Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 22

Thread: Thirsty Grizzly...

  1. #1
    Member fullkurl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Alaska/Idaho
    Posts
    2,162

    Default Thirsty Grizzly...

    I have a 2005 Grizzly 660, great machine, I really enjoy it but she really seems to drink the go-juice lately--especially when plowing.
    Can anyone else relate?

    Is the new fuel-injected beast any less thirsty?

  2. #2
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    North Pole
    Posts
    424

    Default

    I have the 2007 450 grizzly and its the same story, its a guzzler. I think I only get around 30 miles or so to a tank but I havent really guaged it to see. Alot of factors though while your hunting....4x4, towing a meat wagon loaded down and the hills. My buddy has the 06 660 and his was the same story also on our last hunting trip.

  3. #3
    Member AKArcher's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    ANC
    Posts
    687

    Default Yes...and a solution...

    I borrowed a friends 05 Grizzly two seasons ago and he told me when I picked it up to only run Premium Fuel in it. Well I lost my fuel can and I didn't want to run all the way back into town, so I filled up at a small store that only had 87 octane....wow. The mileage was cut easily in half. I ran the 87 out...filled it with 91 and sure enough... back to its normal self.
    When all else fails...ask your old-man.


    AKArcher

  4. #4
    Member fullkurl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Alaska/Idaho
    Posts
    2,162

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by AKArcher View Post
    I borrowed a friends 05 Grizzly two seasons ago and he told me when I picked it up to only run Premium Fuel in it. Well I lost my fuel can and I didn't want to run all the way back into town, so I filled up at a small store that only had 87 octane....wow. The mileage was cut easily in half. I ran the 87 out...filled it with 91 and sure enough... back to its normal self.

    Thanks Archer, I'm gonna give it a try.

  5. #5
    Member bgreania's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Eagle River, AK
    Posts
    16

    Default trade it for a suzuki king quad!



    Went to Knik glacier last weekend, put 50 miles on my new 450 King Quad...it has a 4.6 gallon tank; everyone else had less than a quarter tank, I had a half tank left.

    After owning a Polaris and experiencing the same issue with the poor fuel mileage...I sold it and got the King Quad...

    I am impressed.

  6. #6
    Member AKsoldier's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Wasilla
    Posts
    1,555

    Default

    Rode about 55 miles on Thursday to the Knik Glacier. Only burned 2 gallons of gas. The Big Bear is a sipper. 87 octane, too.

    The other 299,300,000 people can have it.

    Noone has a more intimate understanding of, or deeper appreciation for freedom, than a soldier who has fought for it in a country where it does not exist.

  7. #7

    Default

    I had a 750cc brute force (dual carbs) that chugged the gas like you would not believe, but this machine had that 'rip your arms out of the sockets' power that I loved o' so much. After a clutch kit, jet kit, module, and 28" in bugs the fuel comsumption worsened even more, but the ability to wheelie was effortless. Fair trade if you ask me. My 6.0L 10mpg chevy got better gas milage but I had so much fun on that atv. Last December NO ONE could follow me, on an atv, up and into Jim Creek. It was me on my brute and snowmachines riding the trails. I figured the extra money I spent on gas was well worth the additional fun I had.

  8. #8
    Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    702

    Default

    I haven't noticed any poor gas milage on my 05 660 Grizz. around 70 some miles to a tankfull. only lost a couple miles per tankfull after putting in bigger jet with a dynojet kit and a highflow HMF pipe. I take my carb apart 4 or 5 times a year though to keep it clean and set my valves all the time to keep them exactly perfect.

  9. #9
    Member AKMuddy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Palmer, AK
    Posts
    458

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by AKArcher View Post
    I borrowed a friends 05 Grizzly two seasons ago and he told me when I picked it up to only run Premium Fuel in it. Well I lost my fuel can and I didn't want to run all the way back into town, so I filled up at a small store that only had 87 octane....wow. The mileage was cut easily in half. I ran the 87 out...filled it with 91 and sure enough... back to its normal self.
    Not trying to get a "flame" going here but engineers in the industry will tell you that unless you are running "High Performance" race parts on your quad there is absolutely NO Benefit to running higher octane fuel in your quad. Stock quads can't get any use of the higher octane. If you are running race parts it does make a difference. Running more than 87 Octane in a stock utility quad will actually cause damage in the long run. Here is a link to the Grizzly Central Forums where we had this same discussion. http://www.grizzlycentral.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=2414&hl== Like I said before...Not trying to get a fight started here. Just trying to get accurate information out to those that have questions. The Grizzly Central Forums have all the information you will ever need for your Grizzly!!! Enjoy!!!!
    2007 Yamaha Rhino 660
    2007 Yamaha Grizzly 700 SE w/EPS
    http://www.grizzlycentral.com/

  10. #10
    Member AKArcher's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    ANC
    Posts
    687

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by AKMuddy View Post
    Not trying to get a "flame" going here but engineers in the industry will tell you that unless you are running "High Performance" race parts on your quad there is absolutely NO Benefit to running higher octane fuel in your quad. Stock quads can't get any use of the higher octane. If you are running race parts it does make a difference. Running more than 87 Octane in a stock utility quad will actually cause damage in the long run. Here is a link to the Grizzly Central Forums where we had this same discussion. http://www.grizzlycentral.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=2414&hl== Like I said before...Not trying to get a fight started here. Just trying to get accurate information out to those that have questions. The Grizzly Central Forums have all the information you will ever need for your Grizzly!!! Enjoy!!!!
    I am only relaying the info that the owner gave me (regular vs premium), and my personal experience. I put on 60+ miles on the first tank...and then nearly 30 the second... filled the tank with 91 and went back to 60+...When I returned the quad, the owner was a little miffed I did what I did, but when I explained what I noticed, he said he would ask the dealer why they suggested premium. I never heard back; I could ask what he found out.

    I rode this quad for 3 weeks...

    No fire started...I agree, this place should have all the facts...and best info possible.
    When all else fails...ask your old-man.


    AKArcher

  11. #11
    New member fishingis4play's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Wasilla, Alaska
    Posts
    199

    Default Fouled plug?

    My dad has a 05 660 and somtimes when he plows with it the plugs get fowled. Maybe the cold weather starts?? Anyhow it gets horrible mileage until he cleans or replaces the plug then it's good as new and the milage is much better. He says you don't notice the plug is fouled because your not plowing at any real big RPMs. He said to pass it along anyhow just in case you haven't checked the plugs. Me I own a Suzuki and an Argo so I don't have these problems I have others...

  12. #12
    Member fullkurl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Alaska/Idaho
    Posts
    2,162

    Default

    Good discussion, fellas. Thanks for the insights.

    I'm going to replace the plug for starters. I let her warm up, but I've been known to hit the trail "on choke" once in awhile. Could be fouling her a bit.

    The king quad's a great bike, but I think the grizz 660 is one of the finest machines out there. I've had a few (some good Hondoos) but always come back to the Yammy for my needs.
    I want some sport and power with my ride even if it means a bit more go-juice.
    Last edited by fullkurl; 10-25-2008 at 00:15.

  13. #13
    Member AKMuddy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Palmer, AK
    Posts
    458

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by fullkurl View Post
    I have a 2005 Grizzly 660, great machine, I really enjoy it but she really seems to drink the go-juice lately--especially when plowing.
    Can anyone else relate?

    Is the new fuel-injected beast any less thirsty?
    To come back to your original post...

    I bought a 2003 Grizzly 660 brand new in late 2002. I used it to trail ride and plow with until this last spring. I sold it to a friend of mine with 1200 miles on it. All I ever added to it was some 26" ITP Mudlites on stock rims. I sold it to buy a 2007 Yamaha Rhino 660. The only thing I didn't like about the Grizzly 660 was it's "tippy" feel and poor fuel economy. I would make trips out to Knik Glacier and get back to the parking lot and my fuel light would be flashing. The Rhino has the same motor but has almost twice the fuel capacity so it is not an issue. Last August I decided I really missed the ATV experience and added an 2007 Yamaha Grizzly 700 to the garage. I added 26" ITP Mudlites on ITP SS106 rims. Took the new fuel injected Grizzly on the same Knik trip. Got back to the parking lot and checked the fuel tank...Almost half a tank left in the tank. Went strait to the gas station to fill her back up to see how much fuel I actually used. It took 2.3 gallons to fill it up to the gas cap. My old 660 would take approximately 4 gallons of fuel to fill to the gas cap. Rider and riding style was the same. That should give you some indication of the difference between the Grizzly 660 and 700. Not to mention the power steering of the 700. A stock Grizzly 700 has about the same power as the 660 but does not have the "tippy" feel or eat the gas like the 660. Hope this helps.
    2007 Yamaha Rhino 660
    2007 Yamaha Grizzly 700 SE w/EPS
    http://www.grizzlycentral.com/

  14. #14
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Fairbanks
    Posts
    439

    Default

    Interesting that your 660 used so much more gas than the 700. I have one of each and when a friend and I use them both at the same time I see almost no difference in fuel economy between the two machines. They will both get a little over 20 miles per gallon running mixed trails pulling no trailer but with a cooler on the racks with some gear in them.

  15. #15
    Member AKMuddy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Palmer, AK
    Posts
    458

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Contender View Post
    Interesting that your 660 used so much more gas than the 700. I have one of each and when a friend and I use them both at the same time I see almost no difference in fuel economy between the two machines. They will both get a little over 20 miles per gallon running mixed trails pulling no trailer but with a cooler on the racks with some gear in them.
    I never saw better than 12 - 14mpg with my 660.

    I have a co-worker that I ride with a few times a year. He has a bone stock 2005 Grizzly 660. Right after I bought my 700 we went out to Knik together. I loved the 660 I had owned and was eager to compare my new 700 to his 660. We gassed up at the Tesoro station in Palmer. Both quads were filled to the gas cap. We went out to the Jim Creek parking lot and started from there. We ran the same trail and same speeds all the way to the glacier and back to the trucks. We loaded up and pulled back into the same gas station (we even used the same pumps as before). The Grizzly 700 took 2.3 gallons. The Grizzly 660 took 3.7 gallons.

    Rating MPG on any quad is a tricky thing. Too many variables can manipulate those numbers. Rider weight, quad weight, gear weight, riding conditions, riding style, aftermarket parts, etc. Take two identical quads...rider #1 goes 50 miles from parking lot to glacier and back. Rider #1 is 200lbs and carries 50lbs of gear. He runs the trails hard and hits every mud hole he can find. He gets back to the parking lot on empty (fuel light flashing). Rider #2 is same weight and carries the same gear. He runs the same path as rider #1 but slower speeds and avoids the mud holes. He gets back to the parking lot and has more than a quarter tank left. I have seen it happen a dozen times. That is why the MPG discussion has so many outcomes. Everyone has a different experience. Right now, I think I get great fuel economy on my Grizzly 700. I am going to add a fuel controller and aftermarket pipe to it next summer. Fuel economy should go down...by how much, I am not sure. May put me right back where my 660 was. On the up side I should have more power. It's all a trade off.
    2007 Yamaha Rhino 660
    2007 Yamaha Grizzly 700 SE w/EPS
    http://www.grizzlycentral.com/

  16. #16

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by AKMuddy View Post
    Not trying to get a "flame" going here but engineers in the industry will tell you that unless you are running "High Performance" race parts on your quad there is absolutely NO Benefit to running higher octane fuel in your quad. Stock quads can't get any use of the higher octane. If you are running race parts it does make a difference. Running more than 87 Octane in a stock utility quad will actually cause damage in the long run. Here is a link to the Grizzly Central Forums where we had this same discussion. http://www.grizzlycentral.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=2414&hl== Like I said before...Not trying to get a fight started here. Just trying to get accurate information out to those that have questions. The Grizzly Central Forums have all the information you will ever need for your Grizzly!!! Enjoy!!!!
    I know what you're saying, but, my truck's OM says it will run fine on 87 (and it does to a certain degree), and I'm sure the engineers came up with that, but, going up a grade, I get all kinds of valve train and engine clatter on 87 that I don't on 91. This is not that only truck that I've owned that's done so. I'm no engineer, but to me, valve train and engine clatter under load can't be a good thing.

    So, I'd say if you feel 91 does what you want your rig, atv or whatever to do, I'd say run the 91.

  17. #17
    Member AKMuddy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Palmer, AK
    Posts
    458

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by upstream View Post
    I know what you're saying, but, my truck's OM says it will run fine on 87 (and it does to a certain degree), and I'm sure the engineers came up with that, but, going up a grade, I get all kinds of valve train and engine clatter on 87 that I don't on 91. This is not that only truck that I've owned that's done so. I'm no engineer, but to me, valve train and engine clatter under load can't be a good thing.

    So, I'd say if you feel 91 does what you want your rig, atv or whatever to do, I'd say run the 91.
    If your truck has issues on 87 Octane going up a hill...it isn't the fuel. It's the truck! The chemical properties of fuel don't change between incline and decline. Going to a higher grade fuel may cover up some issues to a degree but it will cause more damage to the engine in the long run. It also depends on the age of the vehicle. Sorry, but I have never seen anything to support your claim. As for running 91 Octane just because you think it does what you want it to do???? Not very good advice. Go back to my previous post and read the attached link or do a google search for low vs high octane fuels and when they should be used. There are thousands of articles (actual proof) that should explain the issue. Bottom line is that your stock ATV motor is not a high performance motor (even though we like to think it is). It is nothing more than a large bore lawn mower engine. It cannot benefit from higher octane fuels. Adding high performance race parts to your ATV motor is a different story. But using 90/91 octane in a stock utility quad causes damage over the long term. Not to mention, you pay more for higher octane fuels and get less MPG from them (in a stock ATV). Depending on how much you ride, you could actually be wasting an extra $500 or so per year by using high octane fuels over low grade unleaded.
    2007 Yamaha Rhino 660
    2007 Yamaha Grizzly 700 SE w/EPS
    http://www.grizzlycentral.com/

  18. #18
    Moderator hunt_ak's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Wasilla--Cantwell Transplant
    Posts
    4,600

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by AKMuddy View Post
    As for running 91 Octane just because you think it does what you want it to do?...
    Pretty sure thats called "placebo effect"!! I gotta agree with you 100% on this one. Octane rating only determines where the fuel auto-combusts. Now if you were running something that required 91 and you put 87 in, then you're more than likely going to encounter auto-ignition (engine knock). Unless your engines compression goes up, higher octane shouldn't and most cases wont give you any more performance. Now in Alaska, there are different summer/winter blends of fuels and depending on the temperature you are operating, your equiment might run poorly if you are running winter blend when its warmer or summer blend in the cold. Alaska gets a bad rap for having bad gas sometimes but most likely it is the smaller outfits that get their fuel delivered during one season and dont sell it out until part way through another, thus making it seem like they have bad fuel...

  19. #19

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by AKMuddy View Post
    If your truck has issues on 87 Octane going up a hill...it isn't the fuel. It's the truck! The chemical properties of fuel don't change between incline and decline. Going to a higher grade fuel may cover up some issues to a degree but it will cause more damage to the engine in the long run. It also depends on the age of the vehicle. Sorry, but I have never seen anything to support your claim. As for running 91 Octane just because you think it does what you want it to do???? Not very good advice. Go back to my previous post and read the attached link or do a google search for low vs high octane fuels and when they should be used. There are thousands of articles (actual proof) that should explain the issue. Bottom line is that your stock ATV motor is not a high performance motor (even though we like to think it is). It is nothing more than a large bore lawn mower engine. It cannot benefit from higher octane fuels. Adding high performance race parts to your ATV motor is a different story. But using 90/91 octane in a stock utility quad causes damage over the long term. Not to mention, you pay more for higher octane fuels and get less MPG from them (in a stock ATV). Depending on how much you ride, you could actually be wasting an extra $500 or so per year by using high octane fuels over low grade unleaded.
    There are studies and articles that say I (and many others) have a higher propensity for violence because our parents allowed us to watch the Three Stooges when we were growing up. Does that mean it's true? Nope.

    Practical experience, on some of the cars and trucks that I've owned (both new off the dealer floor and older) liked 91 octane over the OM recommended 87 octane when accelerating or climbing a grade. I don't really need a "study" or an article to tell me that my experience isn't possible because some engineer proclaimed it isn't, or the engineer didn't come to the same conclusion while testing in a controlled environment.

    Even in taking two of the same engines off the same assembly line, built to the same quality and standards, there's the mechanical factor that both engines may not display the same performance. Why? It's just a fact of things mechanical. Technology being what it is these days, has yet to over come some things mechanical and the problem they display.

    The nitro classes in NHRA (or even NASCAR for that matter), collect data on engine performance, weather conditions (air temp, humidity etc..), clutch data, track conditions, you name it, and yet they cannot, with all the data they collect, consistently repeat the performance from run to run. The same conditions, don't always produce the same results in things mechanical.

    I really think, that 4 octane difference between 87 and 91 isn't going to damage most engines.

    And I'm saying that as a person, who as a kid, burned holes in the pistons of his car trying to run to much octane booster. I seriously mean to much octane booster.

    Which brings me back around to my experience, the 91 octane burns hotter, which in engines, does equate to more "work," which leads me to believe the clattering went away when I went from 87 to 91 because of a somewhat hotter fuel burn.

  20. #20
    Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    702

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by AKMuddy View Post
    I never saw better than 12 - 14mpg with my 660.
    Right now, I think I get great fuel economy on my Grizzly 700. I am going to add a fuel controller and aftermarket pipe to it next summer. Fuel economy should go down...by how much, I am not sure. May put me right back where my 660 was. On the up side I should have more power. It's all a trade off.
    Are you aware that ALL the Grizz 700s from 07 and 08 have a MISS that most drivers fail to notice unless they know what speed to look for it at? adding a fuel controller and Highflow pipe make it VERY noticeable. Yamaha has finally acknowledged it and call it an anomaly. They have no idea how to get rid of it and can only move the miss to happen at a different speed if one desires. a dedicated group of 700 owners has been bugging yamaha to fix this problem since the first 700s came out in sept 06. They all hang out on the yamaha forum at Highlifter.com.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •