Triumph Rat Motorcycle Forums banner

I have Cancelled My T120

15K views 60 replies 27 participants last post by  SirCuffsalot 
#1 ·
I think Triumph have made a big error with the engine characteristics on the new T120, I think its down to the different firing angle of the crankshaft, Test rode one twice and decided to order, but each time I wasn't happy with the power band being very narrow, having to be in 2nd or 3rd doing 30 / 40 mph through town or the engine chugged and complained and runs out of steam at 6500 ish. Between 2000 and 5500 in second it pulls like a train, pulls as you would expect, but I don't want to ride around in 2nd just to keep the engine happy.
Test rode another T120 yesterday and I decided it was not the bike for me, shame really because all other changes that have been made are fantastic, braking, road holding, looks all excellent.
Each time I test rode the T120 and got back onto mine after a test I much, much preferred the engine characteristics of my T100.
I want to stick with Triumph so tomorrow I am test riding a new Street Triple and on Sunday the Tiger 800 XRX low ride, at the moment I favour the Tiger....but I might just keep my T100 !!
 
#4 · (Edited)
Well its not only me that has this opinion......when I sat the salesman down and explained why I didn't want the T120 he told me that I wasn't the first that came back off a test ride and said exactly the same thing, some then decided to buy the Thruxton others walked away. The salesman has a T100 and he isn't keen on the T120.
My friend came on the test ride with me and we swapped over for 20 miles or so, when he got off he said, what a load of s*it, the only gear its happy in was second from 30mph+, he hated it. He has 18 bikes two of which are 1953 S7 Sunbeams, 400 Yam, Harley Davidson and a brand new BMW GS 1200. He has a cross range of bikes and he said he wouldn't buy one.....but each to his own, its not for me
 
#5 ·
One of the reasons I went with the Thruxton R was to have a broader power band. I wanted low-end torque and top-end power. I'm very happy with the power character of the Thrux.

If Triumph would have put the HP engine in a T120, I would have had a much harder choice.
 
  • Like
Reactions: El Fenix
#6 ·
I would describe the T120 as Harleyesk, It has a lot of pull for a little RPM.
I traded a Scrambler for the T120 and also have a Tiger800, both high reving engines compared to the new Bonnie so it took a little getting used to. But once you settle in and get used to the fact you don't need a lot of RPM to get the same result, its quite satisfying. I also found the engine was more responsive and smoother after it was broken in at 1000 miles.
That said, the bike is highly geared so I'm going to drop a tooth on the front sprocket to see if gives her a little more sparkle. If it doesn't work out I will be perfectly happy with the stock setup.
 
#7 ·
I would describe the T120 as Harleyesk, It has a lot of pull for a little RPM.
I agree. The thing I love about the HP engine is that it has as much torque down low as the HT engine, but keeps pulling right to the redline. Due to the heavier flywheel, the HT engine is happier at even lower RPMs than the HP engine though.

Once the HP engine is above 2500 RPM though, its happy to redline.
 
#9 ·
I test rode a Street Triple last spring and loved it, but at the time wasn't looking to buy. This spring I test rode the T120 and really loved that too!

I was intending on buying the T120 but decided to wait and see how they do and perhaps for the price to come down or better yet pick up a leftover because they are just asking too much money for that bike in my opinion.

Suddenly I stumbled upon a wicked deal on a 2014 Street Triple R and I ended up buying it for $7,700 with only 2k miles from the original owner. I figure in a year or two if the T120 is still really calling my name I will have plenty of fun on the Street Triple R until then.

Good luck with whatever you decide!
 
#10 ·
I had a Tiger Explorer before getting my T120 at the end of April. Its a very different bike to the Tiger and should be ridden that way. For what its worth, I love it. Its high geared but if you don't like that change the gearing or buy a Triple. It pulls like a train, is brilliant on fuel, the brakes are **** but you get used to that, its comfortable, well made and looks brilliant. Each to his own. Glad you want to stick with Triumph though. Hope you find a bike to suit your style.
 
#12 ·
I've also test ridden the T120 this week and reluctantly not placed an order. I was happy with the power delivery but bizarrely couldn't get comfy on it. I felt that I was taking all the pressure on my lower back and not any on my legs/feet.

So I've gone for a standard Thruxton 1200 instead which I found more comfortable. Weird. I so wanted the Bonnie!
 
#13 ·
If I can get comfortable on a thruxton I would gladly go for one. the way the power delivery has been described is more in line with what I like. I would rather lose some low end torque and pick up the character of an engine that begs you to rev it out as was described in a comparison with the R9T which the thruxton won. I did not feel that characteristic in the ST I rode and the curves of the T120 plot see to be similar. The issue I run into with the thruxton is the MSRP creep. you step up to the base then your looking at that R model and saying geeze I would be a sucker not to go all in for 2,00, more bones.

Once I am mobile again I'll take a stron look at both the thruxton and the T120. Due to the engines I would probably veer towards the thruxton if I can figure out a way to do all day rides/light touring with pillion and stay comfortable. Lucky for me I have some time to watch what the aftermarket comes out with for these bikes for a while longer before I am on two feet again. Hopefully I will still have two feet because that huge crank case cover would make it tricky to mount an electronic shift solenoid
 
  • Like
Reactions: SSK Dave
#16 ·
If I can get comfortable on a thruxton I would gladly go for one. the way the power delivery has been described is more in line with what I like. I would rather lose some low end torque .....

The Thruxton engines have more torque than the T120 engines from low to high.
The T120 reaches it's peak torque at a much lower Rpm, but at that low RPM the Thruxton engine is actually making more torque than the "High Torque" T120, then the Thrux goes on to make even more torque as it revs, whereas the T120 drops some.
End result is an engine (the Thrux) which has oodles of power everywhere.


Glen
 
#15 ·
Test rode the Street Triple this morning. The riding position, as expected really, was totally not me, sloping seat pushing you down to the tank, pegs too far back, bars too low, pain in the back of my neck and wrist aching from leaning forward. Only went 10 miles and turned around and went back to the dealer. The engine was really nice, accelerates amazingly, can ride it at 40 mph in 6th and the engine just purrs along, drop it 4 gears and give it its head and away it effortlessly goes, Nice bike but not for me, would have loved one 48 years ago but not at 64. Tiger XRX low on Sunday.
 
#18 ·
I think unless one loves the thump of a big single they won't get on with a 270 crank as it is quite similar at low end. I'm keeping my Standard Bonneville but purchased a Honda NC700X with a 270 crank and I love it. A Triple of any description is a 120 which is a really balanced engine and should suit you well.
 
#19 · (Edited)
I agree with your decision. My 2002 Bonneville makes maximum torque at 3,500 RPM. That's
exactly where you want it. But, then it goes on to have a high horsepower hit at 7,200 RPM
that pulls really hard to 8,200 RPM. I think the choice is, do you want engine characteristics
that are pleasing but boring, or do you want an engine that really revs and feels like a real
modern Bonneville? For many, the answer is the former, but for some, the answer is surely
the latter. Harley Davidson has certainly sold a lot of motorcycles through the years appealing
to those who prefer the former. Triumphs' new "HT" (Harley Type) engine will assuredly please
those who are not comfortable revving their engines and powershifting as they pass the Prius
in front of them. Hey, that's fine. However, I really don't want a "British Sportster" , there's
plenty of Sportsters available right here in the U.S. So, before everyone sends a bunch of nasty
posts, let me say, Triumph went in the direction they did because they knew the new engine
format would bring in a host of new and female riders who adore the unintimidating type of
lazy power that has endeared buyers to universal v-twins for years and years. It certainly works
for most people, however, I'm definitely in the minority here: It doesn't work for me!
 
#20 ·
"Boring," just as beauty, is in the eye of the beholder... I've seen some videos of people riding T120s in anything but a boring fashion, exploiting the character of the HT engine to it's fullest.

I've been told by many people that the character of the the Honda GL1800 engine is boring, but I find it to be exhilarating on a tight and twisty road, being able to give it full throttle at 1,000 RPM and to then have it pull howling to red-line, just as I find the Thruxton R's engine character to be exhilarating, but in a different way.

It may be a bit ironic, but it was a ride on a stripped down Sporster that set me down the path that resulted in my purchasing a Thruxton R. I found the Sportster's engine character to be anything but boring. I did want that low end torque combined with more pull up top, to give more flexibility though, which is one reason I picked the Thruxton over the T120.

Different strokes for different folks... Horses for courses... Vive le difference!
 
#23 ·
Triumph has been using the 270 crank on the classic line for some time. The Scrambler for sure and Thruxton I think had them. Gives the engine a little attitude.

Back to the T120, It does function very well using low RPM but after I got mine broken in I gave it a hard launch to see just what it would do. Power shift at less than redline resulted in my hands being almost jerked from the grips. I hadn't expected that having gotten used to lower torque bikes. After a few more times the novelty wore off and I went back to normal riding, haven't felt the need to do it again.
Leave the need for speed to you Thruxton types.
 
#25 · (Edited)
I do hope they come out with a more peaky version of the 900. For fans of the classic style of powerband they have raised the entry price to 13-15k. That's a hell of a price tag when you consider what you can get for that money. Slap on a couple choice accessories and my ideal Thruxton R is touching 17k!

so where is my 10k option?
 
#26 ·
Just curious. What could you buy for $10K which doesn't look like "Transformers"? :cool:

Maybe Triumph can toss a cam into the Stwin for the alleged "cup" version. If you want it to perform on the Interstate as the T-120 might, I'd doubt it could.

Buy an R and cough up the $$$ if nothing else will ring your bell..., or buy another brand. "Nothing for nothing". Fit, finish, build quality and performance cost.
 
#28 ·
I am not sure that the Thrux is the answer for people who are dissapointed with the top end of the T120. I like mine a lot but you have to alter your riding style. It runs out of the sweet spot in the rev range very quickly, and you have to use the box more then say on a Street Triple. However you just get used to it pretty quickly.

For me my old Street Triple was a better bike to ride, which was a combination of the engine, the bike's weight and the very relaxed riding position. However the Thrux just looks and feels a bit special.
 
#31 ·
The T120 build quality has much to be desired, the silencers on all 3 I rode could be pulled out at the tail pipe and pushed in at will, the bracket was substandard thickness and as the down pipe meets the silencer it reduces down in diameter and then back up again just before it enters the silencer. It looked to me that Triumph had a load of silencers made for a model that never hit the streets and it seemed a good way of using them, looks like a cheap bodge job.
 
#32 ·
I'm not a buyer because I'm satisfied with the bikes I have which fulfill their missions well as equipped. The water-cooled classics don't need to line up across the board with the older classics IMO.

YMMV..., but no clue why you'd be bothered as you're not a buyer either.



??? You're making a h e l l of a lot more noise than I am 'for not being a buyer' so will I be graded on my reply, say if my reason for having interest in triumphs biggest launch since they introduced the modern classic line some 14 years ago differs from your interest? Iv'e only owned a dozen or so road bikes and 4 were 60's Bonneville's and add an R3, a Storm, and a 1050 S3 so having 7 of my 12 or so road bikes being triumph qualifies me as a fan of the brand, coarse not being a stock holder my opinion means exactly nothing, but not being a buyer neither does yours by your definition. For some making a replica of a bike means more than putting on a flat seat and matching paint schemes, and I would have been interested in seeing what triumph engineers 'could' have done with liquid cooling to a 1200 c.c. parallel twin designed for performance and the thrux is not designed for performance I would still buy it though for what it is if I was shopping for a CR.
 
#40 ·
I've owned an 883, a 1200 custom and a Heritage Softail. While I can't really compare the T to the Heritage, I can compare it to the 883 and the 1200...and IMO, the Triumph is just a flat out better bike in every category. After 750 miles, I haven't found anything I don't like about it.
 
#43 ·
I don't hate the T120. I have a long attachment to Triumph especially the T120. I am sad however after building nearly 40 years ago 2 Tritons, 1 Bonneville and buying a new Bonneville in 1973, I own a T100 at present and was looking forward to buying a new T120 next March. This idea has gone out of the window because IMO Triumph have made a step too far with the new engine. If I had wanted a HD I would have bought one, what I don't want is a T120 that pulls, performs and sounds like a HD.

The engine is the foundation of a motorcycle, its the core ingredient of a bike and T120 have NEVER had this small window of power and torque, it was never ever a characteristic of the T120, that's what's made it such a classic bike that it is today, well until this year!
Like I said on my first post,I think Triumph have made a big error. I never expected people that at present own a new T120 to agree with my opinion, after all, you never get turkeys voting for Christmas
 
#50 ·
If I had wanted a HD I would have bought one, what I don't want is a T120 that pulls, performs and sounds like a HD.
Never once has my mind made a comparison of the T120 to a Harley. Sound-wise or power-wise. Not that I would really care that much if it did. Power-wise, what I really think of when I get on the gas is the Cummins diesel in my Dodge truck. Gobs and Gobs of seamless torque. I am amazed that someone would complain about a bike having lots of torque.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top