Triumphrat

MickMaguire · 12-09-2004

You coudl use the same arguments to say why didnt they put the daytona engine in it. It's all to do with insurance rating / target audiences and making the range varied.

TBSstunta · 12-09-2004

When they brought the TBS back in 03 the rest of the naked bikes were more powerful than they were in 98. Always wondered why they didn't give the TBS the green (1gen S3 and Sprints) cams so it would be closer to its competition. Everything had been pretty much figured out so its not like it required a lot of work.

[ This message was edited by: TBSstunta on 2004-12-09 11:52 ]

vonbonds · 12-09-2004

Quote:

On 2004-12-09 11:08, 00wabbit wrote:
My thought would be gas mileage, but the Executive is a Sport Touring style bike so it would seem you would want decent gas mileage on that one as well.

I can assure you it wasn't fuel mileage. My Sprint Executive got 48mpg no matter how hard I hammered at it. That bike could get nearly 300 miles out of a tank full of fuel. Hell...I didn't flip over to reserve until 220-240miles

. I am actually starting to miss that bike!

97TB · 12-09-2004

not for nothing, but how much faster do you want the Tbird to go?? I thought my bird performed terrific for the type of bike it was/is.

vonbonds · 12-09-2004

I have to agree with 97TB. It seems to make more sense to hop up a TBS rather than a Tbird. I would start to worry about upgrading the brakes to deal with the quicker overall bike. With the TBS you already have the dual disk front brakes. There is always a ying and yang with performance upgrades. Once you upgrade one part of the bike you usually have to catch another part up to meet the increase in performance. How is that for a technical analogy?

Hinckley · 12-09-2004

Quote:

On 2004-12-09 12:55, vonbonds wrote:
My Sprint Executive got 48mpg no matter how hard I hammered at it. That bike could get nearly 300 miles out of a tank full of fuel. Hell...I didn't flip over to reserve until 220-240miles

. I am actually starting to miss that bike!

Wow! 48 MPG! That rocks! I'm lucky if I get 40 MPG with either of my Daytonas.

Beemie · 12-09-2004

Performance cams increase top end power at the expense of low end torque. Not everyone wants a motor that requires constant revving to get out of it's own way.

tridentt150v · 12-09-2004

It's not worth modding a TB or TBS, no sooner would you do it than the factory will bring out a new model with just as much or more, and at half the cost and none of the headache.

They'll slot the 955 motor in on their next TB run, there will be another run, nothing surer, just wouldn't hold your breathe, but it will happen.

If they can build a RIII based on opinion then a TB with a 955 motor and a bigger twin are only a matter of time.

00wabbit · 12-10-2004

It may not be worth it to do it, but that hasn't stopped me before.

:-D :-D :-D :-D :-D

Tell TBStunta or AlecGore it wasnt worth it to do all that work to their beautiful bikes.

jimmyj900 · 12-10-2004

Mick nailed it on the performance ratings of the earlier Triumphs: insurance regulations.

Apparently Triumph had to comply with the euro rules when that was their only market, and Germany had a 70 HP limit on an insurance bracket.

My 2000 shop manual gives the HP rating given in the German Pferd Starke (PS) so that's a pretty good tipoff.

Jim