'99 vs. '05 tiger

[tigerhund]

...and I was told by a respected Triumph technician in Florida that the FI system on the 1999 has some room for adjustment while the one on my 2004 has no room for technician adjustment.  My wife's 1999 starts on the first attempt, while my 955i takes about three attempts to start.  The 955i is, however, a pisser once it finally starts......

[Chris Canning]

Tigerhund



The 900 injection motor was a turd!!! if you've got lucky with a good one,then well done dude,late nineties when Triumph had so many broken motors(in all  models) i remember going unto my local dealer who were up to their collective neck e'm trying to help out(rebuilding them),they were 30 miles from the factory,the alarm bells were going full blast(Triumph were well aware the 595 motor was a dud) in 1989 and hence the 955 which has proven to be another league.



I went on a factory visit in 1990 with a group of Tiger owners,my first question why 900?? they had the cheek to say i was wise with hindsight!! yea sure and thats why you got the 900 for just 3 years and the 955 has been around ever since 2001,and the 1050 is just a bigger version of the same apart from the water outlet moved from the side to the back of the water jacket.



The stock suspension on 955 isn't good,the 900 was like an over wieght jelly!!! i rode mine, maximum everything from day one and even then at anykind of speed would tie iteself in knots.



Living so close to the factory i've lost count of the number people who had complaints about the 900i,suspension,broken motors,bad starting!! the crank would move before the ignition pickup!!,turn it off and try again,but what the hell Triumph new the score and did somthing about it.

[Foxy]

You sure you've got your dates right Chris?

[Chris Canning]

oops should have said 2000