Deeper Comparison

20340 Views 79 Replies 17 Participants Last post by BillyD66, Aug 4, 2013

Sirrush99

Discussion Starter · Aug 1, 2013

My first post. Love the forum. I have been looking forward to buying a Stryker for months now. But I came across a Raider at a great price. But after plenty of research, I am actually very lost as to how or why a Raider is a better bike than the Stryker. It seems like the bigger engine only makes the bike an unoticeable bit faster than the Stryker; based on the 0-60 and 1/4 mile times I have found. Clearly it has more torque and HP but why are the numbers almost identical. I ask because on paper the bigger engine doesn't seem to equal better performance.

I am interested to know what I am obviously missing. My intentions are to ride with a passenger at times and on long trips. I like the looks of both bikes equally. So performance and comfort are the deciding factor here. But I am not seeing a difference in performance or comfort that justifies the extra cash. Any input would be appreciated.

1 - 15 of 80 Posts

toby

· #18 · Aug 1, 2013

Ergonomics/fitment is about the only real noticeable difference.
I'm just under 5"6' and the Stryker fits me like a glove. The raider is better suited for a much larger person. I couldn't reach the bars and set all the way back on the seat of the Raider.
The Stryker will beat the Raider hands down in tight mountains no question about that, I can't even use all the power the Stryker has in the mountains where I live. But if you don't live in mountains and only plan on visiting once in a while then that should not be a concern. The other thing that is a big concern is the liquid cooled verses air cooled. The Stryker is such a smooth running machine due to that and the roller rockers. It never gets hot, in fact my wife is looking into liquid cooled bikes to trade her 950 on just for that reason. After testing a few she has decided on a Stryker. Because it also has to handle serious mountain twisties and my Stryker handles even better than her 950 up here. Oh and it handles near max load just fine in mountains and has plenty of passing power to spare. I've rode 2 up fully packed at about 425 lbs.:thumb:

See less See more

toby

· #22 · Aug 1, 2013

Daisy power sports has a beautiful pearl wight Raider for $13,800

toby

· #23 · Aug 1, 2013

mikoloe said:
Just Toby's and mine have roller rockers!

Ye but lol I'm talking about the motors not us.

toby

· #28 · Aug 2, 2013

I think the answer to the question of value is the Stryker is the best bang for your buck.
The answer to the question in size is, two sizable people say 220+ lbs each, the Stryker would start to get cramped for long rides. But power and load handling is still there.

toby

· #33 · Aug 2, 2013

Yikes your screwed lol. Best thing you can do is go test ride them then.
With those numbers the only things to think about is the Strykers liquid cooled, price of insurance is much less, handle ability is better verses Raiders more power, bigger size and more chrome. Oh I don't think it was mentioned that the Raider runs on premium gas. So the only thing that has changed is the price difference. Which now is about $2000? Put that much in power mods in the Stryker and I don't think the Raider would be much faster if at all.
To me because of where I ride the liquid cooled would be the seller. In fact it is because I have been shopping for another bike for long rides to replace the 950 and that wight Raider sure caught my attention but it boils down to the liquid cooled. So we will be a two Stryker family if we can get a good deal.

See less See more

toby

· #40 · Aug 2, 2013

http://www.cycletrader.com/listing/2011-Yamaha-Stryker-110704684#tabs-Map

toby

· #57 · Aug 2, 2013

yammyboy said:
Just curious. Is your Stryker stock or modded? I would think a Stryker with a cobra tri flow two into one exhaust, cobra power flow air filter, a fuel tuner and a 30 tooth
Pulley should at best hold its own against a stock Raider? The Strykers smaller cc motor
is still pound for pound a better deal.IMHOP.

Pound for dollar maybe, but, pound for pound the Raider motor is 550 more cc than the Stryker.

toby

· #60 · Aug 2, 2013

yammyboy said:
I can't agree on that. Case inpoint. If you do the same mods on a raider as the Stryker you get around 97-100HP on the Raider with its 113 cubes. On the Stryker your at 78-80+ hp according some some who have been dynoed with the same basic three mods. So for 80 cubes your getting 80 horse's. The Raider would have to be at 113 horse's. Tq of course would be alot more simply because of the bigger cubes of the Raider. Torque is off the line, Hp keeps you there,Hp is a by product of TQ. My Roadliner had a slipon pipe, modded air box,Cobra auto tuner. It ran very good. But a GPS'T top speed was 124MPH and the gearing is alot shorter on the liners and Raiders. Both bikes are not geared for the highway, they rev very high at 70MPH for a big 113 cubic inch motor. 3,200 RPM'S is pretty high at 70MPH and that is another reason they are quick .I was doing 120MPH on my totally stock Stryker (corrected speedo healer I installed) two up. I pretty sure I had a little more to go . Im pretty sure owneing a Roadliner and its 113 cubes I do have some experience with its power. Stryker feels about the same, you just have to twist the throttle a little more,LOL. I love this motor in the Stryker so much I would not be suprised this winter if I remove the heads and have them ported and polished by Patrick raceing where I had my Roadstars big bore kit done. I will have my Stryker dynoed as soon as I can after I install my Cobra Tri flow pipe, cobra power flow air cleaner and my EJK tuner ,which will be all on by next weekend. I just want to find a dyno that is at a lower elevation than my area, probably Atlanta area. If I can get 80+ hp from 80 cubes vrs 100HP from 113 cubes, that is cube for cube a better deal.:wink:.

I had done a "110" big bore on my 2004 Roadstar silverado because some guys in the southern cruisers I rode with called my Road star a SLUG STAR. Then I ripped apart the motor ,sent the jugs out to Patrick raceing (the Warrior champ shop) and had it bored to 111.36CC. I kept the heads stock except for the speed star springs. No porting of any kind. I did the speed star cams, 42mm side draft carb, barons big air kit, ported the stock intake myself, dyna 3000 inj. I did this all my self. V&H power shots. I dynoed on a hot day at 95.8HP and 119.56 TQ. I blew away the VTX'S in my group and to add insult I got beteen 50-55 MPG. They then called my Roadstar a torque monster,LOL. I know my Yamahas pretty good.

I'm talking about, literally speaking, pound for pound of the motors and even overall weight of the bikes, there isn't as much difference in comparison to the massive displacement differences..

toby

· #62 · Aug 3, 2013

Sirrush99 said:
I concur. All my research suggests that these bikes are so close in speed that I can't figure out what the **** all those extra cc's are doing for the raider. But that's coming from a guy who has rode neither. Hence the birth of this thread. I'm sure it pulls real hard...but the raider just isn't that much faster. Slow enough that rider skill is probably more important than the engine.

Sent from Motorcycle.com Free App

Absolutely, the only place that the Raider is going to have an advantage is 2 up fully packed fighting headwinds and needing to have that extra torque to pass etc.
When it comes to really serious twisties with mountain grades where you can't go more than 35 to 50 mph in curves with 15 to 25 mph hair pin turns, it boils down to the skill levels of the rider and how easily the bike can be thrown back and forth around curves. You can't use the power that either of these bikes have in those conditions. And I'll guarantee you a Stryker will smoke a Raider in those condition 2 up packed or solo riding..
But I think you are mistaken with the Straight line numbers, I don't think they are that close. I don't know where you got the 4. something 0 to 60, the Stryker is 5. something to the Raiders 4.1, and 12.35 to 13,28 in the 1/4 is a bit of difference too. That equates to near 110 mph and the Stryker can't hit 100 mph in the 1/4. Although someone I think on this forum did say that in the family there was a Raider and a Stryker and there wasn't that much difference in acceleration.
Also I think someone said the Raider hits 65 in second but I can tell you the Stryker will hits near 80 in second gear.:thumb:
Oh and their not 100 lbs difference it's only 84 lbs.

See less See more

toby

· #65 · Aug 3, 2013

Sirrush99 said:
I pulled 0-60 times from 10 or so sources. No one had the Stryker in the 5's. Not one. And those same sources had the Stryker a second down in the quarter mile as well. I'll look again so I can quote more reliable sources than "cuz the new guy said so." But with those kinds of differences, the average person vs the average person in a straight line is going to come down to skill not bike. Most quoted times are from people that take machines and make them go 0-60 for a living. It's why I'm so doubtful of spending the extra cash on a raider. I'll pull those sources.

Sent from Motorcycle.com Free App

I got the 5+ second 0 to 60 time from one of the first articles I read on the Stryker almost two years ago. There was one that said over 6 seconds but I'm not believing that at sll. So ya I would love to see some newer more accurate numbers. And I know the stock Stryker isn't going to get you more than 13.25 in the 1/4 maxed at 97 mph.
A near one second difference in the 1/4 depending on acceleration rate can make a lot of difference.

toby

· #66 · Aug 3, 2013

Sirrush99 said:
Right so the times I found are as such:

The Stryker from Cycleworld- 4.3/[email protected]

The Raider from Motorcycle-USA 4.46/[email protected]

A shame I never did find numbers on both bikes from the same source. But all the numbers I found are similar within half a second. There also seems to be quite a debate within forums on times. But these are from reviews from press.
A bit concerning to me when pondering the value in the extra cash. I'm sure torque matters. But how much if we all get to 60 at the same time? Based on the quarter mile it seems like Stryker gets off quicker and the raider catches up. That's all I need to know right there.

Sent from Motorcycle.com Free App

[email protected] right? You wont hit 100 mph with a 13 .29 1/4 mile run, that's got to be a miss print.

These times are probobly about right.
Again these times are plenty fast for a cruiser and most of the time you are not going to use that power on either bike.

toby

· #68 · Aug 3, 2013

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**

You need to check around some more to get the correct times. In all my research that's the first I've seen that says any where near 13 seconds for the Raider. You can ask some of the guys here and on the Raider forum that have taken their bikes to the strips and clocked them.

toby

· #72 · Aug 3, 2013

strykenshane said:
Having ridden both bikes the biggest difference I noticed was upper gear power like say when ya want to pass at a high speed. Say you're riding at 60 mph and need to get to 80 to pass a couple trucks on a 2 lane, raider will make that pass easily, sometimes ya have to time it right with the Stryker

Sent from Motorcycle.com Free App

The Stryker will do 50 to 100 mph in forth in about 3 seconds with a 140 lbs rider.:thumb:

toby

· #73 · Aug 3, 2013

Sirrush99 said:
I had seen a quote somewhere for 12.8 on the raider. I had wrote it down at work. It's obviously capable. But that's still barely quicker than the Stryker and not worth 5k to me. And yeah you can tell by the higher speed and slower time it goes 60-80 way quicker than the Stryker.

Sent from Motorcycle.com Free App

I totally agree
BTW I'm going down the hill to probobly by a pearl wight Stryker for $10,480 OTD. But its going to be real hard to walk away from that pearl wight Raider setting next to it for $13,800. But wait that's still $3,320 more and that's not the OTD price? Well that's just a no brainer.:nod:

toby

· #76 · Aug 3, 2013

It's for my wife. She wanted a blue one just like mine but we couldn't get a good deal on one that was within reach. They wanted almost as much for 2011 impact blue as the 2014:suspicious: at a dealer in Redding. We almost were ready to go get it for $12,163 OTD. That's Cali tax&license and what other fees. But then I called down to the local independent dealer that I was talking to that has that Raider just to see what he would let the wight Stryker go for. After some negotiation Bam there it is $10480 OTD .
I think that $12,163 included saddlebags, suports and a Cobra tall backrest that we would have to install ourselves. But still, we're talking about a 2 year old left over new bike vrs a brand new one. No brainer there.
The main reasons for the Stryker is first the liquid cooled, the back of her leg gets red from the rear cylinder on the 950,then comfort. We looked at 1300 tourers and she had her heart set on the blue 2013 deluxe. We even rode 265 miles one way thinking we were going to trade her 950 in and ride it home. Paperwork was approved but when we got there he said they sent the wrong bike. A black and Chrome 1300 tourer. Even had a chrome kickstand. But She sat on it and didn't like the way it felt. Said it was just a bigger version of the 950 and felt like a pig. Didn't even want to test ride it. So with that in mind the deluxe is the same bike with a fairing and no back rest. So I let her ride my Stryker again on the way home from Tahoe through some twisties in Lassen National Forest and some open freeway. Then when we got home the next day I let her ride these mountains up here which are some really nasty twisties and she did fine and said the bike was extremely comfortable and handled surprisingly well. So we searched and until we found the right deal.

See less See more

1 - 15 of 80 Posts

This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.