Polaris

[buckfever]

How about the new Razr or Ranger 800? The Razr looks like a million bucks and the Ranger loogs like a hog (in a good way). What du u guys think?

[uwyo]

I've hunted with all three. The 500 Ranger got around surprisingly better than i anticipated. The Ranger 700 EFI would be my choice all things being equal. The Razr is cool for looks, speed, fun, but functionally i don't think i would ever want one. I'm talking about using for elk hunting in the mountains (my bull this year almost flipped the Razr when it was going up a hill, just too tipsy for hauling imo). Plus the ground clearance on the Razr was very poor, it scraped constantly while sportsmans went right on through.

[Todd G.]

First off, let's keep in mind that the Ranger 700, 800 etc. are not in the same class as the RZR. How in the world would you even get an elk on a RZR???

The Rangers are intended for "work" much moreso than play. They are much slower and will have the ability to haul a heavier load, pull more weight, and actually have a box that will hold more than a cooler. On the other hand, they will be much heavier, longer, and wider therefore making them next to impossible to load on a pickup box or use them on any federal/state atv trails. But, when it comes to work, they are the ticket.

On the other end of the spectrum is the RZR. They are narrow, thus able to access any atv trail, federal/state/private and are able to be loaded in the back of a pickup. They are fast (60mph) and handle like a dream. Although they may resemble a truck, they are not! They are meant for play, racing, and generally getting out of work, not going to work. They have a low center of gravity to keep from flipping on rough terrain and fast corners. And, since they are much shorter, the ground clearance isn't as far off as some would think.

So, if its work you are after, buy the Ranger. If its all about play, go with the RZR (I actually like the RZR-S).

[uwyo]

I would disagree. Most of the people who buy rangers or rzrs in my experience use them for both, anytime i've set one up and ppl come looking at them talk about everything from trail riding to dunes to hunting. In essence they're the same thing just a smaller version. While i agree they're designed for different aspects of owning a utv, that doesn't mean people only use them for that, or for that purpose at all. As far as the elk, I assumed ppl would realize not a whole elk. Two quarters in the back and it was tipsy, and the ground clearance is much poorer than sportsmans.
I also agree the ranger is better for work and the razr for play but the rangers are pretty fun in the sand themselves. If i didn't hunt in the mountains i'd like a razr for both (assuming tools etc.. would fit).

[Warlock49766]

I don't know,... I love my Sportsman 500 4x4,... it's the perfect machine as far as I'm concerned.

It has ample power, carries a decent load, and does everything I ask of it.

I hunt with it, carries the game out, the only time I've ever had to use my winch was to raise and lower the snowplow blade while it works double duty here on my farm. Yes both work and play,.. cultivates my food plots, runs the brush hog, plows the snow while also getting me back to my hunting areas both at home and out West.

I guess if I wanted a "golf-cart" I'd buy one,.. that's what the UTV's remind me of they are just too big legally for the majority of trails while hunting and the ground clearance on them don't seem to be anything over what I already have.

I don't play the game of golf,...so I guess that won't be purchasing one anytime soon.

[Todd G.]

I would disagree. Most of the people who buy rangers or rzrs in my experience use them for both, anytime i've set one up and ppl come looking at them talk about everything from trail riding to dunes to hunting. In essence they're the same thing just a smaller version. While i agree they're designed for different aspects of owning a utv, that doesn't mean people only use them for that, or for that purpose at all. As far as the elk, I assumed ppl would realize not a whole elk. Two quarters in the back and it was tipsy, and the ground clearance is much poorer than sportsmans.
I also agree the ranger is better for work and the razr for play but the rangers are pretty fun in the sand themselves. If i didn't hunt in the mountains i'd like a razr for both (assuming tools etc.. would fit).

With all due respect, the RZR is like buying a jeep, while the Ranger is like buying a 2500 series pickup. Both a jeep and the pickup can be used to pull a trailer, but I know which one will work better. Also, both can be used on a trail, but I would prefer the jeep.

If you buy the RZR to do work, its a compromise. The same is true if you buy the Ranger for play.

No different than buying a sport quad versus a utility quad in 4x4.

[uwyo]

With all due respect, the RZR is like buying a jeep, while the Ranger is like buying a 2500 series pickup.
If you buy the RZR to do work, its a compromise. The same is true if you buy the Ranger for play.

No different than buying a sport quad versus a utility quad in 4x4.

We completely agree on this subject, we're just taking two different paths to make the same argument. How many people buy a 3/4 ton 6.4 litre powerstroke and actually put it to use (use that would be too much for a half ton truck)? Or people who buy a jeep that ends up being a daily driver grocery getter? My point is also that doing either is a compromise (buying a ranger or rzr). A person would have to put all the variables into account to see which one works best.
What i was trying to say regarding my experience dealing with UTV buyers is that people tend to error on the side of fun. If a person hunts a little but isn't hardcore they usually will buy a rzr. My point in my first post was to let anyone know if they choose to go this path that the ground clearance may be more of an issue than one would think.