New 2010 M50 Info and Pictures

[GeorgiaRoller]

Originally Posted by Davecm203

Soooo,...you would do to it what you would/have done to your bike. From what I see and read, those are changes that just about every cruiser rider makes or wants to make to their bikes that they love. So, what is the difference?

I don't think it would be bad looking if I did all those changes to the new 2010 design. But I still think a stock 05-09 M50 looks good on its own. I only do changes because it's fun and it gives your bike a unique look. I wouldn't want to ride the new M50 stock at all. It looks thrown together. Not everybody is going to sink $2500.00 in accessories or changes in their bike. But imo the new 2010 would need all those changes done that I listed before to at least make me want to ride it or be happy with it.

You shouldn't "have" to do all that to a bike. For instance PurpleHaze just got a new HD V-Rod Muscle. That bike is 95% perfect stock imo. Needs no cosmetic changes. You might want a more comfortable seat but that's about it. Just one man's opinion. I still really like my current M50 design quite a bit. And you know what, it's going to make the 05-09 models even more unique and I'm not complaining about that at all!

[SnackeM50]

Originally Posted by amvince

So lets pretend the the M109 and M50 were on the showroom floor, same price and the overall ergonomics were acceptable on both bikes, you would have bought the M50 anyway?

The M50 was my first bike, and it was a whole slew of folks who post here first bike as well. I think its safe to say that the 805cc size engine appealed to me in that it wasnt too small and wasnt too big for a newbie. As a first time buyer the look of the bike was of course paramount. It had to look sweet! Ergonomics aside (considering Im a lil dude), if the new M50 and the new M109 were there side by side I would have bought a Kawasaki 900 Custom, cause the 109 is too much bike for the M50 first timers, and the new 50 doesnt look like a "sweet" ride. It looks wierd, along with the M90 and M109. I think the only thing that justifies somthing that looks like the 109 is its performance and HP. Ill end with a little quote that puts this whole thread into some perspective:

"Change is good! You go first."

[Talarspeed]

Originally Posted by SnackeM50

The M50 was my first bike, and it was a whole slew of folks who post here first bike as well. I think its safe to say that the 805cc size engine appealed to me in that it wasnt too small and wasnt too big for a newbie.

I agree with SnackeM50 on this.
Since it had been 20 years since I rode, this bike and others in its class were in serious consideration for my purchase.

I definitely used the internet to become educated about the M50. Had I read a bunch of negative posts about the bike on multiple forums, I might have looked elsewhere. Reliability and function were more important to me than appearance. But then again, I remember standing on the showroom floor looking at the 109s and salivating. I would have definitely bought this bike had I not thought it too big.

I greatly appreciate DrBob's insight into the business model of Suzuki. I hope Suzuki understands that many future customers like myself get their education from former and current owners via the internet. Personally, I hope the new M50 will be a success.

Maybe after the economy betters itself, people will ease in to buy a mid-size cruiser rather than the $12000+ models.

[05HDRAM]

Originally Posted by Talarspeed

Personally, I hope the new M50 will be a success.

Maybe after the economy betters itself, people will ease in to buy a mid-size cruiser rather than the $12000+ models.

The midsize bike should always sell. 1st is price as you pointed out, and 2nd it is a good starting point for beginners or people that just want to cruise locally. I am really not sure on how the new look will impact sales, but the local dealers here are not stocking very many M109s or M90s. It could be a little to do with the economy, but I don't think that is the entire reason. It's a love it or hate it look, and I think the hate it group is bigger.

[Manuel]

Originally Posted by Pinhead78

Man, I cannot believe the negativity towards the natural progression of the M50. I can't believe you guys don't like that thing! It's awesome looking!!

(I stand on the stage while the Secret Hideaway crowd throws various rotten vegetables at me)

Ok, ok, ok, you are right, that thing stinks!!

I do like the mirrors though. Unfortunately, that's all I like about it.

Although, I don't think the picture of our 05-09 M50 on the Suzuki website really do the bike justice. Agreed? The stock photos' make the M look kinda stretched and awkward. In person though, it is a totally different story. I think I'll reserve my final judgment until I see the 2010 M50 in person. I don't want to completely condemn the 2010 just by one photo.

You actually have a really good point there. When I was looking for a bike, I didn't like the look of the M50 on suzuki's website either. I thought the C50 looked pretty good, but wasn't my style. Then a few months later I saw an M50 for sale and said "holy Crap!"

[drawflush]

Booooo big thumbs down on this. I do not like the headlight nor do I like to full fender, Its like a sports front with a a touring tail. Bring back the erect fender.!!!

Oh and I do without all the extra chrome, including the brushed wheels.!

Im disapointed.

[CooleyM50]

Originally Posted by SnackeM50

The M50 was my first bike, and it was a whole slew of folks who post here first bike as well. I think its safe to say that the 805cc size engine appealed to me in that it wasnt too small and wasnt too big for a newbie. As a first time buyer the look of the bike was of course paramount. It had to look sweet! Ergonomics aside (considering Im a lil dude), if the new M50 and the new M109 were there side by side I would have bought a Kawasaki 900 Custom, cause the 109 is too much bike for the M50 first timers, and the new 50 doesnt look like a "sweet" ride. It looks wierd, along with the M90 and M109. I think the only thing that justifies somthing that looks like the 109 is its performance and HP. Ill end with a little quote that puts this whole thread into some perspective:

"Change is good! You go first."

I agree!!

M50 my first bike ever. M109 not a chance then or now.

I like to look at my friends custom M109 with color matched corbin fairing and bags but I wouldn't want it.

Something no one seems to mention about the M is the fact that it is an 87 Octane user. This is big, BIG I tell you.
My Roadliner S (91 octane), My Raider (91 octane), My Vulcan 1600 nomad (91 octane) My Harley Nighster (91 octane).

My Vulcan 800 Drifter and my two M50's 87 and part of what brought me back after a lapse of reason and judgement.

Good fun to look at the M109 and M90 design but who wants a baby brother, or kid sister, I want my own look with the Batwing rear fender, cool squished headlight that looks cooler than VTX and tear drop tank, etc., etc., etc.

[Quantumcat]

For whatever reason I feel that I need to defend my opinion on some of the M90/M109 styling. When I was looking at the M50 I was also drooling over the M90/M109. I liked the greater power and I really liked the headlight cowl and exhaust pipe configuration.

I did not like the rear ends at all (and that's important to me ) and on top that I couldn't afford them.

Beside being in my price range, the M50 sold me on its black edition and the great reviews and reports about it in forums and consumer sites.

With all the help I'm getting here in terms of ideas, tips & tricks, I'm happier than I thought possible with the M50.

Thanks everyone.

[Davecm203]

I stopped in at my dealership today and was talking to a couple of the salesmen that have been there for a long time. We got to talking about the change in the M50. They have been reading the displeasure in the new M50, but said that the sales on the M50 have gone really soft. The M50 is not near the seller that it was. So, they are hoping that the changes will bring back interest in it. Especially since the M90 and 109 are huge sellers. They also sell Honda, but it does not seem like the Honda is pulling sales from the Suzuki, so they feel they are losing it to Yamaha and Kawasaki.

It is just time for an update on the bike. Suzuki did what they felt they had to do to sell more bikes. I guess only time will tell.

My dealer has three M50s in stock. They said they will make a good deal on one.

[Quantumcat]

The M50 is not near the seller that it was.

I have no problem with that at all. I rather like having a bike that not a lot of others are buying. Other than my M50 I've always preferred things that went against popular opinion.

[ghostriderchuck]

I find myself thinking that I must be feeling the same way most Marauder, Intruder, and Volusia did when Suzuki revamped the cruiser line under the Boulevard banner. I guess I am understanding the need to move on. I think the feelings I have now are more of almost remorse, it feels like they are killing off my M50.

[CentIllRider]

Originally Posted by Copronymous

Here are the aesthetic reasons I bought the M50:

• Great headlight (gone)
• Unique rear fender (gone)
• Black engine case/final drive (gone)
• Black wheels (gone)
• Teardrop style air box (gone)

When people talk to me about my bike, they first reference all the black and how great it looks.
All that's gone now.

Frankly, this looks like the Kaw 900 Custom with a goofy headlight.

I hate it. I really hate it.

That is a big there buddy, I could not have said it any better myself.

[Pinhead78]

Originally Posted by 05HDRAM

Let me guess, you would be the guy that buys a new Camaro or Challenger and get's the 6cyl. The 109 has the power to backup the freakishly different look. The 50 should not be made to look like a rocketship, it should remain the stylish cruiser that it is.

Originally Posted by amvince

If you look I have an M50 and M90 now so I guess I would by the 6 cyl version if th eprice were right. Anyway, If they kept the M50 it the same they wouldn't sell many more bikes. It has looked the same for 4 years. We may all like the way the current model looks but obviously the sales numbers warrant a change. It may be a change for the worse in your opinion (and mine) but it is a change.

By the way using the 6 cyl Camaro & Challenger theory Suzuki is making a great move. The 6 cyl versions always outsell the 8's. Had to throw that in.

......Lets go ahead and jack this thread:
The late 90's version of the Camero Z28 and SS have almost the same exact stated HP as the 2010 Camero V6. So, this would be the first time that I would consider picking up that type of vehicle with a V6.

[DMAN302]

Change is unavoidable. I remember when the S197 mustang came out (2005) there was uproar with the revision...so much negativity aside from the media. Now some 5years later teh S197 version is the coveted version and the 2010 is frowned upon...nature of change. It will grow on us and as new members emerge with the new bike we will come to love it as part of the crowd. I love the front end...will adapt to the rear, but truth is I will buy a new bike come 2yrs and no matter what the M50 becomes I will be moving up in displacemnt to the 90 and will look back at the M50 new and old with good memories.

[05HDRAM]

Originally Posted by Pinhead78

......Lets go ahead and jack this thread:
The late 90's version of the Camero Z28 and SS have almost the same exact stated HP as the 2010 Camero V6. So, this would be the first time that I would consider picking up that type of vehicle with a V6.

The Camaro options I saw were the 3.6 V6 making 304hp, and the 6.2 V8 making 426 hp. If I was buying one, it wouldn't be for gas mileage. My point was all about power backing up the looks. I wouldn't buy a new Camaro that just looks fast, 122 hp is a big difference.

Along that thinking, the M50 as it is today looks like a nice cruiser and the performance pretty much matches the look. Now throw that small bucket on the headlight and make it look like the 109R, which is known to have some power, and it is starting to look like a drag bike. Kinda like the ricers putting the big wings and coffee can mufflers on the unmodded 4 cycl.

[GeorgiaRoller]

Originally Posted by 05HDRAM

Kinda like the ricers putting the big wings and coffee can mufflers on the unmodded 4 cycl.

I hate those teenie bopper cars! C'mon wings on a 1992 Civic with a loud muffler don't make for a sports car. Give the current M50 more credit than that.

[cyclechris]

LOL! It's like they did the exact opposite of everything I liked or disliked about all the M models. I know it's just my opinion, but they coudn't have hit the ball in the wrong direction more if they tried.

I REALLY would like to see the current M50 with the M109 engine put in and good brakes. Sigh, guess that is never going to happen.....

[Davecm203]

Originally Posted by Quantumcat

I have no problem with that at all. I rather like having a bike that not a lot of others are buying. Other than my M50 I've always preferred things that went against popular opinion.

You might not have a problem with it, but Suzuki does as it is a volume model. It is such a competitive and price sensitive segment that Suzuki can't afford to keep producing a bike that they cannot sell a lot of. They would kill it off entirely rather than keep losing money. Everyone should be glad that the name is still living on.

This discussion reminds me of when Suzuki went away from the perimeter frame on the GSXR line. It became a trade mark of the GSXR line and so a lot of people were upset. But when people got used to it and realized it was an improvement, the complaints went away.

[Quantumcat]

I was just trying to express that I prefer to be on the fringes of society and pop-culture instead with the huddled, addled masses of sheeple.

I understand the market demands and that a company has to make money. Usually new models incorporate improved features. Sometimes though new/improved products simply contain marketable gimmicks or take advantage of fad buzz words that just sound cool. I'm not saying that the new M50 is being dumbed down or that the quality is suffering, I've just got pet-peeve about design for mechanical products being driven primarily by aesthetics and gimmicks instead of sound engineering and elegant problem solving. Of course I did by the M50 black because of it's looks as well as the rave reviews about its function.

A few years back, here where I work, the marketing department wanted us to add titanium in any way, shape or form to our products regardless of whether it improved the product or not (in some applications it would have been a detriment, not mention more expensive => less profit). In most cases I prefer a product that is built solidly, functions simply & elegantly and will last a while. IMHO too many business strategies require that the consumer is convinced to buy a new/improved product every couple of years. It used to be (decades ago now) that a pair of Levi's were durable enough to take abuse for years. It's my opinion that somewhere along the line they realized that their jeans were lasting too long and repeat purchases weren't happening at an acceptable rate. In my opinion most mass-market products have a design with too short of a lifecycle for just that reason.

<stepping of soapbox>

[Copronymous]

Originally Posted by Quantumcat

IMHO too many business strategies require that the consumer is convinced to buy a new/improved product every couple of years. It used to be (decades ago now) that a pair of Levi's were durable enough to take abuse for years. It's my opinion that somewhere along the line they realized that their jeans were lasting too long and repeat purchases weren't happening at an acceptable rate. In my opinion most mass-market products have a design with too short of a lifecycle for just that reason.

<stepping of soapbox>

Look up the term "planned obsolescence". Particularly as it relates to planned style obsolescence. You'll find some real similarities there, since it's been happening in the automotive industry since the effing 1940s.