Used Street Triple,or New MT07
Discussion
EagleMoto4-2 said:
Get the Triumph. Good as the Yamaha is, paying the road tax for a 700cc class bike and getting 500cc performance just doesnt add up to me.
The performance is very similar to other twins of similar capacity (SV650, ER6, 696 Monster etc.) so I don't agree it has 500cc performance. Are you comparing it to a 600cc sports bike?neelyp said:
The Street Triple is lighter, more nimble, doesn't have a boat anchor for an engine and there is little in it performance wise due to the power to weight ratio.
I'm guessing you've never had a shot of a Street, they're brilliant bikes, I had a test ride of a Speed and just couldn't get on with it at all, it didn't really offer anything over the Street.
Never had a shot of the Yamaha so can't offer any opinion.
I agree with the above but personally I like a torquey engine so I preferred the speed triple.I'm guessing you've never had a shot of a Street, they're brilliant bikes, I had a test ride of a Speed and just couldn't get on with it at all, it didn't really offer anything over the Street.
Never had a shot of the Yamaha so can't offer any opinion.
My mate has a street and top speed and acceleration is not much different, the biggest fault with the speed is the weight of the engine and the downfall of the street is the standard suspension particularly the forks.
The Street Triple R adds good suspension and a nicer handle bar bend.
mike150 said:
neelyp said:
The Street Triple is lighter, more nimble, doesn't have a boat anchor for an engine and there is little in it performance wise due to the power to weight ratio.
I'm guessing you've never had a shot of a Street, they're brilliant bikes, I had a test ride of a Speed and just couldn't get on with it at all, it didn't really offer anything over the Street.
Never had a shot of the Yamaha so can't offer any opinion.
I agree with the above but personally I like a torquey engine so I preferred the speed triple.I'm guessing you've never had a shot of a Street, they're brilliant bikes, I had a test ride of a Speed and just couldn't get on with it at all, it didn't really offer anything over the Street.
Never had a shot of the Yamaha so can't offer any opinion.
My mate has a street and top speed and acceleration is not much different, the biggest fault with the speed is the weight of the engine and the downfall of the street is the standard suspension particularly the forks.
The Street Triple R adds good suspension and a nicer handle bar bend.
I rode the first street triple when it came out before triumph even considered the R - I loved the engine, gearing but the brakes and suspension were very budget - the demo had the full arrow low boy and sounded amazing. Additionally with the mk1 I found the seat very uncomfortable after just an hour of riding I had serious lower back pain on an upright bike!
Move on a few years and I had a chance to ride the latest street triple R while I was testing the Explorer 1200. Hmm what can I say again tiny bike for me to fit on and really too firm for the road as setup as a demo from the dealer and I really didn't like it. Again this was at the other end of the spectrum to the first street in terms of suspension and brakes. I'm sure if you're small enough and light enough it works fine.
Speed has always fitted me better and loved the 1050 engine since a mate had the Sprint ST. Also I guess I like the effortless torque and for me is almost the perfect road engine. I test rode a 2009 Speed with the older round headlight and loved it. Just recently test rode and bought a 2011 Speed, again its all relative but I was coming from a Honda Blackbird so the Speed feels very light and tiny after this. Its perfect for my use for commuting in London and will be used for fun trips in the summer over the weekend.
At the end of the day its each to their own. Some people will like one bike some another.. having test ridden the majority of bikes being discussed here (MT-09 - not a MT-07) I'm able to form a personal opinion of what suits me and recommend only based off that.
neelyp said:
The Street Triple is lighter, more nimble, doesn't have a boat anchor for an engine and there is little in it performance wise due to the power to weight ratio.
I'm guessing you've never had a shot of a Street, they're brilliant bikes, I had a test ride of a Speed and just couldn't get on with it at all, it didn't really offer anything over the Street.
Never had a shot of the Yamaha so can't offer any opinion.
Hmm, I'm sure my wife would love the Street Triple. I'd still go for the Speed, as they say, it's better value, a better bike and of course, you've got the 'big 'an' which is always pleasing. I've never tried the Street but I wouldn't rush to try it knowing that I love the Speed. Even the argument of 'but the R' doesn't wash as the Speed Triple has a really good 'R' variant too. The Speed is probably a bit heavier round town but on the open road, it feels great fun. I've never ridden the Street, but I thought it felt a little cheaper than the Speed (and will have been built down to a smaller budget) so that is perhaps understandable. However, I've not had a chance to ride the Street and I doubt I will soon. I'm guessing you've never had a shot of a Street, they're brilliant bikes, I had a test ride of a Speed and just couldn't get on with it at all, it didn't really offer anything over the Street.
Never had a shot of the Yamaha so can't offer any opinion.
The Triumph I really want to ride is the Daytona 675R. I've heard so much about it, but that's another one I've only sat on and never rode. I hear it's the best handling sports bike around, but I'm so far off having mastered my T595 Daytona that I don't need anything sharper!
Baryonyx said:
neelyp said:
The Street Triple is lighter, more nimble, doesn't have a boat anchor for an engine and there is little in it performance wise due to the power to weight ratio.
I'm guessing you've never had a shot of a Street, they're brilliant bikes, I had a test ride of a Speed and just couldn't get on with it at all, it didn't really offer anything over the Street.
Never had a shot of the Yamaha so can't offer any opinion.
Hmm, I'm sure my wife would love the Street Triple. I'd still go for the Speed, as they say, it's better value, a better bike and of course, you've got the 'big 'an' which is always pleasing. I've never tried the Street but I wouldn't rush to try it knowing that I love the Speed. Even the argument of 'but the R' doesn't wash as the Speed Triple has a really good 'R' variant too. The Speed is probably a bit heavier round town but on the open road, it feels great fun. I've never ridden the Street, but I thought it felt a little cheaper than the Speed (and will have been built down to a smaller budget) so that is perhaps understandable. However, I've not had a chance to ride the Street and I doubt I will soon. I'm guessing you've never had a shot of a Street, they're brilliant bikes, I had a test ride of a Speed and just couldn't get on with it at all, it didn't really offer anything over the Street.
Never had a shot of the Yamaha so can't offer any opinion.
The Triumph I really want to ride is the Daytona 675R. I've heard so much about it, but that's another one I've only sat on and never rode. I hear it's the best handling sports bike around, but I'm so far off having mastered my T595 Daytona that I don't need anything sharper!
If I'm correct you don't like the Street but you do like the Speed and because you like the Speed you wouldn't possibly like the Street, even though you have no intention of finding out.
You should get a job with MCN.
I will agree the Daytona 675 is a fantastic bike, which, of course, the all conquering Street Triple is based on.
Baryonyx said:
Motorcycles are rarely logical purchases. I'm sure my wife would love the Street but I don't spend much time riding in traffic so low speed weight isn't an issue. At the same budget, I'd just take the bigger, better bike is all I'm saying.
You don't know if it's the better bike, you've only ridden one of them. The Speed is bigger, I'll grant you that, but that in no way makes it better.It's like me saying I prefer McDonalds to Burger King but I've never tried a Burger King.
You can really only comment with any authority if you've tried both.
CaptainSlow said:
You need to take Baryonyx's "Expert" opinions with a pinch of salt.
More importantly, Burger King for the burger but McDonalds for the fries.
I was only using burger outlets as an example, I have indeed tried both and prefer BKs for both burger and fries.More importantly, Burger King for the burger but McDonalds for the fries.
Unfortunately they closed the BK in Falkirk so now only have the Golden Arches.
Prof Prolapse said:
I was always of the impression the Street was a far bit quicker but I've not ridden either.
The street certainly has a weight and handling advantage, but the speed has a pretty significant torque and power advantage. The answer may be to wait for the 800 Street Triple 
In real-world head-to-head tests they're almost equally fast. The Speed obviously has more low-down torque, but that's mostly offset by weight. The weight of the speed makes it feel far less skittish in bumpy corners than the (non-R) Street Triple. It also fits taller people better and keeps more wind off your legs.
I've not ridden a Street R, but I bet it's the sweet spot of the two. If you enjoy revving a bike out then the Street is the much better choice – and it still has great mid-range acceleration.
I've not ridden a Street R, but I bet it's the sweet spot of the two. If you enjoy revving a bike out then the Street is the much better choice – and it still has great mid-range acceleration.
Having owned both a Street Triple R and a Speed Triple R, I'd never go back to a Speed Triple.
Point to point it wasn't any quicker than the Street, it had a bit more grunt but ultimately wasn't as nimble.
The only reason I went for the Speed Triple was I didn't get on with the newer Street Triple, but looking back I didn't give it enough of a chance.
I'm in the process of looking for another Street Triple R (pre 2013).
You really need to try all your options :-)
Point to point it wasn't any quicker than the Street, it had a bit more grunt but ultimately wasn't as nimble.
The only reason I went for the Speed Triple was I didn't get on with the newer Street Triple, but looking back I didn't give it enough of a chance.
I'm in the process of looking for another Street Triple R (pre 2013).
You really need to try all your options :-)
For the mt07 corner,
It's a great little bike, really torquey, being a twin and what the designed it to do!
It's crazy light and nimble too. The forks dive a lot under braking, but the budget has to be cut somewhere, it's a lot of bike for the money, be it new or second hand.
It feels quicker than it really is, which I think is a good thing for my license and health.
It's pulls really hard in third, second starts to run out a it early but third make me giggle every time.
You can be nice and lazy with the gears so great for just riding around.
The throttle can be a little jerky when you roll back on after a while, especially at low revs.
I'm not keen on the front end of the street Tripple, but I think ultimately it's a more sporty bike and great engine. Yamaha should look to utilise the mt 07 engine where they can because it's a real peach too, I like the lazier torquey stuff, yet it revs up ridiculously quickly and easily for a parallel twin.
Have you checked out insurance prices and running costs? If undecided this may be a good guide.
Both hold their value very well it would seem, perhaps the mt fairing slightly better in this regard?
A good year old mt must be 4-4.5k? I guess a ST around 5.5-6k? Maybe touch over for the R?
It's a great little bike, really torquey, being a twin and what the designed it to do!
It's crazy light and nimble too. The forks dive a lot under braking, but the budget has to be cut somewhere, it's a lot of bike for the money, be it new or second hand.
It feels quicker than it really is, which I think is a good thing for my license and health.
It's pulls really hard in third, second starts to run out a it early but third make me giggle every time.
You can be nice and lazy with the gears so great for just riding around.
The throttle can be a little jerky when you roll back on after a while, especially at low revs.
I'm not keen on the front end of the street Tripple, but I think ultimately it's a more sporty bike and great engine. Yamaha should look to utilise the mt 07 engine where they can because it's a real peach too, I like the lazier torquey stuff, yet it revs up ridiculously quickly and easily for a parallel twin.
Have you checked out insurance prices and running costs? If undecided this may be a good guide.
Both hold their value very well it would seem, perhaps the mt fairing slightly better in this regard?
A good year old mt must be 4-4.5k? I guess a ST around 5.5-6k? Maybe touch over for the R?
That's the one I'm taking delivery of on 1st March, a new 2016 colour called Night Fluro.
I think the main take away from this discussion is that they are very different bikes and you really need to try them out before drawing any conclusions. Technically, the STR is a superior bike in many ways but that isn't necessarily what's important.
I think the main take away from this discussion is that they are very different bikes and you really need to try them out before drawing any conclusions. Technically, the STR is a superior bike in many ways but that isn't necessarily what's important.
Gassing Station | Biker Banter | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff