Triumphrat

fivehundo · 07-10-2006

Something's been on my mind and for the life of me I can't figure it out. I'm sure at least some of you have been www.bikez.com :???:

They rate motorcycles on a bunch of different variables but the Daytona ratings I don't get. One of the ratings they do is from 0 to 100.

A 1998 T595 rates at a 74.8

A 2000 955 rates at a 62.2

My CE rates at 72.3 but a standard 955i ranks at 73.2... ***?!?!

Finally, a 2006 Daytona 955i rates at 62.3...

Can someone explain this to me??? :roll:

gooseeggtona955 · 07-10-2006

yeah i dont understand the rating either... mine is a 62, and my dads cbr 600 f4i got in the 80's.... personally i think the daytona is better and i do drive both. but the really sad part is that the cbr crotch rocket did better in sport touring than a sport touring bike????... doesnt make sense... i just disregard all that ***** and pay attention to what makes me happy.. and that is the daytona for ***** sure

all the other bikers around here can have their yamahas, suzukis, hondas, and kawasakis...... but ill think ill take my relatively rare 2000 daytona 955i and keep the single sided swingarm and highmount exhaust... i dont know whether i should be riding it or driving next to it so i can look at it

bradtx · 07-11-2006

fivehundo, I'd never been to that site before. My '04 rates an 80.something...BFD as half the replies could've been from Triumph employees. Half of yours from, say BMW employees. Except for cosmetics they're the same bike. The RC51 rated lower than the D955i and I feel they're equals. Go figure! :hammer:

Of anything that I didn't like about my bike when I bought it, none could be attributed to build quality. True, I felt the windscreen was too low, but that's just me, my body and my preference. Once I generally got the bike set up for me the bike has exceeded my expectations and I hope as it garners mileage and age it does as well as the '02 D955i here.

Which leads me to something else...this bike is going to age well in comparison to some others in the class, I think.

Brad

silvoor · 07-11-2006

The scores are subjective which means they are only meaningful to the people who did the rating. Because different people rated the same basic bike in different years comparing one year to another yields no meaningful information (which means the data only measures the variance in peoples subjective opinion).

Having said that I love the Daytona but maybe somebody loves their GoldWing just as much and thinks it has fantastic off-road capability which would give it a higher score.

Avoid data. Study nudity.

HiDesert · 07-12-2006

In addition to the other factors previously mentioned, you also have to remember that these are averages. The usefulness of an average depends strongly on the amount of data being averaged. If you have responses from three people about a model, I might not even bother to read it. 30 or more, great.

The '98 T595 has 20 reviews. The 2000 955 has only 7.

Your CE has ten, and it's gone up to 85.8. The standard has 19 reviews.

The 2006 only has 3 ratings. Way too few for the overall score to really mean much.

bobbo · 07-17-2006

Yeah, my 95 Daytona gets 84, but the 96 only gets 75.9. ***** am I glad that i bought the right year! I think you just put in the numbers yourself, they add them all up, divide them by 2, add their mother's age and multiply by the first number they think of, so at least you know it's scientific

02Daytona955i · 08-11-2006

Perhaps the rating slips as the bike gets no improvements as it ages?

The '02 and '02 CE, I can answer that....................

The DSSA weighs six pounds less and the 180 tire tuns in better; any other questions?

kit:

silvoor · 08-12-2006

The site gets it ratings from the readers so the relative scale is based on the readers subjective opinion not a quantitative standard.

Based on this method if you you feel the Daytona handles best you are 100% correct and no other data is relevent.