Triumph Rat Motorcycle Forums banner

1 - 19 of 19 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
3 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
So I'm looking at purchasing a new 765, but I'm a little divided on whether or not to get the R or the RS.

Will a CPU tune pull the R up to the RS numbers? How about with velocity stacks and an exhaust?

I'm also wondering if there are any differences in engine internals or if the differences are all in the tune.

Thanks!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
26 Posts
I read that the RS has different cams, so you might not get the same effect by tuning an R's ECU.

It also has better suspension, quick shifter, more riding modes, supercorsas, much better front brakes, belly pan, chain guard, pillion seat cover, probably some other stuff I forgot.

That's why I chose the RS over the R. I knew I'd want the belly pan and I figured getting the rest of it more than compensated for the extra cash. I stayed with the standard exhaust and tune and it really is quick enough for me.

Have you priced in the cost of the extras you are proposing to add to an R to try and reach RS performance? I bet there is not much difference in cost between that and a standard RS.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
96 Posts
I read that the RS has different cams, so you might not get the same effect by tuning an R's ECU.

It also has better suspension, quick shifter, more riding modes, supercorsas, much better front brakes, belly pan, chain guard, pillion seat cover, probably some other stuff I forgot.

That's why I chose the RS over the R. I knew I'd want the belly pan and I figured getting the rest of it more than compensated for the extra cash. I stayed with the standard exhaust and tune and it really is quick enough for me.

Have you priced in the cost of the extras you are proposing to add to an R to try and reach RS performance? I bet there is not much difference in cost between that and a standard RS.
I agreed, get the RS if you can. I only choose the R because it has a low height version. I would have gotten an RS if there is a low height version. All the extras add up to way over $1k difference in price.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
214 Posts
The R has different cams, I believe that's what gives it the better torque curve over the RS.
You'd really have to ride both to see if you can feel the difference, for the kind of riding I do the R made more sense if you look on paper. You need to really wring out the RS to get all the HP out...but how real is the difference...not sure.
As mentioned, if you are planning on quickshifter, belly pan, and everything else the RS has, well then the RS makes more sense. But you can get third party quickshifter for much cheaper then OEM, and belly pan isn't that expensive, you still come out ahead with the R.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
16 Posts
Having come from a 2017 KTM Super Duke GT and also owning a '14 Multistrada 1200, I find people's comments about having wring out the RS to kind of amusing. Granted, I'm not a large person so (5'9"/~175cm 157lbs/71kg) I can see that having something to do with it. The RS has loads of power and torque. I can imagine riding them back to back and finding that the low end torque is noticeable on the R but I just don't see much of a feeling of "where's my power" on the RS.

That's not to say that other people don't feel the difference but, even on the back to back dyno comparisons I've seen, the gap just isn't that much? Maybe I'm missing something?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
56 Posts
on the road in real life the R is quick enough. but if you want to save a bit of money the RS has all the extras.
if you going to go on track days a fair bit then RS is way to go.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
214 Posts
Having come from a 2017 KTM Super Duke GT and also owning a '14 Multistrada 1200, I find people's comments about having wring out the RS to kind of amusing. Granted, I'm not a large person so (5'9"/~175cm 157lbs/71kg) I can see that having something to do with it. The RS has loads of power and torque. I can imagine riding them back to back and finding that the low end torque is noticeable on the R but I just don't see much of a feeling of "where's my power" on the RS.

That's not to say that other people don't feel the difference but, even on the back to back dyno comparisons I've seen, the gap just isn't that much? Maybe I'm missing something?
I generally agree, the difference in power between the 2 bikes isn't a step change. But...the dyno curves are different, and since there are people on these forums that seem to swear that 2 HP makes a difference, then looking at the pasted curves you do see that the R has slightly more HP from 6000-10,000 RPM, and more torque all the way to 10,000 RPM. It's not until you get pass 10,000 rpm (hence my "wringing it out" comment) that the RS comes out on top with HP and torque.
I would love to see 0-60, quarter mile pulls, and rolling pulls for both bikes to see if there is indeed a real measurable difference.
 

Attachments

·
Registered
Joined
·
16 Posts
Oh yeah, no doubt they're different. Just trying to say that the minimal differences seem like we're just playing spec-sheet drag racing. If you have a chance to own either then I think the decision should be around stuff like the M50s and stock quick-shifter and extra modes, i.e. practical functional differences. I feel like (again, each to their own) that such small, theoretical performance differences between two motorcycles aren't important given the other differences between the two models.

If someone looks at those graphs and decides that's what's important to them then, more power to them (or not, as the case may be... lol... welcome to Punville). Most of us only get to own one, the color is probably more important than the trivial differences in performance of a motorcycle very few of us will ever push to the limit.

I'll bail on this thread, just wanted to say that the differences are small, if you care get the one that you prefer but I don't care and think that people shouldn't either but, totally support their right to care if they want. lol
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
559 Posts
I'm fairly certain that none of us could tell the difference in butt-dyno power in a true double-blind test. I own the R, but had I known that the LRH model doesn't have rebound damping in the rear suspension, I would have held off for the RS. That's apart from factoring in the absolutely staggering amount of extras you get with the RS for very little extra money. The amount you would need to spend to upgrade components in order to reach parity is jaw-dropping when you consider that Triumph throws it all in for something like 1.2k more. Just the suspension and brakes alone far outweigh the relatively paltry price difference between the R and RS.

Horses for courses and all that....
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
37 Posts
It also has better suspension, quick shifter, more riding modes, supercorsas, much better front brakes, belly pan, chain guard, pillion seat cover, probably some other stuff I forgot.

Have you priced in the cost of the extras you are proposing to add to an R to try and reach RS performance? I bet there is not much difference in cost between that and a standard RS.
We've been over this before (at length in another thread), but the more I think about it, the more I feel you should simply choose R or RS based on aesthetics i.e. which do you find prettier? If you find the red subframed R the better looking bike than the rather subdued RS (all black/grey except for the naff tank/tail stickers) - see my preference - or vice versa, then go for that. With the R over RS savings in most markets, you can easily afford the belly pan, hard tail and quickshifter.

What remains is then a 'spec' debate, but I can tell the thread author that for most of us this is completely theoretical, i.e. unless you are some kind of finely-attuned driving god (in which case: why are you driving a Street Triple?) you will never know. Specifically, having driven my R on track:

Better suspension: Pretty hard to prove this, other than 'Ohlins!'. The Showa setup on the R is excellent and fully adjustable. I can make it supercomfortable (not my preference but it is possible), but can also dial it in and it will firm up and tear around a track in a way that keeps a supersport honest. Unless you are a pro, I seriously doubt you could tell the difference double blind.

Quick shifter: You can add. Having said that it is a must-add for the track.

Track mode: The R has all the other modes as well (it doesn't have 'rider configurable' but as you can edit the standard modes that hardly matters), so 'Track' is the difference. This has 3 components, throttle, traction control and ABS. For throttle, I track the bike on 'road' as that is the most progressive which is what most would want I suspect - Sport just yanks up the sensitivity, much like the obligatory 'sport' button in a car. So no need for 'Track'. Traction control on 'Sport' does not intervene in my track driving, but if you are a true driving god you'd turn it off anyway (which the R can do). The only point of contention might be ABS - on a full track day I had one 'tick' of the rear ABS but I imagine some people might brake harder. You'd only notice in the very last phase of braking to slow speeds anyway. If you are a driving god, you'd turn it off anyway. Reading how Track ABS will never kick in anyway, there is probably not much difference.

Supercorsa tyres: If you are going to thrash your bike so hard on it's first set of tyres that you can tell the difference between Supercorsas over Corsa Rossa's, you're a star. If not, you can still make the choice after a few thousand kilometers. When my Rossa's are done, I'll go for the new Rossa Corsa 3 - a much more suitable road tyre, and on track it will have the bonus of saving me an additional warm-up lap (or tyre warmers) while making no difference to how fast my (modest) skills allow me to go round.

Much better front brakes: This is simply not true. On a bike this short, your M4.32s are just as capable as flipping you over the bike as the M50s, provided you'd be stupid enough to brake 'like that' (which you won't). With brakes like these, the limits are determined by your tyres (Supercorsa's? >:) ), not brakes. For the record, the M4.32s on mine are awesome, on road as well as track.

Belly pan, chain guard, pillion seat cover: All nice, all accessories.

The long and short of it is, this generation of 765 Street Triple in either R or RS spec is able to drive circles around any other sub-liter naked on road and track, and it will eat many 600 Supersports alive as well with average same-skill drivers on them (mostly because it is so easy and confidence inspiring). On a twisty track, it will have the big bikes (liter nakeds, etc.) as well. The difference between them both is going to be pretty minimal in that context.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
356 Posts
Yep I was thinking how much can I gain with just an ecu tweak of a Naturally Aspirated engine. I found out (not for a first time) that I will be better off with loosing extra 10 kg from my belly. I also don't fill her up too much (half is enough) and I rub her with lard to get extra low cx. Any RS can smell me going home from work ;-)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
96 Posts
Yep I was thinking how much can I gain with just an ecu tweak of a Naturally Aspirated engine. I found out (not for a first time) that I will be better off with loosing extra 10 kg from my belly. I also don't fill her up too much (half is enough) and I rub her with lard to get extra low cx. Any RS can smell me going home from work ;-)

I thought I was the only one to fill up the bike half way to save some weight. I like the stock exhaust but I still changed it to save another 8-9lbs. I went from a 370lbs bike to a 470lbs one. I hated the extra weight, especially on top. I am currently trying to get the 765 to around 400lbs.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
56 Posts
i was on a track day with chris walker ex superbike rider and he went out on a ninja 650/er6f and was miles quicker than most people on bigger bikes. sure they overtook him on the main straight but soon as it was into the bends he was overtaking everyone and across the line before they could catch him.
if youre the better and more skillful rider you can out do most with less equipment.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3 Posts
Discussion Starter #14
Thanks for all of the responses. Definitely going with the RS over the R. Also... The RS will come in white for the 2019 model year which is the color I wanted and was considering getting an R just for the color.

I just want something a little lighter than the FJ-09 with a more aggressive riding position.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
356 Posts
Just saw a test of 765R, they squeezed 123 hp on the flywheel. Which makes me happier :/)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
37 Posts
Just saw a test of 765R, they squeezed 123 hp on the flywheel. Which makes me happier :/)

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Most dyno's put the R easily over 120 hp. The engine is no reason to pick the RS over the R.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
12 Posts
I plan on getting a Street Triple next year. Which would be a better choice based off your guys' opinion? To buy the R Low and add aftermarket quick shifter/throttle blipper and belly pan or get the RS and lower it?
 
1 - 19 of 19 Posts
Top