to produce well-built machines. With that said, the Kymco's steering issues really did scare us beyond our expectations. The bottom line is the Kymco isn't what we'd consider a great high-speed recreational machine, but at low speeds and in light-duty utilitarian roles it's a great bargain, and with the money you'll save you can remedy the steering issues.

Polaris Sportsman 400 H.O.
Among the first things you'll notice about the Polaris 400 when compared to the other machines are the sporty looks and lack of tubular steel racks (the Polaris has plastic cargo trays). The next thing will probably be its compact size; at 72 inches long the 400 is close to 10 inches shorter (lengthwise) than just about every other machine in the comparison.

Despite measuring in at a length deficit, the Sportsman actually feels just as roomy as its competitors. Ergonomically, the Polaris is spot-on in all areas except for the floorboards/footpegs/rear brake area. The floorboards tend to get slick feeling, and the motor sticks so far out over them on the right side that it's hard to find the rear brake pedal. Another problem was the lack of rear brakes on the handlebar, which was compounded by the brake pedal access issue. The instrumentation is quite nice, with digital LED readouts for the speedometer, odometer, tripmeter and hourmeter. The shift lever isn't our favorite design, as it's just big and odd and in contrast to the sleek feel of the rest of the machine. The sound the Polaris makes upon starting has you questioning whether it might explode and took some getting used to. With all that out of the way, we'll move onto the one thing that the Sportsman hands-down destroyed its competitors with: storage. The Polaris's cargo trays open up to reveal a glorious, roomy storage compartment with enough room for tools, drinks, straps and spare goggles. The compartment works so well that it had our test riders fighting over the unit.

Brakingwise, the Polaris will stop on a dime--if you can find the brake pedal. The problem is so easily remedied that I'll be surprised if a hand-actuated rear brake isn't included on future versions of the machine.

The steering and suspension are awesome on the Sportsman 400, and it's comfortable at just about any speed over any terrain. The Polaris just plain shined on every lap of every loop it endured. At low speeds, it felt nimble enough to throw around, and at high speeds it felt like a sport quad. The suspension is plush and forgiving, and the steering is completely predictable.

In the power department the Polaris enjoys a pretty big advantage as its 455cc displacement is the largest of the bunch. The power delivery isn't as torquey as we expected, but rather deceivingly smooth and high revving. Despite the lack of a torquey feeling, we were able to pull wheelies on command and power over and through every obstacle on either loop. When loaded with cargo or towing equipment, the Polaris functioned like a typical workhorse.

The Polaris was probably the biggest surprise of the entire comparison. The Sportsman 400 H.O. is the sportiest machine we tested and most comfortable at high speeds. At low speeds and in technical situations, it shines equally, and the deceptive power makes it a blast to ride. A purely recreational rider couldn't go wrong with the Sportsman, with the exception of the rear brake issue there's nothing to keep you from flat out flying down trails. In purely work applications, the 400 can hold its own with the best of them; our biggest concern is that it might entice you to skip work and go play.

Suzuki KingQuad 400AS
Physically speaking, the Suzuki KingQuad 400 is a lot of machine. At first glance the KingQuad's tall seat height just seems to tower above the others.

The big feel is a recurring theme on the KingQuad, as everything just seems beefy. Maybe it's just due to the tall seat height, but the machine feels huge when sitting on it (the key word being "feels," as a quick look at the specs reveals it's right there with the others tested). Ergonomically, it's comfortable and plush to sit on. The controls are well-placed with the exception of the 2WD/4WD switch, which requires you to let go of the right grip in order to engage it. The floorboards are well designed, and the footpegs keep your feet firmly planted in place even while traversing water and mud. Speaking of footpegs, the tall feel of the machine could be easily remedied by lowering them an inch or two. Instrumentation is limited to an analog speedometer/odometer/fuel gauge, neutral, reverse and oil temperature indicator lights. There's no storage to speak of except under the seat. The cargo racks are big and roomy, and function just as they were intended to. As far as looks go, it baffles me why it's not offered in Suzuki yellow (Editor's Note: Quit nitpicking).

The braking on the Suzuki is top-notch and reassuring, while the other handling aspects are comfortably predictable. Suspensionwise, the KingQuad is in a class all its own, and the shocks really shine at all speeds. The steering is pinpoint accurate, and allows the KingQuad to squeeze anywhere you're willing to aim it through. As a whole, the handling on the Suzuki was absolutely phenomenal. The rear end on the machine has just enough slide to let you confidently hang it out around corners. The Zook really performs well under most conditions and at just about all speeds.

Powerwise, the KingQuad is comparable to the other machines in this test. It's fast and peppy enough to keep you on your toes, and strong enough to put in a hard day's work. With that said, to call a spade a spade, it's still only a 376cc machine and is exactly as fast and powerful as you'd expect. The tall ground clearance didn't necessarily translate to any advantage in the mud, but it certainly wasn't a disadvantage, either. All in all, the Suzuki's power delivery was predictable and sufficient for our test loops and work course.

As a total package, the Suzuki is really well-rounded. In fact, the Suzuki breezed through testing almost unnoticed, which is a good thing. The KingQuad just did everything right and as you would expect it to. As a matter of fact, it didn't necessarily stand out until the test crew couldn't come up with anything to really complain about, at which point we realized how well it actually did all the way around. Being well-rounded is a definite plus, and the KingQuad can hang with either the fastest rec rider or hardest worker with little effort.

Yamaha Grizzly 350 Auto 4x4 IRS
You wouldn't imagine just how pleased I was to pick up our Yamaha blue Grizzly. The 350 Grizzly is a sharp-looking and somewhat compact machine. If this were a beauty pageant, as opposed to a shootoutish comparison test, the Yamaha would probably take home the tiara.

The Grizzly 350's instrumentation is fairly no-frills when compared to the other machines we tested, comprised of an analog speedometer and odometer and not much else (it lacks a fuel gauge and the typical warning light clusters and indicators of the other units). The Yamaha's lack of instruments would be the only real mark against it, as every other ergonomic aspect of the 350 Grizzly is top-notch. The gear shifter and 4WD switch work flawlessly, and their design was among the best executed. The floorboards, seat and handlebar distances are just about perfect and accommodated all sizes of test riders without a single adjustment, and the under-seat storage was the roomiest. The textured matte black powdercoat on the cargo racks looks great, resists scratches and even helps keep cargo secure.

The brakes, steering and suspension on the Grizzly all combine for a great package. No single element stood out in a negative way, and by nearly the same token, nothing really blew us away, either. That's not to say we weren't impressed by the Grizzly's handling; we just weren't blown away in one direction or another. The machine pretty much goes where you point it, stops when you ask it to, and soaks up the rough stuff in a relatively smooth and plush fashion.

Now that we've told you what it does well, let me tell you where we felt it was lacking. In a word: power. The Grizzly's lack of get-up-and-go had us questioning whether something might be wrong with it. The 348cc engine was initially described as "painfully slow" by several test riders. In all fairness, once we realized the Grizzly has the lowest displacement out of the fleet we were less shocked by the lack of power. When you consider the 107cc advantage that the Polaris has, it's easy to see why the Yamaha might be perceived as weak. Oddly enough, the Grizzly hauled, towed and moved every single thing the other machines moved just as quickly and easily. Getting the low-displacement Grizzly up to speed with the larger-displaced models just isn't realistic. Our guess is that 90 percent of us wouldn't notice the deficit unless we were drag racing (which we're fairly certain isn't what the engineers had in mind when they designed the 350 Grizzly). The sheer grunt required to traverse deep mudholes or conquer steeper climbs is simply lacking, but the benefits of the handling make it a decent trade-off for those not in any sort of hurry.

At 348cc the Grizzly 350 is a solid choice for the low-speed recreational rider. If you're looking to set the world on fire or move a mountain, the Grizzly may not be for you. If you're looking for more of a smooth, leisurely cruiser with enough grunt to perform medium-duty chores, we've found your machine. Regardless, it's easily the best-looking quad in the bunch.