Which Yamaha Wolverine Do You Have?

One badge, two kinds of machine

The question that brings people here is not a fitment question. It is an identification question wearing fitment’s clothes: somebody types the name of their machine, gets results for a vehicle with a steering wheel, and cannot tell whether the catalogue is wrong or they are. Neither is wrong. The badge has been used twice.

Every record in the ATV application data carrying this name falls in the model years 1995 to 2010. That is the quad era, and it is the whole of what an ATV track catalogue has to say about the name: 7 published records, grouping to 5 machine rows, all of them listed in full further down.

Everything after that span carries the name on a side-by-side, and a fitment tool that holds both kinds of vehicle groups those rows under the side-by-side platform. So typing “Wolverine” into one lands an owner of the quad on a page about a different machine, with no warning that a second era exists. The model year is what separates them, and it separates them cleanly.

Deciding which one you have, without a catalogue

This does not need a serial, a badge or a model year. The two machines are different classes of vehicle and the controls settle it in one look. State the answer to yourself before reading any further, because everything below depends on it.

If the machine is not in front of you — you are buying it, or somebody is describing it over a phone — the model year does the same work, because the two eras do not overlap in this catalogue. Ask for the year first and the displacement second, and ask for a photograph of the controls rather than of the machine.

Two manufacturers, two spellings, no overlap

Inside the quad era there is a second, smaller trap, and it is the one that makes a search come back half-empty. The two manufacturers publishing applications for this machine write its name differently, and the difference is not a variant spelling that a search engine forgives.

• Camso leads with the displacement and writes the drive designation with a capital letter — the shape is a three-digit figure, then the name, then 4X4.
• Kimpex leads with the name and writes the drive designation in lower case — the name, then a three-digit figure, then 4x4.
• Every row from each manufacturer follows its own shape, with no exceptions.

The practical consequence is that a reader who types the name the way it appears on their fender finds one manufacturer’s rows and not the other’s, and has no way to know that a second set exists. So search on the year and the displacement, not on the badge. The same failure in a worse form — two conventions that do not share a substring at all — is covered in reading a Suzuki model code.

Where the two published spans do not line up

Grouped by the displacement each row title carries, this is what each manufacturer publishes for this machine and for which model years. The two columns are not two opinions about the same thing; they are two separate published lists that happen to name one machine.

There is a hole in the middle of it. For the 350, model years 2002–2005, neither manufacturer publishes a row.

That is an absence of published applications and nothing more. It does not mean those machines were never built, it does not mean a mount was never made for one, and it is not a statement about whether anything can be fitted. If your machine falls in that band, the question worth asking at a parts counter is whether an adjacent year’s kit carries the same mount — that is a parts answer, and it is not something either manufacturer publishes.

At the other end, the two lists disagree about how late the machine ran. For the 450, Camso’s last published model year is 2008 and Kimpex’s is 2010 — 2 model years further. An owner of one of those later machines will find a published application from one manufacturer and none from the other, and the difference is in the lists rather than in the machine.

One more asymmetry, smaller but the kind that makes two rows look like two machines. Only Kimpex publishes a trim-qualified row for this family — Wolverine 450 4x4 SE (2007-2008). The other manufacturer folds trims into the base row title. Two published rows can therefore describe the same machine at different levels of detail, and a search for the trim name returns only one of the two catalogues.

The published rows in full

This is the whole of what the catalogue publishes for the quad. Suspension type and sprocket pair appear where the manufacturer publishes them; a blank means that manufacturer publishes no value for that row.

Kimpex publishes no per-application condition data at all: every Commander WS4 record in this catalogue has an empty remarks field. The absence of a WS4 entry below means nobody has published a condition for it — not that none exists. Camso is the only manufacturer here that publishes these flags, so this page is necessarily a Camso view of the catalogue.

Read the fourth column carefully, because it is the one that changes an order. Only Camso publishes a rear-suspension type against these rows, and every row it publishes reads Rigid rear axle. Kimpex publishes no suspension field on any row in this catalogue. That field is what conversion hardware is selected against, so an owner working from the Kimpex row alone has to establish it from the machine instead of from the listing.

The sprocket column is worth a second look too. Every published pair for this family carries the same figure front and rear. That is unusual enough across the catalogue as a whole to be a useful confirmation when somebody reads a pair off a parts list and wants to know whether they are looking at the right family.

The condition flag, and the rows that carry none

One row in the table above carries a published manufacturer condition:

• 450 Wolverine 4X4 (2006-2008) — Temporary body parts removal

Camso defines that flag in the legend printed at the head of every page of its application guide, and the definition is the whole of what it publishes:

C* Temporary body parts removalCamso ATV/UTV Track System Application Guide, August 2026 revision, read 2026-09-26

Which body part, how it comes off, whether it goes back on and whether anything is cut are not published. If your machine is on one of those rows, that is the question to put to the installing shop before the order goes in, and worth having written on it — the flag says labour is involved and says nothing about how much.

The same legend carries one standing qualifier above the letters, and it applies to every row in the table including the unflagged ones:

Minor modification and light interference are possible on any modelCamso ATV/UTV Track System Application Guide, August 2026 revision, read 2026-09-26

Now the part that matters more than the flag. The 2 rows covering the same displacement from the other manufacturer — Wolverine 450 4x4 (2006-2010) and Wolverine 450 4x4 SE (2007-2008) — show no condition at all. That is not the same machine being cleared. It is the same machine listed by a manufacturer that publishes no condition data for anything, on any application, anywhere in this catalogue:

Kimpex publishes no per-application condition data at all: every Commander WS4 record in this catalogue has an empty remarks field. The absence of a WS4 entry below means nobody has published a condition for it — not that none exists. Camso is the only manufacturer here that publishes these flags, so this page is necessarily a Camso view of the catalogue.

So an owner of one particular displacement in one particular year band can find, in one catalogue, a published warning that bodywork comes off, and in the other catalogue, silence — for the same quad. The correct reading is that one manufacturer told you something and the other told you nothing. It is not a disagreement about the machine — so ask the installing shop about bodywork whichever of the two systems you order.

If yours is the side-by-side

Then this is the wrong site: every page here is about quads, and the ATV application data behind them carries ATV-typed rows only, which is why the later Wolverine rows are absent from the tables above rather than shown as having no coverage.

For orientation, the published applications grouped the later Wolverine rows under these names on 2026-09-26, all of them filed against side-by-sides rather than quads:

• Wolverine 700
• Wolverine X2 850
• Wolverine X4 850
• Wolverine RMAX2 1000
• Wolverine RMAX4 1000

Two caveats on that list. It is how one catalogue groups its rows, not a list of Yamaha models. And a system named on this site can still appear against a side-by-side row — the platform type describes the vehicle, not the track system — so a familiar system name against one of those rows is not evidence that the machine is a quad.

What to have in hand

Four things, in this order, and the first one decides whether the rest matter.

• Which class of machine it is. Handlebars or a steering wheel. Everything downstream forks here.
• The model year of the vehicle. Not a range, the year. Both published lists are organised by it and the two eras do not overlap.
• The displacement. It is what separates the two quad rows, and it is on the badge or in the title of the registration.
• Whether the rear axle is rigid or independent. One manufacturer publishes this against its rows and the other publishes nothing, so on half the catalogue it is a question about the machine rather than a lookup. If the bolt circle is also unknown, measuring your own bolt pattern is two diagonals and a tape measure.

If the machine already has a track system on it and the question is parts rather than fitment, that is a different lookup keyed on the system’s own year rather than the quad’s — see older quads and, where the plate is gone, an unmarked system in a barn.