RE: [ST] MCN: Eight 2002 Triumphs on test

["David McCarthy" <dave.mac@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

The comments on the Daytona's left me a touch confused, but that could
simply be because I am thick?

The comparisons seem a bit mixed up in terms of handling etc:

They claim the rake has been changed/reduced on the Centennial. Correct me
if I am wrong, but the most obvious ways of decreasing the rake would be to
either:

a.	Change the headstock, which means a different frame.
b.	Change the yolks or triple clamps, which they haven't.
c.	Drop the yokes down the fork tubes, which they haven't.
d.	I suppose they could jack the back end up, but they ain't done that
either.

So assuming it hasn't been changed, the following have:

The wheelbase has been extended some 11mm by refitting the single sided
Swinging Arm and some 6lb added. Finally the 180 section tyre has been
replaced with a 190 as was the case on the older Daytona (obviously just
using the same wheel).

All the above seems to add up to a bike which should turn slower, but they
claim quicker!! Now totally confused.

Out of interest, I rode the 2002 (non-Centennial) today - wonderful!!

Dave Mc



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