MotorcycleDaily.com – Motorcycle News, Editorials, Product Reviews and Bike Reviews

Motorcycle News, Editorials, Product Reviews and Bike Reviews

Triumph Announces All-New 1215cc Trophy

When Triumph announced the Tiger Explorer with an entirely new 1215cc triple with shaft drive, we were quite sure we would eventually see a no compromises tourer with this same drivetrain.  Our suspicions were justified, and Triumph has just announced the new Trophy with the same 132hp engine delivered via shaft drive to the rear wheel.

As the press release below indicates, this new Trophy seems to have everything the long distance rider might be looking for, including electrically adjustable windscreen, 6.9 U.S. gallon fuel capacity, standard large panniers (with optional trunk), ride-by-wire throttle that allows sophisticated traction control and cruise control, as well as linked ABS.   The upmarket SE version (which will be the only version available in the U.S. and Canada) also features adjustable electronic suspension, tire pressure monitoring and a powerful integrated audio system with Bluetooth.

Make no mistake, this is a big machine with a claimed curb weight of 662 pounds.  The new Trophy SE should be available in U.S. and Canadian dealerships in January of next year in both Pacific Blue and Lunar Silver colors. We currently do not know pricing, but will update you when we receive this information. Here are the details we have received from Triumph:

TRIUMPH ENTERS TOURING SEGMENT WITH THE NEW 1215cc TROPHY

  • Powerful three-cylinder, 1215cc engine developing 132bhp and 89ft.lbs of torque at just 6,450rpm.
  • Robust, virtually maintenance-free shaft drive.
  • Supreme ride comfort coupled with Triumph’s dynamic handling expertise.
  • The most technologically-advanced Triumph ever, featuring ride-by-wire throttle, traction control, electronic cruise control, electronic suspension, electrically adjustable screen, integrated audio system with Bluetooth functionality, linked ABS, and Tire Pressure Monitoring System.
  • Triumph Dynamic Luggage System comes standard, providing practicality with dynamic stability.
  • Extended service intervals along with two-year unlimited mileage warranty.
  • Available at U.S. and Canadian Triumph dealerships in January, 2013.

Triumph Motorcycles is entering the touring market with the launch of the all-new shaft-drive Trophy. The Trophy is the third all-new model to be launched by the Hinckley manufacturer over the past 18 months, confirming Triumph’s continued investment in design, technology and engineering. The all-new Trophy is packed with a host of technology features, most of which are standard equipment.

At the heart of the Trophy is the same powerful, three-cylinder engine developed for the award-winning Tiger Explorer. The shaft driven, 1215cc triple delivers an impressive 132bhp at 8,900 revs and 89ft.lbs of torque at 6,450rpm, providing smooth, effortless power whenever it’s needed. To ensure the optimum levels of refinement, the engine features a counter-rotating balancer shaft to smooth out crankshaft vibrations.

A torsional damping system is used to transfer power from the gearbox to the shaft drive through a sprung bevel gear. In addition to this, a metalastic shaft drive is used which allows a certain amount of compliance in the shaft assembly. These combined features help to provide a refined drivetrain and overall chassis performance which ensures power is delivered in a smooth and controllab/le manner.

An extensive testing and development program has honed the chassis to provide true touring comfort while still connecting the rider with the road. Ride-by-wire technology provides both traction control and cruise control functionality, as well as optimizing engine efficiency and fuel economy. Great effort has been made to optimize weather and wind protection with aerodynamically enhanced fairings. The electrically-adjustable screen can raise nearly 6.5” and comes with a memory function that automatically adjusts to your last pre-set position when you restart the bike. Rider and pillion passenger comfort is further enhanced with a range of seat options including heated front and rear seats. The rider seat height can additionally be adjusted between 30.3” and 31.1”.

Two models are available: the Trophy and the Trophy SE. Either model can be selected in Pacific Blue or Lunar Silver paint schemes. Both models feature headlight positional adjustment, center stand, rider seat height adjustment, lockable cockpit storage box with 12v power socket, a 6.6 gallon fuel tank and Triumph’s unique Dynamic Luggage System (TDLS), all as standard.

The Triumph Dynamic Luggage System helps maintain chassis balance by decoupling the mass from the chassis allowing each pannier to move up to a 5 degree arc therefore optimizing stability and refinement. With 31 liters of storage capacity per pannier, additional storage can be gained with the optional 55 liter, powered “Plug and Play” top box. The “Plug and Play” feature allows easy fitting and removal without the need to connect and disconnect cables or wires. It features a 12v socket on the inside to charge a camera, phone or any other electrical device while on the move.

The range-topping Trophy SE features a powerful integrated audio system, with Bluetooth technology, USB input and iPod/MP3 player compatibility. The SE also features adjustable electronic suspension from WP, which is operated via an ergonomically-designed switch cube. Riders select their preferred damping setting – Sport, Normal or Comfort – then combine it with the bike’s loading – Solo, Solo plus luggage or 2-up – and select and review their settings via a dot matrix LCD screen. The ease of use and functionality means that personalized settings can be easily adjusted at the press of a button. The SE also benefits from Triumph’s Tire Pressure Monitoring System, which adds a further layer of rider security while an integrated passenger 12V power supply allows additional accessories to be added.

The Trophy enjoys extended 10,000-mile service intervals, with major services only needed every 20,000 miles.

The new Trophy will get its first public unveiling at Triumph Tridays in Neukirchen, Austria on June 22-24, 2012, and will make a further appearance at the Triumph Live event at Mallory Park, Leicestershire, U.K., which takes place August 31 – September 2, 2012.

Full pricing will be confirmed in early September with the first bikes available in U.S. and Canadian dealerships in January, 2013.

100 Comments

  1. Scorpio says:

    Not nearly as pretty as the previous generation 900/1200 Trophy, kind of an amalgam of the rest of the market/niche in my eyes, but certainly desirable! I expect it will do very well.

    Report this comment

  2. Todd says:

    This may be the one that prompts me to consider a move off the FJR but it will have to be stellar on the road and not too expensive. Can’t wait to ride it. Only negative is the weight but it’s not significant vs. the FJR.

    Report this comment

  3. Mike955i says:

    Seriously WANT! Having owned a Sprint RS and curently owning a Speed triple I love the triple motor, but my “FOG” status makes the S3 a little small for long trips. I like the looks of the FJR but have never liked any i4 motor. The Concours 14 has awesome power but I cant get past it’s looks. I’d love to own the K1600GT but $22k – seriously? I didn’t pay that much for my truck!

    Triumph triple motor – check
    Sweet lines – check
    Capacity for 2 “real” people – check
    Priced at less than $17k – here’s my check

    Report this comment

  4. Alain says:

    This 1215 Trophy seems to be a superb sport tourer but I think I’ll keep my VFR1200 for for a few more years…

    My question is: Is a Triumph Trophy would be as reliable as a Honda ST1300 or Concours 14 or FJR1300 ?

    I have always prefer the japanese brands over the Germain/English/Italian brands for the service, number of dealerships and pricing (purchase/parts/service).

    But a Triumph Trophy in silver would be nice sitting next to the VFR…

    Report this comment

  5. Gary says:

    To each his/her own. To me this bike strikes a nerve, and lies at the perfect intersection of usefulnees, performance, servicability and “character.” I’ve owned two Trimphs … both Sprints … and fell in love with the inline three-cylinder. It splits the difference between twin torque and four-cylinder revability. And you can get parts for ‘em. No minor consideration, that.

    Report this comment

    • John Tuttle says:

      Not to mention that it straddles the fence between twin revability and four-cylinder torque. By “torque” you no doubt are alluding to low-rpm engine performance, which can be measured via either actual torque or actual power. As for “revability”, my guess is that this alludes to the engine’s inertial moment, or perhaps the balance between that and its typical power, and possibly with a correction for engine friction thrown in for good measure. Whatever. The true, substantive differences between different engine configurations are with the difference in the balance characteristics. There are of course other differences that fundamentally influence the performance character of an engine, notably the bore/stroke ratio and, for a given displacement, the stroke measured in absolute terms. But these sorts of differences have nothing per se to do with the cylinder configuration, or with the quantity of cylinders, etc. An in-line triple is inherently similar to a boxer twin. In both of these types, rectilinear piston motion fully cancels among the pistons, but end-over-end rocking motion does not cancel. No 2nd-order or high-order rectilinear motion remains, which sets these two types apart from parallel twins and even in-line fours, since with either of those two parallel configurations, 2nd-order rectilinear piston motion does not cancel among the pistons. With the boxer twin and the in-line triple, all vibrational motion is of the end-over-end, rocking sort, as opposed to rectilinear, and it occurs at the same frequency at which the crankshaft rotates, i.e., it is 1st-order motion. The in-line triple is similar to a boxer twin, although somewhat smoother, the extent to which can’t be generalized, and also with more compact packaging. No question that it is an excellent type of engine for motorcycles. Some would say that it is preferable to the in-line four, but it is subjective and also depends on whether counter-balancing is used and on how well the counter-balancing is implemented. I am looking forward to taking a test ride on either this bike or the other new bike with the same engine, but most likely the other one.

      Report this comment

      • Gary says:

        Dude … I think you may be overthinking this a bit.

        Report this comment

        • John Tuttle says:

          Mr. Gary-Dude … The point that I try to make is that cylinder configuration has no direct bearing on engine performance. Second to that point, I also try to make the point that the correct, substantive meaning of the word “torque” is not synonymous with low-rpm performance. These two misconceptions are pervasive with motoring enthusiasts, both two-wheel and four-wheel variety. The true, inherent differences among engine types, i.e., among engines with different cylinder configurations, are with the balance characteristics. People frequently make comments that say that a certain type of engine is better for “torque”. It annoys me, because it amounts to a falsehood layered over a contrivance. The falsehood is the idea that the arrangement of the cylinders has any direct bearing on the performance characteristic of the engine, i.e., the overall shape of the torque curve and the power curve. The contrivance is with the way that the word “torque” is used to denote low-rpm performance. I can deal with falsehoods, and I can deal with contrivances. I deal with both fairly regularly. But when it comes to a falsehood that is layered over a contrivance, and when I encounter this just about every time that I visit any automotive enthusiast site where people can share their opinions, I just can’t help but think that something is fundamentally wrong on a cultural level.

          Report this comment

          • Gary says:

            Yeah, my wife is always telling me that I am “fundamentally wrong on a cultural level.” She usually says that right after I let loose a huge phart. I hang my head in shame for not having better social graces, along with a more nuanced understanding of torque versus HP.

      • goose says:

        John,

        Thanks for fighting the good fight on this. I’ve tried to make the same or similar points many times here and elsewhere but people just seem happier believing myths and over simplifications.

        I’v never heard first order called rectiliniear but it does make sense given the direction of the forces.

        For what its worth, I’d guess four cylinders became dominant because the first modern multies (CB750s then the Z1) were designed in the sixties, before Yamaha pioneered rotating counter balancers in motorcycle engines in the seventies. The old BSA/ Triumph tripes were not someone with a future, more of a shadow of the past.

        Rest assured that at least some people understand what you are saying and appreciate your effort.

        Goose

        Report this comment

  6. Tom says:

    I haven’t ridden in years, will not buy a bike anytime soon, and sort of like the concept of youngsters riding and racing but not me. Anyone eager to read my opinion on this Triumph? Ok then, it’s nice and expensive and big and fast. Thanks

    Report this comment

  7. Jamo says:

    Really, I shouldn’t be so negative. It is a really nice bike. I hope it’s affordable. Once it’s ridden and reviewed, it’ll be beautiful, especially in the blue. I bet Triumph comes out on top with this one.

    Report this comment

  8. Jamo says:

    It’s a nice bike, don’t get me wrong. I’d love to own one. But my 1996 Trophy 1200 weighs 125 lbs less, came with a topcase and has more displacement. And no scurvy shaft, like a BMW! It cost only $4000 (used). I doubt I’ll be trading in any time soon.

    Report this comment

    • ApriliaRST says:

      It seems like all vehicles today gain weight when new models are designed. This one probably will eventually come in another version; same bike but 4 cylinder.

      Report this comment

    • fast2win says:

      Your old bike was no where near 125lbs. lighter. roadtests of the day showed those bike closer to 650 lbs ready to ride. which makes them similar in weight. Loaded one of those bike on and off a trailer next to my old S2 Buell which I put on a scale full of fuel at 495ish. My buell went up by myself and the trophy needed 2 of us. The manufactures now a days seem o be much more realistic with their specs. I know Triumph advertised that bike at 518, but thats not even close. As for the shaft, I would not buy a sport tourer without one.Why would you want a chain?

      Report this comment

  9. ApriliaRST says:

    If the bike is too heavy, most motorcyclists could easily drop the combined weight of rider AND bike by making sure they are at the recommended weight for their height. I know I could. Just sayin’. ;-)

    Report this comment

  10. Bones says:

    OK, if you like it and are willing to part with the coin, buy it and happy riding.

    And if you don’t like it, then ride something else that you do like.

    There..we all OK now?

    Report this comment

  11. Bruce says:

    Triumph already has a great small sport tourer. It’s called the Bonneville. Add parabellum fairing, hepco becker bags, 19 tooth sprocket, and I’ll see you at the end of your 500 mile day for real. Oh yeh, all for under $12,000 retail. Hell of alot better looking and sounding to boot.

    Report this comment

    • Nick says:

      The Bonneville is great. I own a 2009. However, it sounds like a sewing machine and that vinyl plank is a miserable excuse for a seat. The crap suspension doesn’t help the cause. I love the bike, but there is no way I would ever want to tour on it. Really, I do love to ride it, but only for about 150 to 200 miles at a time.

      Report this comment

      • mickey says:

        I agree with everything you said although you forgot to mention the weak motor (for any serious sport touring duty) and pretty weak brakes. I had a 2003 T-100. Even Triumphs expensive “off road pipes” couldn’t make it sound like a real Triumph. Loved the machine for what it was,a really nice solo around town machine, but a sport tourer it is not. I guess one could tour on it, but with so many choices more suited to LD riding, why would you, unless it was the only bike you owned?

        This 1215 Trophy would make an infinitly better sport tourer than the Bonnie. However if the price is really $21,500 there is no way I’m getting rid of my ST 1300 to buy one.

        Report this comment

    • mark says:

      Don’t think the 55 hp Bonnie compares to this bike in any way shape or form. Bonnie is great bike, but not a sport tour.

      Report this comment

    • Bruce says:

      Your right on the money with the seat and suspension. I changed out to Hagons out back with Ricor Intimidators in the forks with the Triumph king and queen seat. I added the sound with a set of Dominator exhaust and remap. I love it. But I think I am now in trouble after seeing this. I will keep the Bonnie and rethink the set up for bike nights and tour the Trophy. Cool, Very Cool

      Report this comment

  12. Big displacement triple (nice growl) – gobs of low and mid-range torque – shaft drive – lighter than a Kawi C1400 – awesome and original styling – more touring than sport – SIGN ME UP! This will make a nice stable-mate to my Triumph Scrambler.

    Report this comment

  13. Jim says:

    Geesh…..tough crowd. A good looking bike IMO and an awesome engine. If you think thats heavy my Gold Wing weighs about 50% more.

    Report this comment

  14. John says:

    Too big, expensive and heavy for my tastes, but then I’m not 6’3″ weighing 250lbs either or it probably would be perfect.

    It would be great to see something like this at 800cc which is plenty. A Tiger based tourer with shaft drive. God I miss shaft drive.

    It used to be available on all manner of motorcycles in the 500cc-800cc range.

    Report this comment

  15. Vrooom says:

    Glad to see the Trophy back, wish they’d bring the cheaper lower spec unit here, and wish they’d trimmed about 75 lbs., but it probably covers the miles well.

    Report this comment

  16. Tommy says:

    Regarding curb weights, here are the wet weights reported by Rider magazine for the sport-touring players:
    BMW K1600GT 754 lbs
    Honda ST1300 716
    Kawi C1400 690
    (Trophy 1215 662 – Triumph spec)
    Yam FJR1300 649
    BMW R1200RT 626

    So it seems to me that the new Trophy is not all that heavy by comparison.

    Report this comment

    • Vrooom says:

      Nice post, always good to see comparative #s. Going from Triumphs claimed weight to wet weight is going to add quite a bit though, 7 gallons of gas alone is 43 lbs. or so. Likely it will end up on the heavier end of the spectrum.

      Report this comment

    • Paul says:

      Just to get the fact right, BMW 1200RT curb weights is 570lbs

      Report this comment

      • Nick says:

        BMW website lists the 1200RT at 580lbs, without panniers. That 626lbs is probably correct. Not positive, but I believe Triumph is including the panniers in their curb weight.

        Report this comment

    • John Tuttle says:

      Nice to see all these numbers. And weight is important irrespective of power-to-weight ratio. But it would be nice to see a comparison of this sort that considers power, because in the case of a bike that is not as powerful as the other bikes in the class, you would expect it to weigh less. If a bike has significantly less power, but weighs nearly the same as the others, then that’s a strike against it. Before it will be possible to do this, you need to have peak power numbers, and ideally you also would factor in the engine performance at lower rpm. An easy, quick guestimation that I occasionally find useful is to average together the peak power (measured in hp) and the peak torque (measured in ft-lbs). That will give you a useful metric for overall engine performance, and if you then divide that metric by mass, you will have a useful metric for overall performance, that you can use for comparative purposes.

      Report this comment

  17. Fuzzyson1 says:

    Not official but just read on a British bike site that estimated U.S. price may be around $21,800.

    Report this comment

    • JB says:

      That’s from MCN, yes — but that’s what they’ll pay THERE in the U.K. It’s not just a simple currency conversion. We won’t be paying NEARLY as much in the U.S. So, if we use the 1199 Panigale as a reference point (14,995 GBP is what they pay for base, we pay $17,995 base = ~1.2x), so the 14,000 GBP they estimated on MCN would come out to about $16,800 here in the States. Not bad at all.

      Report this comment

  18. Neil says:

    Top heavy I am sure. Hot as well. But mostly, we are in the midst of a recession for most U.S. citizens. We need CB350′s and 500s. Balanced motors. Economy. Six speeds. There are almost no motorcycles on the road compared to cars on the way to and from work. As a society we do not get it. We drive huge cars. Huge bikes. Someday we will see. The Islamists just won in Egypt. Now let’s see where the Middle East and SUV Oil prices go. It’s a nice bike. But so is a Rolls a nice car.

    Report this comment

    • mark says:

      Bet they sell everyone they make. Recession? Don’t think so. Just a new economic reality where lots a have a lot and many have a little. Some are needing CB350s but many are just fine plunking down $17 large for a toy.

      Report this comment

      • Neil says:

        I guess it is not so much a new economic reality. It is that we are back to the old Imperialist economic reality of many monarchies and feudal societies in times past. The haves have always had. Triumph and Ducati are selling to the haves. The number of haves is equal to the sales of the European big three, which is not most of us who read these moto web sites. Not a motorcycle in sight on the way to work today. Americans. We are in for a rude awakening someday, unless we wake up first. But, we are too busy being brainwashed by Hollywood. Oh well. C’est la vie. I’ll ride my Honda Nighthawk.

        Report this comment

  19. Ken Springhetti says:

    Wow.. Detail for detail, a total BMW clone…

    Report this comment

  20. Doug Westly says:

    662 lbs? And that is only the claimed weight. Yikes… My Multistrada undercuts it by more than 200 lbs, with an extra 20 hp on top of that. I see a lot of “touring” and not much “sport”. It will undoubtedly be a nice bike, but don’t expect to throw it into corners.

    Report this comment

  21. Fuzzyson1 says:

    Triumph listened! Well sort of. This really isn’t a “Sport-Touring” bike, but a “Touring-Sport” bike. Exactly what I was hoping for to replace my high mileage, low technology ’01 Trophy 1200. Yeah it’s a bit heavier than hoped for. But again, it’s really more of a Touring-Sport bike, not a Sport bike with bags. I think it’s more geared toward the late 40ish through early 60ish crowd like me that hasn’t totally given up on performance but don’t need to through it into a corner doing 90mph any more. All I’m waiting for is for one to get to the showroom so I can climb all over it and push all the buttons just before I say “I’ll take it”!

    Report this comment

  22. kman says:

    I’m wondering what ever happened to the simple “joy of motorcycling”?

    Report this comment

    • MGNorge says:

      I think anyone old enough to remember back to the “good ol’ days” recalls the simple pleasure that riding was. But just as it is with cars, people (generally) want more and more stuff with them and comforting them and the manufacturers are only happy to oblige. For a simpler way of riding you may need to look beyond the major players?

      Report this comment

    • Gary says:

      As someone who started riding in the early 70s, I remember plenty of those “joyous” times. Drum brakes that did not stop. Two-stroke engines that fouled plugs and seized. Frames and spokes that snapped. Chains that tossed themselves free of sprocket. Ahhhh, yes …. GOOD times!

      Report this comment

      • Fuzzyson1 says:

        DITTO! Don’t forget frequent roadside stops for carb adjustments, tighting down loosened fasteners that rattled loose and how about those high quality tires! Anybody remember those “reliable” coils and condensers? I started on dirt bikes in the late 60′s-early 70′s. Road bikes in the mid-late 70′s. Just like with cars, the “good ol’ days” on bikes is now, not then.

        Report this comment

      • Francois says:

        I hear people say from time to time that “they don’t build thing like they did in the good old days”. My reply is “yes, you are right, they build them better.” which p**s them of. Especally when it comes to reliabiltiy. 20 to 30 years ago, you would not by a car with more than about 40,000km on it because it would have to be rebuilt soon – yes, there are exceptions, but Im talking in general. Nowadays most cars will last 300,000km without as much as a misfire as long as you service them regularly and even then they will just keep on going. A friend of mine’s Toyota Coralla went over 400000km before it was stolen without smoking and was more fuel efficient than some other cars I’ve seen. The only thing he replaced at the time I knew him was the cam seals. Some bikes will go 300,000km as well, but you really have to maintain it will to do that. Another frined of mine got a 1998 Kawasaki ZZr1100 (ZX11) with around 150,000km ont and still going strong, and it was a project bike when he bought it originaly.

        Report this comment

  23. JPJ says:

    Evolutuion of the bike from its Sprint ST/GT cousin. Will the GT still be available ? I doubt it here in the good ol’ USA. So, Triumph has added performance, shaft drive, adjustable windscreen & ergonomics. What’s not to like ? Additional weight, and for sure a price increase. How will it compare to the Kawi Connie’ & FJR ?

    Report this comment

  24. Michael H says:

    What’s not to like? Another new motorcycle from a company that builds very good motorcycles. Sweet engine, plenty o’ features; looks like a fun bike to ride.

    Report this comment

  25. ApriliaRST says:

    Waaah!!! I don’t like the headlights, the exhaust pipes look like bananas, the signals don’t self cancel, it looks like a BMW and it’s too heavy because it has all the things we’ve demanded every motorcycle have or else we won’t buy.

    Sheesh. I heard a nice quote last night by Billy Corgan of The Smashing Pumpkins: The internet gives everyone the ability to be Archie Bunker.

    Does anyone here have anything positive to say?

    Report this comment

  26. sam says:

    Look a bit bloated compared to a sleek Moto Guzzi Norge!

    Report this comment

  27. Norm G. says:

    omg total BMW clone, but then imitation is the sincerest form of flattery.

    Report this comment

  28. andy1300 says:

    Yea, My FJR is now 9 years old i guess I need to start thinking of a replacement ?

    Report this comment

  29. John Tuttle says:

    It looks like a BMW. Not that there’s anything wrong with that. But it also seems a little heavy, and the engine also seems maybe a little weak in comparison to some of the bikes that it will compete with. The peak power number doesn’t tell the whole story, and neither does the peak torque number. Neither number tells you much about torque and power at low and moderate rpm. The more revealing fact is that the torque peak occurs at “just” 6,450 rpm. I haven’t taken the time to compare that with other competing bikes, but it seems a little high to me, which suggests that torque and power at low and moderate rpm will not belie the two peak numbers, i.e., performance at low and moderate rpm likely will not be greater than what you would normally associate with 90 ft-lbs of peak torque and 132 peak hp. That all said, for anyone who truly wants to use a touring bike for touring as opposed to canyon racing, the engine performance is certainly more than adequate even given the weight. In all likelihood this will be a very nice touring bike. Whether it sells well will all depend on how it is priced.

    But as I think about it, I think that I would rather have the Tiger Explorer. I think it offers a lot more practicality than this type of bike, and I think that you do not give up very much when you choose that type of bike over this type.

    Did I mention that this bike looks like a BMW?

    Report this comment

  30. Bob L. says:

    I’ll just keep my FJR, thanks.

    Report this comment

    • Fred M. says:

      Even if this bike turns out to be significantly better once the press has had time to do the comparisons?

      Report this comment

      • Reinhart says:

        Unfortunately, the press always goes gaga when reviewing new models. That’s why “the Bike of the Year” is always a new release. You have to ride it yourself to see if it’s worth switching and not lean too heavily on what the press thinks.

        Report this comment

        • MGNorge says:

          A BIG thumbs up!

          Can’t evaluate anything until you swing a leg over it and try for yourself. Looks are subjective, I personally think it looks fine. But the real test is taking one for a ride and seeing if it “fits”.

          Report this comment

  31. Reinhart says:

    Looks like stainless steel bananas, the best available!

    Report this comment

  32. Doug says:

    Aimed squarely at the BMW RT, which is my current ride, and I’m sure they will price this bike quite aggressively to get BMW market share. I’ll take mine in blue please. :-)

    Report this comment

  33. Montana says:

    What’s that hanging below the radiator, bananas?

    Report this comment

    • goose says:

      Are you asking about the exhaust pipes? I wouldn’t even have noticed without your post but the yellow tint of stainless steel and their shape does give them a slightly banana like appearance.

      Goose

      Report this comment

  34. Jay says:

    Another motorcycle well equipt with high tech bling that I don’t need but lacking the self-cancelling turnsignals that could save my life. My 1983 GS1100e has great SCTS, so I know they are possible. Harley Davidson and BMW, I believe, include very fine SCTS on all it’s bikes.

    I don’t get it, but I’m disappointed. And I won’t pay tens of thousands of dollars for a motorcycle if Triumph refuses to include a fundamental safty feature – that should be mandated – like SCTS.

    Report this comment

    • Dean says:

      Self Cancelling Turn signals could save your life? I didn’t realize that false signaling was the leading cause (or any cause) of motorcycle deaths!

      I guess it is a good thing that I just PAY ATTENTION to what I’m doing when I ride. Pay attention to traffic. Pay attention to what gear I’m in. Pay attention to using my high beams, and signals, and flashing my brake light to warn traffic around me. And Pay attention to turning off my own signals. Maybe that’s just me.

      Report this comment

      • Fred M. says:

        Not everyone can be perfect 100% of the time like you are. We mere mortals sometimes make mistakes. We can only sit in awe of the perfection that you grace us with when you ride in our presence.

        Report this comment

        • kawzies says:

          Jay is right. SCTS CAN save lives and prevent accidents. If someone sees your signal is on for a right turn, for example they might just go left in front of you into the left hand lane on a multi-lane street, thinking you you will be in the right lane.

          Report this comment

          • goose says:

            What about when the SCTS turns the turns signals off prematurely? Isn’t that just as dangerous as leaving the turn signal on too long? It happens even on the sophisticated systems Fred references in his first post. Not often but more often then I leave my signals on.

            Goose

            Report this comment

    • goose says:

      Jay, I have two bikes with very well designed self canceling turn signals you mention. Based on over 40K miles of experience I have to agree with Dean. Self canceling turn signals are a nice feature but I would oppose making them mandatory. I wouldn’t rate them as a significant plus for a bike buying decision, just a nice feature about as important as a power outlet.

      Back to the subject, Triumph seem to be hitting home run after home run, this looks like another one. I’ll be waiting for the first road tests.

      Goose

      Report this comment

    • sherm says:

      Dean, I wish I was as well disciplined and alert as you are, but I’m not. Every once in a while I forget to cancel, and that little flashing green is almost invisible during daylight on some bikes.

      The potential for severe accidents is there with an uncancelled turn signal. Your right signal is accidentally on, you are approaching an intersection with a car on the right waiting at a stop sign to enter. Your on right turn signal tells the driver that it is safe to enter the interdiction, so he does. 911!!!

      While SCTS is an irrelevant feature to a rider of your caliber, there are others like me that sometime need a little help from a friend.

      Report this comment

    • paulysr says:

      I think the reason more bikes don’t have self-cancelling signals is because they SUCK. I’v ridden harleys, bmws, and kawasakis with self-cancelling signals, I used to own a yamaha with them, and most of the time they’re on when I want them off or they’re off when I want them on. I don’t like someone else in charge of my blinkers.

      Report this comment

    • Austin says:

      According to the Triumph web page, it does in fact have self canceling turn singles. So maybe you do need it?

      Report this comment

  35. Fangit says:

    Oh dear… rather overweight aren’t we, even compared to significantly more powerful VFR1200 and 1600GT…

    Report this comment

  36. Scott says:

    Thank you Triumph. You get it. Any bike made for touring (sport,cruiser,adventure) should come with cruise or at least make it a factory option. I think that hurt the sales of Concours,Fjr’s,ST1300, etc

    Report this comment

  37. kjazz says:

    ….very BMWish.

    Report this comment

  38. Travman says:

    Darn, looks so good until you see the front end. Specifically, the headlights look terrible. Why can’t manufacturers do better with the headlights?

    Report this comment

    • Garak says:

      Call the headlights out if you must, but they look to me like they’d throw a lot of light down the road. And really, if you’re noticing the headlights on your bike, you’re doing it wrong.

      Report this comment

  39. Reinhart says:

    Triumph seems to be the only manufacturer that is making bikes that people want to buy. If I were in the market for a sport touring bike I would look no further.

    Report this comment

    • Dave says:

      Seems like they’re taking a page from Honda’s book. Instead of anchoring their line with race replicas and making a few more things to fill the line they’re making bikes for real people to use and presenting them as the core of their design philosophy. I hope buyers reward them for that.

      • John says:

        Seems like Honda took the page from Triumph, considering Honda has done nothing but race and harley replicas for most all of the last 20 years. Most of their attempts at a practical motorcycle have been failures – Shamu. The overpriced Dullville. The new NC700s are interesting to me though. Not nearly as interesting as a Tiger 800 though.

        Report this comment

        • Dave says:

          Honda: VFR (all of the last 4 generations), VTR1000, CBR 600′s that were more versatile than everyone else’s, CB599/919/1000, Honda has done plenty of interesting and successful bikes, just maybe not to your tastes, all with excellent build quality. They are leaning more toward the value side of the spectrum than Triumph which positions themselves more on the premium side, the NC700 and Tiger 800 are a great illustration of that.

          Report this comment

    • JB says:

      I AM in the market for a sport-touring bike, but this is far too heavy for me. It leans too far into the ‘touring’ part of the spectrum. The Sprint GT is too large and long and heavy. We STILL want a Baby Sprint 800, Triumph…

      Report this comment

  40. RedFZ1 says:

    A lot depends on the price. You have to go a long way to beat the value of a Connie 14.

    Report this comment

  41. wctriumph says:

    Looks a like the BMW RT but with 10,000 mike service intervals and Triumph legendary reliability it will cost a lot less to own than any other big Euro style touring bike on the market.

    Can’t wait to ride this beast.

    Report this comment

    • MGNorge says:

      “Than any other Euro style touring bike” You may have overlooked the Moto Guzzi Norge? Not quite as powerful but still plenty so and may undercut the Triumph in initial cost? They have earned a reputation for being very reliable and if you aren’t afraid to do a little work yourself pertaining to maintenance you can easily bypass the dealers service department and their shop rates. With those big cylinders sticking out in the breeze, valve ajustment is almost too easy to let someone else do it.

      http://img526.imageshack.us/img526/2496/norgegt8v.jpg

      Report this comment

  42. Gary says:

    This is looking a lot like my next bike. It has everything I need. If it has a decent, comfortable top case, it will trigger a wallet-reaching reflex that is impossible to resist.