ramblings(Re: [ST] fjr, again)

["Brian D ." <brd@xxxxxxx>]

On Tue, Feb 18, 2003 at 09:05:12AM -0600, Tom Emberson wrote:
> 
> 
> Don't get me wrong, the ST is an excellent mid 90's bike, but it 
> is now almost a decade later. I loved my ST, wish I still had 
> it, but it was taken away from me in the prime of its life.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but your main complaint about the ST seems to
be the handling, specifically front suspension?  You can upgrade the
suspender relatively easily.  They sell the bike to a target market, and
I would guess the demand for race-ready handling is not there.  

Yes, they have parts on the shelf they could drop in and make the ST
better, but they don't seem to want to, and I think you've heard the
same directly from the mouth of a Triumph rep?

I still think the ST has the best FI on the market and a great engine
and good ergos for most people.  The looks are maybe not fresh and new,
but it's a good looking bike and has better factory luggage options than
many bikes out there.  I wish T. would revamp it and sell more just
because I'd like them to do well and I'd like to see more Sprints out
there, but I can see where they're coming from.

> On Mon, 17 Feb 2003, Brian D . wrote:
> > I think Triumph knows that the Sprint is not on cutting edge of 
> > technology. Their showcase for that is the Daytona.
> 
> So, Yamaha's showcase is not the FJR, but they put the effort 
> into it.
> 
> As far as H*nda, which bike is their show case, VFR, ST1300, 
> CBR954rr, Rune, VTX, HondaBago, CBR600rr, F4i, well, which one, 
> all of them are top notch, most of them re-designed in the last 
> two years.

Technically, the VFR is their flagship (SSS, FI, vtec, all the new
goodies as they come out).  The CBR600RR really made an entrance,
though, with all those goodies from the GP bike.

H*nda has a MUCH bigger research budget than T., but you're right,
they've revamped a lot the last 2 years.  However, before that, the
ST1100-come-ST1300 went essentially unchanged for how many years?
Ditto the VFR from 94(or even 1990)-97.  I don't think Goldwinnebagos
changed much except from the 1200->1500->1800.  I think that at this
point in time, Honda has done a lot of redesigning, but in the past
they've also known to leave well enough alone.

> > Why would anyone buy a daytona if the ST was the same bike, but 
> > comfier and slightly heavier? They're afraid of cannibalizing 
> > Daytona sales.
> 
> Different seating position, different look, the Daytona will be 
> lighter, different geometry, thus better handling, even if just 
> marginal.

Yes, that's true, but Joe Consumer won't see it that way.  Many people
compare hp specs and price and go on that.  They would look like "the
same bike".

> I guess it depends, are the Daytonas jumping off the sales room 
> floors, AFAIK no!
> 
> Where the ST's jumping of the sales room floors, AFAIK, damn 
> close, but not now.

Both these are pretty much guesses, based on your or my limited
experiences with local dealers in 1 market.

> So, if you make the ST better, cut the Daytona sales in half, 
> but increase the ST/RS sales increase by 50%, Triumph would be 
> better off, at least I would think.

You make a good point.  I think overall sales could be increased in this
manner. 

> Anyway, you can still de-tune the ST's engine for lower end 
> torque, keep the peek torque numbers the same between the bikes, 
> just make the ST's lower than the Daytona's, maybe drop some of 
> the higher revs of the ST's engine, and bang, the Daytona has 
> 5-10 more HP than the ST.

Essentially, but on a larger scale, isn't this what they do with the 02
ST engine? 

> Yes, the Daytona does out handle the FJR, duh, but they both out 
> handle the ST.

I know, I just like ruffling your Yamaha feathers.


It seems to me Triumph should concentrate on doing a few things and
doing them well, rather than trying to have as full a lineup as a
Japanese manufacturer.  I can see the need to introduce new bikes and
generate interest, but it seems they already have enough problems with
parts and support work.  Won't more models make that worse?  (I know
they try to make the bikes modular, but still.)  

For example, I think they should just have canned the TT600 and replaced
it with the Daytona600.

What also should be scary for Triumph is that they used to have a unique
advantage on some bikes, like the Speed Triple and the Tiger, but
probably didn't milk that for all it was worth.  Now there are waves of
new naked bikes and adventure tourers hitting US shores.  Maybe that's
why they're trying to keep things fresh with new models, but it seems
like Triumph should also say, "hey, you want an adventure tourer?  We've
been doing that for years!"  "You want a naked wheelie monster?  we
invented that niche!"

That's all really moot, however, if Triumph keeps losing dealers and
doesn't fix their customer support.

Laters,
Brian
- -- 
Euless, TX
'97 VFR 750
'99 Sprint ST(black, RIP)

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