Rocket III vs. Suzuki M109R

dougl said:
You should test drive both and get the one you like best. They're obviously both great bikes.
Click to expand...

Suzuki won't let you do "test drives". Every dealer I spoke with in AZ., OK., and Ca. said that Suzuki didn't allow then to let customers do "test drives" because of liability issues.
You could "buy the bike". Down payment, paperwork and all and they would give you 24 hours to "trade it in" on something else. BOGUS!!
 
When I bought my Rocket the m190 was just a twinkle in the designers eye, now I have two friends who own M190S and I have taken one out for a whole day I put about 250miles on it.
If you think the rocket will blow it away think again the rocket is faster but my buddy riding my rocket could not lose me. The 190 is a better looking bike the rocket has looks that only a mother could love.
The 190 is a lot more aerodynamic than the rocket and at speeds over 100mph you can really notice the difference.
All said I would own the Rocket before the 190 as said it is another vtwin a fast one but another vtwin.
 
I like the looks of the M109R alot. It is a great looking bike. I really like the white with blue racing stripe. The biggest thing I don't like about the M109R and alot of Suzuki cruisers is all of the plastic chrome. Alot of parts that shouldn't be plastic are plastic, even some of the covers on the motor, such as valve covers, etc. are chromed plastic. In my experience, chromed plastic looks great for a couple of years, after that it starts looking like crap, and that's if you take care of it. I don't even care too much for the chrome plastic gauge cups on the Rocket.
 
Japanese bikes are good, dependable bikes and they have the go fast thing down pretty good (******rockets). The chrome on the cruisers is inferior. Put one next to a Harley and compare. It's no contest. Harley chrome is head and shoulders above. But, for what they cost the **** things should be gold plated.
 
something to consider on the m109 is the handling, if you like to go around turns pretty fast, its not the bike for you! my brother had one and I took it for a ride, power is good! but handling is not! again I am just talking about goin fast around turns! the problem lies in the fact it has the 240 tire out back! but a small tire up front! bike does not want to lean! I am told its because of the big difference in the curve angel of the front and back tires! this doest not exist on the rocket because of the 150 tire up front! rocket handles great! right up to scraping yout footpeg feeler off!
 
That should be a non-issue for anyone trying to decide between the Rocket (Standard or Classic) and the 109. The Rocket doesn't handle very good either, in terms of mixing go fast with turns. I have the R3T (much smaller tire) and a Tiger. The R3T, which handles much better than the Standard or Classic, is a log wagon compared to the Tiger. But, that's apples and oranges. I wouldn't think there would be too much difference between the Rocket and the 109.
 
RocketDaryl said:
The R3T, which handles much better than the Standard or Classic, is a log wagon compared to the Tiger.
Click to expand...

If my friend who owns a Tiger reads this I'm holding you personally responsible for all the abuse I'll be getting.....
 
For me the choice for a Rocket III was simple; there are Harley’s and Harley want to be-s but only one Rocket III. It is in a class by itself … Go your own way! dshort58

 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

2016 Rocket III - Time for Tires - But which ones...and what sizes?
2
Replies
10
Views
635
1olbull
Tires!! (non rocket)
2
Replies
14
Views
353
mexican
2005 Rocket III - intermittent fault
2
Replies
11
Views
1K
Journeyman
Rocket 111 Classic thermostat differences????????
Replies
4
Views
42
Kim Turner
2018 Rocket III Roadster - Drive Issue?
2 3
Replies
27
Views
2K
Kevin frazier
Menu
Log in
Register