[morrell]

Hi guys, long time skulker first time poster. I have wanted to buy a Warrior for some time now, but my timing has been off. Good old Yamaha Australia no longer sells new Warriors so I have been keeping my eye out for one second hand. I own a Suzuki M109R (1800 Boulevade), and plan on customising the Warrior - as expensive as that will be from here.

What I was wondering was have any of you guys had the chance to ride a M109R and, if so, how does it compare to the Warrior? I noticed a few posts commenting on Warriors hitting 106 hp or there abouts, where as the M109R comes stock pushing 127 hp (claimed) but obviously is a slightly heavier bike.

 

[dmonty]

Here is the review Popular Mechanics did “Power Cruisers” which includes the Warrior & 109.

http://www.popularmechanics.com/automotive/new_cars/4216203.html

Here are the track times for each: (Converted to km)
M109R
0-50 km/h 0-100 km/h 65-113 km/h 0.402336 km
1.53 sec. 3.89 sec. 2.52 sec. 12.08 sec. @ 178km/h

RS Warrior
0-50 km/h 0-100 km/h 65-113 km/h 0.402336 km
1.83 sec. 4.56 sec. 3.35 sec. 13.01 sec. @ 162km/h

 

[morrell]

Thanks for that dmonty. Great article. The scope for customising a Warrior is so much broader than with the Boulevade, as the quality of bikes on this site attests. I can't wait to get my hands on one.[/emoticons/emotion-2.gif]

 

[Pyre]

I looked real closely at the M109R before buying a warrior. The 109 will be faster in a straight line, but the warrior will handle much better on the corners. In the end, I bought the warrior because of reliability issues. I got tired of reading about the problems that 109 owners are having, while everyone raves about the reliability of the warrior.

 

[ekmaint]

welcome to the forum

 

[morrell]

Yeah Pyre, I read up on a few problems with the 109's, but I think it's like most things, you get bad with the good and alot comes down to how you run it in. Admittedly I've only clocked 4000 kms with mine, but it hasn't missed a beat and there have been plenty of times I've felt like I'm strapped to an ACME rocket. I certainly have no intentions of parting with it in the foreseeable future. My wife wants a bike that will give the 109 what-for, and if I'm buying something for her reliability is a big issue, plus it has to be something I want to ride. I couldn't think of better stable mate for the 109 than a Warrior. As I understand it the Warrior has better ground clearance than the Bouley and I have no doubt on the twisties I'll be left for dead, especially the way she rides. Plus I get the bonus of fiddling with the look of the bike and hopefully it will end up looking as tough as some of the examples here. (I'll be fine as long as she thinks it's hers, he he he)

 

[morrell]

As yamaha Aust, stopped producing the Warrior with the 2005 model, I was wondering what differences there were, if any, between it and the 2003 model? Aside from colour that is (we only got silver in 2003 and burgundy in 2005) Were there any bugs in the 2003 that had to be ironed out in the later model? i read somewhere that the 2005 was the better bike, but there was no explainationn for this theory.

 

[rswcrazy81]

It's good to have you here! Welcome to the 4M. Hope you can find the right bike soon. By the way... The 109 is not a bad bike either! PhatA$$

 

[arizonawarrior]

In the real world of hot bikes and city streets the Warrior is king of smiles.
It's nearly king of the hill country too, 'cept they make these R1 sporty-bikey-thingys.