What does everyone think about the Yamaha Raider? Is it me or is it something else. The real differance between the Raider and the Stryker would be engine size. Would everybody agree or am I missing something? I recently test rode the Raider and I really did'nt see anything major different other than the size of the engine. I would love to hear anyone's comments.... 8) 8)
Raider
1 - 20 of 32 Posts
Joined
·
1,757 Posts
Since I'm a Raider owner I'll chime in on this - I added the V&H 2-1 with the PC111 with stock air it dynoed out at 94.6hp and 119.4 trq....I like both bikes and if the Stryker had been available before the Raider I might have gotten one.sdsting said:
The only thing I don't like about the Stryker is all the plastic - guess I'm old school my chrome needs to be metal.
Compared to what else is out there both are two of the best cruisers for the price
Joined
·
366 Posts
I agree with Roadkill. I alos have road both bikes. i will say that the Stryker handels the turns a little better than the Raider, and if the mods ar edone correctly to the Raider you get between a 8 and 10% gain in power and if done correctly on the Stryker you can achive betweem a 10and 12% gain in power. I just wish i could put the kick A** Big Radius pipe on my Roadliner. 8)
Joined
·
1,757 Posts
There are a few guys that have done more performance mods - polished throttle bodies, BAKs, etc that are putting out over 100hp and over 125 lbs trq - I'm not that into it what I got suits me just fine. I'm sure with the right work a Stryker can put out some higher numbers...if you want to spend the money.sdsting said:
Joined
·
638 Posts
Steve, with all respect your numbers are a bit low, I got a 13-14% increase across the power band on my Stryker mods, specs on my dyno printout. Not to nitpick numbers too much but when you drop $1,700 in mods you want to squeeze every % increase in power that you can out of your $.saclean said:
Joined
·
2,488 Posts
Have not ridden both but own a Stryker and sat on a Raider multiple times. From Star's website the Raider obviously has the bigger motor but is 84 lbs heavier, 2.5 inches wider, 1 inch higher seat and overall/wheelbase is right around 2 inches longer.
It could be the handlebars etc. but on the Raider my arms were locked and stretched and I'm 5'11" with a 32" inseam. I can flat foot both easily but I just don't think I'd enjoy the Raider's stock ergonomics and have to drop cash into the bike to make that work.
So... I guess it comes down to the motor as being the biggest difference for me and I still have to ride one to actually feel the difference but on paper converting things to a power(actually size since I don't know the HP for each) to weight ratio gives the Raider the advantage at 2.54 cc's/lb verses 2.02 for the Stryker. What that equates to in the real world is lord knows and of course mods can up the ante for both bikes. Even stock the Stryker moves me around fine for now.
Like others have said, they look similar and are both good looking and good values. I hope other manufacturers keep up the good work as well. Competition is always good for the consumer
It could be the handlebars etc. but on the Raider my arms were locked and stretched and I'm 5'11" with a 32" inseam. I can flat foot both easily but I just don't think I'd enjoy the Raider's stock ergonomics and have to drop cash into the bike to make that work.
So... I guess it comes down to the motor as being the biggest difference for me and I still have to ride one to actually feel the difference but on paper converting things to a power(actually size since I don't know the HP for each) to weight ratio gives the Raider the advantage at 2.54 cc's/lb verses 2.02 for the Stryker. What that equates to in the real world is lord knows and of course mods can up the ante for both bikes. Even stock the Stryker moves me around fine for now.
Like others have said, they look similar and are both good looking and good values. I hope other manufacturers keep up the good work as well. Competition is always good for the consumer
G
Guest
·If the Raider was liquid cooled, I would have given it a much longer look - and might have left with it instead. Might have.
Joined
·
4,672 Posts
If I didn't live so far up in the mountains where I have to ride for an hr at speeds under 35 mph before I find roads that I can get out of 2nd gear I would have looked a little harder at the Raider. It would have been a little harder for me to handle in my yard/driveway, backing it out of the trailer down a ramp etc. plus the twisties/hairpin turns and it would probably suck up more gas than the Stryker riding around in 2nd gear on the grades up hear. Plus it uses premium I believe. Then ad the fact that the Stryker is liquid cooled which is much better for those conditions plus it's several thousand dollars less.
Joined
·
58 Posts
The Raider is an awesome bike. But when it came time to buy I spent the entire day at the Bike shop sitting on both. I am 6' 2" and like most post I have seen from people not as tall I find the riding position of the Stryker to be more relaxed though as with every bike I have owned I am installing a forward control set. One of the main things that I liked about the Raider was the 1854cc beast of an engine so my main concern with the Stryker was the 550cc smaller engine. Though it may not have the power of the Raider I have not been disappointed at all, I am 215 lbs and this bike has plenty of power. As has been said before these are both excellent bikes so I suggest spending as much time finding your comfort zone as possible.
1 - 20 of 32 Posts
