Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Land of the Rising Sun: ADV Bikes from Japan' started by Kali Trailrider, Feb 8, 2013.
Last year I test rode a Tiger XC at Doug Douglas and was impressed by the low and mid range. It 's grunty! The high end is, like all Triumph triples, always there if you want it.
I've owned a R1150GS and a R1100S BCR (and bunch of Airheads). Later I picked up a 2001 Sprint RS 955i (for $2,500!) that was superior to the big boxers in almost every way, I was amazed. I don't especially like or dislike the triple engine exhaust sound but the power and smoothness is undeniable.
I had to sell the RS as I got a three level fusion surgery in my neck back in Nov. The recovery is 6-12 months and I didn't want to deal with keeping it happy. And it's depressing enough going through this without having to look at a bike every day and you can't ride. I won't be able to really sit a sport bike anymore, even a comfy one like the Sprint, so the XC (or Roadie) is top of my list when the Doc says I'm recovered.
That's keeping it positive. Sounds like you have a lot to look forward to when you get released.
The time drags though...
Today the friend I sold the Sprint RS to came by and he was riding a Tiger 955i he'd just bought! I have never sat on one much less ridden one. So I did pick it up off the stand and sit on it - I liked it, enough that I may keep an eye out for one. When he took off it sounded identical to the RS.
We not talking "tuning" we are talking basics, more cubic inches/cubic centimeters means more torque end of story. No cover ups necessary by bring in exhaust back pressure, Oh, please.
Just because you don't understand something doesn't mean it isn't true.
While it IS true that "There's no replacement for displacement", is is also true that if that were the only factor in torque production then all engines would produce peak torque from idle to redline.
A 3.3 litre model A motor puts out only slightly more peak torque than my 1.2 litre '07 GS. The low compression model A engine hits its peak torque output @ well under 2k rpm while the GS spins past 5k to reach it's peak, and the difference is entirely caused by the factors I mentioned. A ninja 250 hits peak torque at over 9k, IIRC. It's ALL about tuning, and BTW, the Tiger 800 is tuned to produce at least 90% of it's peak thruout the rev range, unlike almost any other engine.
AT 3,500 rpm, the Tiger and GS both put out about the same torque.
...unfortunately there is little if any difference between "paying attention" and experienced rider senses to be of any significance there kip... Maybe you need to chill on the ham sandwiches if you are "feeling" the difference. <?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-comfficeffice" /><o></o>
I'll admit I love my XC, but that love comes from riding plenty of other bikes and the distinguishing impression it has provided.
Sorry to interrupt your physics lesson...
(EDIT: you're a GS owner with prostate issues. Of course you feel everything)
My remark was that if YOU can't tell the difference in YOUR bike (ANY bike) between solo, and 2 up with luggage, you've never actually ridden a bike at all. Adding over 100 lbs to your loaded weight makes a huge difference in suspension compression and torque to weight ratio. On "your" Tiger, the torque divided by wieght nets about 20% less power per pound with an average passenger and luggage than it does solo.
Your assinine remarks about ham sandwitches have nothing to do with anyone's ability to tell if thier bike is carrying a passenger and luggage or not. FWIW, I'm a fit 6'-1" and 220 lbs and even if I weighed twice that I'd STILL know if somebody was on the back of the bike (both in acceleration and suspension). Anyone who thinks otherwise has never been on a bike before, and I'm confident you haven't.
Nothing wrong with my prostate, thanks for asking. The stock GS seat, OTOH, is a torture device.
Damn, my Tiger must be THAT great If I can't "Feel" the difference huh kip.
STFU and quit bitching you FF's.
Taking a great thread and crapping all over it. GB will come along and purge you both.
Yup, started with helpful info to the original poster. Still stand behind what I offered.
I'd take the KTM 9xx over them any day...had the GS...it doesn't like fire roads...suspension needs a 1000e upgrade to come close to what the KTM offers out of the box...suspension components / weight distribution / balanced chassis is what you should be looking into if you're planning to have fun while riding a heavy bike on dirt. The KTM is the undisputable king of the bunch for that use....SE's or Adventure...get one while they're still available...
But then you already chose....good luck with that...
Says a guy with an all orange sig.
I would have to agree, and I too have been a long time KTM fanboy. However, and it's a big however, not all of us want to deal with the LC8 lump. I'd have a RFS or RC4 lighweight in a heartbeat, but really didn't want to deal with their bigger motor(s). I was never a fan of all that plastic shrouding either, that you have to remove before commencing any work on the bike. Since I've never worked on one maybe that is less of an issue than I perceive it to be.
And then there's the fueling issue, said to offer lightswitch like throttle control. And neither is as good of a road bike, nor for 2-up, as the Tiger.
So there you go, just a few minor reasons we chose the new Triumph.
Again, I would tend to agree, if a guy intends to ride a lot of dirt with his big bike then the 950/990 is a better tool. I also tend to think the very few that are intent on hardcore dirt with their XC chose the wrong bike. One look at the aircleaner setup and suspension should know it's a road machine adapted to some off pavement going. Those that got sucked into the theme of the ICON vid were just that...sucked in. I never once believed it to be reality.
I too chose a Tiger 800 XC over the KTM 990. It was close, believe me! The Tiger won based on MY needs/desires in an adventure bike. The looks, gas mileage and reliability were bonuses!!
All of my dirt bikes are KTM's... so I DO like orange!
Even better stated Z. I test rode a 990 as well and did not feel half as comfortable as I thought it would and nowhere near the smoothness of the 800.
I'm sorry you feel that way, but I really don't feel like I am "crapping all over" this thread at all. The man made some statements that clearly aren't true and I pointed it out, as I think we all should do as responsible members of the forum. I did not make personal insults, and I'm not here to "boo at the special olympics".
But I'm really dissappointed that more people, including you, Mr. Brown, didn't chime in and help point out the gross misinformation being spouted in the guise of opinion.
His statement, that riding 2 up with luggage made no difference in both power and suspension clearly isn't true, but can be believed for one of 2 reasons. But the issues of suspension and power should be addressed seperately.
First suspension; IT'S ADJUSTABLE.
That means something to most people, but for those who think "there's no difference" I'll explain. The engineers who designed the bike, as with all bikes, understand that differences in load affect suspension and handling. So they design systems of optimising the load carrying abilities for a range of weights. Then the marketing gurus decide just how much adjustability they can use and still hit the price point for the target consumer base. They're not going to drive up the price if the expected market segemnt won't be interested in that level of performance.
There IS a difference, and pretty much everybody knows it. Saying "there's no difference", actually means (for whatever reason) they haven't noticed a difference.
Power; Power moves wieght. That's why there's an engine in the bike. (I shouldn't need to explain this, but appearently not everybody knows) If you increase the load an engine needs to move by 20%, there can only be 2 reasons for being unaware of the loss in performance. 1. you're using substantially less than 80% consistantly, and so don't notice the defecit. 2. You can't tell the difference so you don't notice the 20% loss.
Making the statement "There is no difference" is expressing an erroneous opinion. Everybody has the right to have an opinion, but not to state thier opinion as fact and be insolent to people who can recognize the obvious errors. THAT says a lot about a man's character.
I can agree with your core point. I honestly DO NOT notice a difference, that's what I should have written in retrospect. Why dont we have a poll of owners opinions as stated to help out the potential buyer? Chill out on the granular dissection of every word on the internet, you just end up looking like an ass my friend.