Triumph 1700 twin

[xwhatsit]

I think it would kick you

[FilthyLuka]

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

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,

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,

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

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?
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.

[Big Dave]

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