Triumph Speed Triple
Discussion
The quality feel of the bike is a cut above the KTM and MT10.
The primary issue is the age of the engine. It's about 15kg heavier than the competition and incredibly long stroke. It won't make the power as it won't rev. It has it's design roots in the 90s and can trace its original cribbed design back to the GPZ900 Kawasaki if you believe some.
Triumph have done the 765, the retro and now the explorer engines. They need an all new engine, with a much shorter stroke and around 1100cc. It needs a stacked gearbox and to rev to abour 11500rpm. The rest of the bike, including the Spondon frame needs virtually nothing.
This engine can then be used across the Tiger sport, and Sprint ST range to share costs.
I love my Speed Triple, but the engine on the MT10 feels 20 years newer and the although I didn't like the KTM, the SDR engine shows that all that power is tameable in a supernaked.
The primary issue is the age of the engine. It's about 15kg heavier than the competition and incredibly long stroke. It won't make the power as it won't rev. It has it's design roots in the 90s and can trace its original cribbed design back to the GPZ900 Kawasaki if you believe some.
Triumph have done the 765, the retro and now the explorer engines. They need an all new engine, with a much shorter stroke and around 1100cc. It needs a stacked gearbox and to rev to abour 11500rpm. The rest of the bike, including the Spondon frame needs virtually nothing.
This engine can then be used across the Tiger sport, and Sprint ST range to share costs.
I love my Speed Triple, but the engine on the MT10 feels 20 years newer and the although I didn't like the KTM, the SDR engine shows that all that power is tameable in a supernaked.
I think it's as good as the rest of the top 'super naked' bikes, even though it's not as fast. That comes down to the engine, as 3DP noted. It's very old unit now, and even with continual refinement and improvement, it can't match a modern four cylinder for pace. Triumph can't increase the piston speed and the scope for ever larger bore must be nearly played out.
That said, the engine is still great. Some love it and some hate it but I think that ubiquitous triple makes for a really good engine on the road, because it makes a broad spread of power with plenty of character. I really like the Speed and I always have done. I think it's a great bike that acquits itself well.
That said, the engine is still great. Some love it and some hate it but I think that ubiquitous triple makes for a really good engine on the road, because it makes a broad spread of power with plenty of character. I really like the Speed and I always have done. I think it's a great bike that acquits itself well.
What 3dp said is spot on
You can say you don't need that extra power and for real world it's a better bike which in alot of ways it is
I like triples and I like Triumph but I won't get one. Too slow and a touch heavy
Latest super nakeds are a cut above. Ol Trumpy is just a nice big naked now... For me atleast
(and yes I've done hundreds of miles on one with a arrow system) before someone says ' have you ridden one'
You can say you don't need that extra power and for real world it's a better bike which in alot of ways it is
I like triples and I like Triumph but I won't get one. Too slow and a touch heavy
Latest super nakeds are a cut above. Ol Trumpy is just a nice big naked now... For me atleast
(and yes I've done hundreds of miles on one with a arrow system) before someone says ' have you ridden one'
I think it is as good so long as you ignore the power deficit, which on the road in real world use will not be that much different. Certainly a Speed Triple would be higher up the list for a big naked than some of the other more powerful models.
They all have their pros n cons, it really depends on what your top criteria is .....140bhp with a good mid range is a lot more usable on the road than 160bhp thats all at the top end.
No doubt a pipe/filter/map should release a bit more to narrow the gap if the only negative to a prospective purchase is power.....
They all have their pros n cons, it really depends on what your top criteria is .....140bhp with a good mid range is a lot more usable on the road than 160bhp thats all at the top end.
No doubt a pipe/filter/map should release a bit more to narrow the gap if the only negative to a prospective purchase is power.....
Pravus1 said:
I seem to remember performance bikes took the new one to rockingham and it was the second fastest super naked behind the tuono 1100. It's a great chassis and engine.
Blimey I never read that article. I can believe it for handling - bloody good bike when you start pushing it despite the weight. You just need to thrash it alot more than a Tuono, superduke, S1R etcI love the Speed engine. It's got plenty of power for a road bike and loads of character. For me though it's all gone wrong with the looks. By keeping on updating it to try and make it look all modern and to compete with the Tuono and S1000's of this world it's lost it's unique character, the thing that made it different.
this is when they had it right. A proper British bruiser
The only bike I've ever owned that come trade in time I was as sorry to see it go as I was excited to get on the new steed.
Note: Pick isn't my bike but darn similar.
this is when they had it right. A proper British bruiser
The only bike I've ever owned that come trade in time I was as sorry to see it go as I was excited to get on the new steed.
Note: Pick isn't my bike but darn similar.
Edited by Harry H on Tuesday 16th January 10:31
I guess if you like the triple 1050 engine like I do it will suit you fine - its certainly not underpowered as a real world engine and has a nice fat flat torque curve which makes it effortless to get off the line and up to speed or gain speed stupidly easily without having to thrap the crap out of it.
Can't quite understand why you need 160bhp on a naked road bike - I rode the MT10 its in another league of go but way too much for the public road if you value your license - the riding experience just wasn't even close when I compared my 2011 Speed back to back with the MT10. MT10 felt very remote and dare I say it soleless but ballistically fast with crap brakes (compared to the Speed front Brembos) and a rubbish RBW throttle esp on off throttle mapping.
Overall Triumph will get more sales with a nice new large CC triple engine which is based off a more modern design as 3DP indicates. Sadly they'll have to match the toys and power of the competition to be taken seriously by some it seems.
Can't quite understand why you need 160bhp on a naked road bike - I rode the MT10 its in another league of go but way too much for the public road if you value your license - the riding experience just wasn't even close when I compared my 2011 Speed back to back with the MT10. MT10 felt very remote and dare I say it soleless but ballistically fast with crap brakes (compared to the Speed front Brembos) and a rubbish RBW throttle esp on off throttle mapping.
Overall Triumph will get more sales with a nice new large CC triple engine which is based off a more modern design as 3DP indicates. Sadly they'll have to match the toys and power of the competition to be taken seriously by some it seems.
Agree with all of the comments. I have owned a 2014 Speed R for about a year now and did have a couple of other bikes in mind at the time of purchase.
The reason for purchasing was to get a good all-round package... Not just the fastest, or the one with the most toys, or the newest etc. Although the Speed is very long in the tooth underneath the skin that doesn't detract from the experience... At least in my humble opinion.
The 130 odd bhp sounds rather feeble in comparison to the younger competition. However I still get lots of fun out of it. In fact, much more fun than I get out of my Hayabusa. For me it's a great amount of performance to enjoy on the road. Definitely enough shove to get a thrill.
What's quite strange with the Speed is that is could be referred to as the sensible or even boring choice, but somehow it still has character.
The reason for purchasing was to get a good all-round package... Not just the fastest, or the one with the most toys, or the newest etc. Although the Speed is very long in the tooth underneath the skin that doesn't detract from the experience... At least in my humble opinion.
The 130 odd bhp sounds rather feeble in comparison to the younger competition. However I still get lots of fun out of it. In fact, much more fun than I get out of my Hayabusa. For me it's a great amount of performance to enjoy on the road. Definitely enough shove to get a thrill.
What's quite strange with the Speed is that is could be referred to as the sensible or even boring choice, but somehow it still has character.
WarnieV6GT said:
I'm getting a speed triple 1050 in the next couple of months. Is there a model in the range where you get the most bang for your buck? Ideally I'd like to spend around £4-5k but reckon u could stretch to a bit more if there was a massive difference between models?
You want a 2011 updated one. Regardless on cosmetic changes with round light to fox eye there were significant chassis upgrades. I have a late 2013 model and was prepared to buy new when the 2016 model came out but the update was too small to warrant extra money over an ultra low mile 2nd hand model.Some pics...
Harry H said:
I love the Speed engine. It's got plenty of power for a road bike and loads of character. For me though it's all gone wrong with the looks. By keeping on updating it to try and make it look all modern and to compete with the Tuono and S1000's of this world it's lost it's unique character, the thing that made it different.
this is when they had it right. A proper British bruiser
The only bike I've ever owned that come trade in time I was as sorry to see it go as I was excited to get on the new steed.
Note: Pick isn't my bike but darn similar.
The 955i is my favourite Speed Triple. this is when they had it right. A proper British bruiser
The only bike I've ever owned that come trade in time I was as sorry to see it go as I was excited to get on the new steed.
Note: Pick isn't my bike but darn similar.
Edited by Harry H on Tuesday 16th January 10:31
3DP said:
You want a 2011 updated one. Regardless on cosmetic changes with round light to fox eye there were significant chassis upgrades. I have a late 2013 model and was prepared to buy new when the 2016 model came out but the update was too small to warrant extra money over an ultra low mile 2nd hand model.
Some pics...
Really pretty bike in a very simple, stylish way..Some pics...
Gassing Station | Biker Banter | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff