Re: [ST] For what it's worth

[Matt Heyer <mattheyer@xxxxxxxxx>]

Unfortunately, I can't see that happening.  The Daytona is their
"super-sport" offering, and even that is not supposed to directly
compete with the GSXR/ZX/CBR/R.  The say it is more of a real world
sports bike.  So you have the race replicas like the GSXR/etc, then a
step back is the Daytona, and then a step back is the ST (a very
"sport" oriented sport-touring bike).  I think it's more splitting
hairs to place a bike in between the Daytona and ST in terms of
performance.  IMHO, the real reason the RS existed was not as
something in between the Daytona and the ST (even though it sort of
fell in that way), but rather as a semi-naked offering for those who
are not into full fairing work.

Matt Heyer


On 8/25/05, Chris Harwood <Chris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Marc
> 
> Sounds good to me.  I'll wait.
> 
> Chris Harwood
> 00 RS
> 
> >>> MarcVE@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx 25/08/2005 08:33:37 >>>
> Seems pretty clear to me that the Triumph marketing guys are missing
> something here.
> 
> Lost of people on this list (myself included) seem to want something a
> bit sportier and lighter than the ST1050.
> 
> Those same people are hesitating at buying a Gixer/R1/ZX etc, so the
> new Daytona probably also wont appeal to them.
> 
> What's needed (IMHO) is an RS with the 1050 motor tuned for more HP,
> less weight and a better adjustable suspension.
> 
> 
> cheers
> <<<<<<
> _______________________________________________
> Triumph Sprint ST/RS mailing list
> Send list posts to ST@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Change your list options at www.Triumphnet.com
>
_______________________________________________
Triumph Sprint ST/RS mailing list
Send list posts to ST@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Change your list options at www.Triumphnet.com