The competition between different brands has always been one of the most important aspects of marketing and of doing business overall. You can't turn around without coming across a business that is promoting its product by asserting that it is superior to others on the market.
Consumers, especially those of us who may be apathetic or simply uneducated about the various products that we consume, can have a difficult time understanding the history of the companies they patronise or the calibre of the goods they produce.
The world and market for UTVs are not significantly distinct from any of the others. People gather in the hundreds of thousands of online discussion groups on the internet to debate which product is superior and why, using their personal computers.
What is the proverb that goes like this? "Get them on the cheap and bury them as far as you can"? This is just one of the many phrases that bikers use to criticise one another's selection of a particular brand of bike. The insults "What did you expect when you bought a Polaris?" and "That would never have happened had you been riding a Maverick X3 X rs." are examples of other, more obvious insults. I
n the world of off-roading, there is a healthy competition between fans of different brands, with Honda fans pitted against KTM bikers, Kawasaki fans going up against those who prefer Yamaha, and so on. However, we have to admit that the ATV shootout between Polaris and Can-Am owners is by far the most intense competition we've ever seen between two groups of people.
You can say without a shadow of a doubt that your machine, regardless of whether it is a Polaris or a Can-Am, is capable of reaching incredible speeds, handles perfectly, and is immune to breakdowns, in contrast to motorcycles from that other brand. The problem is that riders of the competing brand feel the same way, which is why you'll never see more verbal shade exchanged between two groups than what happens between Can-Am and Polaris riders.
Can-Am and Polaris riders feel the same way about their respective brands. Even though there are supporters of opposing viewpoints working in our office, we decided it would be in everyone's best interest to put an end to this argument once and for all. Now, without further ado, let us present our viewpoint on the heated debate regarding Polaris and Can-Am all-terrain vehicles (ATVs and UTVs).
If you're looking for a top quality service body then give our experienced team a call to see how Ridgeback Service Bodies can make your business, fleet or recreational service bodies make your life on the road easier and safer.
70 Years of Competition
Both Polaris and Can-Am operate from the same point of origin. Both of them launched their businesses in the snowmobile industry. J. Armand Bombardier, the founder of Can-Am, was only a teenager when he constructed the world's first propeller-driven sled in 1922. He also constructed the world's first track-based snowmobile in 1937. After that, in the year 1942, he established Bombardier Inc. The actual Can-Am brand wouldn't be established until the 1970s.
It wasn't until 1954 that Polaris made their debut in the snowmobile industry with the introduction of their very first snowmobile. This snowmobile was on the smaller side and could only accommodate up to two riders at a time. It was the very first snowmobile designed in the modern style.
These guys have been competing from the very beginning. Bombardier pioneered the concept of a self-contained, wind-powered snowmobile, and Polaris later refined it with a vehicle that was more compact, sleeker, and appealing to a wider audience.
But let's skip over the development of the personal watercraft, the companies' forays into the motorcycle market, and Bombardier's establishment of the Can-Am brand, as well as the departure of one of Polaris' founders and the establishment of his own company, which would later become Arctic Cat, in order to get to the exciting developments of the past 20 years, which include both companies' forays into the off-road vehicle market.
Both of these companies were late entrants into the market for four-wheelers. Honda and other Japanese manufacturers had a substantial head start, so the market was already entirely controlled by them. You might also find it surprising to learn that neither was the first company to enter the market for UTVs.
In 1998, Polaris came out with the Ranger, following in the footsteps of the Kawasaki MULE. Polaris didn't become the dominant player in the market for utility terrain vehicles (UTVs) until ten years after the release of the Ranger, when it also introduced the Ranger RZR.
The Yamaha Rhino was the vehicle that served as the primary inspiration for Polaris's Ranger RZR. The ever-growing segment of the automobile market occupied by utility vehicles was given a sportier makeover by the Rhino. When it was first introduced in 2004, it was a huge hit due to the fact that it combined elements of both work and play. In 2008, Polaris introduced the Ranger RZR, which was designed from the ground up to be the most capable recreational sport vehicle on the market. In that regard, it was an industry first and absolutely destroyed the competition, particularly the Rhino. At long last, a machine that prioritises fun without making any sacrifices.
Can-Am earns another point from me for releasing the Commander two years after Polaris did, which was just in time for Polaris to release the RZR 900. However, I give Polaris credit for being the first company to introduce a product that was so transformative for the industry.
The Competition to Determine Who Owns the Most Reliable and Powerful ATVs and UTVs Has Started.
Both Polaris and Can-Am entered the all-terrain vehicle (ATV) and utility terrain vehicle (UTV) market late in the game, after Honda and other Japanese manufacturers had already established themselves as the dominant players in the industry. However, the fact that both parties were late bloomers did not prevent them from penetrating this sector of the market. In 1998, Polaris introduced the Ranger, modelling its design after that of the Kawasaki KLX. Polaris did not manage to win over the hearts of ATV enthusiasts until approximately ten years later, when it introduced the Ranger RZR. Despite the fact that the ATVs were quite popular.
Polaris's real breakthrough in the all-terrain vehicle (ATV) market came with the release of the Ranger RZR. The RZR was the first utility terrain vehicle (UTV) designed for all-around play, and the industry adored it. Can-response Am's came within two years, in the form of the Commander 2, which, despite having a design that was less hyper-focused on the game, emphasised power more than anything else. The RZR or its successor, the 900 model RZR, were unable to provide the same level of excitement as the Commander 2, which boasted a 1000cc engine, giving thrill-seekers more opportunities to go buck wild than the RZR could. From that point on, the research and development teams at both headquarters competed against one another in an effort to outdo the other's most recent product.
Let's fast forwards to the present day, when both companies added turbo engines to the mix. For the purpose of this post, we are going to compare the Can-Am Maverick X3 X ds and the Polaris RZR XP Turbo as the two brands that produce the most powerful and fastest utility vehicles (UTVs).
RZR Turbo Vs. Maverick X3
The release of the Maverick X3, a UTV with 154 horsepower, triple cylinders, 20 inches of travel in both the front and rear wheels, and 20 inches of ground clearance, caused a sensation in the utility terrain vehicle market (UTVs). In contrast, Polaris was determined to see the battle through to its conclusion. In order to meet the challenge posed by Can, Am's the company created a twin-cylinder, four-stroke engine with 168 horsepower. To rub salt in the wound, Polaris strengthened the travel rear suspension, sped up the steering, and added other necessary upgrades to ensure they could outrun the Maverick. Due to their similarities in suspension, engines, width, and price, people often wonder whether Polaris or Can-Am is faster.
The Polaris XP has a 925cc engine that is turbocharged, parallel twin-cylinder, double overhead camshaft, direct electronic fuel injection, and liquid cooling. Similar to the XP, the Can-engine Am's is a 900cc triple-cylinder turbo-induced four-stroke unit that is electronically fuel-injected and liquid-cooled. Despite their striking similarities, their behaviour can vary depending on the situation due to a number of factors, including minor differences in their makeup and the fact that they have different bodies.
The XP Turbo, for instance, takes longer to get going, but once it's moving, it can handle rough terrain with ease, while the Maverick X3 struggles in such situations. In order to get past certain obstacles, Maverick drivers had to apply more force than they would have otherwise, while RZR drivers only had to apply the force they would have applied under normal circumstances. In contrast, the X3 excelled in flat-out speed tests, where it even bested the Turbo at the very end of its range.
The suspension of the Maverick X3 strongly suggests that high-speed travel was a primary design goal. Our test drivers immediately recognised the Maverick's superior suspension as the clear victor on stretches of highway. Because of its longer wheelbase, lower centre of gravity, and increased suspension travel, the vehicle was able to achieve victory. The Polaris can handle whoop sections with ease, but the Maverick provides a ride that is more assured and smooth no matter how long they are. In contrast, when driving over rough terrain with rocks or waves, the Polaris cushions the impact and does not send you bouncing as much as the X3.
Simply put, the Can-Am is the faster of the two vehicles because it performs better at higher speeds than the other vehicle. On the other hand, the Polaris is a true all-terrain vehicle. If you're shopping for a UTV that can travel over any surface, the RZR is your best bet.
Whether you are looking for a vehicle service, a replacement part, or other vehicle maintenance, the service team at Ridgeback Service Bodies have all your needs covered.
Can-Am Maverick X3 X rs Turbo R vs. Polaris RZR XP Turbo
Both of these machines are lightning quick. According to the results of our SPEED RUN VIDEO, the Turbo RZR gets off to a slightly quicker start and reaches its top speed of 80 miles per hour a little bit more quickly than this X3. Because the wider X3 Xrs is turning heavier tyres that are 8 inches further out, causing a little lag, we actually feel, but have not yet confirmed, that the narrower X3 might be just as quick as the RZR Turbo.
This is because the wider X3 Xrs is turning heavier tyres than the RZR Turbo. We were able to reach a speed that was 5 mph higher than the RZR Turbo before it reached its limit of 85 mph because the top end of the X3 is not limited as much as the RZR Turbo. To this day, the Polaris RZR Turbo and the Can-Am Maverick X3 remain the two fastest utility terrain vehicles (UTVs) that money can buy.
Both Can-Am and Polaris use a powerful continuously variable transmission (CVT) that is fully automatic and driven by a belt. Can-Am did not only increase the size of the clutches and belt for the X3, but they also moved the entire powertrain rearward, making it much easier to access. This was done so they could increase the size of the clutches and belt.
Each new model year brings about significant advancements in the belt's strength, and Polaris has always made it simple to gain access to the belt. Both the X3 and the RZR Turbo have belts that are almost the exact same size. To this point, we have had to replace one belt on each vehicle. During the intense driving, they both failed somewhere around the mark of 200 miles.
It is incredible to see how well each of these vehicles manoeuvres over rough terrain. Although the X3 has an advantage in this category due to its increased wheel travel, wheelbase, and width, the Polaris is still capable of competing with it and can go over any bumps that the X3 can. The Can-Am feels a little more planted and unruffled as it travels through them. To complete the same section in the RZR requires a little bit more skill, steering input, and line selection; otherwise, you will find yourself bucking or two-wheeling through the rough and off-cambered sections of the trail.
The Polaris RZR is a vehicle that can be manoeuvred with relative ease. It has excellent handling and is simple to operate at any speed. It excels at almost all tasks to an excellent degree. When we put it next to this Maverick, however, we notice that it is noticeably more slender and a little unsteady around the corners. The more precise steering box that Polaris included in their 2017 models is a welcome improvement that works exceptionally well in the slower, more precise turns.
When compared to the RZR, the wide X3 X rs should be able to come out on top because it has a wider stance, more wheel travel, and a good solid stance. When the driver applies significant braking as they turn into tight corners or accelerates out of them, something in the steering system provides a great deal of steering feedback to the driver. Unfortunately, the unpleasant feeling is present in exactly the same way in each of the three modes of the Dynamic Power Steering. The RZR also has a significantly improved ability to absorb the impact of low-speed bumps. On the X3, we have not been able to locate a compression setting that functions equally well in slower speed chop as it does in faster speed bumps.
Both of these vehicles have very comfortable cockpits. We appreciate how straightforward the Polaris seat and seating position are, in addition to the front-facing view that they provide. The Can-Am also has fantastic seats that offer a high level of adjustability and generous amounts of legroom. The noise from the intake behind the driver's head is probably the only thing wrong with the vehicle, and it's a minor issue.
When Polaris installed a Turbo in the RZR, they also upgraded the brakes to a larger size. Because of the increased HP, their developers must have decided that the game needs that particular feature. When we had the old RZR, we never once had a problem with the brakes. The new configuration is fantastic and slows the RZR down in a very predictable manner every time and for the entirety of the day. A few of our test drivers mentioned that the Can-brakes Am's were a little bit spongy and that they were losing their effectiveness after long runs. The brakes aren't terrible, but the RZR Turbo has significantly better stopping power.
Wheels & Tires
On this X3, Can-Am put a great set of aluminium wheels with beadlocks measuring 14 inches in diameter, and tyres measuring 30 inches tall and 10 inches wide. It is a standard dimension for any modified UTV designed for long distance travel or high speed. Both vehicles have Maxxis Big Horn tyres, which are known for their excellent performance in a variety of conditions. The non-beadlock wheels with a diameter of 14 inches that Polaris is using in 2017 are among the most aesthetically pleasing wheels available anywhere.
The egos of each car are quite large. The controls are within easy reach, and nothing looks or feels out of place in the cockpit. Again, we find the seating position in the RZR to be quite comfortable; however, the adjustability offered by the X3 makes it likely that it will appeal to a wider audience.
Both of these machines come with high-quality digital displays that can show a variety of information, including temperatures, mileage, warnings, and diagnostics. Both of these models lack the GPS capabilities that we believe should be standard on all high-end models produced in this day and age.
Fit & Finish
We are dissatisfied by the fact that neither of these high-priced vehicles (both of which are over $25,000) comes with complete doors. Due to the latch system on the RZR, we prefer the doors that come standard on the Polaris more than those that come standard on the X3. The Turbo RZR does not come with a roof, while the X3 can be purchased with one. The rest of the fit and finish is pretty comparable, with the exception of the skid plate on the X3, which is riveted on rather than bolted on. This is something that we do not like.
We like the cargo platform on the Maverick X3 more than we like the cargo platform on the older model of the Maverick; however, we do not like how hot the platform gets. The heat from the engine and the exhaust is transferred to the cargo when it travels through the vent holes in the platform. After each ride that we have taken, the platform is so hot that it is uncomfortable to touch. Polaris equips the Turbo RZR with a spacious storage compartment that can accommodate anything the rider may need to bring along. On the other hand, it would be helpful if the hooks used for the tie-downs were somewhat larger.
At a price of $26,699, the 2017 Maverick X3 Xrs from Can-Am is the most expensive two-seat utility vehicle that you can purchase. It does come with some excellent features, such as a long-travel suspension, a powerful engine, and Beadlock wheels, all of which have the potential to save you thousands of dollars in the long run. It costs $1700 less to purchase the Polaris RZR XPTurbo than it does the X3, but you get some of the best technology that Polaris has to offer, including excellent brakes, a quick engine, excellent suspension, and an excellent cockpit.
We spent several days putting these two vehicles through their paces in this competition, talking about it with our test drivers, and looking at the numbers to come to the conclusion that it was a tie between these two machines. Can-Am might have easily taken first place if the X3 hadn't bothered us with its shaky steering and its overheated cargo area during the race. Both of those problems are currently being addressed, and we should have solutions to share with you very soon.
Who's the Best?
Who, then, comes out on top? At this point in the game, it appears that neither team has a clear advantage. Different owners may take issue with various aspects of the design philosophy espoused by each company, which will play a role in determining which ride-ally they select. When looking at the X3, one might feel that there is an excessive amount of plastic used for the bodywork, which is a drawback. Some people may be able to look past that and appreciate the fact that the plastic offers lightweight yet appealing curves and angles.
Some people may look at the RZR and continue to think of it as a short, puerile buggy that borrows far too heavily from older off-road vehicles and lacks a sleek, contemporary appearance. Others may believe that the RZR embodies the look of the perfect sport utility vehicle (UTV), and that to depart from its design aesthetic would be to create something that does not resemble a UTV.
As you move away from the aesthetic, you will have to deal with a different handling and throttle feel. The Maverick X3 is a powerful vehicle, but it is quite cumbersome. The RZR Turbo is more manageable due to its reduced size and simplified controls, but it has a lower top speed. And now, Can-Am is increasing the power of the X3, and Polaris is improving the handling of the Turbo, both of which make it easier for us to write this article because we've already assured you that we've provided you with a winner.
And the Winner Is…
Who comes out on top, then? You run the risk of coming across as entirely too sincere, but you do!
You got that right! When it works properly, good old-fashioned capitalism ensures that you, the consumer, come out on top. As these manufacturers compete with one another for your business, the quality of their products and the affordability of their offerings both improve. Due to the fact that both companies sell insanely powerful vehicles for less than $20,000, and due to the fact that their philosophies are different, there is a top-of-the-line vehicle available for you to purchase regardless of the type of riding you are interested in.
Not to mention that other brands, such as Yamaha, have also entered the sport utility vehicle (UTV) market with their YXZ model. The Honda Pioneer 1000 was only recently made available, while the Kawasaki Teryx continues to dominate the market. And Arctic Cat, er, I mean Textron, has bestowed upon us their Wildcat XX model at long last.
Therefore, take pride in the fact that you own a Polaris or a Can-Am, as well as a Yamaha, Arctic Cat, CFMOTO, Honda, or Kawasaki. And feel free to make fun of the other guy for purchasing the useless item that he did by using the phrase "stick it to the other guy." According to what we've picked up so far, that's the standard way that the game is played. It is highly recommended that you have evidence ready to back up any claims you make. You wouldn't want to be forced to admit that your ride isn't as flawless as you claimed it to be, or even that your friend's ride is superior, because that would be embarrassing.
Winners in each category can be easily recognised and awarded here. The length of the rpm range that the Polaris motor is happy to work in is simply amazing, and it's one of the motor's most impressive features. It has more effective brakes, enhanced visibility, and a more user-friendly entry and exit system. It also has a 4WD system that is significantly more effective and efficient, as well as a suspension that is more forgiving when you are driving on slow, winding roads. The RZR is a more versatile machine than its competitors. It has a shorter turning radius, which makes it better able to handle mud, woods, and technical trail riding.
The Polaris vs. Can-Am ATV shootout is the fiercest rivalry we've ever witnessed. It's Honda fans versus KTM riders, Kawasaki riders versus Yamaha riders. Off-roading is full of friendly rivalries between brand loyalists. Can-Am and Polaris both have their operations based in the same place. J.
Young Armand Bombardier built the first sled with a propeller when he was just a teenager. After the success of the Kawasaki MULE, Polaris released the Ranger in 1998. Polaris and Can-Am were late entrants in the market for ATVs and UTVs. Polaris debuted the Ranger in 1998, and it was clearly inspired by the Kawasaki KLX. As a result, it took the company another decade or so to earn the favour of ATV fans. Polaris introduced the first utility terrain vehicle (UTV) in the form of the Ranger RZR. The triple-cylinder, turbocharged, four-stroke engine of the Can-Am Maverick X3 made waves in the industry.
Ground clearance and wheel travel of 20 inches are standard on both vehicles. Which vehicle is more rapid at high speeds: the Can-Am Maverick X3 Xrs Turbo R or the Polaris RZR XP Turbo? It was clear that Maverick was the winner across the board thanks to its longer wheelbase, lower centre of gravity, and greater suspension travel. Currently, the Polaris RZR Turbo and the Can-Am Maverick X3 are the two quickest utility terrain vehicles available on the market. Both are powered by a belt and feature a powerful CVT transmission.
Because of its longer wheel travel, wider track, and longer wheelbase, the X3 excels in this category. Both the Polaris X3 X r and the RZR X r have roomy, plush seats. The only real issue with the X3 is some noise from the intake behind the driver's head. Both cars are equipped with Maxxis Big Horn tyres, which are widely regarded for their versatility and reliability. Seating in the RZR is very relaxed.
The X3's customizable features increase its potential customer base. Both of these models are lacking in GPS functionality, which we feel should be standard on all modern luxury automobiles. When it comes to two-seat utility vehicles, Can-2017 Am's Maverick X3 Xrs is the most luxurious and pricey option. As opposed to the X3, the Polaris RZR XPTurbo is $1700 cheaper. It's possible that some property owners will have issues with certain tenets of the design ethos.
Though it packs a punch, the Maverick X3 is a rather ungainly vehicle. The RZR Turbo's reduced size and streamlined controls make it easier to operate. You, the consumer, will always come out ahead when capitalism is functioning properly. You're in the winners' circle if you own a Yamaha, Arctic Cat, Honda, Kawasaki, or Can-Am. The RZR can do more than its rivals can. It's safer, has better visibility, and is easier to enter and exit.
- However, we have to admit that the ATV shootout between Polaris and Can-Am owners is by far the most intense competition we've ever seen between two groups of people.
- Both of them launched their businesses in the snowmobile industry.
- The Yamaha Rhino was the vehicle that served as the primary inspiration for Polaris's Ranger RZR.
- In 2008, Polaris introduced the Ranger RZR, which was designed from the ground up to be the most capable recreational sport vehicle on the market.
- Can-Am earns another point from me for releasing the Commander two years after Polaris did, which was just in time for Polaris to release the RZR 900.
- Both Polaris and Can-Am entered the all-terrain vehicle (ATV) and utility terrain vehicle (UTV) market late in the game, after Honda and other Japanese manufacturers had already established themselves as the dominant players in the industry.
- For the purpose of this post, we are going to compare the Can-Am Maverick X3 X ds and the Polaris RZR XP Turbo as the two brands that produce the most powerful and fastest utility vehicles (UTVs).RZR Turbo Vs.
- In contrast, the X3 excelled in flat-out speed tests, where it even bested the Turbo at the very end of its range.
- The suspension of the Maverick X3 strongly suggests that high-speed travel was a primary design goal.
- To this day, the Polaris RZR Turbo and the Can-Am Maverick X3 remain the two fastest utility terrain vehicles (UTVs) that money can buy.
- The brakes aren't terrible, but the RZR Turbo has significantly better stopping power.
- Due to the latch system on the RZR, we prefer the doors that come standard on the Polaris more than those that come standard on the X3.
- The Turbo RZR does not come with a roof, while the X3 can be purchased with one.
- At a price of $26,699, the 2017 Maverick X3 Xrs from Can-Am is the most expensive two-seat utility vehicle that you can purchase.
- And now, Can-Am is increasing the power of the X3, and Polaris is improving the handling of the Turbo, both of which make it easier for us to write this article because we've already assured you that we've provided you with a winner.
- Due to the fact that both companies sell insanely powerful vehicles for less than $20,000, and due to the fact that their philosophies are different, there is a top-of-the-line vehicle available for you to purchase regardless of the type of riding you are interested in.
- Therefore, take pride in the fact that you own a Polaris or a Can-Am, as well as a Yamaha, Arctic Cat, CFMOTO, Honda, or Kawasaki.
FAQs About Can-Am & Polaris
Can-Am came in as the third most reliable ATV brand. These machines are also considered top-tier performance. Polaris ATV models came in fourth place for reliability. So, although these brands are sometimes docked for unreliability, they are each respected in the ATV community as well.
Honda ATVs are the most reliable quads. These quads have bomb-proof transmission and use metal gears. They are resilient to rugged terrains, durable, and can keep kicking despite taking much abuse. Other reliable ATV brands include Kawasaki, Polaris, Yamaha, Arctic Cat, Argo, SYM, Can-Am, and CFMoto.
Can-Am ATVs and side-by-side vehicles are manufactured by Bombardier Recreational Products (BRP), a Canadian company. BRP owns manufacturing facilities in Canada, the United States, Mexico, Finland and Austria and its vehicles are distributed in over 100 countries by more than 4,000 dealers and distributors.
Now that's what we call an American-made ATV. Where is Polaris ATVs manufactured? Polaris is based in Roseau, Minnesota, USA. Components are mostly manufactured in Osceola, Wisconsin and the vehicle assembly in Roseau, Minnesota.
Polaris is changing its manufacturing and sales strategies on the fly to cope with shortages of materials and parts and an unreliable global transportation system that has disrupted precise production planning.