2003 V-Rod Vs. Warrior Reader Feedback

[sjriott]

Where is the Honda VTX in this so called "Power Cruiser" article? It definetly belongs in this class.



The Harley engine doesn't blow me out of the water since there are a bunch of V-twins out there that perform better with less displacement. VTR1000, Ducati 998, Suzuki TL1000, Aprillia Mille Engines all have more balls.



I have to give it to Harley for no longer having a Cranial Rectal Inversion with at least one bike. They did a great job with the performance on the bike and finally have the ability to attract all riders, not just guys who like making up excuses about their bikes performance. Too bad it's so damned ugly you need a 6 pack just to look at it. When will they put that engine in the line of bikes people want, Softail, Fatboy, Sportster, etc?



Until someone comes out with the whole package, I think I'll keep my Vmax. Oh I forgot, since it's a V-four, it doesn't count according to MO. Wonder how that translates out on the road when the V-rod and Warrior guys see all the white smoke rolling off my rear tire?

[kawazuki]

I have a Warrior, and I test rode a V-Rod before I bought it.



I found the Warrior to have more "seat of the pants" kick than the V-Rod, probably due to the higher torque number. I also liked the stiffness the aluminum frame over the steel cradle of the V-Rod.



As far as the instruments go, I've never had a problem reading them, day or night, so I'm not sure what the MOfos were talking about there.



As far as the ergonomics go, I'm 6'5", and 240 lbs, so the handlebars are the perfect width for me, though on really long trips (500+ miles) I end up wishing they were about an inch higher and 2 inches further back. I also added a pair of footrests further forward of the stock pieces for similarly long trips.



I agree about the stock sound on the Warrior, though. It's a bit weedy. I'll be remedying that shortly though. I have essentially no complaints about the aesthetics of the bike, though. And the best compliment I can give it, if mine died, and I had to buy another motorcycle, I'd buy another one of these.



As far as the guy with the V-Max goes... well, I can do that trick with the smoking rear tire, too.



-Kawazuki

[longride]

Not a problem. If you ever have anything informative or of any possible value to say, please notify me ASAP since you haven't said anything worth anything so far. Keep up the fine work.

[Betamax]

LOL. OK, you win. The brawny (I assume that means obese?) Harley mountain men would no doubt be proud...

[Andonyx]

Yeah, I get the feeling their ergonomic complaints apply to under six footers. I'm 6'2" about 180 (about), and I putzed around on a warrior at the dealer, and I thought it fit just fine.



I know Burns is not a towering monster, but I don't know anything about ebass' dimensions.



They're dead on about it being lighter than it looks though. I almost flipped the damn thing clear over on the right side when I pulled it off the stand because I expected it to be so much heavier. It was unbelievably light, and the balance was excellent.



Now I just gotta save up money.

[ebass]

For the record, I'm 5'9" with average arm and leg length. I would expect that big fellers with longer arms would have a lot less trouble with the handlebars and more with the footpegs. They're kinda tucked under for a cruiser, which would only be exacerbated by longer legs. Be that as it may, either of these problems can be addressed by aftermarket fixes, but the question remains, "What the heck were the dimensions of the guy Yamaha designed this bike for?"

[Steven_Verschoor]

What happened to the stock exhaust on the Warrior? Last year it had something that looked like the V&H can. I thought it was one of the most distinguishing features that set the Yammie apart from the other power cruisers.</p>


MO's own review said:
<blockquote>The exhaust exits through a controversial exhaust can. The muffler weighs in at 8.3 kilograms. That's 1.6 kilograms less than the a standard Road Star muffler, while increasing internal capacity by 1.8 liters to 11.5 liters. And not to worry, while the exhaust can looks very sportbike-esque, the essential cruiser exhaust note remains.</blockquote>Have a look at the pics if you want to refresh your memory.</p>

[KPaulCook]

LOL thanks

[rsheidler]

Good to see you back here. This is your best work in some time.



Has about as much to do with reality as one of Arnie Schwartzenegger's movies, but what the hell, we need some escapist entertainment.



Keep em coming.



Bob

[kawazuki]

Hrmmm. I don't know. (Sitting *on* the motorcycle while writing this. Yay laptops and wireless cards.) Assuming the ergos haven't changed between 2002 and 2003...



With my tailbone cradled firmly in the curve of the seat where it starts to rise up to go over the fender, and the center of my instep on the footpeg, the front of my patella sits just about halfway between the lower side of the gas cap and the front of the seat, and at about the same point, the top of my leg / knee is in line with the top of the gas tank. My upper and lower leg form about a 100 - 110 degree obtuse angle. (No protractor, sorry.) My upper leg and torso form about a 85 degree angle, and my head, therefore, about a 95 degree angle.



Ideally, the handlebars would be back far enough that I could sit straight up or back a little. But other than that, I have no complaints. As I mentioned before, I'm 6'5, with a 40 inch inseam from the floor in socks, with a fingertip to fingertip spread of 87 inches. I'm going to have to say that I'm the guy they designed the bike for. It's just not loungy enough for really long journeys.



On a completely unrelated note, I've been modifying my rear turnsignal and license plate holding setup (plastic inner fender bob) and this involved taking off the rear fender. And while it was off, I realized that the bike would look *really* cool if I took the fender off completely and chopped the seat down to solo mode. Legal, perhaps not. But really cool looking.



-Kawazuki