ADVrider

Go Back   ADVrider > Bikes > Beasts > British Beasts: Triumph Tigers
User Name
Password
Register Inmates Photos Site Rules Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 11-04-2010, 07:39 AM   #1576
Keithy
Chaotically Keith
 
Keithy's Avatar
 
Joined: Aug 2010
Location: Leeds England
Oddometer: 286
A few more months and the true spec and costs will be known.....Maybe!

Just how heavy is that XT1200Z Zapp?

With the price of the accessories Triumph are having a laugh!

One moment the gel seat is standard next it's an extra......Starting to become pissed off with the bike nobody has ridden yet (Yeah MCN nobber is a nobody )
Keithy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-04-2010, 07:45 AM   #1577
John Ashman
Adventurer Wannabe
 
Joined: Aug 2008
Location: Viejo Mexico
Oddometer: 2,301
Quote:
Originally Posted by llamapacker
The U.S. specs are not that good, sigh.

fuel tank = 19L
wheelbase = 1568mm

Can't imagine why the tank size would be different and for that matter how the wheelbase is different, maybe different tires, but 1.2"??? I would love it to be a typo tho and have the shorter wheelbase.
You're being sardonic, right?
John Ashman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-04-2010, 07:48 AM   #1578
RichardU
Let's Ride
 
Joined: Aug 2004
Location: Marietta, GA
Oddometer: 903
Quote:
Originally Posted by KildareMan
He was talking about the 800 not the 800XC
Thanks. I have the big Tiger and love it, but I'm always open to alternatives, particularly when the result is less weight. In this case, I can't see giving up the power and ergonomics of the big Tiger to lose 40 pounds. Although, if I recall correctly, that's the same weight difference between the vStrom 650 and 1000. A lot of people felt those 40 pounds made a huge difference in handling. We'll see if there is a similar trade-off with the 800, although the 1050 probably has a handling advantage with 17" front and rear.

On the other hand, the 800XC is a different class of bike, and one that might make sense compared to appropriate alternatives.
RichardU is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-04-2010, 08:07 AM   #1579
Gravehunter
Studly Adventurer
 
Gravehunter's Avatar
 
Joined: Feb 2008
Location: Clarinda, Iowa, USA
Oddometer: 753
Quote:
Originally Posted by John Ashman
You're being sardonic, right?
Getting your "word of the day" put to use pretty early in the day. NICE!
__________________
2005 BMW 1200GS
Gravehunter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-04-2010, 09:57 AM   #1580
John Ashman
Adventurer Wannabe
 
Joined: Aug 2008
Location: Viejo Mexico
Oddometer: 2,301
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gravehunter
Getting your "word of the day" put to use pretty early in the day. NICE!
I'm [functionally] bikeless at the moment! What else am I going to do?
John Ashman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-04-2010, 10:23 AM   #1581
markbvt
Beastly Adventurer
 
Joined: Sep 2007
Location: Georgia, Vermont (that's one town, not two states)
Oddometer: 2,765
Triumph press release on the XC once again claims adjustable forks.





--mark
__________________
'11 Triumph Tiger 800 XC / '03 Honda XR650L / '01 Triumph Bonneville cafe

My ride reports: Missile silos, Labrador, twisties, and more

Bennington Triumph Bash, May 29-31, 2015
markbvt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-04-2010, 10:33 AM   #1582
SpaceManSpiff
Man of Mystery
 
SpaceManSpiff's Avatar
 
Joined: Mar 2007
Location: Tucson, Arizona
Oddometer: 1,075
Quote:
Originally Posted by RichardU
Thanks. I have the big Tiger and love it, but I'm always open to alternatives, particularly when the result is less weight. In this case, I can't see giving up the power and ergonomics of the big Tiger to lose 40 pounds. Although, if I recall correctly, that's the same weight difference between the vStrom 650 and 1000. A lot of people felt those 40 pounds made a huge difference in handling. We'll see if there is a similar trade-off with the 800, although the 1050 probably has a handling advantage with 17" front and rear.

On the other hand, the 800XC is a different class of bike, and one that might make sense compared to appropriate alternatives.
Good points Richard. Courses for horses, for sure. I liked the idea of the Tiger 1050 but it didn't quite do it for me. A little too road focused, the seat forced me into one seating position, the passenger and luggage sits up high. You are right, the DL650 weighed 43 lbs less than its big brother --and the two bikes had different handling and road manners. I rode a wee for 54k miles and found it to be a great all-around bike but lacking in finishing touches, braking and suspension, and slightly top-heavy too. I am hoping the Tiger 800 will fill that role for me.

The engine in the 800 should be a cracker --(94 hp @ 9250 and 59 ft-lbs @ 5750). the 3500 rpm spread between torque and hp peaks should make for a very wide, usable powerband.
Edit: the triumph uk /usa site has the torque peak occuring at 7800 rpm, so . Eh, if it is a bigger more practical street triple --I'm down.

SpaceManSpiff screwed with this post 11-04-2010 at 10:45 AM
SpaceManSpiff is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-04-2010, 10:36 AM   #1583
Lion BR
I'd rather be riding
 
Lion BR's Avatar
 
Joined: Oct 2005
Location: Oregon
Oddometer: 4,137
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gravehunter
I'd disagree but you've been riding since 1966 so there is no point.
Quote:
Originally Posted by nomosnow
IMO extra weight will NOT improve any bikes handling on gravel . Handling on gravel depends upon steering geometry, tire choice, and handlebar position.
Note I have been riding on gravel since 1966.



In my humble opinion, both are missing the point.

Curves:

If you want to go fast, on gravel roads, you will not be steering with the front wheel. You will be steering with the throttle (and the rear wheel). Your front wheel should either be neutral to the curve, or should be pointing outwards, off the curve, if you are really sliding and being aggressive. The motorcycle weight is irrelevant. Increasing acceleration (throttle action) is the key.

If you want to steer with the front wheel, leaning like you do on pavement, it will eventually wash out no matter how heavy your bike is. As you try to go faster on gravel roads that way, eventually the front wheel will go.

Straight Line on Gravel:

Going straight, at higher speeds, you want to consider the risk of a wobble. That is also a function of bike set up, suspension, and weight balance back and front. Not the total weight of the bike necessarily.

But then again, YMMV.
__________________
Whenever we are riding, we are an ambassador to our sport

I'd rather be riding!


Lion BR is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 11-04-2010, 10:38 AM   #1584
SpaceManSpiff
Man of Mystery
 
SpaceManSpiff's Avatar
 
Joined: Mar 2007
Location: Tucson, Arizona
Oddometer: 1,075
Interesting press release. It also mentions soft luggage options --but we have only seen the hard cases so far. and the tall tankbag, of course.
SpaceManSpiff is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-04-2010, 10:42 AM   #1585
Gravehunter
Studly Adventurer
 
Gravehunter's Avatar
 
Joined: Feb 2008
Location: Clarinda, Iowa, USA
Oddometer: 753
That would be nice if it was adjustable and i would think it would be since its a bike they keep touting about its off road capabilities.
__________________
2005 BMW 1200GS
Gravehunter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-04-2010, 10:49 AM   #1586
Gravehunter
Studly Adventurer
 
Gravehunter's Avatar
 
Joined: Feb 2008
Location: Clarinda, Iowa, USA
Oddometer: 753
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lion BR
Quote:
Originally Posted by nomosnow
IMO extra weight will NOT improve any bikes handling on gravel . Handling on gravel depends upon steering geometry, tire choice, and handlebar position.
Note I have been riding on gravel since 1966.




In my humble opinion, both are missing the point.

Curves:

If you want to go fast, on gravel roads, you will not be steering with the front wheel. You will be steering with the throttle (and the rear wheel). Your front wheel should either be neutral to the curve, or should be pointing outwards, off the curve, if you are really sliding and being aggressive. The motorcycle weight is irrelevant. Increasing acceleration (throttle action) is the key.

If you want to steer with the front wheel, leaning like you do on pavement, it will eventually wash out no matter how heavy your bike is. As you try to go faster on gravel roads that way, eventually the front wheel will go.

Straight Line on Gravel:

Going straight, at higher speeds, you want to consider the risk of a wobble. That is also a function of bike set up, suspension, and weight balance back and front. Not the total weight of the bike necessarily.

But then again, YMMV.
Good point. I was reffering to its stability on gravel under normal riding. Not trying to push the limits and riding really hard, powersliding, whatever.. etc....
I was meaning the heavier bike was much less sensative to changes in gravel depth/conditions etc.. It was much smoother and danced around on the gravel a lot less than the lighter bike.
If i was wanting to manhandle it and get really aggressive a lighter bike would be better.

In order to not derail the thread here i'm done talking about this. But i understand both points of view. Lots of factors.
__________________
2005 BMW 1200GS
Gravehunter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-04-2010, 11:04 AM   #1587
John in Leeds
Gnarly Adventurer
 
John in Leeds's Avatar
 
Joined: Jan 2007
Oddometer: 378
Quote:
Originally Posted by nomosnow
IMO extra weight will NOT improve any bikes handling on gravel . Handling on gravel depends upon steering geometry, tire choice, and handlebar position.
Note I have been riding on gravel since 1966.
To the average rider (not the riding god) the combination of big weight and poor off road is not good news. And I'm not talking about unsurfaced motorway here. Although the 1200gs and 990 Adventure have some talent they are still lard ass bikes as is the 950 SE and they can bite you hard. Lighter bikes invariably give you an easier time given like for like in set up.

Note - I have been riding on rough since before 1966 and have always been rubbish
__________________
Moto Guzzi V11 Rosso Corsa
Highland Outback 950
Highland Motard 950 x 3

Highland for the Body and Guzzi for the Soul
John in Leeds is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-04-2010, 11:45 AM   #1588
Adv Grifter
on the road o'dreams
 
Adv Grifter's Avatar
 
Joined: Jan 2010
Location: Passing ADV Stalkers in California
Oddometer: 6,128
Quote:
Originally Posted by markbvt
Triumph press release on the XC once again claims adjustable forks.





--mark
It would appear Triumph are committed to backing a fully capable off road bike. They talk about "tackling jumps" and "rough trails", claiming the bike is "tough as they come".

This is quite a departure from any previous Tiger where Triumph specifically backed away from any endorsement of off road use of the bikes.

Same for Suzuki. Having talked ... In Person ... to the Suzuki Vstrom project leader, I can assure you Suzuki never, ever suggested going off road on either Vstrom and were shocked to hear just what owners were putting the bikes through

I'm thinking that toughness Triumph claim cost some weight. Probably worth it to have a bike whose sub frame won't crack or who's foot pegs won't snap off a la BMW.
Adv Grifter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-04-2010, 11:55 AM   #1589
Adv Grifter
on the road o'dreams
 
Adv Grifter's Avatar
 
Joined: Jan 2010
Location: Passing ADV Stalkers in California
Oddometer: 6,128
Quote:
Originally Posted by markbvt
What makes a KTM 950 Super Enduro better offroad than an F800GS (besides suspension -- we have to remove that variable for now because none of us have any idea of the XC's suspension quality)? Most of their specs are very similar, but I've never heard anyone say that the BMW is the KTM's equal in the dirt, even with upgraded suspension. So what makes the difference? Mass centralization? Some other aspect of the bike's geometry? What?
I think the 950 SE has a combination of things that make it work. Mostly its good chassis design and really good test riders (racers no doubt) giving excellent feedback to the factory. Few other things:
Forks:
KTM: 48mm BMW F800GS: 45mm
Travel:
KTM: 10" / 10" BMW 9" / 8.5'

Claimed weight is a mystery. BMW claim 392 lbs. dry weight for the F800GS. Yet reliable USA MCN weighed the bike and claim 480 lbs.
Tester of the KTM 950SE claim wet weight around 450 lbs.

I'd say most important would be chassis geometry, front rear bias, mass centralization and suspension set up. ALL those things make the KTM better.

But the KTM 950 SE is very tall. Too tall for me. For those 6 ft. or more, no problem. The BMW F800GS is low and feels much smaller ... and actually lighter. (to me) In pro race mode the KTM probably has the advantage.
Quote:
Originally Posted by markbvt
I don't think we can judge the XC's offroad prowess by reading a spec sheet. Triumph have proven that they build good bikes that handle well. They're not stupid; if they've designed the XC with offroad capability in mind as they say they have, I tend to believe they've probably made it work pretty well. Test rides will tell us a lot more than specs.
All true. I'm thinking despite the less than perfect "on paper" performance, the XC800 will likely impress in the real world.
Adv Grifter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-04-2010, 12:02 PM   #1590
Pcfly
Dude?! Seriously??
 
Pcfly's Avatar
 
Joined: Nov 2008
Location: SF. Bay Area
Oddometer: 1,121
Quote:
Originally Posted by Adv Grifter
It would appear Triumph are committed to backing a fully capable off road bike. They talk about "tackling jumps" and "rough trails", claiming the bike is "tough as they come".

This is quite a departure from any previous Tiger where Triumph specifically backed away from any endorsement of off road use of the bikes.

Same for Suzuki. Having talked ... In Person ... to the Suzuki Vstrom project leader, I can assure you Suzuki never, ever suggested going off road on either Vstrom and were shocked to hear just what owners were putting the bikes through

I'm thinking that toughness Triumph claim cost some weight. Probably worth it to have a bike whose sub frame won't crack or who's foot pegs won't snap off a la BMW.
As for durability testing, until the real world gets these things and beats them up for a year I wouldn't believe any manufacturing claims. I know that sounds anti kool-aid but only after a year or so did we hear the ramblings of the bent shock bolts and fuel tank cracks and softy suspension of the 800GS! I'm just saying.......
__________________
2011 Husqvarna TE-630 The Red Raptor
2012 Yamaha 50th Anniversary Badass-Sounding R1
2008 BMW 1200GS The Blue Rhino (SOLD)
Pcfly is online now   Reply With Quote
Reply

Share

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

.
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump


Times are GMT -7.   It's 03:56 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.5
Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ADVrider 2011-2015