[Author Index]
[Date Index]
[Thread Index]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: test rides(Re: [ST] still wishy-washy)
- Subject: Re: test rides(Re: [ST] still wishy-washy)
- From: brd <brd@xxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2001 15:56:56 -0500
Jim, you missed the context of this paragraph in my message, which is
what I was replying to (and implying that the RS & ST should be the
same):
On Thu, Apr 19, 2001 at 12:53:13PM -0400, Paul Fox wrote:
>>> you probably realize this -- but the RS and ST definitely ride
>>> differently. the RS is a little lighter feeling, both because of the
>>> weight (natch), and also the higher rear ride height. seating position
>>> may have something to do with it as well.
On Thu, Apr 19, 2001 at 04:29:46PM -0400, Jim Karl Gagné wrote:
> > I do know they are different. But the test ride would at least give me
> > a good sense of the engine's strength and powerband, which should be
> > similar to the ST.
>
> wrong man just check top gear roll-ons 60-80 mph st 3.83 vfr 5.23,
> that says a lot about midrange or in the vfr case, lack of. 8^)
Not that I'm disputing the difference between the ST & the VFR. :)
Laters,
Brian
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
The ST/RS Mailing list is sponsored by Jack Lilley Ltd.
http://www.TriumphNet.com/st/lilley for more info
http://www.TriumphNet.com/st for ST, RS and Mailing List info
=-=-=-= Next Message =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=