|
Classic Bikes
Custom Bikes
Individual
Racing Bikes AJP
AJS
Aprilia
Ariel
Avinton / Wakan
Bajaj
Benelli
Beta
Bimota
BMW
Brough Superior
BRP Cam-Am
BSA
Buell / EBR
Bultaco
Cagiva
Campagna
CCM
CF Moto
Combat Motors
Derbi
Deus
Ducati
Excelsior
GASGAS
Ghezzi Brian
Gilera
GIMA
Harley Davidson
Hero
Highland
Honda
Horex
Husaberg
Husqvarna
Hyosung
Indian
Jawa
Kawasaki
KTM
KYMCO
Laverda
Lazareth
Magni
Maico
Mash
Matchless
Mondial
Moto Guzzi
Moto Morini
MV Agusta
MZ / MuZ
NCR
Norton
NSU
Paton
Peugeot
Piaggio
Revival Cycles
Roland Sands
Royal Enfield
Sachs
Sherco
Sunbeam
Suzuki
SWM
SYM
Triumph
TVS
Ural
Velocette
Vespa
Victory
Vincent
VOR
Voxan
Vyrus
Walt Siegl
Walz
Wrenchmonkees
Wunderlich
XTR / Radical
Yamaha
Zero
Video
Technical
Complete Manufacturer List
|
Triumph Speed Triple
This latest incarnation of the Speed Triple is Triumph's best yet. Using the frame and engine from its flagship Daytona sportsbike, Triumph has created a naked musclebike which offers strong performance and quirky looks.
The first Speed Triple appeared in 1994, using the 885cc triple engine from the first Daytona 900 in a steel-tube spine frame with a single round headlight. Performance was brisk, the torquey engine producing 73kW (98bhp), and the Daytona-derived chassis allowed nimble handling.
For 1997, the Triple was updated, and renamed the Speed Triple T509. The 885cc engine received Sagem fuel-injection, and the steel-tube frame was replaced with a new aluminium tube perimeter frame and single-sided swingarm, again borrowed from Triumph's flagship sportsbike, the T595 Daytona. Peak power also increased, this time to 80kW (108bhp).
This pattern of following the development of the Daytona continued for 1998 and 2002 model years. The latest Speed Triple has the most recent 955i Daytona engine, producing 88kW (118bhp), with a strong, torquey delivery. Visually similar to the 1998 bike, the 2002 Triple had a host of internal engine mods, including raised compression, larger valves and new pistons.
Revised airbox and exhaust characteristics further improved power delivery.
The sportsbike-quality chassis gives the 2002 Triple outstanding handling, although the sharp steering geometry, together with a short wheelbase and powerful engine can make the Speed Triple feel quite lively over bumps. The suspension is also rather firm for bumpy road comfort, although the brakes are very impressive, stopping the Triple quickly and accurately from speed.
Kept around town or on mountain backroads, the Speed Triple is an impressive performer, which can surprise sportsbike riders on the track, where its good ground clearance, firm suspension and splendid brakes are all at home. Few motorcycles stand out from the crowd quite like the Speed Triple. Its raw, aggressive styling, built around Triumph's distinctive 955cc three-cylinder engine, gives the bike a muscular streetfighter look that is perfectly matched by its explosive performance, sharp handling and awesome braking ability. The motor is based on the Daytona's 12-valve liquid-cooled unit, tuned for an even broader spread of midrange torque while still producing a maximum of 110PS (108bhp). The fuel-injected power plant gives the Speed Triple brutal acceleration from almost any engine speed, plus the ability to be ridden effortlessly with minimal use of the smooth-shifting six-speed gearbox. Excellent handling and stopping ability are assured by a blend of Daytona-derived tubular aluminum frame, fully-adjustable suspension components and top-quality brakes with four-piston front calipers. And like all Triumph's sports bikes, the Speed Triple is a comfortable, practical and well-constructed machine that excels in every situation from high-speed sports riding to city commuting. This year the Speed Triple comes in two vivid new color options, Neon Blue and Nuclear Red. Both are bold, unusual hues that perfectly complement the Speed Triple's extrovert personality.
Speed Triple vs V-Max vs CB1000 vs M900 It's a hot, sweaty night in Sepulveda. Lined up at the lights, four motorcycles. Racing for pink slips. The light flickers from red to green, hammers down, they're gone in a wisp of smoke and a black squeal of tires. Who wins? For our Musclebike contest we picked Yamaha's V-Max, Triumph's Speed Triple, Honda's CB1000 and Ducati's M900 street rods. As hot rod cars get more and more popular on the streets of the USA, can hot rod motorcycles be far behind? Well, actually, yes. The naked musclebikes that the rest of the world is demanding, and getting, haven't reached these shores. Bikes like Suzuki's 1200 Bandit, Yamaha's FJR 1200 and TRX 850. What the rest of the world doesn't have is Buell's S1. Unfortunately, at the time of this test, we didn't have one either, because the MO road test Buell had been deflected out on the racetrack - where it gave good account of itself before blowing up at the Atlanta round of the NASB EBC Brakes Sportbike Challenge Series. But that's musclebike life: sometimes a short one.
4th place Yamaha V-Max It never was a handler, even back then. And every other powerful motorcycle on the market was big and heavy, so its substantial weight wasn't a disadvantage. Nowadays, with a new generation of lightweight motorcycles to compete against in the traffic light Grand Prix, its bulk is noticeable. On our brand new V-Max, even before it's stock rear tire (the V-Max is shod with low-lifetime Bridgestone Exedras) went bad, handling was, shall we say, interesting. It's quite a feeling to gingerly feel your way around a corner, throttle carefully feathered, as the forks pogo and the front wheel threatens to push every inch of the corner. But the king of raw power since 1984 still makes it big in the cool stakes. Park on the boulevard on a Saturday night, and who cares about corners. The added grunt corralled by the V-boost system (which directs inlet charge between carburetors) and the beefy V-4 engine means that there are still few challengers who stand a chance. There's still little that will beat a V-Max, at least in a straight line. The V-boost system and low gearing guarantee that. Once you get into that first corner though, all bets are off. And highway cruising is buzzy, thanks again to the low gear ratios. Suspension was primitive, even in 1984. The narrow, conventional front fork lacks sophisticated damping control and is easily overwhelmed. The rear shock is classically oversprung and underdamped, and the motorcycle is designed with a long wheelbase, carrying a lot of weight on the rear. Try to corner hard, and you'll regret it, as the front wheel starts to push and the back pogos all over the place. It is fairly easy to lean over enough, at least on a smooth road, to scrape the pegs. As a practical, day-to-day motorcycle the Max is a little overwhelmed. The 4.0 gallon gas tank lives under the seat (the dummy tank actually contains the airbox and the header tank for the radiator), and to refill it, which you have to do after you hit the electric reserve button at around the 100 mile mark, you must first pull two underseat mounted toggles. Then, to the delight of gas station attendants everywhere, the mid part of the seat bursts open, revealing the lockable filler cap below.
Party games aside, the V-Max is fun to ride around town because of its good
looks and low down grunt, but out on the open road the fun diminishes, as
narrow, upright bars head the rider up into the wind like a parachute at any
speed above 65. Apart from the electric gas reserve switch on the right
handlebar (now why hasn't anyone else copied that?) rider amenities are few. The
tachometer is buried in the front of the faux gas tank, and only readable when
you're nodding off at the wheel. But, hey, you have to live with a few
compromises when what you want to do is ride the coolest looking musclebike in
town. And the Yamaha is still unarguably that. We had our doubts about including the Triumph in the test: After all, at only 885 cc, it gave away capacity to the multi cylinder competition and much weight to the twin cylinder rival (the Ducati). And at first the motor seemed low-powered: That was until we ran all the bikes away from the lights at once, and the Triumph took the lead. It's a great motor once you realize it has to be revved. There's not too much power down low in the rpm range, but get that three cylinder motor spinning and it pulls with alacrity. Carburetion glitches seem to hamper the Triumph in the midrange, and we're sure that a little tuning would help the gas consumption: the Triple was the thirstiest of the lot, even out-gulping the V-Max into the low thirties when both were ridden side by side. Once you do get the motor revving, power builds until it reaches a flat spot just before the 9,500 rpm redline. Keep it spinning in the sweet spot, and the triple will keep up with the rest of them, at least until the road begins to bend. The riding position was the sportiest of the lot, in that the narrow, clip-on bars put the rider into a forward crouch. But for most riders, the footrests were a little too far forward for the bars. If the bars were replaceable, we'd say just change to a cowhorn bar, but the bars are cast, non adjustable, non replaceable. It's kind of a pity that a bike built from a modular design should be so non-customizable. We would have voted the Triumph higher marks but for one thing - the suspension and resulting handling problems. For a sporty motorcycle, the Triumph sure has a lousy suspension setup. Both ends of the bike are underdamped and undersprung. The frame, (the same type used for all Triumph models), is a tubular steel spine type, and means the bike is high (too high for some short-legged riders: One of the reasons Triumph's Thunderbird is popular is that shorter riders can get their feet on the ground). Combine the height with the mushy, wallowy suspension and uncertain handling and you have a recipe for rider distrust. These criticisms have been leveled at Triumph for several years now, and we're beginning to wonder why they don't fix up the suspension to suit the sporty image they've adopted. True, very few Triumph owners will push their bikes to the limit, but the competition (even the big, wallowy Honda) is just so much better around the bends. Heck, even the V-max wasn't that much worse. Given these criticisms, it probably doesn't really matter that the Triumph was shod with slightly long in the tooth Michelin Hi Sports, which aren't famous for their responsiveness. Bridgestone Exedras would have worked just as well. The Speed Triple has potential for the top of the musclebike class - but it doesn't quite know what it wants to be. The riding position is a compromise between sportbike and standard. Low footpegs and knee cutouts in the tank are the sporty bits. Narrow handle bars lack musclebike leverage. The tires fitted were lacking feel in hard sporty cornering (although nobody expects a musclebike to corner well). Compromises in the suspension let this motorcycle down: but even with its compromised design, if it had been a smoother suspended performer, it would have been hard to beat on the street. For: Character, soulful wail of three cylinder motor. Good brakes. Surprising peak power Against: Hi-strung, peaky power, odd riding position nobody liked, spongy front suspension.
2nd place Honda CB1000
1.
We think everyone would agree the 1996 Buell S1
Lightning qualifies as a Muscle Bike. Maybe the ultimate American-made muscle
bike? Well, we wanted to see just how well the S1 would stack up against the
other muscle bikes in our test, but a scheduling snafu meant we couldn't get a
test Buell in time for our Muscle Bike comparison. Source Motorcycle.com
|
|
Any corrections or more information on these motorcycles will be kindly appreciated. |