The Redline Riot was unlike nearly every side-by-side available when we drove it. With a 72-horsepower Weber engine, rear-wheel drive, a low seating position and up to 18 inches of suspension travel, it felt more like a miniature sand car than a conventional UTV.
Editor’s note: This review preserves our impressions from driving the Redline Riot when the vehicle was still being marketed. Redline Performance Vehicles and the original Riot are no longer in production. For complete specifications, detailed photos and additional history, visit our Redline Riot model guide.
What Was the Redline Riot?
The Riot was an intriguing concept for sport UTV enthusiasts. It occupied the space between the performance side-by-sides of its era and a small two-seat sand car. It was somewhat larger and wider than a traditional UTV, yet more compact than most purpose-built sand cars.
Its design reflected that specialized mission. The Riot used a continuously variable transmission with forward, neutral and reverse, but it did not have a low range or four-wheel drive. The vehicle we tested also lacked a conventional parking brake.
Rear-wheel drive was not necessarily a disadvantage in the open terrain for which the Riot was designed. Two-wheel drive can work well on a track and in the dunes or desert. However, the absence of four-wheel drive and low range made the Riot far less versatile than a conventional recreational UTV.
Cockpit and Driving Position
The cockpit provided adequate room for two adults. The suspension seats were comfortable, and five-point harnesses were appropriate equipment for a vehicle with this level of performance.
Legroom was acceptable, but the driver’s footwell needed improvement. There was no well-defined place to brace my left foot, and I found that it could slide toward or underneath the brake pedal. That was distracting when driving the Riot aggressively.
I also found the shifter awkward to operate. Neither issue ruined the experience, but both reinforced the impression that the cockpit still needed refinement.
The low seating position was one of the Riot’s best attributes. With the engine mounted behind the occupants and the fuel tank positioned between the seats, the driver and passenger sat considerably lower than they did in contemporary Yamaha Rhino, Polaris RZR or Kawasaki Teryx models.
That arrangement lowered the center of gravity and gave the Riot a distinctly sporting feel. You felt seated down inside the chassis instead of perched above the drivetrain as you did in many early side-by-sides.
Long-Travel Suspension
The Riot was expensive compared with mainstream UTVs of the period, but it included a substantial long-travel suspension system from the factory. Redline claimed 18 inches of travel in front and 16.5 inches at the rear.
Up front, the Riot used dual A-arms. The rear was more unusual, employing trailing arms rather than the rear A-arm arrangements commonly found on the Rhino, RZR and Teryx. That layout was closer to what we were accustomed to seeing on a performance sand car.
The available wheel travel was impressive, particularly for that era, but the Riot we tested felt stiff on the track. Shock and spring adjustments may have improved the ride, so I would not consider our test vehicle’s setup the final word on its suspension potential.
Dimensionally, the Riot felt similar to a Rhino or Teryx equipped with an aftermarket long-travel kit. Its published overall length was approximately 115 inches, but its 84-inch wheelbase was considerably longer than those early UTVs. The extra wheelbase and low seating position helped give the Riot a planted, performance-oriented character.
Weber MPE 750 Engine and CVT
The Riot was powered by a naturally aspirated Weber MPE 750. This compact 749cc, liquid-cooled, parallel-twin four-stroke was rated at 72 horsepower—an impressive figure when mainstream sport UTVs were still operating with considerably less power.
The Weber had a high-revving personality that reminded me more of a two-stroke than the typical four-stroke UTV engine of the period. It made the Riot feel energetic and reinforced the vehicle’s race-inspired character.
The CVT calibration was less convincing. On the vehicle I drove, the clutch did not engage until the engine reached approximately 4,000 rpm. That behavior made the Riot poorly suited to creeping through technical terrain or performing precise, low-speed maneuvers.
Once underway, the powertrain made more sense. The Riot was designed to carry speed through open terrain, not crawl over rocks or work around a ranch.
Steering and Chassis Concerns
The steering on our test vehicle felt unusually heavy. I could not determine whether that was representative of the production setup or a problem specific to the machine we drove, but it detracted from the experience.
I also had concerns about a few of the suspension mounting points. The single-shear front spindle mounts appeared lighter than I would have preferred for aggressive off-road use, while an upper front A-arm mounting area looked as though it could benefit from additional reinforcement.
These were observations from inspecting the test vehicle rather than reports of a component failure. Still, they were details I would have wanted to investigate before purchasing one for hard dune or desert use.
Safety and Occupant Containment
The large, low door openings made the Riot easy to enter and exit. The tradeoff was reduced side containment in a rollover. The five-point harnesses and supplied wrist restraints therefore were not merely decorative equipment.
Drivers and passengers should wear the harnesses correctly and use wrist restraints whenever the vehicle is moving. Modern sport UTVs typically employ taller doors or window nets, but occupant containment practices were still evolving when the Riot was introduced.
Redline Riot Review Verdict
The Redline Riot was a genuinely interesting attempt to fill the gap between a UTV and a miniature sand car. Its strong Weber engine, long wheelbase, low seating position and factory long-travel suspension gave it performance potential that few production side-by-sides could match at the time.
It also felt unfinished in several areas. Heavy steering, abrupt CVT engagement, awkward controls, limited foot bracing and questions about a few chassis details kept me from being ready to place a deposit after our test.
With additional refinement, the Riot could have occupied a distinctive place in the performance market—especially among dune enthusiasts. Production proved short-lived, but its basic formula anticipated the wider, lower and more powerful sport side-by-sides that would arrive years later.
Redline Riot Review: Pros and Cons
What We Liked
- Strong 72-horsepower Weber twin-cylinder engine
- Low, sporty seating position
- Factory long-travel suspension
- Long wheelbase suited to open terrain
- Comfortable suspension seats and five-point harnesses
- Distinctive miniature-sand-car driving character
What Needed Improvement
- Heavy steering on our test vehicle
- CVT engagement occurred at high rpm
- Awkward shifter placement
- No suitable left-foot brace
- No four-wheel drive or low range
- Low door openings offered limited side containment
- Some suspension mounting points appeared light for aggressive use
