Triumph Tiger 800

[ducatirdr]

Originally Posted by blacktiger

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".

I have a KTM woods bike and it has excellent brakes with strong initial bite. The brakes feel like overkill on that machine. I adjust to them quickly and appreciate their strong, save my arse, initial bite stopping power. I wish my Triumph had that same inital bite. I'd rather have to back off, then feel like I need to squeeze the juice out of them. They have a feeling of being undersize for the machine to me. I'm sure there is a reason for this like you mention but I wish they had a bit stronger feel to them.

[KildareMan]

Originally Posted by ducatirdr

I have a KTM woods bike and it has excellent brakes with strong initial bite. The brakes feel like overkill on that machine. I adjust to them quickly and appreciate their strong, save my arse, initial bite stopping power. I wish my Triumph had that same inital bite. I'd rather have to back off, then feel like I need to squeeze the juice out of them. They have a feeling of being undersize for the machine to me. I'm sure there is a reason for this like you mention but I wish they had a bit stronger feel to them.

Try EBC HH pads.

[ducnut]

Originally Posted by blacktiger

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".

What was the redline of that engine? I'm guessing the Honda was at the absolute limit.

As mentioned, I'm not exactly sure of the layout and design of that vavletrain. I know it has rockers, which may contribute to Honda being able to run hydraulic lifters. The triple is shim-under-bucket. I'm not sure if there's ever been a bike with a hydraulic valvetrain and having the cams directly acting on the valves.

Originally Posted by blacktiger

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".

See this post and "intended purpose". Different strokes for different folks.

[KildareMan]

Originally Posted by blacktiger

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

The Red one on the right was mine. Believe me when I say that engine was a peach and no slouch. Nearly as good as the Tiger. Wonder what happened to it?

[bross]

Originally Posted by ducnut

What was the redline of that engine? I'm guessing the Honda was at the absolute limit.

As mentioned, I'm not exactly sure of the layout and design of that vavletrain. I know it has rockers, which may contribute to Honda being able to run hydraulic lifters. The triple is shim-under-bucket. I'm not sure if there's ever been a bike with a hydraulic valvetrain and having the cams directly acting on the valves.

Who cares what the redline was/is? You mentioned the bikes I was talking about we're cruisers, and yes my Meanstreak was a cruiser, but I also mentioned Buell which are a long way from a cruiser. Great handling bikes with nearly 100hp (at the crank). Perfect for the road. The only people who really complained about Buells were riders coming off high strung 600 super sports who thought you had to be spinning 5 digits on the tach just to get moving.

In all honesty, how much of your riding time do you spend at 3/4 - wfo? I admit I love the sound of the Triumph triple when wound up, especially my wife's Street Triple even better than my Tiger, but seriously, that's probably less than 5% of my riding.

I know a lot of riders need that high rpm HIT of acceleration, I've owned KTM 2 strokes so know what that rush is like, but I also like a linear (read boring) rush of constant acceleration, which can be deceptively fast.

Honda had the chance with the new NC700, but chose not to. Oh well, going for my first ride on Friday in months, woo hoo!

[bluesman]

I tend to disagree about Buells. Worst part of them was that tractor motor.
Good torquey, hard pulling engine does not have to be like that - running out of breath before you finished blinking. I was very happy with my Honda VTR engine. After that Buell I tried felt like it's motor place is in field at nearby farm. Like chassis was totally let down by motor. Very narrow rpm range does not make good engine for asphalt-going bike enthusiastic riding. Specially when you ride somewhere like mountain passes in Switzerland.

[Yossarian™]

Originally Posted by bluesman

I tend to disagree about Buells. Worst part of them was that tractor motor.
Good torquey, hard pulling engine does not have to be like that - running out of breath before you finished blinking.

Agreed wholeheartedly. The 1125 was different, of course, but the other Buell models, based on the H-D v-twins -- in a nutshell, WTF!? Just as it's getting a head of steam going, it runs out of RPMs.

[KACinPA]

Originally Posted by Yossarian™

Agreed wholeheartedly. The 1125 was different, of course, but the other Buell models, based on the H-D v-twins -- in a nutshell, WTF!? Just as it's getting a head of steam going, it runs out of RPMs.

Sadly, that was a constraint placed on Eric Buell by H-D. Anything he built had to use H-D based V-Twin engine. Even the 500cc Blast was half of a H-D v-twin.

I believe he initially wanted to use a Rotax parallel twin, a la the BMW "F" engine in several bikes but was told no by H-D just before they kicked him to the curb.

[Vzuke]

This is a little embarrassing. I decided to mount my universal Acerbis mud/debris flap (this one keeps the crap off the rear shock). When I pulled the battery out I was surprised to see all those connectors/doodads in the bottom of battery box. I also noticed the “hooks” for the battery retention. Uh oh.

When I picked up the bike back in the Spring of 2011 the rubber strap was just laying in the storage area with the tool bag. I thought it was for the tool bag or the U-lock. I cut out all the U-lock features, to include that rubber bumper on the back of the passenger seat, and filled up the space with tire repair stuff and a little compressor. So I didn’t need that strap.




I never really thought about it. On my wife’s bike the seat is the battery retention device!

Well it’s were it should be now. I was having a devil of a time trying to hook the back side. So I cheated a little. I just used two tie wraps on the front end. It was time for dinner!



While I was cleaning up the bottom of the box I removed what I guess is a sensor (Its the one with the purple tube on it). Is that to let you know that your battery box is full of water?



Need to rethink the mud flap mounting idea. Maybe a L bracket to the bottom of the battery box, then mount the flap to that.

Another day.

[ducnut]

Originally Posted by bross

Who cares what the redline was/is? You mentioned the bikes I was talking about we're cruisers, and yes my Meanstreak was a cruiser, but I also mentioned Buell which are a long way from a cruiser. Great handling bikes with nearly 100hp (at the crank). Perfect for the road. The only people who really complained about Buells were riders coming off high strung 600 super sports who thought you had to be spinning 5 digits on the tach just to get moving.

The Buell engine you mention had a cruiser-based engine that was very RPM limited (5000-5500RPM?). The knife/fork connecting rod setup will not take much RPM. They had to be cammed in such a way that they only made power, just before the rev-limiter. Because they have to be spun-up and get ridden like a sportbike, they don't stay together. There's a huge Buell club, about an hour north of me. They've blown so many engines it's crazy; one guy had blown three in 2yrs. Bob Taft (multi-time, H-D world record holder) is about 45min north of me. Even he will tell you the engines aren't worth a crap for use in a Buell.

I can't stand 600cc, I-4 sportbikes, for just the reason you stated. Yet, I complained about Buell's use of a Sportster engine. Why? Because after riding my 900SS, the Buell engine felt like a joke. Even the XB series was a letdown, in the engine department.

Originally Posted by bross

Honda had the chance with the new NC700, but chose not to.

You're contradicting yourself. They built a solid, tractable motor that's efficient at street RPM. What more could you want?

BTW, Just busting your balls a bit.

Originally Posted by bluesman

I tend to disagree about Buells. Worst part of them was that tractor motor.
Good torquey, hard pulling engine does not have to be like that - running out of breath before you finished blinking. I was very happy with my Honda VTR engine. After that Buell I tried felt like it's motor place is in field at nearby farm. Like chassis was totally let down by motor. Very narrow rpm range does not make good engine for asphalt-going bike enthusiastic riding. Specially when you ride somewhere like mountain passes in Switzerland.

Agreed.

The VTR was a brilliant bike; sorta' like a reliable, Japanese Ducati.

[ducnut]

Originally Posted by Vzuke

That poor strap will disintegrate in a year, anyway.

[browneye]

Originally Posted by Vzuke

This is a little embarrassing. I decided to mount my universal Acerbis mud/debris flap (this one keeps the crap off the rear shock). When I pulled the battery out I was surprised to see all those connectors/doodads in the bottom of battery box. I also noticed the “hooks” for the battery retention. Uh oh.



Need to rethink the mud flap mounting idea. Maybe a L bracket to the bottom of the battery box, then mount the flap to that.

Another day.

Yeah, I cut all that crap out of mine as well.

While you're in there, reroute the lead for the master fuse under the battery. If that thing ever blows it's total BS to get to it. I guess we all need to make sure we have a headlight fuse as well as it also operates the starter. We don't want to be left dead in the water.

I guess the mud flap mod thingy makes sense for those that see a LOT of mud. There was some discussion about the shock sitting in front of the rear tire, but the exposed shaft is well below and over 5K miles mine hasn't seen any mud on it. The bike hasn't seen much mud, just a little on the last big trip.

[lmychajluk]

Originally Posted by browneye

...I guess the mud flap mod thingy makes sense for those that see a LOT of mud. ...

My 800 was filthy within the first 300 miles, and I wasn't even looking for mud, incl. the back of the 50L bag that was sitting on my tail. Already got the front fender extender (which I'll install as soon as I get a chance to get the bike, and under the front fender, cleaned up good), and am looking to pick up a rear fender extender and maybe the R&G rear hugger (which should keep the shock clean).

[bross]

Originally Posted by ducnut

The Buell engine you mention had a cruiser-based engine that was very RPM limited (5000-5500RPM?). The knife/fork connecting rod setup will not take much RPM. They had to be cammed in such a way that they only made power, just before the rev-limiter. Because they have to be spun-up and get ridden like a sportbike, they don't stay together. There's a huge Buell club, about an hour north of me. They've blown so many engines it's crazy; one guy had blown three in 2yrs. Bob Taft (multi-time, H-D world record holder) is about 45min north of me. Even he will tell you the engines aren't worth a crap for use in a Buell.

I can't stand 600cc, I-4 sportbikes, for just the reason you stated. Yet, I complained about Buell's use of a Sportster engine. Why? Because after riding my 900SS, the Buell engine felt like a joke. Even the XB series was a letdown, in the engine department.



You're contradicting yourself. They built a solid, tractable motor that's efficient at street RPM. What more could you want?

BTW, Just busting your balls a bit.

Nope not contradicting myself, I'm trying to focus on hydraulic lifters and the total lack of maintenance that comes with them. I rode what I consider one of Honda's best engines for three years. The CBF1000. You guys in the US never got to ride it but that was one gem of a motor. Take a 170HP CBR motor (from the 2005 CBR I believe), and cram all that goodness into 90 some odd hp, BUT with torque galore from off idle all the way to redline. That bike has a torque curve as flat as Kansas, or Saskatchewan. You could literally pull away from a stop in 6th gear if you wanted to. Great bike in the twisties, just pick a gear, usually 2nd or 3rd and roll on, roll off as you're concentrating on your line etc. Sure you could bounce it off the rev limiter and work through the gears but it sure wasn't necessary to have fun. Way better bike to ride than the R1200RT I sold when I bought the CBF. A few people who rode the CBF called it boring, my wife included, she even calls my Tiger boring compared to her Street Triple R, but I'll take torque over hp any day.

[Poweranger]

Originally Posted by lmychajluk

My 800 was filthy within the first 300 miles, and I wasn't even looking for mud, incl. the back of the 50L bag that was sitting on my tail. Already got the front fender extender (which I'll install as soon as I get a chance to get the bike, and under the front fender, cleaned up good), and am looking to pick up a rear fender extender and maybe the R&G rear hugger (which should keep the shock clean).

First 50 miles on my roadie and it was covered with mud. I live on a dirt road so no big deal to me I'm used to dirty vehicles. What I didn't like was how much mud packed up in the radiator. I installed the front fender extender and it helps a little. But I still get mud packed up on about the bottom two inches of the radiator. Hopefully when the weather warms up this will not effect cooling enough to be a problem.