Couple of Interesting Photochops From Another Forum:

[ChuckofTahoe]

I think this seems about right based on the 19" vs. 17" front wheel. Maybe the 955 should be a smidge bigger for a true equal scale comparison:



The Trail enthusiasts might like this chop:

[stanegoli]

Nice comparison - thanks

[Jonny955]

Thanks for posting - you can see the pillion seat height difference quite clearly

Jon

[Mudhen]

Oooo....love the chop on the second pic!!!!

:upthumb:

I really like the look of the new bike...but I'm done buying poseur bikes. It costs too much money to make them do what I want to with them (even though I've probably had just as much fun modding my Steamer as riding it!)

My next bike will be orange.

[stanegoli]

Interesting how the front wheel is spoked but the rear still cast (on the chop).

[ChuckofTahoe]

Using a ruler, I scaled the tip of the tail of the 1050 T at 40-41 inches.

Basically about the height of a 10" tall tail pack mounted on the back of my Bonnie. Quite tall for a pillion to sit on. Though there should be a lot of compression of the rear shock with the load. I noticed the high position of the pillion pegs. I think this is the other reason the tail is so tall- basically to keep the leg room dimension in the ballpark with the old Tiger.

On 2006-11-15 06:01, Jonny955 wrote:
Thanks for posting - you can see the pillion seat height difference quite clearly

Jon

[stanegoli]

Chuck, regarding your measuring:
It is not clear that the two different photos are accurately scaled (relative to one another), so I'm not sure that the ground-to-seat height comparison is accurate.

The new Tiger has a 17" front wheel, the old a 19". Hard to see the difference in the photos.

[ChuckofTahoe]

Yeah. I think the Girlie scales about an one inch too short at the wheel. And the seat height about one inch too short. I didn't create this graphic but got it off another forum.

Thanks.

On 2006-11-17 19:16, stanegoli wrote:
Chuck, regarding your measuring:
It is not clear that the two different photos are accurately scaled (relative to one another), so I'm not sure that the ground-to-seat height comparison is accurate.

The new Tiger has a 17" front wheel, the old a 19". Hard to see the difference in the photos.

[ This message was edited by: ChuckofTahoe on 2006-11-17 19:43 ]

[blacktiger]

On 2006-11-17 19:16, stanegoli wrote:
The new Tiger has a 17" front wheel, the old a 19". Hard to see the difference in the photos.

If you compare the rear wheel rim of the girly with the front of the 1050. The 1050 appears bigger but both are 17". So, the 1050 is scaled too big.
Also, I don't believe the seat heights should be the same. The 1050 is lower.

[ This message was edited by: blacktiger on 2006-11-18 15:30 ]