Motorcycle Forums banner

New Triumphs

17317 Views 81 Replies 39 Participants Last post by  rc51zen
>The Thruxton is a Bonneville dressed as a cafe racer. The motor has 65 more cc of grunt. It has clip-ons and high pegs.

Is it gonna look like Bonneville Ace Replica;

I donno what the production model looks like but that 2.2L triple thing just look ugly.
41 - 60 of 82 Posts
Good point cap'n but I didn't sell my Valkyrie Tourer to get the RoadKing because I thought the Valk was ugly. Far from it. I thought the Valk was a beautiful and unique bike and my dealer had a hard time finding one for me because he couldn't keep the things on the floor. No, I sold it because I got too many tickets, went through rear tires at 3,000 miles and the gas milage suc'd.

It may not be the ride for everybody but ugly is in the eye of the beholder.
Re: Triumph Rocket III

LOL!!! Couldn't agree more.
I seriously doubt there will be a line at the Triumph dealer's door for one of these. I'm sure you will be able to buy as many of them as your wallet, and eyes can stand.
While your argument appears logical.. and I agree 1000% about European style cruisers (lord that BMW is a silly looking thing)... you can't deny that BMW is selling a sh!tpot full of those ugly cruisers. Heck they've got 4 different iterations of the 1200C.

Much as I may hate to admit it I think Triumph will sell every one of those things that they can ship over here. It'll be like having a Boss Hoss with a real dealer network. People already plunk down 17K for Harleys with springer forks and much more than that for GoldWings and K1200LT's and those stupid Indian Harleys.

Ugly sells. How else can you explain so many Ford Explorers and Lincoln Navigators.. or Hummers for that matter?

I think Triumph is short sighted with that 17K price. The Triumph name doesn't have THAT MUCH value. OK, the motor is big, but it's not made of titanium and carbon fiber. I think they would be much better off selling it under 13K.

If they promised to make it a limited edition, or put ABS and custom shield & bags, I could see 17K.
Yes, 1st cruiser Virago 1100, current cruiser is a V-max. Most rode bike-Concours-that's right Concours.

If you understood anything about cruisers you would know this. Style is king in this game, hp is not.

This is the perfect explanation . Cruisers are worthless crap.

Bet part of you really misses that Valk. I have a V-max and I know what you mean about going through tires. When you have all that real power so quickly available that throttle just seems to twist on it's own.
Re: New Triumphs and Pricing

I agree that Triumph's pricing is all out of whack. I've been interested in the Bonneville (not the America... yuck) but can't quite get my arms around their pricing. It's a nice bike, promises to be well built, and in my opinion looks good, but at $8k, there are many other options out there.

Also their dealer network is woefully lacking. Here in the Bay area, Triumph dealers have been closing down and there aren't any convenient to my home any longer.
Well even if Triumphs heritage would be cafe racers, why on earth they should stick to it?

Its like hey, I have always had vanilla ice cream thats why I never try cranberry-oreole-flavor. More boring the better huh

Okay, what I'm objecting to is your blanket statements of what "cruiser buyers want." I started on a Magna, and now I have a Valkyrie and CBR1100XX. Love the Valk for the power, the comfort, the back seat, and the fact that nothing else looks like it. Likely that all the same could be said for the Triumph. I saw a Rune in person, and it's a fascinating piece of machinery--and it's $27,000, and the entire production run is sold. Why can't the same thing happen at Triumph for $17,000? The Triumph doesn't do much for me, but in my mind I already have the ultimate cruiser. I asked if you owned a cruiser because I'm just sick of the sportbike guys painting cruiser riders with the Harley brush. I'm not bashing Harleys, I'm going after the "this is what everybody different from me thinks" crowd says. I'm in both camps now, and I'm pretty tired of "You slow emasculated cruiser guys" vs. "You squids in flipflops" arguments.
Well this is BS

Right side ugly??? This proves one likes the mother, other likes the daughter. I just had to print the right side picture and hang it over my desk. Is this a bike or what.

Also VMAX getting weaker, well if you check, this babe won the power cruizer comparo incl. V-Rod, despite being old enough to marry witout parental permission.

All opinions are about right on the new Rocket III. I don't much like the looks of the right side of the bike, but Triumph's aggressiveness with this one should be applauded. I kinda like the over-all look of it (if you stay on the left side of it) and would seriously consider buying one instead of waiting for BMW to play catch-up with all the other manufacters in the performance race (I ride a R1200C now). Still, $17k+ is a lot when you don't get bags, shield, ABS or really anything but a monster engine. Have to wait and see about final pricing and accessories.
You're right, of course. If they're going to expand market share it's best to have a more diverse product line.
Style?? HP?? This crap makes me weep

Even my mother knows that with the cruisers torque is the king.

And talking about torq, by golly if is true that the Rocket makes 90% of torque at 1800 rpm… hmmm… 2.5 times the torq of the my stock carb Fat Boy at this RPM point… well if I bolt on three (3) more cylinders I'll get the same twist in my butt…

You have me all wrong. I was responding to one who knows what "real cruisers" are supposed to look like, sound like, and what brand should be plastered all over everthing they own. See previous post in this thread.

Actually I agree with everything you said. Magna-nice bike, Valkyrie-awesome bike, CRB1100XX-I'm too old. All I am saying is that those looking at cruisers should not be limited to the stereotyped V-Twin. Choice is good. In my HO the V-twin is the worst choice for a power plant. I am not into it has to be some retro in vougue tough guy wannabee style.

Everytime something different comes out that group wines and complains about how it is different. "Can't be a real cruiser"
I think you're right about the Brits not getting the cruiser thing. Their focus has always been sportbikes.

Other than Harleys it's pretty rare to see a "cruiser" over there at all. The whole laid back V-twin mile-eater is an American thing.

I don't think this looks TOO bad, and power wise it looks compettitive. It might be another case of looks better in person than in pictures. The proof will be how many people actually buy one.
HD will not roll over and play dead

Prediction: HD will pretty soon come up with a big one. My guess is 2 litres in 2005.

Lets face it: the hog is increasingly looking like a beginners bike. I am surely not the only one who is looking forward to upgrade my current 88, and I am not talking about some pissy 10% this time. They have no choice.

Maybe ya got somthin' there!
Usually I have a "wait and see it in person" attitude, but I'm not sure I have to wait to judge this. The only good thing is, I have a Triumph dealer 4 blocks away and I may be able to weasel a test ride and report the results. Should be interesting either way.
41 - 60 of 82 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.