Triumph Rat Motorcycle Forums banner

FZ 09

3K views 16 replies 13 participants last post by  OmarF 
#1 ·
Has anyone ridden our owned this bike sufficiently to share how they feel the 2017 FZ 09 would stack up against a 2014 Speed Triple R? I've read & watched vids, but was hoping to hear from Speed Triple R owners of the 2014 model era. I own a 2014 Street Triple R, but looking to compare actual riding experience between the 2 bikes I'm looking at buying very soon & not vs what I own now. Thanks all


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
#11 ·
I think it's compared to the Street Triple over the Speed Triple due to it's price point.

Power-wise and acceleration times, it's more of a match for the Speed. I think the FZ-09 was a tenth slower than the Speed Triple in the 1/4 but had a higher trap speed.

I liked the FZ-09, but the reason it is cheaper is because it is made cheaper. I have read a tune fixes the throttle issues, but even then the suspension and brakes lack.
 
#4 · (Edited)
I rode my buddies MT09 which is the touring version on the FZ....I HATE the ride by wire! Delay no matter which riding mode & just makes me feel disconnected. Motor is decent above 6K but has no torque compared to my 2012 S3 IMHO. It is a 2016 so they have not fixed the snatchyness IMHO. Suspension is good & fit & finish is very nice.
 
#5 ·
I tried the 2015, and like it a lot, but wasn't sold on it like the Triumph. I'm 6'6" 250lbs, so there is no factory suspension that feels good. If that is your biggest complaint, that is an easy fix for a lot less than other bikes. If the bike is reliable, easy to get parts for, and fun to ride; what else would you want? Supposedly the suspension has been fixed this time around; but I've never sat on anything that I would ride that didn't need more spring, so take it for what it's worth. Wish they would get the better color combos in the U.S. though; we're getting cheated...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
#6 ·
Not liking the Yamaha's transformer looks to start.
If riding one as one person noted it felt disconnected because of fly by wire then they don't have the fueling sorted. Fueling has been an issue with Yamaha in the past especially with the fuel injected FZ-1's.
I owned 2 carbureted FZ's, a 2002 and a 2005. They were a good bike with strong motor but the FZ's went more sport than sport touring and I went with the S3's
I like the Triumph because it has Brembo's, single sided swing arm, better suspension, more comfortable and better looking.
There's a reason the FZ09 is a lot less money.
 
#7 ·
I also have a first year FZ-6 and it was noted for having a snatchy throttle. I did not find it a problem, but some riders did. The FZ line is built to a price point, and it shows.

I would not buy a new bike and have to fix it as soon as I got it home.
 
#8 ·
I owned a 2014 FZ-09 for a while (2,000 miles) but sold it to get a 2013 Street Triple R for a lot longer (8,000 miles) which I recently sold to now get a 2016 Speed Triple R.

Search my threads about my take on the FZ-09 vs the ST3R, lots and lots of typed out thoughts in there. Overall, my take on it was ST3R > FZ-09.
But, I had the ST3R for almost 3 years and wanted to try something bigger, hence the S3. Overall I would still say that both Triumphs are greater sum of their parts than the Yamaha is (was)...perhaps they sorted some of the quirks out of the 09 since '14, but my impression of the 09 was erratic. Definitely a fun and punchy bike but far more hectic than either of the Triumphs, they're far more refined.
 
#9 ·
I feel 2014 Street Triple R is nicely refined & assume the Speed Triple R is as well, but it's a fair bit heavier than the 2017 FZ09 (I'm also since this thread looking at 2016 XSR900 I just discovered and love the look).


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
#10 ·
You are looking at around a 15kg difference between the bike so the Speed will feel significantly heavier than the FZ09. Even with a lowboy exhaust it will still be 10kg up but with its weight redistributed for a low centre of gravity.

In all honesty a proper comparison will be the new 875cc Street Triple that is being released. Both will have that 115-120bhp mark, similar weight and price. The Speed is comparable with the MT10.

I've ridden loads of the modern Yamaha's and I prefer the cross plane engine to the Triumph triple. It sounds amazing, goes like stink and a peice of engineering beauty. It's a pity for me the rest of the bike doesn't match it. The current Yams are built to a strict price and the finish reflects it. They're reliable but in a MX way, very rugged and plasticky. However they can't hold a torch to the modern Triumphs for finish quality.
 
#13 ·
I just sold off my FJ-09 which I rode for a good 4000 miles, because it couldn't compare with the 16 Street Triple RX I just picked up. There's simply no comparison, they're not in the same league. The Yammy is pretty nice, but the Triumph beats it in every way. Handling, engine smoothness, revviness, did I mention handling? Build quality, fit and finish, personality. The Triumph just flat wins. One thing you'll notice on the FZ/FJ engine is a grainy buzz above 4500 rpm. I didn't think much of it until I wound up the Triumph's buttery smooth engine and went back to the Yammy. It sounded tinny and cheap by comparison.

This last weekend I spent half an hour demoing an FZ-09 to compare it with my FJ. The Z felt like a cheap toy compared to my FJ, and I couldn't see how anyone who drove the FZ and Street triple back to back could prefer the Yamaha. In another post here, I linked to an article by...motorcycle mag?...where they spent $2000 trying to bring the FZ up to the Street's level of performance, and they finally threw their hands up and concluded they should never have tried.

Comparing the FZ to the Speed is...not even a comparison. I lost a good chunk of change getting rid of two bikes (FJ-09 and Scout abs) to have the ones I have now (16 Street and Speed) because I found their quality and performance was just so much better I couldn't do without them, but that's my personal take.

Omar
 
#14 ·
I understand the s3 and st3 having different personalities but they are still the same tool built to do the same job, no? I'm married so I get 2 bikes 1 for us 1 for me but even if she quit riding with me I think I would have 2 bikes built for different purposes. If I had a street triple my other bike would be a R3r with a screen and saddlebags.
 
#15 ·
Long story short, you're right to a degree, esp when looking at both bikes compared to a third very different bike. But I think they're different enough to keep me enjoying both. Other issue was the only way for me to get out of my Indian was to trade it. I already had the Street and officially had fallen in love with Triumph, and the Speed was beckoning to me :)
 
#17 ·
Well the Scout was my first bike so has a special significance for me. Positives included that it was low slung and forgiving, thus I was able to learn how to ride on it at the ripe old age of 49. Once past that stage however, the things that made it easy to learn with made it less appealing. The bike sits low so I find myself constantly scraping pegs on it. It's low sitting position and forward foot controls also have lent to backaches and butt aches for me. In order to meet their price point Indian cut a lot of corners, so many things on the bike need to be changed to bring it to its fullest potential-- The stock tires sucked, the suspension and front fork springs needed to be changed, the OEM seat was unlivable, it had no passenger pillion by default so one had to be added. To drive highway speeds of front windscreen had to be added. These were the basic necessities to make it more than just a casual ride around town bike. Then I added saddlebags and some other odds and ends too, like reduced reach handlebars.

I, like many others, grew to resent the bikes' inherent limitations as being excessive and too expensive. On The other hand, it had a nice strong engine, fairly smooth and very torquey, and a decent gearbox. The frame was solid as a rock, being cast from a single mold. The last straw for me was how much the value of Indian Scouts has plummeted. Bikes that six months ago were selling brand-new for 11 and $12,000 are now selling brand-new for eight and $9000. Thus the bikes have no residual value at all.

Omar
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top