MBF Motorcycle Forums banner
1 - 20 of 40 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
236 Posts
Discussion Starter · #2 ·
That was supposed to read *aawhoopin'. The damn apostrophe is too close to the enter for my oversized pinky finger...lol. ;D anyway...I was choosin' between a 109 and a raider. The raider is more comfy, better for long rides, handles like a dream, Butter smooth tranny, and more than enough juice for me. But the 109 is silly when it comes to brute power, I've got broad shoulders, I can admit it. Still no choice though, 109 has some serious flaws that turned me off to it. Enjoy the read.

Flame on.... :icon_evil: :eek: ;D

Oh....don't say anything about the rider, must've been top notch.... ;).... :rant-rave:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
826 Posts
OK,
I am not going to say that the M109 may not be faster, but this just screams BS!! I let him get ahead of me by a nose and when he was ahead of me then I slipped the clutch. Put 2 on him off the line and then added another 3 b4 the top of 3rd gear. Come on>>> Can this guy on the Raider ride, was he giving it everything she had.....I would have to say no. I will take numbers from a closed course with professional riders b4 anything like this. It is a good story though! LOL

From RaiderPerformance Bragging Rights...............Thanks Luke
Bike 1/4 mile E.T.
Yahama Star Raider 12.09*
Suzuki M109R 12.08**
HD Rocker 13.30*
HD Night Rod Special 12.47**
Honda VTX1800F 12.90**
Kawasaki Vulcan 2000 Classic 13.30**
Victory Hammer S 13.17**
Yamaha Star Warrior 13.01**


*CycleWorld, March 2008

**Popular Mechanics, May 2007
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
530 Posts
WEll we all know the 109 is faster..maybe not this much faster but it is faster.. What gets me is how anyone on a 109 can talk about the looks of another bike when they own basically a Moped with a 109 engine.. Your tank has a cheap looking seam and your talking about our gas tank looks funny??? WAAAHHHH

I guess your either born with style or your not. I was at a local bike night the other day parked right next to a new Orange (thats right orange) 08 M109 R2D2 or whatever it's called and everyone kept making comments on how great the raider looked and no one said squat about the 109.. The guy was a nice guy though and we chatted for awhile about other stuff. Oh and a pretty much stock raider took 2nd place and I did'nt even enter it...LOL
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
236 Posts
Discussion Starter · #5 ·
I agree with all the above comments, I just found it to be an interesting read. I've been on the 109riders forum for a while now, when I was researching the bike. Alot of very nice people on the board, so I'm not starting the board war. They have taken the stocker, like us, and done every possible mod to it. It's actually pretty funny the similarities to the two boards as far as people helping each other out, and posting every possible solution and mod. Bikers truely are a rare breed, and good to see.

As far as the 6'1" 260lb guy who says the Raider doesn't "fit" him, well, same height and got him by about 10 lbs, the Raider fits better than the 109, trust me.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
17 Posts
Yeah , I agree. A tank seem, how gross. That's THE main reason I'd never buy one of those cheap looking, cookie cutter type motor cycles. I'd rather go slow all day long , but look good doing it, than go the fastest but look stupid doing it. Also...the duel wrist pin engine sucks. I don't think the Raider has one, or does it ? I hope not. I haven't bought one YET, but I'm well on my way. I have tested one, and it sounded a little too unsteady at idle to have a duel wrist pin crank...to me anyway. But.. like I said those M109s are U-G-L-Y with no alibi .
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
157 Posts
They are UGLY! And the poster must have been mistaken on one fact. It must have been the -S model, not the "black" one.

I love this forum!

Later

Coyote
 
G

·
Re: First hand a**whoopin

The M-109 is a decent bike, but the style bothers me.
The Raider is a chopper styled cruiser. Classic. Beautiful.
The M-109 looks to me like Suzuki couldn't decide whether to make a sport bike or a cruiser,
so they made a weird combination of the 2. It just doesn't work for me.

The Raider is fast enough. If all I wanted to do was go fast, I'd have bought an R-1.

I'd bet money the Raider handles much better than the M-109 too!

I rode my last bike for 26 years. I had a 1982 Yamaha XJ-1100 Maxim. In all those years, it never needed to be repaired ever. Not once! Only routine maintenance. So I'm pretty convinced that Yamaha's are bulletproof.
I plan to have the Raider for a couple decades!

77º in Denver today, 84º tomorrow! Woo Hoo!

Going riding.... SEE YA!!!!!!!!!!!!!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
499 Posts
Ok... I have an M109R in the house... my oldest son.

And I... of course.. have the Raider (red S).

It's a dead heat...

I've ridden his and he's ridden mine. He likes his... and I like mine.

My second son (26 - 6'3") has ridden both. He says that mine is far more comfortable and really likes the handling.

I'm not going to bad mouth the 109. They have a loyal following and that great.

The Raider riders are a loyal bunch.. and thats great too.

As I've said before:
They make Harley's because people like Harley's
They make Yamaha's because people like Yamaha's ... and
They make Suzuki's because people like Suzuki's.
 
G

·
The M109 is a fine bike! I see them all over!
We high five all around!

Here's what I don't get.
The Raider weighs: 692 dry
and has about: 80 horsepower.

The M109 weighs: 703 dry (11 pounds more)
and has about: 125 horsepower.

So why does the M109 only beat the Raider by 1/100th of a second in the 1/4 mile?
Shouldn't it be much faster?

I'm no engineer, but still...........
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
148 Posts
Id belive it since it was a black raider. But I think more of this story is bs. Was the Raider Rider a new rider. Was the Raider rider even racing. I was riding with a friend of mine that rides a triumph speedster. Dang fast bike. I wasnt racing him but when he took off he left me behind a little but a little twist on the throttle I was passing him.

Look im beating a Dodge Charge R/T (even though the charger wasn't racing me I still won)

Pictures taken by my daughter in the official Raider Red S chase car. only thing that can keep up
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
826 Posts
I just want to clarify my comments. I am not saying that the 109 is a bad bike at all, diffrent strokes for diffrent folks. Would I ride one.....no way, but does that mean they are not a capable scoot.......no way. I was just commenting on the 5 bike length desamation of the Raider b4 the top of 3rd gear. As someone said in this thread earlier its a dead heat. The m109 will beat my Raider there is a guy here in town that has one and we have run them pretty good several times. Through 3 gears we are side by side, he starts to pull away in 4 but not 5 bike lenghts.
I bought a crusier cause I want to cruise...not drag race....although I do find myself having to prove myself to other bikers.

Ride what you like, nothing else really matters.

Oh and Sleeper, How and the hell did you score a Raider clear back in 05? Have you been holding out on us?? :icon10:

Later
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,178 Posts
vintagecar1957 said:
The M109 is a fine bike! I see them all over!
We high five all around!

Here's what I don't get.
The Raider weighs: 692 dry
and has about: 80 horsepower.

The M109 weighs: 703 dry (11 pounds more)
and has about: 125 horsepower.

So why does the M109 only beat the Raider by 1/100th of a second in the 1/4 mile?
Shouldn't it be much faster?

I'm no engineer, but still...........
A very interesting question, and one that deserves a little 'splaining...

Horsepower figures alone don't tell the whole story, especially when we're talking about "off the line". In these types of contests, it's torque that matters. The numbers vary greatly depending on elevation, atmospheric conditions, etc... but the torque numbers between the two bikes are much closer.

Torque matters most because it represents the ability of the engine to initiate twist, get the wheel moving, and launch you off the line. Horsepower matters much more at the top end, the ability to reach a higher top speed, not to mention the ability of a motor to maintain a higher rate of travel - the ability to carry out a measured amount of work in a given amount of time. Being a short stroke, high revving motor, the M109 has more HP, though even with a Power Commander and V&H pipes, my brother's ride makes about 105.

The Raider's motor is a stroked engine - ideal for pumping out gobs of torque at the low end, and really exciting, grin producing launches and 1/4 miles. It also means that the piston has a longer distance to travel, so it ends up being a low-revving motor, generating less HP at the top of the rev range. Again, I've seen figures in the 90's, so the bikes are pretty close in that department as well.

Factor in individual rider ability, state of tune on a particular bike, etc, and you have two bikes pretty equally matched in the performance dept.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
236 Posts
Discussion Starter · #16 ·
So...Shorter stroke equals the higher rev limit on the 109? The explanation makes more sense now. But to quell the thoughts of me feeding the fire. In my second post I 'fessed to the 9 being a brute, and in 3rd post stated how much I liked the 109 board and similarities between the 2 boards. I just find some of the chest thumpin' that goes on pretty funny. I 100% agree with the mantra if you're on 2 wheels it's all good! Different strokes for different folks falls in at a close second. Gotta love the freedom of choice.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
67 Posts
I traded a late '07 M109 for the Raider...both have their virtues, and NJRaider explains the engine differences exactly.

But, would I own another 109 vs the Raider...not with my short frame...the bike's designed for 6' folks.

I will own another Stratoliner bagger as my next ride, however...I had to sell my '06 for med fixes, and really like the Raider as a bar hopper, but I miss the Liner's long-range cush and carrying capacity.

The Liner and Raider are different in their purpose and design, but share the same wonderful engine...both are excellent rides.

Gary in Fairbanks
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
258 Posts
vintagecar1957 said:
The M109 is a fine bike! I see them all over!
We high five all around!

Here's what I don't get.
The Raider weighs: 692 dry
and has about: 80 horsepower.

The M109 weighs: 703 dry (11 pounds more)
and has about: 125 horsepower.

So why does the M109 only beat the Raider by 1/100th of a second in the 1/4 mile?
Shouldn't it be much faster?

I'm no engineer, but still...........
OK, two things......the Zuki is in crankshaft horsepower, and that Raider HAD to be one with a coil wire crossed!
The "powers that be" need to do some more testing with a Raider that is running right.
I'll be setting up my dyno tune run very soon, and I'll deff post after I do.
I really think it has more than 80HP stock, although torque does all the work.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
220 Posts
vintagecar1957 said:
The M109 is a fine bike! I see them all over!
We high five all around!

Here's what I don't get.
The Raider weighs: 692 dry
and has about: 80 horsepower.

The M109 weighs: 703 dry (11 pounds more)
and has about: 125 horsepower.

So why does the M109 only beat the Raider by 1/100th of a second in the 1/4 mile?
Shouldn't it be much faster?

I'm no engineer, but still...........
Torque moves V-Twins - not HP. If you were running a sport bike - you'd want HP.

Also - i love 109's. My friend has one and we've gone at it when we were both bone stock and by around the 90-100 area (when I let go of the throttle) I was roughly 3 feet from his rear tire. That's more than 1/100th of a second in distance according to the 1/4 mile runs - now that I've gotten used to the bike - I should do better - maybe a few more feet... but not much.

It's not just the bike - IT'S THE DRIVER!

Just because you have a 12.0 second bike doesn't mean you know how to make it go 12.0 seconds.

Sure... The 9 will beat a Raider - but not by much.

Personally - I love both bikes - but I just like the looks of the Raider better... So I bought the Raider.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
123 Posts
Harleys (heavily-tuned, of course!), M109's, VTX's 1800...

They are always wanting to race Warriors, and now Raiders...but it's always in a straight line!

The guy purchased an 1800cc power cruiser and fitted quick shift and tuning accessories, but claims: 'I don't condone street racing...'. He was itching for it!

I have a buddy with a heavily-tuned HD Deuce, and yes it is fast, no doubt, he gave my Warrior a run, until we came to a bend in the road!

And he blew the crank trying to race the Raider, and it's stock!

Next time a Harley, M109, VTX 1800 owner asks you to show what the Raider(or Warrior) can do, suggest a route that covers acceleration, deceleration and cornering, and then see who is sat drinking beer first!

Cheers,

Scooter
 
1 - 20 of 40 Posts
Top