"So if you meet me, have some sympathy, have some courtesy, have some taste ..."
Thanks for the link big dave, I read through the more modern era information from the 60's forward.
Dumb question time: At an engineering level is there any commonality between the Meriden and Hinkley eras?
By this I mean when the new Triumphs started rolling from the new plant built by John Bloor were they a completely new platform or an evolution from the existing bikes?
Cheers
The answer is a great one for trivia night.
Riccardo Engineering - after who the 'Triumph Riccy' is named - provided engineering design services to Hinckley and Meriden.
That's about as good as it gets common-link wise. The old factory was redeveloped as housing (from memory - don't quote me) and as previously noted - some effort was put into the 'these are different' campaign when Hinckley kicked off.
Mr Bloor's bikes pretty much started from scratch and consulted firms like Cosworth and Lotus in the early designs. They also sent a team of engineers to observe Kawasaki production processes.
They are. It's part of the "You don't ride proper bikes and are therefore not cool enough to talk to us" thing. I dunno what the whole bike marque "image" thing is all about and it's pretty childish IMHO. Shit, I'll talk to anybody on 2 wheels. Since ditching the Duc I've been looked down on or ignored at some watering holes. I either didn't notice it in the UK or simply couldn't give a fuck as I was having fun putting in serious miles. Hell, I attended a HOG rally in Scotland on a mate's Kawasaki 440 twin and was treated exactly the same as my mates on "proper bikes". Couldn't imagine doing that here.
New platform - no common parts - different design ethos - different bikes for a different market and a very different time. What they do have in common is the same number of wheels, cylinders and general layout plus a reference to a place in america written on the side.
A great many people think this is a splendid arrangement - a few people don't, some people think they are somehow connected through the ages of time and even confuse the new bikes for restored old ones and some bright sparks have asked me how I like the new scrambler... ie confused an old bike for a new one.
People's taste is random is the only lesson in all of this... If you like em for what they are - fine - they are better than a good thing but if you don't like em, get ready to be told off because not liking them (even a little bit) is not allowed ;-)
btw - I dont like them, I was horribly disappointed in them and still think Mr triumph could have done a lot better job BUT sales disagree with me so I suppose that makes me a majority of one... Mark Twain said "We are discreet sheep; we wait to see how the drove is going, and then go with the drove." So once the first magazine declared it just like the original except better.... (right next to an expensive advert from Triumph themselves) It was a done deal. Muppets like me would not have a clue anyway as I'm a well known non conforist and trouble maker... (as well as a bit of a bastard too)
Taste aside - right now the Modern ones compare well with any similar class of vehicle.
The 1050 triple is in my opinion the best mass produced street motorcycle powerplant yet.
Of any of the several hundred I've evaluated anyway.
I'll find out all about the new Triumphs in around ten years time - there will be someone with one that doesn't go,and he can't afford someone to fix it for him.That's where I come in....bottom feeding is the best way to bet the bikes you want.
>Insert short joke here<
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Bookmarks