Bonneville America Forums Forums Off Topic Discussion Forums Lounge Is Triumph just stupid?

The Triumph twins do a good job of what they were intended to do. The 865 has the misfortune of having been forced into the mold designed by idiot politicians who wish they had been smart enough to have grown up to be engineers. You can't blame Triumph for that.
Now, for very little more money, they had the Thunderbird and Thunderbird Sport, which really should have been badged the new Trident. Those bikes had classic looks, plenty of power, everything except enough people buying them. That they fell by the wayside tells me that more power really isn't all that important to a significant number of classic Triumph enthusiasts.
As for superhighwy needs, I can go north or south and get on I40 or I10 and hold the speedlimit or traffic speed all day in either direction with plenty of throttle to spare. I don't really consider whitelining at 160+ MPH as a real need.
Now, comparing my America to the '49 I had. Keep in mind that, at the time, the '49 was highly modified and considered to be very fast...
America is about as fast.
Considering that it weighs near twice as much, it handles about as well.
It rides a whole lot better.
It looks as good.
The '49 was only a little easier to work on.
The '49 had to be worked on a lot more.
The America goes farther on a tank of gas.

So, They did well on the new twins until the politicians came along and screwed it all up.

GB, I agree the T-Birds(and especially the T-Bird Sport) were umm...nice machines, but their water-cooled engine and requisite radiator were never in my estimation the aesthetic success that the Bonnie line's powerplants are.

Re the 160+ MPH requirement for a bike: Nether do I, but it would be nice to grab a handfull of throttle on my BA occassionaly when I'm out there on a two-lane road with the wife and some luggage, and I come up on a 18-wheeler going 65, and I don't want to have to calculate how much time it's going to take me and the wife to get past that long truck, just as I see a car in the distance coming over the rise the other way.

Now, Re the politicos....Sorry, but I don't get(or evidently know the history of) this particular issue, and why these politicians(not sure if you're talkin' about those in London, D.C. or The Hague, either) would have any bearing upon why Triumph Twins are 790cc, 865cc, OR 1500cc for that matter, other than the old.."Let's help out H-D here and slap a tarif on all those japanese 750cc and higher machine that they're dumpin' on the amercian market"(which as you know was true, BTW) back in the early 1980s, OR the.."Let's clean up the emissions of vehicles out there" that presently is the stated goal of those politicos which will case a switching to F.I. and eventually maybe the end of all air-cooled machines in the future.

Please enlighten me here.

Hey Greg!

Haven't you got a few job applications to fill out or somethin'???!!!

(preferably those openings for positions in the Mile High State)

I'm tryin' to talk to GB here, Dude!!!

Greg, the tennis ball is too big

I get the power thing I just don't get the size thing. Though to me the power is not a need but a want. There are not many cars out on the highways that can keep up with most bikes so I don't get that side of the argument.
I have ridden many of the bikes available and have yet to ride a big fat cruiser that handles better. Yeah there are some big cruisers that handle some long twisties well but they are too heavy to flick around. Maybe it's my sport riding backround but to me for a bike to handle well it must handle quick. I would like to see a cruiser styled bike get more power without gaining a couple of hundred pounds or even better losing some weight.
For now I will be happy having two bikes, my SM for it's looks, character and class and a sport tourer or adventurer tourer for two up and real handling.

Look at the valve timing on the new twins. The model T Ford had a more radical cam. With the 790 twins, you could get a significant power gain just by opening up the exhaust and intake a little. The newer ones don't respond to that at all until you change the cams. Now, you can bet that Triumph didn't just decide one day to change to a bigger bore and then detune the engine to the point of uselessness, it was to please the idiot politicians who voted themselves to be engineers.
To give you an idea of the situation, in many states, it is illegal to "tamper" with your emission control equipment. So, you get an idea how to reduce the emissions of your engine to a level of cleanliness that rivals new fallen snow. So, like a fool, you do it. Then you get slapped with a huge fine and your vehicle is impounded because you (gasp)
"tampered"!

Now. if the politicians of the world really gave a rats patooty about emissions, they would have simply put together an incentive plan making it worthwhile for the real engineers to make vehicles run as cleanly as possible instead of arbitrarily setting design standards. Had they done that, the new Bonneville engines would probably beat the emissions standards for 15 years from now and produce some 75 - 80 HP out of the box.