Power Differences Tourer/Roadster

[Jamo]

What's the engine differences between the Roadster, which makes like 140 hp and 163 ft/lbs, or something, and the Tourer, which makes so much less, like 106 hp and 150 ft/lbs? Does anyone know from experiece riding them if there is a noticable difference in riding power?

Why can't you get the higher performing engine with bags and windscreen?

I mean, you'd want the Tourer except it makes so much less power, and you'd want the Roadster except it doesn't have bags and screen.

[DeanRider]

Are you talking about the Rocket III Touring or the Rocket III Tourer? They are different bikes.

The Rocket III Touring and Rocket III Roadster not only have different engine outputs but also have different frame designs as well swing arms.

[Jamo]

Originally Posted by DeanRider

Are you talking about the Rocket III Touring or the Rocket III Tourer? They are different bikes.

The Rocket III Touring and Rocket III Roadster not only have different engine outputs but also have different frame designs as well swing arms.

I don't know. When I go on the Triumph site, there are only two offerings for 2013, a Tourer and a Roadster.

[DeanRider]

Have a look at the wiki entry: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Triumph_Rocket_III

[dougl]

There are no differences in the engine or gearing. Only in the tunes. I talked to a guy at the dealer who had triple K&N and Jardines on his RT3 plus a power commander and custom tune and got 157 hp and 150 ft lb.

[rambo]

The bikes are very different.Frame/wheels.As Triumph found out with the tourer,even with its lower power,the rear tyres failed.Ok,a 140bhp is nice,and i do have one of these.However,if you are genuinely touring with luggage,would you really need 140 bhp.May be a little unstable doing 130 mph so the power is limited for your own protection.I have a screen and do a bit of touring using a rack and no luggage on the sides.I would guess that most people that own a Rocket have explored the power and then ridden it as a large docile bike.Yes,i can do 140mph but cant see where i am going at that speed.The bike is best at around 90mph so both bikes would do that speed and you would not notice any difference in bhp terms.I prefer the one i have because i dont like the style of the tourer.

[norton74]

Originally Posted by Jamo

What's the engine differences between the Roadster, which makes like 140 hp and 163 ft/lbs, or something, and the Tourer, which makes so much less, like 106 hp and 150 ft/lbs? Does anyone know from experiece riding them if there is a noticable difference in riding power?

Why can't you get the higher performing engine with bags and windscreen?

I mean, you'd want the Tourer except it makes so much less power, and you'd want the Roadster except it doesn't have bags and screen.

Both of them have more power and torque than any stock Harley. Did you see where a very lightly modified Rocket 3 set a record at Bonneville? It was a little over 174 mph.

[dougl]

The Carpenter kit (240 hp) is a bit more than lightly modded.

[Jamo]

I see. The Wiki story is helpful. Which model is the most popular with riders, if that's a fair question?

[norton74]

Originally Posted by dougl

The Carpenter kit (240 hp) is a bit more than lightly modded.

What do you define as "lightly modified"?
I was refering to the class that the record was set. The bike looked stock with no fairing.

$5,900 for the Carpenter kit, installed. Includes head porting, new cams, valve springs and retainers, clutch springs, and higher compression pistons.

http://carpenterracing.com/RIII.htm

Could a stock Harley be made to go that fast with similar mods?


How much performance can you get in a Harley for $5,900?

Again, both the roadster and the touring make more torque and horsepower than any stock Harley.