Triumphrat

bred

so im finding dozens of old bonnies from the 70's on craigslist. very reasonable prices, 2-3k. now, i dont know much about bikes, but ive got numerous friends that have been riding street bikes for years... hyabusa, gsxr, cbr rr, r1... that kinda thing. I on the other hand, like the classic look, and would rather putt around rather than race around. So ive narrowed it down to a thruxton or bonnie. How reliable are bonnies from the 70's? what mileage do they tend to max out at? i want something reliable, but id rather get something older for badass factor. any comments? im 6'4", so a bonnie might be tight to begin with. the thrux is a little larger, but that would require a fairly new one, and more money. 70's or new?

epynt1050

Old Bonnevilles and new Bonnevilles only have the name in common. The company who makes them ie Triumph is not even the same company, again just the name is the same.
Unless you are really into home mechanics, keep to the new ones (2001 on) which are ultra reliable and very user friendly.
The old ones are great machines if you do not mind spending more time working on them than riding them.
The T140/TR7R range from 1974-88 can be made to be everyday machines but without the performance (inc brakes) of modern bikes.
Earlier machines (upto 1973) are really for short, Sunday runs at sedate speeds and for shows. However, if you really want a "classic" there is nothing better.

KADUTZ

epynt1050
You are correct in stating the old and new only have the name in common. A Sales Manager of Triumph Of America told me in 1995 "we ar not the same Triumph" as far as the rest of your comments if you spend more time working on them than riding you are not a compentent mechanic nor rider. In the past 30 plus years any Triumph that I rode out of the driveway was ridden back into same
What is your opinion of the reliablity Pat Owens 400,000 mile 70 T120RT or the reliablity of the 500cc bike in Jupiters Travels?
By the way I have ridden the new Bonnie's my pinion is they are more top heavy than some full dress bikes I have ridden. I wouldnt give you a dime for a Bloor Bike.
Jus the K's pinion

epynt1050

Kadutz
If the "old" Triumphs were so fantastic, why were they wiped out by the Japanese?
I am a very well qualified, graduate engineer with some 40 yrs experience and enjoy working on motorcycles of all ages from preWW1 to 2009. I have Triumphs that cover the same time span and which I ride regularly.
My favourite bike is a TR65 (650cc version of TR7R) which is a much nicer to ride than my T140E as it vibrates far less and hence can be ridden at higher speed for longer. The T140 I have had from new and never been apart. So I do respect the qualities of pre-Hinckley machines but also recognise their limitations.
However, I also recognise the great strides made in all sections of engineering in the last 40 yrs inc Triumph. The T140 series could not compete with the Japanese in 1979 whilst the modern Bonneville can compete very effectively in 2009 in its segment.
This not to criticize older Triumphs, they were a leading force in motorcycling for 70 yrs (1902-72) but times moved on and for various reasons, after the mid 60's Triumph did not, that is until the modern factory was established.
Modern Bonnevilles have their limitations. I am sure that had the old factory survived and been able to compete with the Japanese, it would not be T140's or New Bonnevilles they would be building but rather something closer to the Street Triple or Speed Triple.

jimmy bush

It'll take awhile to reach the break-even on work to ride time ratio on my '68' Bonnie. I put more than a few hours into a ground up rebuild and haven't had the opportunity to ride a lot but I expect to reverse the ratio. I had a 71 Bonnie back in 72 and rode the dog out of it. All I ever did was keep the timing, carbs and valves set and change the oil. If I spend more time working on the 68 than riding it, it'll be because I like tinkering with it more than it needing it. My 2006 Bonnie on the other hand seems to be bullet proof. 8000 miles on it and only oil change and lube chain. The way it is designed, there isn't anything to tinker with unless I want to start doing some performance or appearance mods.

Vince C

Yes of course modern bikes are far better 'engeered' than a T140. I love my T140, but I wouldn't want to have ridden it to Morocco and back as I did my BMW 1150GS, or all around europe. But the T140 has something modern bikes don't - character!

They are just fun to ride, in the same way that a steam loco is fun to watch or a Tiger Moth is fun to fly - but you woudn't want to go to Majorca on holiday in one!

I had a Honda Blackbird - it might as well have been electrically powered; no noise, no vibration, just a bottomless pit of power under your right wrist. I soon sold it.

The point about old bikes is that they are FUN! They are fun to ride, and they are fun to fettle.

Oh, and they rise in value, whereas modern bikes, like modern cars, just depreciate.

So, new or old Bonnie? Depends entirely on what you want it for.

epynt1050

Vince
I could not agree more. The original thread was "old or new Bonneville?". My reply was stick to the new unless you want spend time working on them (and know what you are doing) as they are completely different and from different generations.
I have both old and new Bonnevilles and other Triumphs covering nearly 100yrs. And yes, the old ones have more character but newcomers to motorcycling invariably want something they can get on and ride. If you want real "character" try doing 100miles on something pre First World War!
I tried to put the advantages and disadvantages of each option. The problem I have is when a myopic view is taken of old Triumphs and new generation Triumphs are dismissed out of hand.

Vince C

That's it, epynt1050. Horses for courses....

The new Triumphs are great bikes... but the old ones are fun!

panda

after 40 or so years of neglect and bad maintenance, many of the old bikes are unreliable. They weren't in their day. My own 500 cc bike ( similar to Teds) did over 90K miles without a breakdown. Although I did once suffer a broken clutch cable...This was mostly doing 435 miles to /from the base where I was stationed, being late would have made me AWOL and I never was. My routine was to do 3 x900 mile trips, and routine service on the fouth weekend ( saturday morning) to keep the bike in good condition.
The myth that Japanese bikes displaced Brit bikes is simply not true. It was the twin attacks of cheap cars and motorways. by 1970 you could buy a mini for about the same price as a bonneville. The old bikes do not cope well on motorways. They were designed to run on small British roads with lots of bends. The early Jap bikes may have had better engines, but no Brit company ever had to set up a separate factory to replace frames under warranty (unlike Yamaha). Even so, the brit bike companies managed to mismanage themselves into bankrupcy, as did most other motorcycle manufacturers. Many went in the 30's 40's and 50's, only the last few survivors made it to the end of the 60's. The big four Japanese manufacturers just filled the gap left by them. They did not really make good bikes until ten years after the space was vacated. Even after Triumph went bankrupt, Triumph bikes were still winning the production TT race on the same bike for five years.
Vincent, douglas, rudge, scott, sunbeam, brough, to name just a few names that have vanished.
It was the same in Japan, They had dozens of companies before and after the war, but by 1960 had died away to four.
As to which bike... the new bonnie is reliable but not an old bike. Bit heavy for me, with higher centre of gravity due to its wet sump engine/gearbox.
As an aside, Velocette still hold the 24 hour world record for 500 cc bikes ( only failed with the 350 due to a wire breaking in the magneto)
averaging slighly more than 100mph for 24 hours set in 1961. Using straight oil, amal carb and lucas electrics. Why is this record still standing ?
For myself, I have just bought a newish Enfield. It is like a 1960's bike but better built. the technology that has been applied was well done and cost effective. both the black boxes ( charging and ignition) cost about £50. and it has both electric start, and kickstart . This means if I dont want to kick it, I can use the starter. Handy for me as I have twice wrecked my right knee in car crashes, and some times I just dont want to kickstart a bike. If it were a twin, it would be perfect

__________________
A wise man learns from his mistakes..
A genius learns from other peoples mistakes.

pookybear

Bred,

Wow, Welcome to the forum. You found a hornets nest today.

My take on this. The older rides have a certain feel, nothing like
the sterilized ride of a new bike. I perfer that feel. Some people
like that and some do not.

Also if you are willing to take a bit of time and sort out problems
with an older ride it can be made into a great daily driver. But the
new one come right out of the box ready to drive.

Try a test drive on one of each and only you can make your mind
up as which path is the one you want to follow.

Good luck,

Pookybear