Sold M109R, thinking of a Raider. Just a few quick Q's??

[phatjoe]

Hello,

The M109R was a nice bike.  But honestly, I just didn't like the handling of the bike.  I wasn't a fan of the 240mm rear tire.   

So now I'm considering an '08-10 Raider.  I'm hoping a few folks on here can speak to the handling of both bikes.  How's the handling of the Raider compared to the M109R?  Any real difference between the 210 tire of the Raider vs the M109R's 240?  Any additional info you can provide between the two is greatly appreciated.  If the handling is about the same, I'll probably just try a Vic Vegas. 

Also, It's difficult for me to test ride one being in Chicago right now.

THANKS!!
 

[A.T.]

Several 109rs on this forum should be able to chime in with advice.

Never ridden a 109; however, having ridden several other bikes, I can tell you the Raider is one of the best handling / best performing cruisers I've ever ridden.  It's pretty nimble despite the rake.  You're just gonna have to get a test ride.

[Ron505]

Several 109rs on this forum should be able to chime in with advice.

Never ridden a 109; however, having ridden several other bikes, I can tell you the Raider is one of the best handling / best performing cruisers I've ever ridden.  It's pretty nimble despite the rake.  You're just gonna have to get a test ride.

True.....for me as well.

[distantThunder]

handling of the Raider is very good considering it's a big bike.  it's not just a bike for cruising on straight freeways.  we ride these bikes on mountain curves all the time.  it can hold its own  :-)

i had a 210 tire.  now I've got a 240 tire. It handles just as well as the 210, and some would say better.  don't take your experience with the 109 and carry it over to the Raider.  start with a fresh perspective.  any problems you had with the 109 were due to the design of the 109.  the Raider is a totally different animal.  many guys are riding with the 240's and there have been no complaints.

good luck to you!
dT

[Sweet Tooth]

I have the Raider with the 240 . In my opiinion it handles better than the stock 210 did. And looks better too.

[michael t]

 

[RaidWA]

Guys, the 240 on the stock 7.5" Raider wheel has a very different profile than the size it is supposed to be on, an 8.5" wheel like that on the M109. The narrower wheel pinches the big tire's sidewalls and the center bulges out, probably helping with handling. It sits a lot flatter/wider on the M109 so it isn't the apples to apples comparison the OP is inquiring about.

I think only a handful members here have an aftermarket 8.5" wheel on the rear with the 240. Scientifically, I don't see how that turns better than the stock set up but I've never ridden one so what do I know?

Joe, I'd say wait until you can test ride one locally. The many magazine comparos (Google them) between the two bikes generally seem to favor the Raider by a small amount. You should be able to judge it easily since you know the M109's handling first hand.

[wolfraider]

Love my 240 rear tire and would never go back.

[3fan4evr]

Love my 240 rear tire and would never go back.

What he said

[gostr8r]

I rode my Metz 210 for a couple sets then went to the Avon 240’s  never to go back! On my 3rd set of those, with over 16,000 on the present set. The Raider has the advantage of a belt final drive, so it has none of the jacking effects that the drive shaft bikes do. It also has the air cooled push rod activated 113” mill that not only looks better, but produces some real asphalt ripping torgue at low engine speeds. The sound alone is soooo much better than an OHC engine. Never once heard an OCH motor on any M109R that sounded even remotely as good as a Raider does! The fun factor on a Raider is waaaay above that on a big 109’er. Many that I talk to said they didn’t like the ergo’s of the Suzi' at all in comparison to our beasts.

[RangerRick]

I have the Raider with the 240 . In my opiinion it handles better than the stock 210 did. And looks better too.

Love my 240 rear tire and would never go back.

What he said

  also by the way, and Welcome from Oregon and to the forum, phatjoe

[Bill L]

Welcome from Yuma, AZ.  Pull the trigger, you won't be disappointed... 

[Capt_Zoom]

The stock raider handles well but I'm not a fan at all of the ME880 rear 210 tire.  It has a very flat profile making leans feel somewhat discontinuous.  This tires is also very squirrelly in the wet.  If you buy the raider ask your dealer to credit you for the 210 and have them put on the AVON Cobra or Venom 240.  You'll be much happier.  After the credit the Avon should cost you less than $100.  I think I paid $40 for it after the credit on the mets.  The avon's Cobras are much stickier, last 3-4 times longer (10k miles), have the most tread of any of the 240's that fit the raider, look better, are shorter correcting your stock speedo error and improving acceleration, and have a more rounded profile that makes leans feel more linked.  Don't worry about the stock MEtz front...its fine unless you want your tires matched...its the rear 210 that's crap. 

[109rfan]

Welcome and there's quick a few of us ex 109r's here   On the 210 it's much more lighter and flickable I did notice te length on the rake out front end. But it's not heavy handling like the 9 was youl lose a little hp to the 9 but the raiders are way More comfortable  rideing.    I still ride with 9riders here and there and I can still dice it up quite a bit.   

[Madcow]

The only thing I can say is to change the foot pegs to floor boards. As the raider is rather low to the ground, the pegs scrape long before your done leaning. I DO NOT LIKE THAT! I replaced mine with some flat floor boards that are about 3/4 of an inch thinner. LOVE IT..! I haven't caught them yet and have a new confidence with sharp turns. Actualy the thing that sold me on the raider was the balance. When I took oe out for a test drive I wound it up to 50 and let go of the bars.. she tracked flat and straight.. SOLD!!!