Re: [ST] fjrIII

[Tom Emberson <ate_st@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On Tue, 18 Feb 2003, Don Olson wrote:

> Mid 90's tech.? That's choice. That shows that you don't know 
> the subject

That was in reference to the suspension. And I know a lot about 
the ST, put over 25k miles on my '01, did the valves and several 
other bits of maintanance. I followed with baited breath the new 
engine before the '02 became reality, so don't say I don't know 
a reasonable amount about Triumph bikes! Well at least the S3, 
Daytona, RS and ST!

> that you are talking about. In every test between ST type 
> scooters in all the mags. including the Brit rags the FJR isn't 
> even mentioned. The ST's motor is probably the best out there. 
> The FI alone in too numerous mentions is arguably the best FI 
> system out there at the present time and the most

I never said anything about the FI.

> tunable. Fuel economy, I don't think the FJR will get close to 
> an honest 50-51 mpg. Styling? at least the ST doesn't look like 
> a piece of origami

The FJR is close, my ST never got any better than 46 MPG (US 
gallon), and that is what the FJR is rated at. My bike is still 
loosening up and I have yet to get it out on the HWY where the 
temperature is above 40 deg F.

As far as styling, to each his own, I like the looks of both, I 
am not trying to get you like my bike. Hell half the people I 
talk to think the TL is an old heavy pig of a bike, so f'n what, 
I love the bike.

> with Hoover vacuum cleaners on the back. The FJR better have 
> 135 hp rwhp just to equal the 105 of my ST due to the 100 lbs 
> of extra lard. A good rule of thumb has always been about that. 
> Brakes? Same thing applies. The FJR doesn't have "wonder 
> brakes" and with the same 100 extra lbs of lard to stop you 
> better allow yourself a little extra room.

Add luggage to your bike, and the weight difference is closer to 
70 lbs, and so far I have yet to complain about the brakes, hell 
in the last MCN it out braked the ST1300 and BWM K1150K (can't 
remember), both of which had ABS where the FJR did not. As far 
as wonder brakes, well they are the same calipers that appear in 
AMA super bike races on the R1, so they can't be all that bad.

> Suspension? Tastes to the individual rider. I just changed to 
> the next higher weight oil and was able to back the preload 
> down and it suits me just fine. So if you want to convince 
> yourself that the FJR is the better bike that's fine but I'll 
> keep my ST thank you very much. Oh, if you find yourself in 
> Oregon I'll be happy to show you some slick 20mph switchbacks 
> through the coastal range or some fast 45mph sweepers up 
> through the Cascade Range to the 7k foot level.

Well put your bike back to stock, change the preload and oops 
you can't, and we can head out.

For some reason you seem to not pay attention to a simple point 
that I have said about ten times, if the ST had the Daytona 
suspension, and the Daytona's cylinder linings, forged pistons, 
and shot peened con-rods (IIRC the cranks are the same), maybe a 
reasonable meeting point between the cams of the Daytona and the 
ST engine with the appropriate tune, the ST would damn near be 
perfect IM(NS)HO !

But obviously that is just me, so I will be quiet now, sheese, 
all I am trying to do is maybe get a bit of a fire going under 
Triumphs butt so when the FJR turns 100k their might be a new 
Sprint ST waiting for me.


Tom

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