[1fastcat]

I've been reading all the responses from current Tiger owners based on the new Tiger - It seems that many of you wanted the new bike to keep the "off road" capability of the old. However, correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought that the old Tiger (based on numerous reviews and comments that I read) was a very poor performer on anything but relatively smooth dirt and gravel roads.

IMHO, the new Tiger is everything the new Sprint should have been with the added bonus of better lean angles and a more relaxed seating position. To me it strikes a balance between Supermotard and Sport Touring. I will be ordering one in black for my canyon and sport touring rides.

As for my "get dirty" inclinations, I just picked up a new 2007 KTM 525 EXC. Looking at the options, if I really wanted an Adventure bike with off road capabilities I would buy one of the new KTM 990 Adventurers that are coming out next month. That bike can really handle some nasty stuff.

Looking forward to joining the ranks of the Tiger members in the coming months.

 

[winger]

Your absolutely right,non of the tigers have had any more off road ability than a honda VFR,haveing been in a situation some years ago i'm speaking from experience!!!,of course one has to define 'Off Road' i think a lot of peoplel consider forest tracks and fire breaks as off road!!!!

Were the problem is,all of the tigers have been good alrounders,i've spent several years and a lot of money building a tiger with better brakes,suspension,and 17" wheels,to make for me a bike that is even a greater alrounder,,the mistake Triumph have made,not only will they loose few that go e'r!!!! offroad,their going to loose a lot of people who ride two up,for the people who only ride one up there are plenty of other bikes to choose from thats for sure.

Triumph's concept is a good one,the problem being the mistake they've made with the rear end has turned what could been a really great alrounder into a toy.

 

[Tiger-G]

To say the Tiger has no off road capabilities is absolute tosh !!

I keep up with my mates on their Yamaha R1's, GSX's and Hyabusha's on the country roads up to 100mph (which is fast enough for any of us), but as soon as I take them on some of "my" roads, i.e. - gravel tracks, I am still knocking along at 60-80mph and they can not do more than 10-20mph.

Case closed !!

The Tiger has (until 2007) great off road ability, and I used it to it's full potential. I won't be able to do this with the new "007 model cause it ain't a trail bike.


edit - I'm sorry my anger with Triumph keeps coming out in my posts, but I feel really let down by them. I can't believe a great bike has been turned into........... well words fail me !!

Hope you don't take offence, as non is intended.

[ This message was edited by: graeme on 2006-11-03 04:17 ]

 

[FifeTiger]

But is that just because you're on slightly knobbly tyres with pliant suspension and your mates are on rock hard settings, sports rubber and hate the sound of stone chippings pinging off their shiny plastic ??

Stick Tourances on the new Tiger and I bet it will horse down gravel tracks just the thing.

As for the rear seat, my hairdresser (she's blonde, what more can I say) and hubby have a Tiger, she hates not being able to see forwards, a slightly higher rear perch will suit her down to the ground.

And nobody's mentioned how much sag there is when you actually put a second body on the seat yet ? Convention suggests that in male/female combinations the female is about a good 4 inches shorter than the male, is the seat reall this steeply angled to get the pillion higher than the rider ?

the pic on the triumph site here

http://www.triumph.co.uk/uk/5923.aspx

makes it look like the pillion's comfortably looking over the riders shoulder. Isn't that just about perfect ?

 

[Tiger-G]

The point I'm making is at the moment I don't have to change tyres, suspension settings, etc. It is (was) a good all round bike already.

 

[Sprintster]

On 2006-11-03 01:43, winger wrote:
Your absolutely right,non of the tigers have had any more off road ability than a honda VFR

actually, the old triumph tiger also has rather poor off-road capabilities. all it would take is five minutes on a real dirt bike to convince you of this ...

bikes of the tiger's ilk are the jeep grand cherokees of the two-wheel world. they look tough but in essence they are comfortable sportbikes.

you can certainly take them off road ... but only gingerly. just like most any other street bike.

 

[Tiger-G]

Again, to make an analogy, could they have done "Long Way Round" on a standard R1, Hayabusha ??

I think not !!

 

[Euro]

The slowest part of any bike is the rider. If you want to be an awesome off roader you shouldn't complain about the Tiger and buy a KTM, you should just practice riding. Example being, Ken Howerton could kill anyone on a late Yamaha while he's using his old Husqvarna 390.

 

[winger]

Two things!! 100mph fast enough for anyone!! Oh yea is that a fact,the next time i do Barcelona in 16 hours and Valencia in a day and a half,and only drop below that figure going into service stations i'll remind my self.

The reason your mates can't do more than 20mph is very simple,they've got zero off road ability,haveing been faced a couple of years ago in central Spain of 40 klicks of 4" deep gravel on my Tiger and my mate on his VFR rideing it just well,tells me the bikes got sweet FA to do with it.

Always find it funny people talking about a offroading,Weston beach race?,Welsh 2 day Enduro,UK clubman Enduro championship,haveing spent ten years doing e'm thats offroading

 

[Jonny955]

I've always said that all I'm really bothered about is the 0-100-0 (mph) performance. Yes, of course anyone can ride faster but the roads on which you have MOST FUN on the Tiger are generally in the sub-100mph zone.

As for off-road potential, you can take ANYTHING off road. I've ridden a GPz in the sea and a Honda C50 through a field of donkey-doo. I'm not very skilled these situations but by the fact that competitive Motocrossers use competitive MX bikes suggests that there IS a difference!

Jon

PS - I Like the Long way Round analogy, Graeme, but do you remember that cheap Russian bike that the cameraman followed them on which kept up over the rough going?

 

[OKCTriple]

On 2006-11-03 04:41, FifeTiger wrote:
But is that just because you're on slightly knobbly tyres with pliant suspension and your mates are on rock hard settings, sports rubber and hate the sound of stone chippings pinging off their shiny plastic ??

Stick Tourances on the new Tiger and I bet it will horse down gravel tracks just the thing.

As for the rear seat, my hairdresser (she's blonde, what more can I say) and hubby have a Tiger, she hates not being able to see forwards, a slightly higher rear perch will suit her down to the ground.

And nobody's mentioned how much sag there is when you actually put a second body on the seat yet ? Convention suggests that in male/female combinations the female is about a good 4 inches shorter than the male, is the seat reall this steeply angled to get the pillion higher than the rider ?

the pic on the triumph site here

http://www.triumph.co.uk/uk/5923.aspx

makes it look like the pillion's comfortably looking over the riders shoulder. Isn't that just about perfect ?

I agree, and look at all touring bikes closely and you will see the pillion perch is slightly, too much higher than the pilot's seat. This is for exactly what Fife said; this gives the pillion the ability to see down the road and not look at the back of the pilots head.

[ This message was edited by: OKCTriple on 2006-11-04 10:03 ]

 

[Jonny955]

Well I took a 6ft mate pillion over to Sheffield today to pick up a 660 Baghira. He was already looking slightly over the top of me on my 06 soi on the 07 he woulkd be getting a full blast in the face!

And even with the more sensible pillion seat:rider seat ratio on the 06, the piilion seat is already so high that my wife has to use a well-practised technique getting on. I have not sat on/seen the 07 yet so I'd like to give it the benefit of the doubt but I do know my missus is not alone in thinking 'no way' when looking at the height in the pictures.

As for the riide today, we ended up taking all the windy back roads and had a ball, despite the often slippery conditions on the peaks. Riding for 4 to 5 hours there and back makes you appreciate heated grips!

Jon

 

[blacktiger]

On 2006-11-03 14:34, winger wrote:
Two things!! 100mph fast enough for anyone!! Oh yea is that a fact,the next time i do Barcelona in 16 hours and Valencia in a day and a half,and only drop below that figure going into service stations i'll remind my self.

Just shot yourself in the foot there "winger". I'm sure graeme was talking about riding on proper roads not motorways. There's no skill involved in sitting on a motorway and holding the throttle wide open.

 

[winger]

It takes great skill!!! and even more concentration,rideing for that kind of distance for that amount of time,not a jot of fatigue and have had loads of people say 'I bet you were cream crackered' what did you do when you got home?? the pair of us watched a program on the box for an hour and a half!!!

Would i do it again?? probabaly not,it's a bit like climbing Everest people do because they can,i'm proud of doing it and so's my wife who was on the back,because i know most people couldn't do it!!!,but you can imagine the mirth when i read about how poor stock screens are and how much buffeting people supposedly get,when we did it on a stocker!!!

Every car you come up behind the first thing you have to do is look at the plate,depending what nationality denotes how your going to deal with them and how they'll react

It's no problem BT your not the first person to make that mistake,no matter were i am and what ever roads a i ride treat e'm all the same and apply myself accordingly.

You should try the same technic!! you'll fall of less!!!