I picked up a 2010 Can-am Outlander 650 XT a little while ago, It's a nice quad with a lot of power. I always wanted the Can-am 800 but the 650 goes pretty hard, the only other quads out there that have more horse power than the 650 are the 800's and up.

 

Congrats on getting a sweet ride, I very much doubt that most of the time you`ll really notice the difference between the two.

 

only time you'll notice much of a difference between those bikes is in 3ft of mud with 2 full sized peeps on... even then, a smart driver could outride a dummy on a more powerful bike. My 450 went thru lots of stuff in low range that guys 1/2 plastered couldn't get thru on the bigger bikes... sobriety goes a long way

 

I love the can ams, but have been hesitant. I know quite a few guys with them, and a few have had problems that my second fav quad (suzuki KQ) havent had.

 

The suzuki King quad 750 was second on my list as well, I have heard about axle problems with the Can-am's but I was told that only if you put the big tires on will you have trouble and I plan on keeping mine stock. The reason I went with the 650 over the king quad was power, the KQ 750 has 49.6hp and the 650 Can-am 60.3. In comparassion to the other quads in it's class.

Artic cat 700 mud pro- 49hp
Kawasaki brute force 750 - 49.7
Yamaha grizzly 700 - 45.6
Honda rincon 680 - 38.5

 

I know the Can Ams are known for their power, and from what i read/hear reliability (enginewise)

Keep us posted Marlon on how it works for ya, and if your ever south of Langham with it, stop on by!

 

I hadn't heard anything engine wise, I always thought Rotax built good engines, Had a lot of them in all the skidoo's we had but none of them where four strokes.

 

Ive been a huge fan of rotax as well. We had Ski-doo ever since I remember, and they have generally been very well.