[Author Index]
[Date Index]
[Thread Index]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: [ST] First question!/pardon my ignorance
- Subject: Re: [ST] First question!/pardon my ignorance
- From: triumph1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Wed, 23 Jun 2004 05:19:48 -0500
My RS is my first modern machine and I really have had no problems with
the suspension. The one thing that occurred to me last night while
riding was, I don't even know what better or great suspension feels
like. Then I was thinking maybe better or great suspension really is
not better or so great for sport tour riding on real roads. I would
love the chance to ride something that is set up with a race tech front
and an ohlins rear, but I just don't think I could part with that kind
of money on the chance I may not be happy with it. Modern machines are
designed a certain way for a reason and I believe each bike is designed
to perform a certain way and built that way. For every mod or
enhancement a person does to a bike there is a trade off. Sometimes
these trade offs are not so good. I once put a bigger sprocket on the
rear and was not happy with the higher revving motor and the lose of
top end speed. I always felt like I was abusing the crap out of the
bike because it sounded like the RPM's were going to force the bike to
explode, so the end result was I used the 45.00 sprocket for two weeks
and now it hangs on my garage wall. I have never messed with the rear
shock setting in 49584 miles and have never been let down by the stock
shock in any situation or style of riding, but then again I wouldn't
know what to do or what to feel for if I did change the settings.
Sometimes I wish I were a performance guru, but then I probably would
ride less because of my insane desire to make the bike perform better
than it was intended. Perhaps someday I will have the opportunity to
ride a "nicely" set up bike and feel the difference first hand. Just my
rant and .02 worth.
Tim Elliott
Auger Pascal wrote:
>>Stephen and I have disagreed about this before on the Wales
>>and SW list.
>>I actually believe the ST's suspension is perfectly adequate for the
>>average rider on average roads doing the job it was designed
>>for - namely
>>a slightly sporty tourer.
>>
>>
>
>If I can add my 0.02, my ST has only 30000 km but suspension seems Ok for me. Sure we can enhance it but it's Ok for me like that.
>
>No need for me to spend money before it's necessary (until shock wears out). I ride on french roads where small bumpy sections alternate with good highway sections.
>
>If I feel sometimes that the ST needs more attention than the Daytona on very high speed curves in reality ST is often more efficient than my Daytona and an RS even more thanks to less weight.
>
>my ride style goes from pretty clean boy attitude to sometimes harsh rider.
>
>Stock, I find ST has good suspension. Some have better ones. For road usage they are nearly perfect. far better than previous sport touring bikes I owned.
>
>If I keep the Daytona, it's more for the style and design, I like the riding position, even if more tiring, the weigth, engine, and style, and design, and style ... ;)
>
>For other brands I have tested, I were not impressed by suspension differences. sometimes better, but not really to make a big difference on roads.
>
>Probably I'll change for a better set when it will be necessary and if I have money. But not before it's needed.
>
>Pascal Auger
>'00 silver Daytona 955
>'01 blue Sprint ST
>France
>
>
>
> * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
> 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
>
>
>
>
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
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 =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=