re: suspension general, comment

[Jim Huber <jhuber@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

	I'll second Erik's opinion. I'm more than a bit over 175 pounds and the
dive under even moderate braking had the forks almost bottomed out, even when
properly taking the braking force by leg-gripping the tank, not leaning on the
bars trying to stoppie. Good brakes, insufficient fork springs. It's not unique
to Triumph. My Suzuki SV650S came with equally cheap and undersprung forks, and
real junk for a shock. RaceTech rescued the front, Ohlins the rear.

	Jim

 >  From: Erik Miner <Axeis@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, on 04/22/2001 20:46:
 >  Ken I have to respectfully disagree. The stock forks are not junk BUT
 >  if you weight more than 165-175 lbs the stock springs are inadequate
 >  , that's a fact. Also and we've all tossed this around before, but
 >  it's really a shame that Triumph choose to short change us with
 >  damping rod front forks in instead of a modern cartridge style fork.
 >  Damper rod forks are OLD technology and the ONLY reason Triumph gave
 >  us those instead of the fully adjustable cartridge forks of the
 >  Daytona, Speed Triple, and TT600 was to SAVE $$$. IMO it's the one
 >  glaring weakness in an otherwise damn near perfect bike, and I for
 >  one really hope Triumph rectifies in the next ST.
 >
 >  Erik


     *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *
      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 =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=