Triumphrat

redl1nerpm · 08-09-2008, 04:14 PM

Anyone owned or ridden both? Im trying to decide between the two and haven't ridden either. My past bikes have been the TT600 and a ZX9R. The first bike I owned was a Katana 750 which was very heavy and of course thats one thing I dislike. Ive heard the BMW feels light despite its weight though. I like the technology in the BMW and am a BMW fanatic in the car world, just never considered the bikes. Ive always loved the raw simplicity of the S3 though and that triple sound is awesome. The other downside to both bikes is going to be riding position which Im not accustomed to. And Id be buying slightly used in either case. Anyway what are your thoughts on the two?

88blkbird · 08-09-2008, 05:10 PM

My personal experiences with BMW is they are great bikes, so long as you have a decent budget for repairs. Anytime an issue comes up with my pal's bike it is usually expensive. His bike has so far needed a new swing arm due to cross threaded bolts, clutch including throwout bearing , 5 sets of brakes, ( always noisy ), fuel line connections ( began to leak while riding ) head bearings and dampener. My expectations may be higher than they should be but in five years he has been downed for weeks each of the last three years. He currently has around 65 thousand miles on his bike. I can't give you a proper comparison because my experience with Triumph is with a 30 year old bike.

redl1nerpm · 08-09-2008, 07:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 88blkbird

My personal experiences with BMW is they are great bikes, so long as you have a decent budget for repairs. Anytime an issue comes up with my pal's bike it is usually expensive. His bike has so far needed a new swing arm due to cross threaded bolts, clutch including throwout bearing , 5 sets of brakes, ( always noisy ), fuel line connections ( began to leak while riding ) head bearings and dampener. My expectations may be higher than they should be but in five years he has been downed for weeks each of the last three years. He currently has around 65 thousand miles on his bike. I can't give you a proper comparison because my experience with Triumph is with a 30 year old bike.

how new is his bike? what kind? Im interested in the modern K-bike (163 bhp) versions. Sure adding some gadgets increases the liklihood of something needing a repair but I dont really mind taking the chance.

BanditBrad · 08-09-2008, 08:02 PM

No offense but on that K-bike, the front fairing looks like something Darth Vader took off his head

88blkbird · 08-09-2008, 08:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by redl1nerpm

how new is his bike? what kind? Im interested in the modern K-bike (163 bhp) versions. Sure adding some gadgets increases the liklihood of something needing a repair but I dont really mind taking the chance.

I believe his is a 2002 K1200LT. It is completely stock with the exception of the tires and highway pegs which were added a few years back. They are even BMW origional items. He takes meticulous care of it and I have watched other brands ride for miles seemingly care free while his has been costly to repair at times. Not to say this is everyone's experience. My brother purchased a 2000 year model of the same bike and had it for 8 months before he decided he couldn't stand it any longer. I think the tall saddle, poor passenger accomodations and a few other items didn't work too well for him. He now owns a Yamaha cruiser with bags and full shield.

flyinloww · 08-09-2008, 09:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BanditBrad

No offense but on that K-bike, the front fairing looks like something Darth Vader took off his head

HA HA I thought the same thing

redl1nerpm · 08-09-2008, 10:29 PM

haha thats true

losangeles_S4 · 08-10-2008, 12:13 AM

I've always thought that BMW was gorgeous.
Its a cash flow decision on my part.

Here's a review
http://www.visordown.com/articles/vi...200r/4549.html

mikey94gt · 08-10-2008, 01:05 AM

There seems to be alot less problems with the later K1200's than the earlier versions, like they got all the kinks worked out. The telelever front is a dream, but takes some getting used to. the power is outrageous!!!!! these K bikes pull from almost any gear and any engine speed, regardless of who is on it. They are a touch uncomfortable, and I find the ergonomics of the Trumpet to be more to my liking. I have had equal experience with both bikes. It is true that the K bike will be more expensive to repair, but the Trumpet and the K bike will be comparable on service intervals, at the better part of 3 bills out the door. Overall, the K bike is more expensive, but they are pretty comparable on the overall scheme, if price is left out of the equation. Put it this way. if you are commuting around town, with the occasional romp in the twisties, the Trumpet is your bike. If you are the high speed touring type, throw some small saddlebags on the K1200R and get lost.

Synergy · 08-10-2008, 07:13 AM

You mention you've had a TT600 and a ZX9R but don't say which you prefered or why. Which one you prefer will depend on what you want from your riding.
I've ridden both the K1200R and the 1050, but they're both very different.
The Beemer doesn't feel light it just feels well balanced. It's heavier than your Katana was which you may not like, plus it's very long and heavy, and many people find it ugly. On the plus side it's got a high top speed (if that's what you want), massive power and torque, and a brilliant exhaust note.
The 1050 is a good combo of torque and power, sitting somewhere between a twin and a four. It handles well, is real fun to ride, and would suit a shorter rider better. A speed Triple won't give the rider as much wind protection, but that's probably a good thing as it means you keep your speed more real world (below three figures). The Sprint ST has a smoother tune and makes a better fast tourer than both the other two.

If you ride lacal at under 100mph and don't take pillions much buy a Speed Triple. If you travel large distances and want the higher power (and size & weight) buy the beemer.