I live in Ontario Canada and am thinking about buying a new 2017 rancher dct in camo. This will be my first Honda ATV, I have owned many other brands. Is this a good choice in the Honda line-up. And where is a good place to buy? Thanks
Opinions on new 420 rancher dct
1 - 20 of 41 Posts
Joined
·
708 Posts
Good morning. First, a question, are you looking to buy the solid rear axle (TRX420FA2) version with DCT or the independent rear suspension version?
Either way, I have owned a 2016 Honda Rancher 4x4 DCT EPS (TRX420FA2) since December of 2015. With over 340 hours and 3200+ miles, I can say mine has been flawless. I LOVE it! It is rider friendly for everyone who rides it, beginner or experienced. It has never let me down in any way. The fuel injection is awesome and it starts every time you push the button, whether it's 0 degrees outside or 100 degrees outside.
I have ridden mine in the Colorado rockies, Utah high mountains, sand dunes, AZ low desert, AZ mountains, all sorts of elevations & terrains, and it has been a total pleasure. The DCT transmission has been great. I love that I can shift manually when I want to. I love that the automatic works great for all other occasions.
In short, I say yes. I bought mine at Western Honda in Scottsdale, AZ.
Joined
·
8,309 Posts
I think if you want us to give you some feedback, you might want to explain the use of the atv for you?
is it for work, , mud< or just trail riding
do you ride FAST SLOW< or??
and maybe what atv;'s you had before
if you have any that were of other brands and over 500 cc's
odds are you might find a ALL Honda 4x4 atv's SLOW, as all will have a a bunch more HP than any honda!
Ranchers are great atv's for what they are, as are most Honda's
but, there no rocket ships or big HP atv's Honda's way more on the work side than play side of things ! IMO
is it for work, , mud< or just trail riding
do you ride FAST SLOW< or??
and maybe what atv;'s you had before
if you have any that were of other brands and over 500 cc's
odds are you might find a ALL Honda 4x4 atv's SLOW, as all will have a a bunch more HP than any honda!
Ranchers are great atv's for what they are, as are most Honda's
but, there no rocket ships or big HP atv's Honda's way more on the work side than play side of things ! IMO
I have a 2017 Rancher DCT with IRS, and it's been great so far! Runs beautifully, smooth ride with the IRS, and couldn't be easier to start (thanks to fuel injection. The headlights are nice and bright, but I found mine were aimed to high from the factory. They are super simple to adjust the height though.
I like the DCT transmission and honestly find myself using the auto mode the most. It is great for trail riding and most situations. I only find myself switching to ESP mode to climb hills or going through heavy mud in 4x4, both situations where I like to hold it in one gear and keep my RPMs up. But that's just preference too.
So far the quad has given me zero problems and I've been very happy with it.
My only issue with it was the tires they came with from the factory. They look so tiny on it and leave a lot to be desired if you ride through any mud. I put light 26's on mine and it looks much better, rides just as good, and gained me an inch of clearance. The bike sits noticeably higher. Overall though, it's a very nice quad that should hopefully last me a very long time.
I like the DCT transmission and honestly find myself using the auto mode the most. It is great for trail riding and most situations. I only find myself switching to ESP mode to climb hills or going through heavy mud in 4x4, both situations where I like to hold it in one gear and keep my RPMs up. But that's just preference too.
So far the quad has given me zero problems and I've been very happy with it.
My only issue with it was the tires they came with from the factory. They look so tiny on it and leave a lot to be desired if you ride through any mud. I put light 26's on mine and it looks much better, rides just as good, and gained me an inch of clearance. The bike sits noticeably higher. Overall though, it's a very nice quad that should hopefully last me a very long time.
Joined
·
5,072 Posts
I use a 2008 rancher (slightly different to the newer rancher i know) at work, does exactly what you'd expect it to do. Great little machine IMO.
For me, being nearly 6'3" I find it a little small in the seating department but that said, it's not my ATV so it doesn't matter to me. The only downside we found was that 1st gear isn't quite low enough for work use. I beleive the foreman has a slightly lower 1st gear though so take that into consideration before you buy.
Overall, good all round ATV for regular work and play.
For me, being nearly 6'3" I find it a little small in the seating department but that said, it's not my ATV so it doesn't matter to me. The only downside we found was that 1st gear isn't quite low enough for work use. I beleive the foreman has a slightly lower 1st gear though so take that into consideration before you buy.
Overall, good all round ATV for regular work and play.
Joined
·
8,309 Posts
the new ranchers are now on the full sized frames, same size more or less as the foreman and Rubicons, as same frame size on all now! as of I think 20015?
and yes Ranchers were always geared a little taller than the foreman, a more work ATV than the Rancher
Joined
·
172 Posts
I have 2 of these, year 2016. Love them. We work hard, carrying heavy loads across bumpy terrain for work. Quad can take more abuse than I can. Glad I don't have to shift, what a pita, it would be really often and I usually have a gps or map or something in one hand anyways. I travel less than 30 mph, usually about 6 actually, did hit 49 once trying to catch a Polaris 650 on a salt flat, but basically grind on very hard access terrain most of the time. Differeent people use these quads, all experienced, and they all love this model too, so I guess they are the best of the fleet. IRS super comfy, plus great clearance. Power steering is an added bonus. All depends what you want to pay for, but I am glad for my decisions.
Joined
·
5,072 Posts
That's an added bonus for the OP then if he's looking at Ranchers, the size of the earlier models is somewhat restricted for taller riders.
Nevertheless, I find the Rancher I use a cracking machine, despite first not being as low as we want it, it still does the job well.
Joined
·
172 Posts
PS.
Dealer said this to me about the camo version: "You wouldn't believe how many people come in here and ask me if we have a gps tracker on the quad so they can find it".
Also, the Rancher has been using just less than 2 gallons gas a day, the best of the fleet. The Polaris 650 has to take 2 gallons in a can, because he uses 7 gallons a day sometimes. He is an aggressive driver though, with big tires and high speeds. He doesn't get any more work done than anyone else though, so the revving up is all for naught.
Dealer said this to me about the camo version: "You wouldn't believe how many people come in here and ask me if we have a gps tracker on the quad so they can find it".
Also, the Rancher has been using just less than 2 gallons gas a day, the best of the fleet. The Polaris 650 has to take 2 gallons in a can, because he uses 7 gallons a day sometimes. He is an aggressive driver though, with big tires and high speeds. He doesn't get any more work done than anyone else though, so the revving up is all for naught.
Joined
·
8,309 Posts
me personally I liked the Ranchers when they had the smaller frames, they were more nimble so to speak, maybe NOT for very tall riders, but they filled a nitch
you now have a smaller motor in a fullsized frame too, as they went larger on frame but didn;t increase any HP
so, your HP to weight went down, and ??
there was always the Rubicon and Foreman for the bigger guys? a hair more HP too for the larger frame?
I gather its cheaper to have all things on one frame , which is why they switched! rather than they did it for taller riders LOL
Yep. I had a friend wanting a Rancher for his wife and when I pointed out the change in frame size he found a 2012 DCT with about 200 miles on it and bought that for her. The smaller framed 420's were great for women and kids.
Joined
·
8,309 Posts
Jeep I fully agree, they were nice addition to the 4 x 4 line up, so smaller folks , or newer folks into atv's could ride without feeling they were on a HUGE atv. or transition model, for those coming off a 250 into there first 4x4 model, IMO they screwed up here, and will loose some market shares they once had with it being a smaller atv!
I also feel the smaller models have lower center of gravity, making them feel more secure to new riders or smaller one's! and made it feel more sporty too I think
as you , could man handle them a lot easier LOL
and all the more so when power between the line up is about the same LOL
smaller lighter and about the same HP< it was a bigger win win I think before these new BIG frames there in?
I also feel the smaller models have lower center of gravity, making them feel more secure to new riders or smaller one's! and made it feel more sporty too I think
as you , could man handle them a lot easier LOL
and all the more so when power between the line up is about the same LOL
smaller lighter and about the same HP< it was a bigger win win I think before these new BIG frames there in?
Joined
·
7,087 Posts
X3 on he smaller ones being better, they were nice and nimble like the old 300's, now just big and clumsy like the Foreman. The Foreman/Rubicant is pretty roomy for a taller rider though, which is nice. One of the reasons I've been trying to get away from the 300's
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Joined
·
1,775 Posts
Yup they made them to big. I like the pre-2014 models better.. Smaller easier to throw around, more visibility and capable in the tight woods. If I am going to buy a bike that is as big and heavy as a new honda it would be something with a bigger motor than what they offer.. But if I had to buy a new honda it would be a rubicon dct with low range and power steering.
Same frame as the Foreman now.
Basically instead of having two distinct models the Rancher and Foreman are now the same bike with a few parts being different.
Engines are pretty much the same. Different clutches, top end, stator but otherwise the same.
Foreman has diff lock and pod light. Rancher does not.
Same frame, so the Rancher is effectively just a cheap, stripped down, low cc base model Foreman now.
Joined
·
5,072 Posts
Ahh ok.. Don't see many new models over here and I haven't been to Honda maindealer for quite some time, think they only had rincons and foremans on display last time actually.
Joined
·
71 Posts
Right on! i have a '13 foot shift, and was a lil upset after i seen they changed the model on '14. Glad i didnt trade up for a newer model. i whip mine around with confidence. Im 5"9" @ 180 and fits well
Joined
·
708 Posts
Also, Foreman has longer suspension travel than Rancher. 25" tires on Foreman vs 24" on Rancher.
The Rancher has a higher compression engine than the Foreman, and I believe the Rancher (because it sits a little lower and has a higher-compression engine) feels more playful. One reason I love my 2016 Rancher is that it feels very playful. I came from all sport quads, 400EX being the latest, to this Rancher and I never felt like I lost my ability to play on the Rancher. It revs well, pulls hard, slides the corners well, etc. It is in no way underpowered, as far as I'm concerned. I can tear down forest roads and trails at 45-50mph and that is plenty fast. It has climbed every hill I point it at. I'm not trying to turn big heavy mud tires, so no need to change gearing.
Let me put it this way: I have been riding quads for a long time now, like many of you. I have spent a great deal of time on some of the older "smaller" Ranchers, for example the Rancher 350, and my new 2016 Honda Rancher is a superior machine. I once did a 60-mile loop ride with a friend at high elevation in the Colorado Rockies. My 2016 Rancher ran circles around that old 350 in every possible way. We traded off several times during the ride. That old 350 felt like a cart compared to my Rancher.
Suspension
Power
Comfort
Steering
...all improved drastically over the old 350.
Everyone has their preferences, but I sense this conversation taking a negative turn toward the latest generation Ranchers, and I feel completely opposite. I am not knocking the Foreman by any means, and I certainly think that:
1. auxiliary power outlet
2. enhanced from bumper
3. 55ccs more (but lower compression, basically same HP/weight ratio as Rancher)
4. 3rd headlight
5. diff lock
6. more suspension
7. larger tires
8. fender storage cubby
9. any minor mechanical differences that may exist
...are all nice and worth the extra money if you want/need those enhancements, but the Rancher is available in more configurations (LIKE DCT), and the Rancher is a very different machine from a Rubicon where the DCT becomes available again. I DID NOT want a Rubicon, the Rancher fit the bill for me. The Rancher has a better HP/weight ratio than the Rubicon, and it is far more playful than the heavy lumbering Rubicon for MY RIDING STYLE.
My .02.
The 07-13 Ranchers were definitely a neat bike, but the new generation on the Foreman frames just don't make sense.
Comparing any 420 to a 350 is apples to oranges.
The Rubicon IRS is 31lbs heavier than the 420 IRS, which is undoubtedly due to the larger tires, diff lock, and added features. Suspension travel is exactly the same. The power to weight combination is insignificant in the IRS models, and is exactly the same in the SRA models.
I can see why you might not want a Foreman/Rubicon, if those features don't appeal to you and you want to save 30 lbs, but my point was more on comparing current 420's to the earlier models on the smaller frames.
I think if you compared your 420 to a 2013 420 you would find that the 2013 would be a better designed machine. Same engine, smaller frame.
The 2014-up Ranchers regressed in a cost saving measure.
I'm glad you're happy with yours, but no way would I buy one.
Comparing any 420 to a 350 is apples to oranges.
The Rubicon IRS is 31lbs heavier than the 420 IRS, which is undoubtedly due to the larger tires, diff lock, and added features. Suspension travel is exactly the same. The power to weight combination is insignificant in the IRS models, and is exactly the same in the SRA models.
I can see why you might not want a Foreman/Rubicon, if those features don't appeal to you and you want to save 30 lbs, but my point was more on comparing current 420's to the earlier models on the smaller frames.
I think if you compared your 420 to a 2013 420 you would find that the 2013 would be a better designed machine. Same engine, smaller frame.
The 2014-up Ranchers regressed in a cost saving measure.
I'm glad you're happy with yours, but no way would I buy one.
1 - 20 of 41 Posts
