Re: [ST] New ST??

[simonb@xxxxxxxxxxx]

Quoting Steven Kohlscheen <TrumpST@xxxxxxxxxxx>:

> <<
> > So, the question is, what the hell is wrong with the Sprint-ST, just the
> way
> > it is?  Or, just the way MINE is?  Race-Tech took care of the front end
> > quite nicely.  Hagon, Ohlins, Penske, et al, do a real nice job on the
> rear
> > shock.
> >>
> I gotta agree.  My bike does everything I've asked it too, and I'm still
> flogging an OEM shock.  Race Teched front, but that's it.  No manufacturer
> makes a perfect motorcycle straight out of the box.  I don't care what Honda
> would want you to believe.  OEM motorcycles are a good starting point,
> customers are to farkle, re-configure, accessorize, and adjust to fit their
> needs.  People who mostly slab tour, and/or commute on the Sprint probably
> like that the suspension is fairly basic, and not to fiddly.

Race Tech and Ohlins on mine. However i don't think it was worth the 7500GBP
OEM price. I only paid 6500GBP for it so I'm very pleased, since you have to
mod it to bring it up to spec.
As value goes the ST at 7500GBP is far too much money. I only paid 7800GBP for
my GIXER.  The ST and other Sports Tourer bikes like it do feal dated compared
to modern stuff. This shoild be reflected in the price.


>
> <<
> The R1's and Gixxer's loose weight and gain HP with every model change
> (not necessarily every year). Loosing weight and gaining HP is a standard
> improvement for any motorcycle, so the ST could use it too.

Exactly. The Gixer is very light and nimble compared to the ST. I would buy a
pillion fiendly gixer with risers without hesitation.

> >>
> Why must the ST do this as well?  The ST1300 gained HP AND weight but it
> still is considered a better bike than it's predecessor.  Your comparison to
> the R1's and Gixxer's is flawed because they are focused on outright
> performance.  I just don't need the bike to weight that much less if it
> means sacrificing workmanship, reliability, and durability.

But they don't.  Have you ever riden a GSXR1000.

>  Not to mention
> GVWR.  This is a sport tourer we're talking about.  A compromise bike.  And
> I feel it's pretty well balanced, for it's target audience, as it is.  Does
> that mean I don't want it to change at all?  Yes, and no.  I'll admit I
> would love to see a redesign just to shut up the damn magazine hacks who
> can't seem to find anything more to bitch about than it hasn't
> changed*boohooo*.  If that's it's biggest sin, than I think that's great.
> But I don't want to see shaft drive, ABS, radical styling and underseat
> exhausts.  These are not high on my list of "needs" in a bike.  That's just
> me.

It could do with more power. A full daytona spec me thinks and better
suspension.  Other than that it's fine. It's not as modern a bike as the GSXR
etc.  It's not as much "FUN" as a GSXR.


SimonB


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