Motorcycle Forum

Motorcycle Forum (http://www.motorcycle.com/forum/)
-   Motorcycle General Discussion (http://www.motorcycle.com/forum/motorcycle-general-discussion/)
-   -   2010 Triumph Thunderbird Review (http://www.motorcycle.com/forum/motorcycle-general-discussion/11960-2010-triumph-thunderbird-review.html)

Administrator 05-19-2009 02:10 PM

2010 Triumph Thunderbird Review
 
Original Article:
2010 Triumph Thunderbird Review

Please discuss the Motorcycle.com article 2010 Triumph Thunderbird Review in our Motorcycle Forums below. Use the reply button to let others know your comments or feedback on the article. Constructive criticism is always appreciated, along with your thoughts and personal opinions on the bikes and products we have tested.

longride 05-19-2009 03:07 PM

"The re’s also no such thing as a viable cruiser that’s ugly, so the UK-based Triumph turned to an American designer to define how an inline-Twin cruiser should look. Tim Prentice, who has styled the Honda Rune...."

Hoo boy, I think I'd take a quick look at editing this one! I think Tim needs to get that OFF his resume pronto.

seruzawa 05-19-2009 03:26 PM

Looks like a nice alternative for those who want a big cruiser. However once again, this motorcycle is designed from the bottom up and recently too. So why the heck must it weigh over 750 pounds? Hello-o. Remember the original concept? A chopper? A chopper was a Harley with stuff chopped off to save weight because of all the US Troops who rode Brit bikes in Europe during WWII and who learned the advantages of less weight. They came home and started chopping stuff off of HDs and Indians. So now we have the Brits designing bikes for the US market and adding weight for some unknown reason? Why? If you are going to build mock-choppers then try chopping them for a change.

theDuke 05-19-2009 03:48 PM

Why does this bike exist?
 
I have no doubt that Triumph is capable of engineering a good bike. I'm just not sure why they keep chasing this segment. From the Bonneville America to the Rocket 3 have any of their cruisers done well in terms of sales volume?

I can see the appeal of high per-bike margins (cheaper components than sport bikes combined with higher MSRPs somehow justified by bigger displacement and more affluent customers) but if you can't sell them, what's the point?

Besides wonky styling in some cases, Triumph is in this no-man's land of cruisers with prices higher than the Japanese and little brand cache amongst those looking for an American ride. Would they be better off sticking to classic-style roadsters and sporty bikes?

Dr_Sprocket 05-19-2009 04:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by theDuke (Post 213977)
I have no doubt that Triumph is capable of engineering a good bike. I'm just not sure why they keep chasing this segment. From the Bonneville America to the Rocket 3 have any of their cruisers done well in terms of sales volume?

I can see the appeal of high per-bike margins (cheaper components than sport bikes combined with higher MSRPs somehow justified by bigger displacement and more affluent customers) but if you can't sell them, what's the point?

Besides wonky styling in some cases, Triumph is in this no-man's land of cruisers with prices higher than the Japanese and little brand cache amongst those looking for an American ride. Would they be better off sticking to classic-style roadsters and sporty bikes?

Said another way: Don't deny your DNA.

mscuddy 05-19-2009 04:47 PM

It looks rather majestic...
 
...like THE HMS Invincible, tottering back and forth on pin like tredles, with all that swoopy swaying about and all that, very nautical.

What's with the chrome doo-dads and all that rot? Why I might even say three cheers! Pip pip pip! Rah-thar!

Wonder if the sludge trap is accessable from the case junction, unlike my old S.O.S. that needed three suction deviced to purge the trap from the effects of pre WWI Castrol XXX 90 wt low detergent.

Eh Wot! Blimey and pip pip! Good show you Hinckly blokes I might say.

!

sarnali2 05-19-2009 06:21 PM

You gotta' be sh*ttin' me. Triumph has such a long and storied history of sporty 360 degree twins and triples why the hell do they insist on copying Harley or Harley style cruisers. Here's a clue, how about a 1600cc twin that looks like a beefed up version of a T100? well screw 'em, If I want a Harley that's what I'll buy not a copy cat sans the vtwin (but with a V twin power pulse) engine.

Triumph has hit a solid home run with the Bonneville and triples, even the original Hinckley Legend, Thunderbird or Trident would look good built around this engine. The development cost of this model would have been better spent on a Trophy replacement as competition for the 1400 Conk and FJR...then at least I would have something to think about buying.

Auphliam 05-20-2009 04:18 AM

Where's the ponies? Maybe I'm wrong, but shouldn't I expect more than 76hp from a water cooled 1600cc mill?

pplassm 05-20-2009 04:57 AM

I don't get it.

To me, the old Triumphs were light, lively machines that put handling and performance above all. I guess that's what the current Speed/Street triples are supposed to be, now.

The cruiser Triumphs confuse me. Apparently, they sell well enough, though, as I see more cruisers than sporty bikes.

Where's the middle ground?

The old T-bird sport (triple with twin mufflers on one side) looked to be my kind of bike.

longride 05-20-2009 05:06 AM

"
The cruiser Triumphs confuse me. Apparently, they sell well enough, though, as I see more cruisers than sporty bikes."

I think you do get it with the last part of your stement. Cruisers sell, sportbikes don't. Add in the cost of retooling a sportbike every 3 years, and I think there really isn't much confusion.


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 08:55 PM.