HP diff between R3Touring and R3

[davidv-soga]

Just visiting and learning about the Triumph R3s..

It's my understanding that the R3 Touring has about 106 HP and maybe the R3 and/or the R3Classic have 140 HP ?

The R3 Touring was "detuned" to give it less HP ...

Guess my question is how do you detune it and why would you want to ?
And what are the benifits of detuning...I guess better mpg, but what other benifits ?

Thanks.

[Molinoman]

The basic one as far as "they" (Triumph) explains it is that at 106 HP they were able to tune it to where the torque went from 147 up to 154 (seems to me like a lot of sacrifice of "34" HP for only 7 more lbs of torque. Then again this comes in at the rpm range of 2000 but since a tachometer does not come on the R3 Tourer how would you otherwise be able to "prove" it during normal use .

Supposedly it also helps to not spin up the new, narrower rear tire as much, but as Flip has said with that much torque the rubber wear will probably be about the same...maybe the new rear tire is cheaper???
Dennis

[Pig9r]

My dealer wasn't sure how they did it. I would say it was a combination of ECU tune and cams.

The reason why? I think Triumph took everything that was scaring HD owners away into consideration when they designed the bike.

[busajack]

I heard smaller valves to. Why is everything a secret with Triumph. Other makes are proud to post there spects. Jack

[busajack]

Originally Posted by Molinoman

The basic one as far as "they" (Triumph) explains it is that at 106 HP they were able to tune it to where the torque went from 147 up to 154 (seems to me like a lot of sacrifice of "34" HP for only 7 more lbs of torque. Then again this comes in at the rpm range of 2000 but since a tachometer does not come on the R3 Tourer how would you otherwise be able to "prove" it during normal use .

Supposedly it also helps to not spin up the new, narrower rear tire as much, but as Flip has said with that much torque the rubber wear will probably be about the same...maybe the new rear tire is cheaper???
Dennis

Supposedly it also helps to not spin up the new, narrower rear tire as much--------Where did you hear that one Molino. Should spin it worse.

[dougl]

Originally Posted by Pig9r

I think Triumph took everything that was scaring HD owners away into consideration when they designed the bike.

If they're scared of power, they should be very scared of 150 ft. lbs. at 2000 rpm.

[F4sSprintST]

More TORQUE, over a broader range (not just peak)

Good thing

Originally Posted by davidv-soga

It's my understanding that the R3 Touring has about 106 HP and maybe the R3 and/or the R3Classic have 140 HP ?.

[KingOfFleece]

I read in one of the mags (or MC consumer news cannot remember which) that it is a function of the twin pipes and headers, among other things that kept the HP down. Could have been Cycleworld, but it had to be one of the major mags as that's all I get-one of my buds stole it! so I'm not sure-don't remember like I used to!

[Molinoman]

Busajack...that is what I meant, ie: spin it up (as in wear)...my version of saying not lasting as long...and that remains to be seen.
Dennis

[KingOfFleece]

Did a little looking. IT's the Jan 08 Rider mag that has the report on HP. Says that just the headers and new pipes account for the difference. King