[bulldogs101]

your thoughts?? for about 1500 i feel the xrs is a MUST BUY over the base model for what you get for 1500. instrument cluster, 2.5 shocks, cool seats, cooler graphics, beadlocks. after seeing them both, i must be a xrs... wat is yoru thoughts on it

 

[C.Moore]

Xrs no doubt, it still surprises me how much the 1,500 gets you

 

[jst4fun321]

I think their marketing is working perfectly and they must love seeing posts like that

I've learned from friends in marketing that they will intentionally position the lesser item at the competitive price point, so they can "price protect" the item they really want to sell in volume. Ex. if they ONLY sold the XRS, they would probably have to price it closer to the $15.9 level, but thanks to the entry level option, the $17.5 seems like a bargain. Most electronics will offer a good-better-best pricing strategy, which I suppose in this case will be the Mav Max at the top.

bottom line, YES, I think the delta is worth it, and likely recovered in resale value, but I really wish the overall entry price to these things were lower. Nearly 20K out the door is a hard pill to swallow.

 

[C.Moore]

I agree, they are priced way to high for many. But when I seen the specs on the xrs with the fox 2.5's bead locks instrument cluster I was thinking 19k at least but to my surprise it was lower.

 

[Megadesertdiesel]

well worth it just for the 2.5" shocks and instrument cluster.

 

[Johnny]

XRS Rocks

 

[jst4fun321]

Could someone point me to the differences in the shocks besides the size? I searched but didn't find much.

I'd like to better understand the drawbacks of going with the 2.0's. Are they less adjustable? Softer? Stiffer?

Obviously the 2.5's would be preferred for competitive racing, landing bigger jumps, and avoiding "fade", but I would appreciate someone with more experience explaining how the average rider might notice the difference? Has anyone tried them both on harder packed ground to actually feel the difference?

I did demo both models on muddy trails, and honestly, without doing jumps, and at the more modest speeds, I really couldn't tell the difference.

Regarding the original thread topic, yes, I still suspect the $1500 is "worth it", and that is not what I'm asking. trying to keep price out of it.

thanks in advance for the education! happy new year.

 

[Glamisfan]

The 2.0 has preload and compression. The 2.5 has preload, high and low compression, and rebound. I have my rear 2.5 set to 10 rebound, 0 high and 0 low compression, and they are still too stiff!

 

[desertdog]

If a person considers the amount of the purchase AND the length of ownership, the added cost and ride comfort should be a no brainer. You may not think you need the bigger shocks today but it's quite possible your opinion could change later. Once you have the upgrades you won't think about the cost. The gauge cluster is much easier to read when traveling at higher speeds on bumpy terrain. And having bead locks should also be a no brainer. All tho a person may want cosmetically different rims. IMO All the upgrades offer a real world value that most people will want. The graphics & seat colors don't offer any real riding value. However IF $ is tight and the choice is between the Mav base model & another brand, I would choose the Mav base model because it's still probably better than anything else.

 

[Wildman]

I too feel the XRS is worth the extra money. I know if I am to buy one it will be the XRS. For what you get it is a no brainer to me.

 

[jst4fun321]

The 2.0 has preload and compression. The 2.5 has preload, high and low compression, and rebound. I have my rear 2.5 set to 10 rebound, 0 high and 0 low compression, and they are still too stiff!

thanks Glamis. Not sure I understand the difference between high/low compression vs. just compression. Also curious if anyone has some helpful links or simple examples of each of these.

I'm assuming preload is how much pressure is on the spring, which sets ride height (the only adjustment I used to have on my quad). And I'm assuming compression and rebound are adjusting the shock resistance.

Still curious about any real world examples of where a rider would notice the difference between the 2.0 and 2.5. ex. perhaps the 2.0s would be less stiff, which seems to be the only complaint.

and yes, I agree with the poster about the value of the bead locks (if you don't mind heavier?) and the gauges, but some people may not care about beads if they are getting sand rims/tires anyway, and I never had a speed-o on my quad, so I'm not sure I would care about the instruments. again, not judging value here, just genuinely interested in understanding shocks better.

thanks

 

[C.Moore]

The 2.5's are some of the latest and greatest shocks to hit the market, whether you would benefit from them depends on how aggressive you ride. If you just cruise around not really pushing the limits, dont jump or ride fast then the 2.0's will be fine. Once you get more comfortable with the machine and start riding harder the 2.5's will really shine. They have a lot more adjustment, wont fade in the whoops, wont bottom out on big jumps. They are no negatives with going with the 2.5's, I myself would rather have to much shock than not enough and wishing for something better.

 

[Blownhotrodder]

x2!

 

[jst4fun321]

I understand the desire to have more shock than you need (it was the biggest investment I made on my quad), and I understand the 2.5's are the latest and greatest. But other than worrying about fade after many laps of a race course and bottoming out big jumps, I was just trying to understand the difference in ride experience and how the additional adjustments will benefit the average rider (i.e. not likely to modify for more power, not likely to go for huge air, and not likely going to race).

Perhaps I should focus the question... how would the 2.5's help for trail riding or riding bowls in the dunes? and people quote the "less fade" aspect, but is that a problem on current machines when going through a single set of whoops? Would be curious to see the X and XRS in side by side slow motion.

just a curiosity. if I had the money, I know which one I would want but I also understand marketing and positioning of a premium product that may only benefit a few.

 

[Glamisfan]

I built a prerunner. Ford Ranger with 22"/28" front/rear travel. I had King 2.5" shocks on it. Those shocks worked great on that 4000 lb truck. To me the 2.5's are overkill on the Maverick. So, IMHO, most people would be perfectly happy with the 2.0's. But, I like to tune shocks, so they're easier than taking the 2.0's apart every time I want to try something new. Also, I figured the XRS would be easier to sell when I'm ready, and that I could get a good portion of the extra that I paid for it back.

 

[usaguy]

I just came back from the Dunes and the 2.5 allows you to make the adjustments that you will need to make just to handle the variety of different of obstacles you will run into. The car is setup nice from the factory but I notice that it needs adjustments mainly on the low speed. Some find that the rebound is not suited to their riding style. The bottom line is with the 2.5 you can make those adjustments yourself with a screw driver and wrench. With the 2.0 shocks if you don't like how the car handles in the dunes or you want to improve it after months of riding it you don't have those options.

Real world example:

1) hitting an unexpected or expected desert speed bump causes most UTVs to kick up in the rear and stand up on its nose. The 2.5 allows you to adjust both the rebound and the low speed compression to lessen or remove that effect

2) making transitions from one bowl to another at high speeds and the car bottoms out. Once again you can stiffen the shock up to help remove that effect to a certain extend.

3) Running whoops at Glamis the car might be to soft and bounce too much. Running the whoops in the desert the car might be to stiff. You can modify the high speed and low speed to adapt to different terrain quickly with a wrench and screw driver.

I talked to the Fox experts at the RZR camp and the 4-10-12 adjustment made a world of a difference in my Mav handling in the dunes.

 

[Meterman]

4-10-12 is what setting

 

[rchrisman1184]

I have both. base model mav and xrs. cant tell a difference at all in normal riding conditions. secondly the shocks isn't the issues as much as the adjustments. the compression and rebound don't truly open all the way on our shocks. so you don't really get the effect you think you are with the valving they have designed. with the adjustment all the way out the shock is truly on about half a port open. hence why most run the compression all the way out and the rebound all the way in and it don't really soften the ride just helps very marginal.