It is torquey but not a huge difference over the 1600
I'm not sure where you derived that opinion from, but i have over a year on mine as a 1600 and almost a year now as a 1700, and the difference on mine is not as you describe. It's quite substantial. I suppose it depends on the individual's opinion of whats huge. If by huge you mean something like a 2 second difference in 1/4 mile times then you're right, but thats a heck of a lot to expect from cams and 100cc. Just as mods go mine went from what i felt was weak to what i felt was very exhilarating. thats the best i can describe it other than to say is was by no means a minor change. Like i said B4, a 1600 that was dyno'd then had the BB installed and dyno'd again showed a 18 HP increase at 5500 over what it did as a 1600. thats RWHP, but if measured by triumph's spec would be around 20-22 HP. I can tell you that a 1600 will barely get to 5500, as it runs out of breath before that. thats quite a healthy difference that i might well call huge. Also note the R3 in question was a touring model which has around 60 HP less than the roadster and 40 less than the standard which is no longer made. It has the same 100 HP a 1700 has and about 60-70 more Lbs. More torque is where the difference is, but if you think a 85 HP 1600 is not huge over a 100HP one, then the R3T isn't huge over the 1700 either.
Now I WILL agree with you it's not real quick compared to all else thats out there. But i think compared to other cruisers in it's size it's right up there if not close to top of it's class. But thats just power wise. Add all the other stuff like handling and how the powerband delivers the goods and it's definately a tough act to follow.
Last edited by dazco; 10-12-2011 at 11:08 AM.