Just got my January edition of Motorcyclist and to my surprise, it has an article titled "Modern Rockers", which compares the Thruxton and Ducati's Sport 1000. Gotta log out, so I can read it. See ya...
My magazine hasn't arrived yet. That said, I'll weigh in with my $.02 anyway.
The Sport 1000 can hardly be construed as cutting edge sporting hardware. It has an air-cooled, two-valve engine; no matter how developed it may be it is certainly not the bleeding edge of motorcycle technology. Saying that it is like a GSXR, R1, CBR-RR, etc. is not accurate by any stretch of the imagination.
The Ducati press describing the Sport1K is very similar to the Triumph press describing the Thruxton. They most definately have the same mission in life: modern bike with cafe racer styling cues. The Triumph is certainly cheaper, but it isn't really a bargain for the bike you get. I've nearly Sport1K money in my Thrux, after spending to overcome Triumphs corner cutting, and not a dime of it on appearance mods. It is still dead slow, and I haven't fixed the sorry brakes yet.
I'd have a Sport1K over my Thrux in an instant, it just didn't exist when I bought my bike. Ducati seem to have done a better job with the modern cafe concept. Triumph seem to believe that buyers will enjoy retro performance with their retro style. I'm sure that some do. Me, not so much. That is not to say that the Thrux is an awful bike, it's not, I rather enjoy mine.
Triumph should either build the Thrux to match their marketing, or market the bike for what it is. That would prevent any so-called "unfair" comparisons.
We all knew what to expect. That's the problem with this article, they couldn't seem to leave their sportbike expectations behind for the article. It's just poor journalism.
There is a pretty good article (by a different author) about a guy in New York restoring and selling old Brit bikes. And another about a custom cafe racer shop in Wisconsin. They should have had those writers do the comparison test, instead of the squids.
I was just looking at the Duc website. Those Sportclassics are just a bit spendy (I thought they were $10,000 ), aren't they? I guess I can fix the brakes, add rearsets, and maybe some neat mirrors before I REALLY have Sport1K money in the Thrux.
Triumph don't currently mislead anyone on their specsheet or press material (even though I've bitched about the original press release forever :-D ) but they have positioned the twins such that they will be compared to the closest bikes out there. The closest thing to the Thrux out there now is certainly the Sport1K. Ducati trumped Triumph on this one; it is still a valid comparison, in my opinion. I'm not mad at anyone about it, but it would be cool if Triumph would grow some nuts and make a performance parts catalog or an "R" version of the Thrux.
At the end of the day, if you buy a Thrux and shake the money-stick at it and turn some wrenches, you'll have a hotrod of sorts even if it is (unless your money-stick is very girthy) a rather slow hotrod. If you spent the same money on a -insert whatever better performing bike here-, you'd just have a stock, new, bike. :wink:
It's all about comparisons. I compare my Thruxton to my 68 Bonniger and it comes out very well, except for price and weight. The brakes and forks are better, the handling is comparable, the engine is smoother and about as powerful, the looks are pretty good, too.
Compare it to an R1 and it's a whole different deal.
Are any of your surprised that the Duc, a bike with superior running gear, won a dynamic comparison between two motorcycles? These are bikes that are supposed to be ridden in a sporting manner, so why wouldn't the Duc win? It has better suspension, brakes, and power? Of course it does, its more expensive. I would have been shocked if the Thrux won, and I would question the credibility of the journos who chose the Thrux. Does that make the Thrux a bad bike, of course not.
Does the Thrux make you feel better and does it feel more retro? That kind of thing is subjective and things like that aren't going to win a comparison of which is a better sporty cafe racer.
So just sit back and smile knowingly that you spent less on a bike and spend less maintaining it. For the price difference you will be able to make your bikes better.
[ This message was edited by: TBSstunta on 2006-12-08 14:55 ]
yeah, they bashed the Ducati. They bashed it spent more time bashing it than bashing the Thruxton. That guy is a moron. The fact that he can't understand why someone would buy one of these bikes is the reason i love my Thruxton.
I think the only thing about this article that really bugged me was calling the Thruxton a cruiser. Those of us who have been stuck behind any variety of cruisers on the twisties know that is a bunch of bs. As far as I can tell, there simply aren't any cruisers that can be anywhere near the Thrux on the curves. Other than that, you have to take the bike for what it is and it's still pretty dang capable.
Who gives a fat rats crack what these people think I am in a better position than these people to make a comparison as have lived with both bikes for almost a year and I say they are both very cool and very different so there!
A forum community dedicated to Triumph Motorcycle owners and enthusiasts. Come join the discussion about performance, racing, cafe racers, bobbers, riding, modifications, troubleshooting, maintenance, and more!