Opinion of new Triumph vertical twins?

This message is not archived
 >> Stay informed about: Opinion of new Triumph vertical twins? 

This message is not archived
 >> Stay informed about: Opinion of new Triumph vertical twins? 

On 30 May, 00:47, ScooterScootWell <scooterscootw... DeleteThis @yahoo.com> wrote:
> What do owners of the older Triumphs (80s or earlier say) think about
> the various incarnations on the new (00s or later say) vertical twin
> Triumphs?


A mate's got a modern Bonnie. I don't get it. It's way bulkier and
heavier than the old twins, sounds like a Honda 250, and is
unbelievably slow for such a big twin (Harley Sportster 'performance',
really).

The old twins were small, light, neat revvy, funky. I cannot see why a
parallel twin has to be as big as the modern Bonnie series.

But I suppose the new ones will be immeasurably more reliable,
smoother, better built, etc etc.

(I always rated the 650cc Trumf twin as being the capacity of choice:
the 750s were too harsh)
 >> Stay informed about: Opinion of new Triumph vertical twins? 

On May 29, 6:47 pm, ScooterScootWell <scooterscootw... DeleteThis @yahoo.com>
wrote:
> What do owners of the older Triumphs (80s or earlier say) think about
> the various incarnations on the new (00s or later say) vertical twin
> Triumphs?

I just sold my lovely, light, nimble, beautiful, well-balanced, low-
mileage, well-set-up, all original 1972 Triumph TR6RV Tiger 650 5-
speed. It was a nice old bike, started easily with the kick starter,
idled smoothly with the single (drippy, leaky) Amal carb, stopped
adequately with the perfectly and painstakingly set up full width drum
brakes (after I'd applied the scarce and hard-to-find factory
recommended actuation lever extensions) and could run with modern
traffic - just barely - with less vibration than the later 750cc
version of the bike did.

Compared to the admittedly larger, heavier, less focused modern
Triumph twins from Hinckley, it was a a beautiful piece of junk.

So what if contemporary road tests (which almost all lied) claimed
that the old bikes could do the 1/4 mile as fast as (faster in some
test reports) the new bikes? The old bikes couldn't maintain the
state of tune to run that fast without constant and meticulous
fettling. The new bikes rip off the same 1/4 mile times, the same
0-60 mph times, and the same top speeds day after day, day in, day
out, continuously, with as little maintenence or owner attention as
any other modern motorcycle. They're quieter, cleaner, and they
vibrate a WHOLE LOT less. You can actually see what's behind you in
your mirrors.

The old bikes are wonderful if you have the room, time, and love to
spare for their character and their beauty. It also helps, if you are
a motorcycle RIDER, to have another motorcycle in the fleet, as you
will spend a LOT of time working on your old Meriden twin for each
hour you spend riding it.

Of course, the short-lived Kawasaki W650 was a better modern
interpretation of the classic British twin than any Hinckley twin to
date - smaller, lighter, leaner, revvier, and most surprisingly, much
more "British" in profile than any of the latter day Bonnevilles or
variants.

That said, I think the best of the "classic" styled modern Triumphs
wasn't a twin at all, but the 3-cylinder Triumph Thunderbird Sport.
Scrumptious!
 >> Stay informed about: Opinion of new Triumph vertical twins? 

On 30 May, 16:47, "tomor...@erols.com" <tomor... RemoveThis @erols.com> wrote:
> On May 29, 6:47 pm, ScooterScootWell <scooterscootw... RemoveThis @yahoo.com>
> wrote:
>

> That said, I think the best of the "classic" styled modern Triumphs
> wasn't a twin at all, but the 3-cylinder Triumph Thunderbird Sport.
> Scrumptious!


Agree 100%. A mate had one, and I loved riding it.
 >> Stay informed about: Opinion of new Triumph vertical twins? 

On May 29, 6:47 pm, ScooterScootWell <scooterscootw... RemoveThis @yahoo.com>
wrote:
> What do owners of the older Triumphs (80s or earlier say) think about
> the various incarnations on the new (00s or later say) vertical twin
> Triumphs?

With a bad conscience I have admitted to guys who are enthusiastic
about the new Bonneville that it looks nice, and though I've never
ridden it I'm sure it is as smooth and well behaved as people say.
However this is where I come clean and say I think it looks heavy and
ugly. The attempt to give it styling kinship with the previous
generation simply makes it look grotesque in my view. I'm not anti-new
bike, I think the Ducatis are beautfiul and some of the Japanese
machinery has wonderful symmetry and form. But the new Bonneville just
looks like a heap of strange lumps to me in comparison to the old one.
My '69 Bonneville just makes me sigh each time I stand back to look at
it. If Triumph made a real replica, I'd buy it.

Of course this is completely subjective and another respondent might
say the opposite with the same validity, but all the same it is the
new bike that is borrowing from the old here, not the other way
around. And the annoyance of the oil leaks, the piston slap (hopefully
nothing worse), the first gear crunch, and the various age-related
ailments of the older bike can get to a level where I say to myself -
what an idiot, could have got something new and perfect for less
money. But the relief of fixing the problem, if only temporarily,
immediately takes that feeling away. So I'll stick with my real
Bonnie.

Steve
 >> Stay informed about: Opinion of new Triumph vertical twins? 

"Steverat" <stephen.ratcliffe.TakeThisOut@gmail.com> wrote:
> So I'll stick with my real Bonnie.

The so-called *real* Bonnies have too much HF vibration
for longish road trips. Owned '67 TR6R (2x), '68 TR6R
(2x), '72 T120R, and '73 T140RV. They were excellent
motorcycles on the winding backroads despite the peg
grinding from assertive riders. Still, sucked valves, holed
pistons, rods poking through cases, and other issues of
durability and reliability eventually resulted in their demise.

However, in the *real* world the new Bonnies rule while
the old Bonnies drool. Word is that Triumph will debut a
new 1500cc/1600cc parallel twin in September/October
so we'll have to wait 3-4 more months and see if it does.

-=Grumbler
 >> Stay informed about: Opinion of new Triumph vertical twins? 

tomorrow RemoveThis @erols.com wrote:

> The old bikes are wonderful if you have the room, time, and love to
> spare for their character and their beauty. It also helps, if you are
> a motorcycle RIDER, to have another motorcycle in the fleet, as you
> will spend a LOT of time working on your old Meriden twin for each
> hour you spend riding it.

Back in another era (the Second Age of Middle Earth)
I had a shiny black '69 BSA 650 Thunderbolt. I didn't spend
a lot of time working on it -- because I didn't know how.

The bike had thoroughbred British character and feel,
but I was too inexperienced to appreciate it.
Its character traits included leaking oil and tingling
painfully at high revs. Finally after about a year
I was glad to get rid of it and rode a succession
of Japanese bikes until I got the Harley.

Sean_Q_
 >> Stay informed about: Opinion of new Triumph vertical twins? 

This message is not archived
 >> Stay informed about: Opinion of new Triumph vertical twins? 

This message is not archived
 >> Stay informed about: Opinion of new Triumph vertical twins? 

I want one or two of 'em
"ScooterScootWell" <scooterscootwell DeleteThis @yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1180478829.508284.117320@q75g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...
> What do owners of the older Triumphs (80s or earlier say) think about
> the various incarnations on the new (00s or later say) vertical twin
> Triumphs?
>
 >> Stay informed about: Opinion of new Triumph vertical twins? 

"ScooterScootWell" <scooterscootwell.TakeThisOut@yahoo.com> opin'd:

> What do owners of the older Triumphs (80s or earlier say) think about
> the various incarnations on the new (00s or later say) vertical twin
> Triumphs?

NEW Triumph twins are hugely lacking in character compared with my
1965 TR6R.


Not that that's always a bad thing . . . .

pooder was -- no lack of character -- here

--
The 50-50-90 rule: Anytime you have a 50-50 chance of getting something
right, there's a 90% probability you'll get it wrong
 >> Stay informed about: Opinion of new Triumph vertical twins? 

On Wed, 30 May 2007 16:58:17 GMT, Sean <no.spam RemoveThis @no.spam> wrote:

>tomorrow@erols.com wrote:
>
>> The old bikes are wonderful if you have the room, time, and love to
>> spare for their character and their beauty. It also helps, if you are
>> a motorcycle RIDER, to have another motorcycle in the fleet, as you
>> will spend a LOT of time working on your old Meriden twin for each
>> hour you spend riding it.
>
>Back in another era (the Second Age of Middle Earth)
>I had a shiny black '69 BSA 650 Thunderbolt. I didn't spend
>a lot of time working on it -- because I didn't know how.
>
>The bike had thoroughbred British character and feel,
>but I was too inexperienced to appreciate it.
>Its character traits included leaking oil and tingling
>painfully at high revs. Finally after about a year
>I was glad to get rid of it and rode a succession
>of Japanese bikes until I got the Harley.

I don't get it... the worst vibrator in the late 50's was a
Harley....I rode the 1959 Sportser and that sucker would pry your
gripping hand off the bars at 90mph in three.
>
>Sean_Q_
>
>
>
 >> Stay informed about: Opinion of new Triumph vertical twins?