Triumph 1700 twin

[huck farley]

The motorcycle was spotted in Wales, in almost complete form, just missing a few Triumph Badges. Originally thought to be a 1500cc machine it looks like the engine has now been upped to 1700cc.

Do you think this is a good move for Triumph? Or do you think the British firm has sold out to the US market?

Have your say about the new motorcycle by adding your comments.

[huck farley]

Me thinks it is a wise move by Triumph and very brave to not copy the HD style of cruiser. This bike will add to Triumph's already range of bikes that cover just about everything. Would you buy one?

I would depending on the price that is. I can't wait to find out more about this bike and it's specs. The Engine in the bike spotted looks as if it's water cooled. Wow a 1700 parallel twin. I bet it sounds nice!! And has a heap of grunt!! It looks like it has forward contols, but can't tell for sure on the spy shot.
Cheers
Huck

[tri boy]

Sorry Huck, but I totally hate the look of the pig.
Triumphs used to be light nimble sickles that carried their riders all around the planet. That looks like a bloated carcass expanding in the sun.
If it weighs less than 280kg I will be very surprised.
I tolerate the monstrous triple cruiser they made, solely cause it's a massive jump to the left of being conventional, but that thing is just plan fat n ugly.:sick:

[xwhatsit]

It looks like some fat 1980s Yamaha `custom'. Christ, the wheels alone...

[Sully60]

Sorry Huck, but I totally hate the look of the pig.
Triumphs used to be light nimble sickles that carried their riders all around the planet. That looks like a bloated carcass expanding in the sun.


Fair point and I cannot disagree with your opinion on the looks etc. But that's the type of viewpoint which caused the once thriving British motorcycle industry to fall over.
The "middleweight" cruiser segment is one of the biggest sectors in the western world's motorcycle market.
And any manufacturer of Triumphs size or bigger would be totally stupid to completely ignore it.
With "big" cruisers now being 2 litres or plus and "small" ones being 800's or 1000's the "middleweights" are all 1500 -1800 cc's and pretty much all of these bikes are V-twins. Triumph as a manufacturer have to have a point of difference and from what we see here they've done a good job.

Proof's in the pudding though, we shall see how this one works out for the Hinkley men.

[Pussy]

I reckon it doesn't look too bad! I wouldn't buy one, though, still like sprot bikes, and probably will for quite some time

[Ixion]

Dunno about the looks, I'm not a crusier person. I imagine it'll be popular with old folk, easy to mount, and they don't care about performance.

But from an engineering point of view , that motor has to be a dogs arse.

DOHC? On a 1700 twin? How high do they think it's going to rev?

And those headers look far too small to scavenge 850cc. And apparently only two valve ?

I hate to think what the vibration will be like, even with a balance shaft.

Doesn't seem to me to be a bold new anything, seems more like the sort of thing that Meridan would have come up with in the 1980s.

[YellowDog]

The motorcycle was spotted in Wales, in almost complete form, just missing a few Triumph Badges. Originally thought to be a 1500cc machine it looks like the engine has now been upped to 1700cc.

Do you think this is a good move for Triumph? Or do you think the British firm has sold out to the US market?

Have your say about the new motorcycle by adding your comments.
I think it is a bad choice myself. Cruisers are very much in vogue and selling in heaps. Boulevard M109 is one of my favourite beauties that I will not be buying (but would if I was after a cruiser). This bike will not sell. I agree that it is a fat heavy ugly pig.

[Ixion]

But you can get all those with a SOHC and rockers (or pushrods, for that matter). Rockers allow any desired combustion chamber shape, they are even more verstile than DOHC (where the valve angle has to be perpendicular to the camshaft).

Actually, given the somewhat 'retro' nature of crusiers, and the fact that the engines are large, slow revving and not expected to produce large power, I'd have thought a flat head would be the wya to go. Think of the torque then!

[MD]

I'm looking forward to seeing what new big twin eventually comes out from Triumph. I hope it looks a lot like the current America.

I wouldn't get all excited praising or flinging shit at the looks of that spy photo. That's most likely just a mule bike for testing parts, engine etc. The final product will probably look nothing like it.

It makes sense for them to fill the gap between their massive 2300cc Rocket and the America, Bonnie, Speedmaster twins. As much as I like the current cruiser twins the 865cc motor is just too weak. I took a Thruxton out last week.

Triumph have admitted that they are building a bigger twin because the yanks aren't keen on buying smaller cruisers but find the Rocket too big.

[xwhatsit]

But you can get all those with a SOHC and rockers (or pushrods, for that matter). Rockers allow any desired combustion chamber shape, they are even more verstile than DOHC (where the valve angle has to be perpendicular to the camshaft).

That's quite right. My SOHC single has rockers and has a very decent valve angle with all four valves, pretty much a hemispherical combustion chamber. Certainly didn't need the two cams that the RFVC head needed to accomplish the same thing.

I take it this model is pre-production? If so, it quite possibly has some random parts-bin tank/guards/seat/tail to disguise it. KTM was doing that quite recently with Cagiva fairings (I think). Well I hope they'll change it, because quite honestly it looks like any run of the mill Jap-cruiser with a parallel twin in it (reminds me of that Suzuki Savage 650 single with twin pipes).

[banditrider]

Not too bad from the front, although maybe a bigger headlight (just 1 big round sucker) would look better. Rear end is just like any other cruiser - pretty crap looking, whay can't they be a bit more inventive? Engine from the left side anyway looks quite nice - way better looking than the Rocket III. Nice that they are maintaining a point of difference by having a parallel twin but is that what the cruiser crowd want?

[Mental Trousers]

The triple's are what differentiate Triumph from everybody else.

[Scouse]

The triple's are what differentiate Triumph from everybody else.Aye the Triples rock eh menty

[MVnut]

Hope it's got electric start.....imagine kickin that biartch:dodge:

[xwhatsit]

I think it would kick you :laugh:

[FilthyLuka]

Hope it's got electric start.....imagine kickin that biartch:dodge:

i think you would need a run up and a really solid center stand

[Big Dave]

It's a mule. Dressed up for the event of just that shot.

Triumph hate their thunder stolen. The embargoes on their stuff are very strictly enforced and they take significant measures to thwart MCN in particular.

The finished product may resemble what you see there - or it might not.

[Dooly]

Looks like the guy is trying to squeeze out a fart.

Looks ok to me, if I was a cruiser guy I'd be wanting a Triumph with big cubes, but not a Rocket, and as said many times, the small engine, low powered cruisers from Triumph now are so weak perf wise, even if some look good like the Speed Master.

[spookytooth]

I would be tempted alot by a 1400 speedmaster :)

[nudemetalz]

Could be a good donk for a Bonnie-type machine with good brakes and suspension - ie MT01 competitor.

[huck farley]

mmmmmmmmm Interesting comments. Like the wording says from the spyshot is Triumph selling us out to the USA. I think not. I personally have been waiting for a mid size cruiser to come out of the factory.

I am getting on a bit, and tried the Rocket out from my local dealers. I found it to be to big and bulky for me, although once moving it was beautifully balanced. it handled very well also. But with a price tag of $27.000 I just could not see value for my dollars.

I wonder if the new cruiser is shaft drive, chain or belt? I have to agree with most that the looks are quite dated, but certainly not a big fat pig as someone called it. I am quite keen on the retro looks, the type of guys buying these cruisers, will be in their forties, and on I should think. And like the retro look of the bike.

Triumph I give 10/10 for being radical and being another first in the world to be giving it's customers a 1700cc Parallel twin. Although I would have loved to have seen maybe a 1700 triple motor in it. In the last few years they have had bike of the year with the Rocket, Sprint ST, the 675 Daytona, and last year the Tiger1050, They could do it again with this machine, me thinks.

I am going to stick my neck out and say. Triumph will sell a heap of these bikes in the States, and Aussie, where crossing state lines is abundant.

And "one" maybe in NZ. I have last years Tiger 1050 It's a fabulous bike, but find it is just to tall for me. I have had the bike nearly overbalance on me a couple of times now. I ride two up 95% of the time. So I am going to trade it in on maybe one of these cruiser type bikes, with the low slung seat.. Oh yes I have had a Speedmaster in 05 I found it to be gutless. Got rid of it after only 4000ks.

[MD]

1.Triumph I give 10/10 for being radical and being another first in the world to be giving it's customers a 1700cc Parallel twin.

2. Oh yes I have had a Speedmaster in 05 I found it to be gutless. Got rid of it after only 4000ks.

1. where did you hear 1700cc? Rumours in Brit. mags last year were that it would be a 1500cc.
2. I had an America and agree they could have been such a good bike if not let down by the motor. Great bike for looks, comfort and better than most cruisers at tackling bends. Cruises along brilliantly until you try and overtake a car/truck, then you are reminded it's only 54hp!

I could be keen one day on a larger Triumph cruiser but my worry is that this new bike might turn out like all the similar 1300cc to 1800cc sized Jap twin cruisers... overweight, still gutless and no ground clearance.

Please Triumph bring it out with all the good points of the current Speedmaster/America with some decent power without the blubber.

[martybabe]

Looks a bit like an xs1100 missin two cylinders. I wont get excited just yet it'll be under powered or too heavy or have a box of bricks for a gear box like its big brother.

Somebody build me a muscle cruiser will ya,:no:

sorry bad day.

[Subike]

Looks a bit like an xs1100 missin two cylinders. I wont get excited just yet it'll be under powered or too heavy or have a box of bricks for a gear box like its big brother.

Somebody build me a muscle cruiser will ya,:no:

sorry bad day.

Glad you havin a bad day
nothing wrong with the heavy old xsessive, which turns 30 this year,
Mine is still keeping up with much younger bikes, lots of them :laugh:

from the pic, I would assume a lot of coverup gear on that bike, it probably looks nothing like the design teams finnished idea, just a test bed to keep us all guessing
Have to agree with many posts here that a 1700 east west tripple would be a better choice.....the sound alone could pull sales. but then could be too wide in a three cylinder configeration. The rocket tripples big enuff!

SO will we be guessing for a few more months
or will a Mclaren/Ferarri leak of specifications appear in a Harley exsecutives Emailbox?:Police:
Only time will tell

[Big Dave]

I've ridden 5 different Rocket IIIs for significant distances.
Including running the first 2 in the country in.

All of their gearboxes are cluncky for the first 800km - and then they settle down. Almost as they clock over 800 on the dot.

Of the 5 - four were sweet as when run in.
One was average.

You musta ridden that one martyb

[huck farley]

1. where did you hear 1700cc? Rumours in Brit. mags last year were that it would be a 1500cc.

As written by MCN and written right across the picture of the guy getting ready to squeeze a fart out. ((I love that)) Triumph have upped the cc rating to 1700cc If you look at the bike pictured it has a bit of the Bonny America about it already. And forward controls. I think it looks kinda tall also, If it's got 5" loaded up it should be just fine. Just you all wait until Triumph launch it. It will look a million bucks.

I for one will be having a very hard look at it if it's around the low $20K Ideal for NZ conditions, I reckon.

I guess a big twin like that would be poking out a hundred ponies. Plenty of Grunt for me, if it does. As it's a cruiser, and that's all I want to do nowadays.

[Big Dave]

Doh - just walking upstairs I remembered another one - make it six RIIIs.

It was on the clunky side too, but didn't have the 800 Ks

[martybabe]

Doh - just walking upstairs I remembered another one - make it six RIIIs.

It was on the clunky side too, but didn't have the 800 Ks

Well I'm glad to hear they improve,I was about to buy one till I did a test drive,I've not ridden as many as you bd but I know me way round a quirky gearbox and this bugger wasn't having it at all, clunky. clunky clunk clunk.:rolleyes:

[Big Dave]

hmmmm - I wonder if it's the clutch - rather than the box.

[martybabe]

Glad you havin a bad day
nothing wrong with the heavy old xsessive, which turns 30 this year,
Mine is still keeping up with much younger bikes, lots of them :laugh:

nah mate wasn't dissin the xs,quite the reverse, seems like we aint moved on a whole lot.:msn-wink:

[martybabe]

hmmmm - I wonder if it's the clutch - rather than the box.


eh, I hope you finished your business upstairs before posting again. accidents can happen.

dunno about the cause but it cost em one sale,I bought a hog instead.

BD you know about bikes,why doesen't someone build a bloody grunty,good handlin hard braking muscle cruiser? 20 years iz been waitin.:msn-wink:

[Big Dave]

eh, I hope you finished your business upstairs before posting again. accidents can happen.

dunno about the cause but it cost em one sale,I bought a hog instead.

BD you know about bikes,why doesen't someone build a bloody grunty,good handlin hard braking muscle cruiser? 20 years iz been waitin.:msn-wink:


I BBQed the chicken breasts and she made the salad and sliced the melons. (leave it out beavis)


In some ways the cruiser 'style point' of a low slung arse and saddle preclude it (good ground clearance) before we start.

I say good ground clearance rather than handling because that Fat Bob handles great - for the style of bike and normal road speeds.

But there is only so much suspension travel available and then that impacts clearance which takes back to the style.

That MT whatever thingy and even my thunderbird i don't class as cruisers - they are standards unencumbered by required arsedroopedness.


Dave Anderson builds some beautiful go fast muscle bikes downstairs at AMPS but they cost $60K+

[martybabe]

I BBQed the chicken breasts and she made the salad and sliced the melons. (leave it out beavis)


In some ways the cruiser 'style point' of a low slung arse and saddle preclude it (good ground clearance) before we start.

I say good ground clearance rather than handling because that Fat Bob handles great - for the style of bike and normal road speeds.

But there is only so much suspension travel available and then that impacts clearance which takes back to the style.

That MT whatever thingy and even my thunderbird i don't class as cruisers - they are standards unencumbered by required arsedroopedness.




Yeah, I dont want the world,if they just lifted their skirts one inch who's gonna notice accept the ridder when he does the twisties,put R1 type stoppers on ,chromed of course and an engine that pumps. hardly any difference to looks but closer to a standard in performance terms please.


Go on BD you've got some clout ,make em do it!:shifty:

[Big Dave]

Go on BD you've got some clout ,make em do it!:shifty:

As posted in the other thread - they kinda did with the street rod. It was a kick arse machine - handled, stopped, hammered - and nobody bought them.

[martybabe]

As posted in the other thread - they kinda did with the street rod. It was a kick arse machine - handled, stopped, hammered - and nobody bought them.



yip true but that thing went to far,no longer a pretty cruiser like the vrod it became an expensive standard road bike with a host of other rivals.

New vmax maybe? not really cruisy but sure as hell looks special.:rolleyes:

[huck farley]

yip true but that thing went to far,no longer a pretty cruiser like the vrod it became an expensive standard road bike with a host of other rivals.

New vmax maybe? not really cruisy but sure as hell looks special.:rolleyes:

Excuse me Guys, I can't help thinking my thread is being hijacked. Can we get back on the topic of how do you think the new Triumph 1700cc parallel twin cruiser is going to sell in New Zealand, and Globally.
Cheers
Huck

[Big Dave]

Excuse me Guys, I can't help thinking my thread is being hijacked. Can we get back on the topic of how do you think the new Triumph 1700cc parallel twin cruiser is going to sell in New Zealand, and Globally.
Cheers
Huck

Better than a Rocket III and not as well as a Bonne America.

[Pwalo]

Excuse me Guys, I can't help thinking my thread is being hijacked. Can we get back on the topic of how do you think the new Triumph 1700cc parallel twin cruiser is going to sell in New Zealand, and Globally.
Cheers
Huck

If it gets into production, it'll sell well in the US, the UK and Europe will probably ignore it, and we'll see the odd one in NZ.

It's an ugly bugger though so it should sell well in 'Merica.

[MD]

Better than a Rocket III and not as well as a Bonne America.

I thought the Speedmaster was the most popular seller in the Triumph twin range, atleast in the oz mags anyway.

I agree if/when it arrives a 1700 twin cruiser will outsell the Rocket. Mainly because the Rocket is a big ask in terms of dollars and kilograms to haul around - too intimidating for some (& me!)

So BD, when do you think we will see this new bike as a finished product and when will it reach our shores? I'm guessing it will a 2009 release...hopefully.
The fuel injected America/Speedmasters should be here soon too? I wonder if that makes much of a performance difference?

[Big Dave]

I thought the Speedmaster was the most popular seller in the Triumph twin range, atleast in the oz mags anyway.

I agree if/when it arrives a 1700 twin cruiser will outsell the Rocket. Mainly because the Rocket is a big ask in terms of dollars and kilograms to haul around - too intimidating for some (& me!)

So BD, when do you think we will see this new bike as a finished product and when will it reach our shores? I'm guessing it will a 2009 release...hopefully.
The fuel injected America/Speedmasters should be here soon too? I wonder if that makes much of a performance difference?

A Rocket fits me best from the current range, but the $ is more than I can manage for a single purpose machine.

The America was the biggest seller here last time I asked - but it's probably 12mths since I did.

2009 Model would be my uninformed guess.

Web hearsay is that the Bonnes start rolling out with EFI in march. Again just hearsay - haven't talked to TNZ about it.

Rocket III tourer test next month is all I have confirmed.

[huck farley]

The America was the biggest seller here last time I asked - but it's probably 12mths since I did.

I read on the MCN website that Triumph sold more none Japanese bikes than any of the others in Australasia. Beating Harley Davidson and BMW for the first time ever.

Not bad from a small bike builder in Hinckley Leicestershitre, England.

[Big Dave]

[quote=Big Dave;1403609] The America was the biggest seller here last time I asked - but it's probably 12mths since I did. QUOTE]

I read on the MCN website that Triumph sold more none Japanese bikes than any of the others in Australasia. Beating Harley Davidson and BMW for the first time ever.

Not bad from a small bike builder in Hinckley Leicestershitre, England.

'best market share' for long time was NZ too.

[huck farley]

Well I'm going to stick my neck out here, and say that Triumph have a winner. Love it or hate it. Me thinks that a lot of the smaller twin cruisers owners will be lining up for this model from Triumph.

And as said on the thread don't judge a book by it's cover. Me thinks the finished product will be a stunning looking motorcycle, with a ton o grunt and with aftermarket pipes on it will make a honey of a sound.

Good on Triumph for being different and using a 1700cc parallel twin. As let's face it that was the old marques forte that made them famous world wide. What with James Dean, Steve McQueen, Marlon Brando to name a few putting Triumph in the spotlight.

I for one will be having a good look around one when they hit the showroom floor. As Triumph are a company that are on a roll, and turning out winner after winner, year after year. Look out Harley, here comes Triumph!!

[laRIKin]

Well I'm going to stick my neck out here, and say that Triumph have a winner. Love it or hate it. Me thinks that a lot of the smaller twin cruisers owners will be lining up for this model from Triumph.


Good on Triumph for being different and using a 1700cc parallel twin. Look out Harley, here comes Triumph!!

I agree, I know of pepole that have their names down for one now.
The motor's they have in the other cruisers is just to small for me and them.
A good motor and will do all it needs to does it well, to get around on.
But still it is one of the smallest motors.
And I'm glad if it is a twin, cruisers to me have to be twins or they are a muscle bike/cruiser.

Pity we have to wait so long for it to turn up, or even see a good pic and get info about it.
I know of at least one person that could not wait any longer and bought another bike in the mean time.
I may have thought a bout it, if it turned up sooner.
May even trade one of my bikes when is does turn up.
May even get a good deal on an older one as I think that they will be traded in by the truck loads.