Total Motorcycle Community Forums

grampi wrote:Venarius

The 109 is also shaft drive. Also, just because the 109 has a 240 rear tire doesn't automatically mean it's going to be a poor handler. The bikes that handle poorly due to a having a 240 rear tire are those that were designed with narrower tires and were then fitted with aftermarket 240 kits. I'd be willing to bet that since the 109 was designed with the 240 , it will probably be a better handler than those bikes with the 240 kits installed.

Thanks, I didn't know that the 109 had a shaft drive, I thought they opted for a chain drive.

As to the tire size, your right, simply because the 109 has a 240 tire doesn't make it a bad handler. It's still well within most's ability to handle the bike. However, when compared to a bike with a 180 back tire (like the VTX), the 109 will not handle as well or easily as the VTX. I remember from at least 1 or 2 mag reviews of the 109 that the 240 tire didn't inhibit handling as much as they expected, but you still needed a bit of muscle to "hold her through the lines". Doesn't mean its incredibly hard to control, just means she doesn't handle with as much finess as the VTX due to tire size. Whether they were able to compensate for that with a shorter wheelbase or getting rid of exess poundage is yet to be seen.

as far as performance goes, given two equal riders the M109 should beat the VTX by a hair. But as I said before, given that people we ride against on the street have more or less "average" racing abilities, that hair extra performance in the 109 will probably not be visible in street terms. I would put both the VTX and the 109 in the same area for performance.
Comfort (especially passenger comfort) I'd give to the VTX

Something else to be considered, this is the first release of the 109. I would not buy the first year release of any model but rather wait at least a year for the first problems to crop up and be resolved. Someone who buys the 109 now will undoubtedly have to wait a year or more for aftermarket parts, mantainance manuals, reliability information, and will be in the forfront for possible bike problems (not that they will be large or expensive)... where as someone purchasing a recent VTX already has 4 or 5 years of product development and aftermarket parts. Not the only thing to consider, but still none the less worthy of said consideration.

It all comes down to preferance. But I will give the M109 this, when compared to the performance VTX's (the C or F models), I think that the M109 is a bit sexier. But when it comes time to take the woman home, I'd take the classier broad over the sexy stripper...

I think ,the 109 is sexy too.I,m probably too little to ride one, 5ft/5.5inches.but I betcha wind will be an issue.If you don,t mind wind ,weather, etc,fine but think hard.

Venarius wrote:

grampi wrote:Venarius

The 109 is also shaft drive. Also, just because the 109 has a 240 rear tire doesn't automatically mean it's going to be a poor handler. The bikes that handle poorly due to a having a 240 rear tire are those that were designed with narrower tires and were then fitted with aftermarket 240 kits. I'd be willing to bet that since the 109 was designed with the 240 , it will probably be a better handler than those bikes with the 240 kits installed.

Thanks, I didn't know that the 109 had a shaft drive, I thought they opted for a chain drive.

As to the tire size, your right, simply because the 109 has a 240 tire doesn't make it a bad handler. It's still well within most's ability to handle the bike. However, when compared to a bike with a 180 back tire (like the VTX), the 109 will not handle as well or easily as the VTX. I remember from at least 1 or 2 mag reviews of the 109 that the 240 tire didn't inhibit handling as much as they expected, but you still needed a bit of muscle to "hold her through the lines". Doesn't mean its incredibly hard to control, just means she doesn't handle with as much finess as the VTX due to tire size. Whether they were able to compensate for that with a shorter wheelbase or getting rid of exess poundage is yet to be seen.

as far as performance goes, given two equal riders the M109 should beat the VTX by a hair. But as I said before, given that people we ride against on the street have more or less "average" racing abilities, that hair extra performance in the 109 will probably not be visible in street terms. I would put both the VTX and the 109 in the same area for performance.
Comfort (especially passenger comfort) I'd give to the VTX

Something else to be considered, this is the first release of the 109. I would not buy the first year release of any model but rather wait at least a year for the first problems to crop up and be resolved. Someone who buys the 109 now will undoubtedly have to wait a year or more for aftermarket parts, mantainance manuals, reliability information, and will be in the forfront for possible bike problems (not that they will be large or expensive)... where as someone purchasing a recent VTX already has 4 or 5 years of product development and aftermarket parts. Not the only thing to consider, but still none the less worthy of said consideration.

It all comes down to preferance. But I will give the M109 this, when compared to the performance VTX's (the C or F models), I think that the M109 is a bit sexier. But when it comes time to take the woman home, I'd take the classier broad over the sexy stripper...

I'd expect the 109 to be a bit more than just a smidge quicker than the VTX if the HP numbers I've seen for the 109 are correct. The VTX makes 106 HP at the crank while the 109 is said to make 123. Also, the 109's engine has a shorter stroke which means it will rev higher and produce its peak torque at a higher RPM than the VTX. Given that both bikes weigh roughly the same, that should translate into a 1/4 mile time of .3 to .4 of a second quicker than the X. Only a full-fledged road test will tell and so far, no one's done one on the 109 yet (at least not that I'm aware of anyway).
_________________
Ferrari California

I bought a new 2009 kawasaki Vulcan 2000 with 1300 miles that is now 5 months old. The chroming on the stamped pieces sucks. The mirrors, brake fluid cover, fork covers are all popping rust through the chrome. I took it to the dealer and he agreed that it is a warranty issue. Kawasaki America shot it down. They claim it is from environmental causes, but will not define ” environmental causes” ( the planet you live on has oxygen in the atmosphere?). I was on the customer service line for an hour and explained how chrome is applied, and that on a 5 month old bike this is outrageous. They claim it is an environmental cause, even though the bike is garaged. The bad pieces are the Thailand mfg’d pieces, as all the other chrome is fine. All customer support will answer ” I don’t know, but it is environmental causes”. Crappy way to treat a customer.