Shocking!

[Shakey]

I took the Street out Sunday for a run across a road that I haven't been on for some time. Now realizing that secondary roads aren't a high priority in Washington State... come to think of it primary roads aren't either, but that's a another story. This particular road is a bit remote and in the past wasn't the best of surfaces to ride on, but has a lot of corners, elevation changes, generally light traffic and the surface is adequate for a spirited ride. Well that was then and this is now. I hit the road with gusto and proceed to ride it at the pace I'm accustomed to. Bad move on my part. The road has gone from worse to worser. I hit a pothole at speed and I swear it was large enough to swallow the little triple. The tarmac was uneven and gnarly most of the 20 mile length of it. The upside of it all was the performance of the stock suspension. While it was pushed to the limits of its ability the bike never once let me down. Even the pothole didn't grossly upset the bike which amazed me. About knocked the fillings out of my teeth, but the bike recovered quickly and without undue drama. I actually was able to maintain a decent pace through the entire 20 mile stretch. Now I'm not saying that the stock suspension is suddenly track day material, but it is reasonably capable of holding its own on some pretty bad roads. That in itself is shocking given how much bad mouthing it has received over recent months. One thing i have noticed is that tire pressure is very important on this bike. Mine seems quite happy with 36 up front and 39 in the rear. Anyway, just thought I'd give a positive post on our much maligned stock suspension.

[BradleyJ]

I agree with you, Shakey. The stock suspension is plenty adequate for probably 99% of us. It certainly is beyond my capability to stress it. Since the new rear shock (recall) was put on the ride is far better. Any bike has room for improvement but this one is much faster than I am. Comments by those who seem to know something about suspension changes are probably right on, but who can ride anywhere near the capability all the time. I'll bet 95% of us use the bike as a commuter, weekend toy and so on. It's fun on a track but not a pure race bike that very few would want to ride on the street anyway.
If you really want that racebike feel why not just buy a Daytona? I love the ST. Besides with work and community responsibilities I want to ride my bike whenever I can, not have it tied up for days at a time because I'm rebuilding the suspension or something. I certainly didn't buy it to wrench on it all day and night.

[Thirdway]

This is weird thread.

Is the gist of it "I like the bike as it is" or "I dont know why someone would want to change it?"

One is a statement and the other is a question. So, if you are happy with the bike why ask the question ?

If your trying to gain an insight into why others have altered the bike there are already dozens of threads dedicated to that subject.

Just a bit confused

[Shakey]

What is it you don't understand about the original post? Pretty straight up if you ask me. I wasn't asking any questions, just commenting on an incident involving a really bad stretch of road and the stock suspensions reaction to it.

[Diego]

Originally Posted by Thirdway

This is weird thread.
- - - - -
If your trying to gain an insight into why others have altered the bike there are already dozens of threads dedicated to that subject.

This is a thread that gives insight into why not everybody does automatically feel a need to alter the bike. Surely that can't be so confusing, can it?

[el paso]

Agree John. I find the original thread particularly helpful, since I am considering a street triple or R. Motorcycle Consumer News, in its recent review, just slagged the suspension without ever mentioning if they were riding a bike that had the recall done. It didn't sound like it. Curiously the recall was posted in a previous edition. It would seem appropriate to identify the status of the bike they were riding.

BTW, over the pond the difference between the Street and the R model is about 500 pounds according to Interbike. The R model will go for 6099 pounds out the door.

[Thirdway]

Originally Posted by Shakey

What is it you don't understand about the original post? Pretty straight up if you ask me. I wasn't asking any questions, just commenting on an incident involving a really bad stretch of road and the stock suspensions reaction to it.

Your original post made sense. It was the second post that I raised an eye at ?

It seems to pose several questions and assumptions.

Who can ride near the capability all the time?
what do you mean ? Is that a question or a statement ?


If you really want a racebike feel why not by a Daytona ?
Race bike feel ????

Its fun on the track but not a pure racebike that very few would want to ride on the street anyway.
What is ? Again, statement or question ?

I'm quite happy to give my answer if these are questions. If they are'nt I can go back to sleep

[Jamie]

Let's face it: The release of the "R" is seen by some as rebuttal on Triumph's part of their loyal and occasionally staunch view that the regular Street Triple is bordering on excellence "as is", rear shock mishap notwithstanding. It's seen by others (I'd count as one of them) as a likely show stopper in terms of upgrading the regular Street Triple on their own. It's already feared by many suppliers of aftermarket "goodies" as an undisguised attempt on Triumph's part to capture that extremely lucrative potential with a catalogue of "R" accessories second to none (take my word for it, for a moment), à la Harley "Screamin' Eagle"

So NO ONE likes the new babe . Right?

Wrong! I, for one, do like it (although I wished it had a steering damper) .

I am actually contemplating trading my regular (although mildly souped-up, some would say "Daytona-ized"), Street Triple for it. The only issue (price aside, that is) is that my dealer who sits on a sizeable backorder list for the (now) regular Street Triple wants to take hold of my bike RIGHT NOW, whereas the "R" won't reportedly become available until next November.

What an unbearable predicament!!!

Jamie

[el paso]

This discussion appears, in se, pedantic. Nevertheless, at the risk of being didactic I would offer the following:

Originally Posted by Thirdway

Your original post made sense. It was the second post that I raised an eye at ?
... etc

With all due respect, perhaps I have only missed the intended sarcasm of your words.

[Diego]

Originally Posted by Thirdway

Your original post made sense. It was the second post that I raised an eye at ?

It seems to pose several questions and assumptions.
... etc

Seems to me that's more of a rationalization for hijacking the thread than any real questions being asked, hinted at, implied, or otherwise being suggested, however ambiguously.

But at the risk of encouraging that misperception, here's a totally unambigous--albeit rhetorical--question: Is it truly so hard to believe some people really, really like this bike just as it is?