Triumph Tiger 800

[bross]

Originally Posted by Windy Rider

Yes it is very possible to drag the pegs, but you have to be really hooking to do it. I have done it twice in twelve months, scared the shit out of me. You have to have the right type of corner do do it, the first time was with road tyres and the second time was with nobbies on and loaded up with 20kg of luggage, but it was on a very tight corner and I was really going for it.

I do it every once in awhile on one corner on my commute, a tight uphill switchback right hander. Have done it with the OEM TrailWings and even when I had TKC80s mounted for a dual sport ride. The handling of the Tiger even with knobs continues to blow me away.

[strider.deano]

Originally Posted by cug

You know the corner - not checked
You know me - not checked
You've been there when it happened - not checked

Your comment isn't very helpful in that context. That never touch down is unfortunately plain not true. It's fairly easy to touch down with the Tiger.

You're right....I don't know and I wasn't there. No offense intended.

Maybe I'm doing wrong, but I've only nicked a peg once or twice with the XC.

After riding 4 or 5 of the XC competitors, I found the XC's ride and handling to be spot on for anything but the track. (Only the Ducati MS handled better!) The XC is rarely too soft for me. I do agree the brakes are not "well defined", just adequate.

[cug]

Originally Posted by strider.deano

You're right....I don't know and I wasn't there. No offense intended.

No offense taken. Just the typical response to "you're doing it wrong ..." ...

Originally Posted by strider.deano

Maybe I'm doing wrong, but I've only nicked a peg once or twice with the XC.

I generally ride in a way that reduces the likelyhood, like shift body weight and such, but I'm not a "knee out, hang off" rider and the ergonomics of the Tiger don't support that well anyways.

The main issue with this, as already mentioned, are bumps in the middle of a nice laid over corner. The softer the suspension the more you get additional compression there and the more likely you are to touch down.

Therefore personally I think that lowering the XC combines the two downsides of XC and Roadie in a dangerous way: soft(er) suspension and low ground clearance. I never understood that. If the very basic layout of the bike doesn't fit you, why force it in a way that generally doesn't work very well? Lowered bikes all have issues in one way or another. You're likely to get better results with a bike that was meant to be low enough. But again, that might just be me.

[ducnut]

Originally Posted by blacktiger

A chunk of the price comes from all the gaskets and O rings they replace when the valve cover comes off.

If they're replacing the valve cover and plug hole O-rings with a valve check, find a new dealer, as those are reusable.

Originally Posted by bross

My beef is why can't they build a moto engine with hydraulic valves?

It's all about the RPM. Hydraulic valvetrains simply can't be spun up. The bikes you note are cruisers, which won't even see the RPM where the triple starts coming on.

[marloweluke]

[QUOTE= It's all about the RPM. Hydraulic valvetrains simply can't be spun up. The bikes you note are cruisers, which won't even see the RPM where the triple starts coming on.[/QUOTE]

I'm quite sure my 1985 Honda Nighthawk 750 S had hydraulic valve adjusters. Can't remember what the redline was, but pretty sure it was around 10,000 like the Tiger. Awesome bike for it's day, including shaft drive. Maintenance was indeed minimal, but you did have to balance the carbs once in a while.

[amanlikemike]

Saw this and thought of you FFs...

[ducnut]

Originally Posted by cug

The biggest downside of the Tiger is the mushy brake. It's just not a "well defined" stopper. I heard different brake pads can make that better and would love to hear positive stories about that, but compared to other bikes I rode, it's certainly its biggest weakness.

I think you and I are probably similar, in riding styles and experience. I use Ferodo, on everything that I personally ride. Their Sinter Grip ST is a pad I think you should try. They can be a little noisy, but, they're very aggressive without the need for a lot of temperature. If that doesn't give you the lever feel you desire, you can easily swap a takeoff master cylinder from a more sporty Triumph. I'm not sure on all the piston diameters of each bike, but, that's where I'd be looking.

[ducnut]

Originally Posted by marloweluke

I'm quite sure my 1985 Honda Nighthawk 750 S had hydraulic valve adjusters. Can't remember what the redline was, but pretty sure it was around 10,000 like the Tiger. Awesome bike for it's day, including shaft drive. Maintenance was indeed minimal, but you did have to balance the carbs once in a while.

Definitely, nice bikes, even today.

I no longer work in a dealership. Otherwise, I could verify exactly what it had. A quick web search shows that it had rocker arms, but, can't quickly find anything further.

[Poweranger]

While we are on the subject of brakes I have noticed my fronts produce a lot of brake dust. I'm still in the break in period but do not remember my other new bikes producing dust. Do these pads just produce dust at break in and then clean up later? Or are they just the cheaper ones that always produce lots of black dust?

[XCRider803]

Originally Posted by marloweluke

I'm quite sure my 1985 Honda Nighthawk 750 S had hydraulic valve adjusters. Can't remember what the redline was, but pretty sure it was around 10,000 like the Tiger. Awesome bike for it's day, including shaft drive. Maintenance was indeed minimal, but you did have to balance the carbs once in a while.

Yep, my 650 Nighthawk from that era had hydrolic lifters, tensioner and shaft drive. Ran like a scaulded dog and never had to do anything to it.

[ducnut]

Originally Posted by Poweranger

While we are on the subject of brakes I have noticed my fronts produce a lot of brake dust. I'm still in the break in period but do not remember my other new bikes producing dust. Do these pads just produce dust at break in and then clean up later? Or are they just the cheaper ones that always produce lots of black dust?

I'm not exactly sure what the compound is. But, organic pads are the dustiest and least aggressive. Semi-metallic are less dusty and quite a bit more aggressive. Given the intended use of the XC, they're probably organic. If they're too aggressive, people always complain.

[kingofZroad]

I wish the rear brake was more aggressive...

[blacktiger]

Originally Posted by ducnut

If they're replacing the valve cover and plug hole O-rings with a valve check, find a new dealer, as those are reusable.

They should be but according to the Triumph manual they're replaced on a service. I certainly won't be replacing them every time when I start doing it myself.

[blacktiger]

Originally Posted by ducnut

It's all about the RPM. Hydraulic valvetrains simply can't be spun up. The bikes you note are cruisers, which won't even see the RPM where the triple starts coming on.

Not true. The Honda CBX750 in the mid '80s had Hydraulic tappets. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Honda_CBX750

http://teamrc17.net/articles/104/a-r...rbike-magazine
Look under "Power train".

[blacktiger]

Originally Posted by ducnut

I think you and I are probably similar, in riding styles and experience. I use Ferodo, on everything that I personally ride. Their Sinter Grip ST is a pad I think you should try. They can be a little noisy, but, they're very aggressive without the need for a lot of temperature. If that doesn't give you the lever feel you desire, you can easily swap a takeoff master cylinder from a more sporty Triumph. I'm not sure on all the piston diameters of each bike, but, that's where I'd be looking.

Thing is, IMO, you don't want an aggressive front brake on a bike that's likely to be ridden on dirt. I think they got it right for the XC at least. That slight "mushy" feel gives the brake, er, feel. e.g. I can drag the front going down loose hills using my "brain ABS".