Go Back   Motorcycle Forum > Motorcycle.Com General Discussion > Motorcycle News > Old News > Triumph News

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 01-08-2002, 10:37 AM   #11
mcjunkie
Founding Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 58
Default Re: 2002 Triumph Speed Four Feedback

I think it's cool, way better use of the motor than in the tt600. better still if it were a little hooliganized twin or triple.



mcjunkie is offline   Reply With Quote

Sponsored Links Remove Advertisements
Motorcycle Forum
Advertisement
Old 01-08-2002, 12:05 PM   #12
CBR1000F
Founding Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 367
Default Re: 2002 Triumph Speed Four Feedback

I like it and I don't like it...



I like the looks (Ok, go ahead and flame me!) and I like the idea...



Unlike the TT600, no claims to dominance in the class are forthcoming - they don't exist in this class...



But damn, the TT600 is already down on power, and now it's gonna lose 11 more?! Won't that put it at like 75 hp or so? There's better be some SERIOUS gains in the midrange for that kind of loss - but there usually isn't when a bike is "retuned" which we all know really means DE-tuned.
__________________
People are more violently opposed to fur than leather, because it\'s safer to harass rich women than bikers.
CBR1000F is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-08-2002, 12:29 PM   #13
Poser
Founding Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 238
Default You think so?

I dunno about the naked friendly motor. I really doubt that the snorkles do much besides look strange. The TT is a little underpowered relative to an R6, but who can really use an R6? It handles well and has good brakes, so I wouldn't notice a couple of missing horsepower or 10 more pounds. Aside from its (deliberately?) odd looks, it will be a pretty good bike.



The 955's new nose looks like a softened version of the old VFR, but think about how many of those current Japanese bike cliches came from the original 595. Look at the old VFR from the side and the SV650 from the front, for instance. Plagarism is basic to all cultures.



I would buy either a Daytona or a TT600 in a minute. The Speed Four might take a few hours or even days, though, because of the looks!
Poser is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-08-2002, 04:41 PM   #14
CarsSuck
Founding Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 282
Default You're not getting it

A lot of people want a streetfighter style bike but don't want to actually build or modify one themselves, just like peole who buy chopper styled cruisers, like springer softails. Except that factory naked bikes are actually decent motorcycles. In America streetfighters aren't even that big, but in europe they are, and people are buying lots of small displacement naked sporty bikes as a result. Now what's this about an...Integrilous? Integrado? What? Streetfighters are like Acuras??



And to that guy below you, the SV and the Duc are good choices if that's what you want, but what if it's not? Neither of those bikes can compete with a TT600 in all out performance. The Duc MIGHT keep up on a road that favors a lighter twin's handling, and the SV might have a chance with an expensive suspension upgrade, but they'd both still be way down on power.
CarsSuck is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-08-2002, 06:03 PM   #15
RonXX
Founding Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 273
Default Re: 2002 Triumph Speed Four Feedback

Exactly my point. This bike will produce only about 5 HP more than an SV650 with a slip on muffler, weigh more, and cost an extra $2000 for all that Triumph "heritage". If you want a bike that will embarrass the speed four for $7500 then get the SV and put an exhaust and suspension work on it. OR... build your own from a full power sportbike.

RonXX is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-09-2002, 03:14 AM   #16
johnz
Founding Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 15
Default Re: How much?

And both of those bikes are in a much more expensive insurance class. That's the whole point of a 600 - you can't afford to ride a bike you can't afford to insure.
johnz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-09-2002, 04:42 AM   #17
mandrake_the_mollusk
Founding Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 85
Default Your point misses the point though...

People who want a bargain performer will buy the SV and do a few mods, yes. Good deal.



But as far as "embarrassing" a Speed4, impossible. Even if it loses the race! You see, some people are *embarrassed* to ride a Japanese motorcycle. I'm not saying should be, many are posers, but they are. It's kinda like wearing jeans from Walmart even if they are better and cost less. But even worse cuz you can't say you got it just to do yardwork, and the label is even bigger. Riding a Triumph, Guzzi, Ducati, Beemer, Aprilia, Cagiva etc you name it, you got class, panache, style and all the ladies wanting a ride on it --even if you don't go quite as fast
mandrake_the_mollusk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-09-2002, 10:33 AM   #18
tbuse
Founding Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 144
Default Re: 2002 Triumph Speed Four Feedback

I don't think your figures add up. The SV650 costs $5,799.00. For that you get a carbed 90º twin, that makes 70 hp @ 8900 rpm. (MO numbers) The Baby Speed makes 97 hp at 11,750 rpm. Triumph specifically notes that this excludes the effect of the forced air induction. Even considering a 15% loss to the rear wheel (high considering a chain final drive), you have about 82.5 rear wheel horsepower, not including the forced air induction. Add this to better brakes, a better frame and better handling, a price tag of $7,499.00 is pretty good. That's $1,700 more than the SV, but you get a lot more and only an 11 pound difference in weight.
tbuse is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-09-2002, 11:09 AM   #19
RonXX
Founding Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 273
Default Re: 2002 Triumph Speed Four Feedback

I don't know where you're getting that figure of 97 HP from, but I am certain that is incorrect. The TT600 makes only about 88 or 89 HP as measured on a Dynojet dynomometer. The Speed Four is going to be retuned for torque (a.k.a. detuned), which the MO article states will result in 11 fewer ponies than the TT. So 88-11=77 HP. The SV650 with a slip on will make somewhere slightly over 70 HP most likely. The real advantage of the SV would be torque though. Despite the statement by Triumph that they are tuning for torque, I would bet that the Speed Four will have only 1-2 more lbs-ft more than the TT. That means the SV will still have a much flatter and therefore user friendly torque spread then the Triumph.

I remember the first TT600 I saw way back when they came out (like 2 years now). The guy couldn't get the thing rolling without using like 5K rpm, or else it would stall. How's that for the modern marvel of fuel injection. Whatever, to each his own, but I would rather spend my money on a very reliable/cheaper/smoother/etc motorcycle. Not that I'm even in the market to buy one though.
RonXX is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-09-2002, 12:25 PM   #20
SilverBullet
Founding Member
 
SilverBullet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 159
Default Re: 2002 Triumph Speed Four Feedback

According to MO's dyno measurements...



SV650

Max Power: 70.9 HP @ 8900 RPM

Max Torque: 46.2 ft/Lbs @ 7200 RPM



TT600

Max Power = 90.6 hp @ 12,600 rpm

Max Torque = 39.3 ft/lbs @ 10,500 rpm



Note that these numbers were measured at the rear wheel and that we can safely assume that Triumph estimated a loss of about 11 hp at the CRANK, therefore we can assume that the loss measured using a dyno would not make the max hp fall under 80 hp.



Note that the max torque advantage of the SV is only slightly less than 7 lbs/ft although the torque spread is nicer (flatter). You should keep in mind that retuning the TT600 engine will make it lose in max hp but will favor a flatter (and possibly beefier) torque curve.



One very nice thing about the ECUs in the Triumphs is that you can modify the fuel maps using your computer (software and a cable are required). Don't put FI down, it can be pretty good thing more often than not.
SilverBullet is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off