Log in

View Full Version : 2 Bonnevilles



Big Dave
24th June 2005, 19:52
Kiwi Rider Magazine

Selective Memory Lane

I’m a bit sceptical when something is described as a ‘New Classic’ or an ‘Instant Classic’. Isn’t there some kind of qualification or criteria that has to assessed by a committee somewhere before something can be proclaimed ‘Classic’!?

Surely what constitutes ‘A Classic’ can’t be the decision of some advertising guy who, for all we know, thinks ‘Britney’ is cool and wouldn’t know a ’64 Mustang from a Mitsubishi Smegma?

‘Classic’ is an extension of ‘class’. It’s about style and longevity, that’s why the 1967 T120 Bonneville rates as a true Classic, but could the advertising blurb about the new T100 Bonneville reincarnate be believed?’

5 minutes after it finished having a pre-delivery groom I was riding in misty rain through Newmarket. Why does that always happen? A succession of memories of new bikes and rain on the day I picked them up stretched back from the traffic lights on Broadway in Newmarket to my late teens. Just like way back then, I got quite well drenched and didn't give a toss!

I was on a Bonneville again - and it felt damn genuine. The immediate answer was yes, the bike was living up to the hype, worthy of the Classic Tag (says the advertising guy - who doesn’t like Britney, after less than 2 km).

Perth, Western Australia, way back then, and some of my ‘best work’ was done on an immaculate T140 Bonneville. The first bike the co-pilot and I owned jointly.

For the first 100km on the new T100, selected memories of ‘The West’ seemed like only a few days - not 25 years - ago.

After living with the Goodwood Green and Gold T100 for a few days I convinced ‘Motomail man’ Chris Hyland to get his immaculate ‘67 T120 out of the shed for a blast of old and new. Col (KB - warewolf) helped us out with the photo shoot.

The first thing we noticed when the bikes were side by side, is how much is similar, and how much isn’t. They are both fine looking motorcycles. The T120 is leaner and more sculpted, the T100 appears sturdier and looks a somewhat sportier in profile.

The T100 has Triumph ‘Sports’ mufflers installed and both bikes sound remakably similar when on the gas - both have 360 degree cranks - which means pots fire opposite each other for one of the sweetest sounds on two wheels. The pushrod driven older one is a bit ‘rattlier’ when at idle.

The ‘67 sales brochure claims 52 horsepower at 6500rpm from 649cc with NO mufflers! The current release claims 61 horsepower at 7,400rpm from 790cc with standard mufflers (add a few for the competition pipes and jets) so we didn’t worry too much about wringing their necks to see which was the better ‘flat out’ performer.

Both can get you plenty of demerit points without due care, however the T100 wins pretty comfortably in the ‘power, handling and brakes’ stakes - it’s like comparing a ‘67 muscle car with a new one - 36 years has seen enormous improvements in automotive technology - this ride was to compare the ‘feel’ of the two bikes - and they feel remarkably similar.

The T100 has longer legs, the T120 is still quite ‘punchy’ and low down pull is comparable. The T120 vibrates more, earlier in the rev range than the later model yet both have excellent road feedback and are a nimble, sure footed joy to toss around suburban streets or a mid paced country jaunt.

The ‘67 has the gear change and brake on the opposite sides to modern bikes, this takes a bit of getting re-used to and slowed me down somewhat at first.

Both bikes are stable and comfortable at open road cruising speeds and can be ridden quite quickly without the need to wash off speed for the sharper corners - particularly the T100.

Both excel at ‘feel good’ - for rider and for the misty eyed old codgers who invite you down ‘selective’ memory lane wherever you park the bikes.

These are fabulous machines if you like meeting people. They wind down their windows at the lights and shout ‘What year is that - mate?’ or some other form of greeting.

When the response is ‘1967’ they nod appreciatively and admire the restoration and the history, when the answer is ‘2003’ you have to add ‘it’s new’ and they still shake their head, not comprehending - ‘it’s an old bike - isn’t it?’

If you let them, men and women will tell you their life story and experiences on a British Twin at the bowser whilst you try and fill the tank.

But there’s more to it than just reminiscences. Many of the grey haired old riders with the stories to tell got to be grey haired old riders because of the way they did their ‘apprenticeship’ on a Brit twin.

Nowdays a Bonneville is a great ‘step up’ bike for a competent rider coming off a restricted license. A year or two on one of these mid power, fun bikes, before jumping on a ‘light speed hypercycle’ makes good sense.

And, as long as Lucas electrics, 3 drip trays, kicking and kicking and kicking and all those other half forgotten ‘good old days’ are not the ‘selected’ memories - I don’t recall there being much difference between the two bikes at all. Classic!

eliot-ness
24th June 2005, 20:14
Thanks Dave. Good comparison write up. As you say, they have the same feel, but I've found the front brake on the 04 model to be a bit spongy, can pull the lever almost back to the bars. Checked against others, same year/ milage and they seem to be the same. Nothing apparently wrong, checked fluid, bled brakes. Had twin leading shoe front fitted on 67/ 69 models. bloody good, more positive than this one. Not as fast as I used to be so it'll do.

Sensei
24th June 2005, 20:31
Friend owns a New Bonnie & have tryed many older ones as well . Found the old type to be a great bike for what they are , A good mate that restores bike for a living , BSA , Triumphs , Vello's , Nortons Etc Put a GB400 honda front & back end onto a 750 Bonnie .Was bloody great went quick & handled really well . Still not as good as his 500 Goldstar Rep . He's still gives me shit for grinding down the muffler on it while on a Classic bike run , forgot that the pegs don't fold up when going round a corner at 130k .Very scary few seconds trying to keep it on the road , mate following said it looked very Kool till the back wheel came off the ground & then started sliding on the muffler .
Good to read these write ups Dave . Some of the younger guys on here might not know how nice some of the older bikes were to ride .

Jackrat
24th June 2005, 20:46
On ya' Dave,I really enjoyed reading that.
I too had a 1973 T140V which I have many fond memorys of.
Now I've finaly addmited to myself that I'm not going to be up to riding a dirt bike in the way their intended to be ridden, I can see a T100 sized lump being added to my mortgage in the near future.
I've still not ridden one but I'd never ridden a Bonnie until I bought one either.
Thanks again.

skidz
24th June 2005, 23:07
Real good writeup Dave. I have had rides on a few old girls, then got a 02 Bonnie America and it was far easier to ride. Put after market mufflers on and was even better. A mate bought it and loves it.

Motu
24th June 2005, 23:17
I haven't ridden a modern Triumph....or honda,or suzuki for that matter...

The Triumphs weren't that great a bike really,BSAs and Nortons were better,handled better,morer power - but the Triumphs were light and peppy,they were fun to ride.Nortons,BSAs and Matchy's typicaly weighed 425lbs,Triumphs were under 400lb,later motors were cammy,with a powerband starting at 4500rpm,the 650s stopped at about 7000,but you could stretch them more - the 500s never stopped reving...10,500rpm was not unheard of from a severly canned Daytona,I blew my zener diode,but never had a tacho so don't know when that happens.They flexed with a snap,get it right coming out of a corner crossed up and you picked it up and slammed on the throttle as it snapped itself straight.
I liked to swap a ride on a Triumph for my Norton,it was more fun than a bike that did everything right.