courtesy of Hell For Leather.
http://hellforleathermagazine.com/2010/ ... #more-9501 (http://hellforleathermagazine.com/2010/09/2011-triumph-adventure-two-models-line-drawings/#more-9501)
i like it - i like it alot 8)
Oh Mamma :shock:
Quoteby lengthening the stroke, a move intended to fatten the torque curve at low revs and make the engine less peaky
Yeah, like the triple needs more torque and is peaky :roll:
Quote from: "Sin_Tiger"Oh Mamma :shock:
Quoteby lengthening the stroke, a move intended to fatten the torque curve at low revs and make the engine less peaky
Yeah, like the triple needs more torque and is peaky :roll:
I think they meant the 675 Daytona is (comparatively) peaky ...
Quote from: "Bixxer Bob"I think they meant the 675 Daytona is (comparatively) peaky ...
You might well have a point there, not ridden a Daytona, had an absolute hoot / scared my self silly on a Street Triple though :shock: (more on that soon :oops: )
So, after the Steamer, Girly and Bear... now it will be the Mosquito??? :lol:
something about it says, "Beaker"...
(http://sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-snc4/hs315.snc4/41068_419607281861_723571861_5529133_187138_n.jpg)
But I like it all the same.
:iagree
:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
Green Goblin
The 2011 "Flying" Tiger. I like it.
and there's more..........
http://www.motorcyclenews.com/MCN/News/ ... ack-tests/ (http://www.motorcyclenews.com/MCN/News/newsresults/New-bikes/2010/September/sep0810-tiger-800-spotted-in-high-speed-track-tests/)
and
http://www.motorcyclenews.com/MCN/News/ ... EPI-126630 (http://www.motorcyclenews.com/MCN/News/newsresults/New-bikes/2010/September/sep0810-Triumph-s-new-adventurer-1200-world-first-pictures/_/R-EPI-126630)
KK
(http://www.motorcyclenews.com/upload/272079/images/tiger-800-1.jpg)
the road going Tiger has sorta gone back to it's origins ........albeit more refined .
don't know why they didn't just keep refining the steamer :icon_scratch
May be I am just not used to see that angle, but the engine looks so boxy, very low, and sticking out there, no frame around it. Looks like the engine is hanging from under the frame.
Is that the oil filter sticking out in front, just beside the 3 exhaust pipes? Same dumb place as the new Super Tenere? I thought is was much the same engine but it looks very different... to me anyway... :roll:
Tiger 800 and Tiger 1200?!? does this mean the Bear dies? I thought the Bear would continue as a roadie while these new bikes would go back to the abandoned adventure segment.
IF it (onroad version):
1. Is comfy enough for a 6+ footer.
2. Is able to carry a large top box on it , no problem.
3. Gets 50+ mph.
4. Actually has a decent charging system (no Sasquatch Fix required).
5. Has a slightly lower seat than 33 inches.
AND
6. People tilt their head sideways (like they do now) when they see me,
THEN,
Goodbye Girly,
Hello "Beaker"! :thumbsup
Quote from: "Mustang"don't know why they didn't just keep refining the steamer :icon_scratch
I always thought The Steamer is a great bike with one big flaw. The flaw was so big you just accepted it considering everything else that seems "good enough".
It's really top-heavy.
Recently I test drove the Triumph Sprint GT in Reno, Nevada. I had access to a highway bypass that had just been completed. The road was completely flat like an airport runway. So I cranked on it. The first thing I noticed was how insanely low the center of gravity was compared to the Steamer. Aerodynamics were also really well-sorted. At over 100 MPH my head was in a cone of silence. Heaving into a banked turn, the bike felt like it was gyroscopically controlled. It was awesome. The Steamer could just never come close to that. And nor should it. But the later Girly comes much closer. Just sayin'.
Cheers,
Nick
Quote from: "haulin' daze"IF it (onroad version):
3. Gets 50+ mph.
Lets hope it can manage that or we may as well get 100cc dirt bikes! :wink:
Quote from: "Colonel Nikolai"It's really top-heavy.
Isn't it just! The new one looks to have the engine a little lower, which might be a good thing for moving it about but it's not necessarily a good thing off road in terms of clearance.
I'd have to agree that 50mph + is a prerequisite!
Bring on the Beaker!
Anyone else seen the spy shots of the Triumph 1200 adventure in MCN this week? I'll scan them later if I get a chance.
I've only seen this pic on the cover , please share more pics..... :D
(http://mrmoto.smugmug.com/Photography/random-pics/001mcnmain0809rev2lo-r/999415769_gYp6j-L.jpg)
More info supposedly based on CARB filings:
http://www.visordown.com/motorcycle-news-new-bikes/official-documents-identify-new-triumphs/13807.html
the same but a bit bigger...
(http://i29.photobucket.com/albums/c273/BixxerBob/scan0001.jpg)
hmmmm ........200 kg or 440 lbs wet weight for the Tiger 800's
it's not going to be a light weight trail bike is it ?
a steamer lists as 209 kg DRY weight or 460 lbs
Heads-Up, MCN is apparently spreading the rumor that there will be an 1180cc Tiger adventure bike in 2010. If so it would appear that Triumph is really embracing the Adventure Riding segment.
Quote from: "TheMule"Heads-Up, MCN is apparently spreading the rumor that there will be an 1180cc Tiger adventure bike in 2010. If so it would appear that Triumph is really embracing the Adventure Riding segment.
The pic at the top of this page IS the rumoured 1200 Adventure prototype, hence the headline "1200" And in the spec MCN estimate the weight at 195kg so it's odd that the 800 comes in at over 200kg. Could be wet vs dry weigth of course. I'm guessing the 1200GS must be around that weight??
Quote from: "TheMule"Heads-Up, MCN is apparently spreading the rumor that there will be an 1180cc Tiger adventure bike in 2010. If so it would appear that Triumph is really embracing the Adventure Riding segment.
Triumph are because it's all about selling units,manafacturers have seen what BM have done sales wise with the GS and all want a piece of the action,what i'm not convinced about is shaft drive,short term it's great,long term an expensive nightmare,having a bike with 40,000 miles on and new chain and sprockets and it's back to new is great,try that with a shaft,ask any BM owner.
Sorry, maintenance freedom outweighs the long term nighmare which is only a possibility anyway. If you can remember to oil the chain just occasionally then looking after a shaft drive at service should be easy.
I like the idea of shaft drive (no chain oil mess etc ) but like Chris I know two GS owners with expensive final drive woes. If Triumph can make it better - fantastic, but as BMW have struggled to make it reliable I won't hold my breath.
There is another arguement, but it only applies in a very few cases. I liken it to a friend who left the RAF to travel round the world and bought an old VW camper in which to do it. I suggested it wouldn't get him to Dover let alone round the world. "Ah", he said, "But no matter where it breaks down, I'll always be able to get spares".
Quote from: "Bixxer Bob""But no matter where it breaks down, I'll always be able to get spares".
That's why I didn't buy a Buell - no possibility of 'field maitenance'.
About the shaft drive, Yamaha has now gone down that road. The new Super Tenere is looking very interesting. If it lives up to former glories, will be quite a bike to match. BMW has the glitter, but it seems that owners tend to prefer Triumphs - unless they are just buying the brand.
And if you guys think that Beemers are not worth it, come to Brazil, where a new 1200GS Adventure will cost a humble US$ 50,000!! And I paid US$ 17,000 for my 2004 Girly a couple of years ago.
Quote from: "Bixxer Bob"I like the idea of shaft drive (no chain oil mess etc ) but like Chris I know two GS owners with expensive final drive woes. If Triumph can make it better - fantastic, but as BMW have struggled to make it reliable I won't hold my breath.
I'll bet the two Be eM owners had 1200s, BMW have had shaft drive from the start, the problems seem to be mostly on the new stuff.
They did'nt get the reputation for RTW bikes for nothing
Quote from: "John Stenhouse"the problems seem to be mostly on the new stuff.
They did'nt get the reputation for RTW bikes for nothing
Those old shafts were HEAVY. The weight of the shaft seems to be why they're tweaking it lately. And failing. Since chain is the lightest kind of final drive and also the simplest, I'll bet you could carry a spare chain and sprocket set and still weigh less than that final drive does -- and cost far, far less. Don't forget, shafts are not maintenance free, either.
Why build a formula one car and put square wheels on it? Why try and get the lightest off-tarmac bike and put a torque-robbing, complicated, no-in-the-field-serviceable-parts-inside, heavy-ass shaft on it?
So why if chains are so good did they do away with them for cars?
Quote from: "John Stenhouse"So why if chains are so good did they do away with them for cars?
You still need to run a differential with a two wheel drive system and here it is easier with a shaft drive.
With Bikes, chains are lighter and the most efficient getting the torque to the rear wheel. Just a bit more maintenance and dirty.
I love the chain drive on my Tiger and the shaft drive on my Valkyrie. Each has its place.
Cheers John!
tett
Getting off topic here... but what about belt drives? Very light, maintenance free on the road and not expensive to change. Always thought it was a sensible option.
Quote from: "Nimrod11"Getting off topic here... but what about belt drives? Very light, maintenance free on the road and not expensive to change. Always thought it was a sensible option.
Totally agree. They are even lighter than chains. And they last longer in ideal conditions. Where they don't do as well is with bad terrain where rocks can get in between the belt and the pulley. I have a friend who had a rock cut a hole through the middle of the belt on their Buell Ulysses when going off tarmac. It held long enough to get it to the dealer to replace it, though.
Quote from: "tett"I love the chain drive on my Tiger and the shaft drive on my Valkyrie. Each has its place.
Totally agree. Wish my Sprint had a shaft sometimes.
Quote from: "Nimrod11"Getting off topic here... but what about belt drives? Very light, maintenance free on the road and not expensive to change. Always thought it was a sensible option.
I'd go with that!
Quote from: "John Stenhouse"I'll bet the two Be eM owners had 1200s, BMW have had shaft drive from the start, the problems seem to be mostly on the new stuff.
Spot on....
It's not shaft drive per se,although BM do have and have had heaps of problems with both the K range and the GS1200,but it's when they start to get on in age and mileage,their not cheap or easy to fix,were as with ours it's new chain and sprockets and it's back new.
Plus as any folks on here who have owned a BM know they are different to ride with a shaft,because you don't have the slack in the drive chain it requires a totally different technique(he says owning two :roll: )
Quote from: "Colonel Nikolai"Quote from: "Mustang"don't know why they didn't just keep refining the steamer :icon_scratch
I always thought The Steamer is a great bike with one big flaw. The flaw was so big you just accepted it considering everything else that seems "good enough".
It's really top-heavy.
Just the one!? :shock:
How about the sprocket cover being part of the engine casing.
Having to remove all the fairings and the carbs to change the air filter.
Oh, having to change the air filter box rather than just the air filter :)
A spine that blocks easy access to the centre plug.
A fuse box in the most inaccessible place ever.
And a digital clock :D
Quote from: "CoolHandLuke"Just the one!? :shock:
How about the sprocket cover being part of the engine casing.
Having to remove all the fairings and the carbs to change the air filter.
Oh, having to change the air filter box rather than just the air filter :)
A spine that blocks easy access to the centre plug.
A fuse box in the most inaccessible place ever.
And a digital clock :D
Those, imho, are minor.
I've already fixed the digital clock problem. I converted the slot that holds the 2" clock with a 2" volt gague for the battery. I took the live 12v to the handlebars for an aux power socket (pictures somewhere around this forum). Cost me $20.
As far as the airbox is concerned, there are worse airbox configs out there :shock: Some have even been discussed here. I've done two now myself and have refurbished one on my own. It's not that bad.
The spine blocking access to #2 plug I fixed with a $17 dealer part. Now I hardly notice it.
The fuse box is easy to move (haven't done it: I have these weird rubber hands that actually fit in there to change the fuses, believe it or not!)
The sprocket cover, well, that's probably the worst. I bought a trophy sprocket cover for $29 on ebay I plan to split the next sprocket set I do. Tips on how to deal with that are here, too. Not too expensive!
There's no way to fix top heavy, though. I just accept it. Does make the bike more stable at high speeds (but less responsive).