richardg
Admonishtrator
Aluminium panniers both empty....
Indeed. No mention of the EwanMcBoorman wannabes standing up on the pegs to negotiate those tricky Tesco car-parks mind you..
Time for a motorbike list
- Thread starter Rasher
- Start date
-alan-
pfm Member
I have a friend who rode one of the Piaggio 3 wheelers commuting last Winter. Says it was a lot more confidence inspiring over wet tram lines and bad surfaces, and the fact that you could occasionally slide the front end without ending up in the local A&E was an improvement on his usual steed.
I've looked half seriously - well probably 1/4 seriously or less really - at some of those big scoots. I always fancied trying something with a foot-forward riding position. I think the main selling point on those is the massive underseat storage space, and the extra weather protection provided by the (admittedly daft looking) skirts.
richardg
Admonishtrator
For me the excitement of 3 or 4 cylinders always beats a twin....I think that is the divisive element. Do you want to cruise or do you sometimes want it to scream....the finish on all of them is outstanding, though. All three will make you turn round and look every time you get off.
So much respect for Triumph and how in 10 years they caught the Japanese bikes up in terms of performance and quality. The finish on all the metal work on the Triumph retro bikes is just the best,
But I'd get bored on a twin. Particularly slow ones like the T100 or T120.
So much respect for Triumph and how in 10 years they caught the Japanese bikes up in terms of performance and quality. The finish on all the metal work on the Triumph retro bikes is just the best,
But I'd get bored on a twin. Particularly slow ones like the T100 or T120.
Thanks for the suggestions (I am actively looking at the moment) but both bikes are a bit heavy. Not bothered about attitude, in truth, I am not sure I understand it when looking at the current bikes on the market that presumably get bought. I would like a fairing, 150 kg weight, 75 bhp, responsive steering, affordable and obtainable parts, reasonable fuel consumption,... I currently have an RG500 which is fun but expensive to run and maintain and inappropriate when attention drifts with its tendency to go from no power to full power in a few revs. I have been pondering the likes of the Triumph Daytona, Honda VFR400, Suzuki SV650S which have significantly different pros and cons but nothing yet stands out as a good fit.
Stilgoe1972
pfm Member
My bikes so far..,
Kawasaki zephyr 750
Kawasaki zxr750 H1
Honda Fireblade cbr900
Kawasaki ninja 750
Honda SP1
KTM 640 supermoto
KTM 950 Adventure
Suzuki GSXR600 SRAD
BMW GS1150 Adventure
And lastly, my current bike a
Honda VFR1200f dct which I absolutely love
All of my bikes were great fun to ride except for...... the GS1150 which was dull as dishwater!!
Kawasaki zephyr 750
Kawasaki zxr750 H1
Honda Fireblade cbr900
Kawasaki ninja 750
Honda SP1
KTM 640 supermoto
KTM 950 Adventure
Suzuki GSXR600 SRAD
BMW GS1150 Adventure
And lastly, my current bike a
Honda VFR1200f dct which I absolutely love
All of my bikes were great fun to ride except for...... the GS1150 which was dull as dishwater!!
I've owned a good number of faired sportsbikes and performance oriented naked bikes. I used to choose faired bikes principally because you couldn't get the same spec engine/chassis spec in a naked model. But now there's a very healthy selection of undiluted naked bikes, including the Street Triple 765 RS (which is higher spec/performance than the last Daytona 675R).
As to why? Well it's not an age thing for me (early-30s). For the kind of riding I do (almost all road, fair weather, mainly B roads and single track roads in the hills/dales), an upright riding position is considerably more comfortable, and tends to offer a more enjoyable experience. So long as it's not watered down with a second rate chassis, excess weight and a detuned engine.
I can see the appeal of a faired bike aesthetically. But then there are great looking (and ugly) examples of both faired and unfaired bikes.
Triumph might well re-release the Daytona in 765 form, possibly next year to co-incide with the Moto2 engine launch.
richardg
Admonishtrator
which Blade was it? Looking at a 96 for myself nowMy bikes so far..,
Kawasaki zephyr 750
Kawasaki zxr750 H1
Honda Fireblade cbr900
Kawasaki ninja 750
Honda SP1
KTM 640 supermoto
KTM 950 Adventure
Suzuki GSXR600 SRAD
BMW GS1150 Adventure
And lastly, my current bike a
Honda VFR1200f dct which I absolutely love
All of my bikes were great fun to ride except for...... the GS1150 which was dull as dishwater!!
The Triumph web site states 126 BHP @ 12500 RPM for the 675 Daytona R and 121 BHP @ 11700 RPM for the larger engined 765 Street Triple RS but the latter does have more torque at lower RPMs. The Daytona is the more highly tuned engine and it seems that in its current form it is too highly tuned to meet the new emissions regulations. The less highly tuned 765 engine presumably still can. The market demand for Daytona-like bikes from all manufacturers appears to have collapsed making the cost of developing a new lower emissions engine just for the Daytona uneconomic. It will be interesting to see if the new Moto 2 engine has features which are not particularly beneficial for racing but are for emissions. An MCN article on the web quotes 131 BHP for the current Moto2 prototype which is significantly less tuned than the Daytona in terms of bhp/litre. We will see.
cutting42
Arrived at B4 Hacker Ergo
Cool but the Suzie's were better
Snufkin
pfm Member
The Suzuki two point lubrication system was far more efficient than either Yamaha's or Kawasaki's. In practice, not only was it a superior lubrication system which aided engine longevity, it also resulted in the Suzi's using less oil so they were less prone to carbon deposits building up in the engine/exhaust. I owned a 380 back in the 70's and it had a great engine in a slightly compromised frame but as an all-rounder it was rather wonderful.
Pete MB&D
Pete Maddex, the one and only!
Don't know how you can say that! the Kawasakis where much better looking!
I did right off a KH250, they don't like hitting 50MPH signs at 90! walked away with out a scratch!
Pete
The Triumph website is misleading, in so far as the 765 is unusually conservatively rated. Every dyno run I've seen puts the RS model at around 125bhp at the wheel in stock trim, which actually puts it on par with the Speed Triple in terms of peak power, despite the Speed Triple being rated at 140bhp+. The old 675 Street Triple typically measured around 90bhp at the wheel, and the old Daytona around 110bhp at the wheel on a good day (both in stock trim).
That actually puts the 765RS in a virtually identical state of tune (bhp per cc) as the Daytona 675, and the engine feels that way too (with a very strong top end missing from the old Street Triple 675 engine). So, if you ditch the exhaust/catalytic converter (as you would for Moto2), then 131bhp is not at all unreasonable as a quoted figure for the RS engine exactly as it is. And it wouldn't be out of place in a Daytona either.
Given the number of bikes a small increase in the quoted power output is likely to shift I would be surprised if the numbers quoted by Triumph are not the largest they can get away with if required to prove them. As mentioned earlier the only "Moto2" clone to survive the latest emission regulations appears to be the Yamaha YZF-R6 and this required a reduction in power of 5.2 BHP compared to the previous version and 10.5 BHP compared to the one before that despite the significant revision of the bike.
The latest emissions regulations have reduced the degree to which a bike engine can be tuned by limiting the amount of unburnt fuel that can be ejected from the combustion chamber at high revs. To burn more efficiently at high revs without losing a lot at lower revs is likely to require things like variable valve timing. Unfortunately the collapsed market for "moto2" road bikes seems unlikely to provide the insentive for this development and so we may well have to live with mass produced production bikes with a lower bhp/litre compared to what we have seen in the recent past.
The latest emissions regulations have reduced the degree to which a bike engine can be tuned by limiting the amount of unburnt fuel that can be ejected from the combustion chamber at high revs. To burn more efficiently at high revs without losing a lot at lower revs is likely to require things like variable valve timing. Unfortunately the collapsed market for "moto2" road bikes seems unlikely to provide the insentive for this development and so we may well have to live with mass produced production bikes with a lower bhp/litre compared to what we have seen in the recent past.
Thanks for your thoughts. Checked the price of the Kwak here and its quite a bit more than the T120, which might swing the decison. I've had both 4s and twins in the past and I think I'd be happy with either. In any case I'll try to check out the Kwak in the flesh to see if it changes my mind. Probably not going to buy for another year.
richardg
Admonishtrator
Is it? I am looking now to see they both start within 300 quid of each other? £9600 vs £9900????
richardg
Admonishtrator
The only current bike that weighs that much with that power is the Duke 690. NO fairing, alas.
I don't remember in my life having that power and weight with a fairing.
I had a few 2 stroke 250s and an NS400 once, that are in the ball park, but you know these bikes already.
Mototech does a carbon body kit for the Duke 690 but it is 3 grand:
My uncle has just bought one, he likes it. He's a lifelong biker, now no longer in the best of health. A 500 cc bike would be beyond him, but this is fine. It's a proper bike too, no slouch. He lives in London so it makes more sense than a car.
There are several reasons why Triumph might under-specify the claimed power. The first is the emissions scandal, which obviously discourages exaggerated specifications, and Triumph's approach may be to measure more conservatively for newly released models. Ducati took the more radical approach of revising down the claimed power figures across their entire range for that reason last year. The second is that Triumph probably don't want to cannibalise sales of the Speed Triple, or confuse buyers of the Speed Triple. The third might be that Triumph want the Street Triple to be cheaper to insure, and the claimed power figure will be a factor in the insurance rating.
In any case, the empirical evidence is that the Street Triple 765 RS produces similar power per cc as the Daytona 675, and is in a similar state of tune, albeit with a slightly shorter rev range. This graph provides an approximate comparison based on fairly reliable dyno graphs published: https://i.imgur.com/3p96Slb.png
It certainly feels that way too, and I say that as someone who's owned the previous Street Triple R, as well as quite a few new and old superbikes (including the Ducati 1299, 2015 R1, & Fireblade SP). The RS has a proper, peaky, sportsbike tuned engine.
The R6 isn't a Moto2 clone. Moto2 didn't use 600cc 4-stroke (all Honda) engines until 2011, and the R6 dates back to 1998. The R6/GSX-R600/ZX6R/675 Daytona/CBR600 are all supersports bikes. Their popularity waned as road bikes long before emissions regulations became restrictive. If they were still as popular as they once were, then the manufacturers could find an engineering solution to the regulations without unduly sacrificing performance. We certainly see ever more powerful 1000cc bikes despite the regulations, and some manufacturers (BMW / Ducati) have achieved that better than others (Kawasaki / Honda). But almost all are now knocking on the door of 200bhp. Despite the R6 being re-developed, the engine work appears to have focused on compliance (with more restriction) rather than re-development. By comparison, Triumph appear to have properly re-developed the 675 engine to meet tighter regulations and actually achieve proportionally greater performance consistent with the capacity increase.
So, I'd say it depends how much the manufacturers are prepared to invest, and the evidence so far is that they will for 1000cc bikes but not for 600cc bikes. But if you want a new Daytona, the Street Triple 765RS is basically that, in naked form. We might well see a faired version return, but I wouldn't expect any substantial engine tuning differences.
Last edited:
