[Author Index] [Date Index] [Thread Index]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]

Re: [ST] Re: 02 daytona/marc cook



You're right...it was not intended to be a comparo but as examination of
twins/triples/fours and how the engine configurations influence handling...a
real highbrow approach. Didn't quite end up that way, but there you go.

I suppose we're going to have to agree to disagree on picking winners or, as
is the case here, offering our judgment on the relative performance of the
bikes. This is the service we're paid to perform. If we gave them all 8s,
said they're all wonderful just different, we might as well just sell the
edit pages to the ad guys and go home early.


> As far as the new swing arm:  It seems that everyone has overlooked the
> real advantage of the small weight savings.  While overall weight
> savings is just frosting on the cake, the real advantage is "unsprung
> weight" which increases the "handle ability" of the bike.  That minute
> difference goes much further than the overall power/weight ratio
> improvement.  Triumph went to great lengths in designing a better
> handling machine than its predecessor and it shows immediately after a
> short ride.

No doubt, and I believe we said as much.

> far as the flat bottom end engine performance, I don't think that's a
> fuel injuection problem; at least not like the TT600 fiasco.  I believe
> it is simply cammed that way so that you get that rippin top end rush.

Hmmm...I kinda doubt it. I've ridden really cammy bikes, and I assure you
that our testbike was just plain dead in the first bit of throttle travel.
Once it picked up, even at very low revs, there was plenty of power
available. 



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