– Motorcycle News, Editorials, Product Reviews and Bike Reviews

Motorcycle News, Editorials, Product Reviews and Bike Reviews

Triumph Says New Compact, Long Stroke Triple Powers Unreleased Adventure Bikes

You may recall our article on July 7, 2010 discussing the forthcoming adventure bikes from Triumph, including one road-focused machine, and one genuine dual sport.  At that time, we believed that only one of the bikes would be powered by a stroked version of the existing 675cc Triumph Triple, but this video just released by Triumph seems to indicate both bikes will be powered by the same “compact”, “long-stroke triple”.  We still think displacement will be 770cc, and that it will be based upon the extremely light 675cc motor, allowing Triumph to bring total bike weight in at under 450 pounds.  Below is Triumph’s latest video tease for the two bikes that should be introduced this Fall.



  1. Tom says:

    Triumphs, currently have an ’99 Thunderbird Sport, practically need to remove the engine to replace #2 spart plug due to the spine, other than that, the bike sounds amazing, only have put about 2k miles on it over the 5-6 years of ownership, always a toy bike, but love it.

    Had a ’01 Sprint ST, put 28k miles on it in 18 months, new chain at ~22k miles, few tires, a couple sets of tires, and sync’d the throttle bodies about 3 times, and a single shim. About the only two unexpected issues, the one time a dealer changed the oil, I needed a tactical nuke to get the spin-on filter off, one of the threaded bosses in the cam cover that holds down the coil over threaded with 8lb-ft applied to the screw. Absolutely loved the bike! Other people reported some issues with the O rings on the quick disconnect of the fuel lines and fuel senders. Did I say I loved the bike. Would still have it if not for a rock slide in N. California.

    Had a ’05 Tiger for about a year, decent, figured out it was abused by previous owner, welded rear sub-frame was bent as it fell over when backed into. Enjoyed the bike, but not enough mileage to really fall in love with it.

    I have a KLR650, and looking at the new Cub to replace it, hopefully!!

    And as far as the triple, from what I recall, it does not need a separate balancer as the V-twins or parallel twins tend to. So yeah, the crank is longer, but you loose the weighted counter shaft. YMMV

  2. Apriliorange says:

    and we all wait for the Daytona & Speed Triple 1175 …

    and we all wait for the Daytona & Speed Triple 1175 …

    and we all wait for the Daytona & Speed Triple 1175 …

  3. robert says:

    #2 commenter Daveee hopes for a us dollar price of $12,000 or less.
    I my opinion, that is way too much. The street triple r is not that much, and the Suzuki V-Strom 650ABS is $4,000 less than that or more. The 800 Adventure in both forms will be awesome, excellent. But is it worth a huge premium, especially when DEFLATION IS EXPECTED TO BE THE CASE FOR THE NEXT FEW YEARS? Why buy an expensive street and 2% trail Triumph when the V-Strom 650ABS is more than adequate? I ask you!

    No premium price for the 800 Adventure. Let it follow in the new prices of comparative first year Triumphs, like the Street Triple R.


  4. jerrylee says:

    Like Daveee I am too very happy with what Triumph has done over the last few years. I have a Speed Triple as well as a GS. I love the triple sound at full chat and the electirc smoothness- great motors. I have really gotten hooked lately on the ride and versatility of the GS though and have been eyeing the new Multistrada for a bit more stomp. A blend of a lighter triple in a all purpose chassis might have me trading the Speed for a little brother to the GS. New models will be few and far between come this fall I’m afraid. My bet is Triumph will have another hit on their hands.

  5. Daveee says:

    Wow… I’m hooked for two reasons: I have wanted an “adventure” bike for a couple of years and I am a current owner of a street triple (a truly fantastic motorcycle) I hope this lives up to the hype and doesn’t cost more than $12000usd fully loaded. I have enjoyed my Street 675 so much that I’m a Triumph convert.

  6. Dave says:

    If it has the ergos of the Tiger, the snap of the Street Triple, and the price of the V-Strom I’ll be there!

  7. Neil says:

    They look like great new bikes. The guys I know who have the new BMW 800 adventure bikes seems to love em, perhaps more than the big GS. – I am about to get a 2006 Honda 919 as I have always liked standards and have been told four times that the CB1100 is not coming to the USA. The 919 has a flat torque curve, almost too flat some people say, throughout the rev range and you get horsepower along with it. Many motors these days are being built this way. My Suzuki TU250 has the same characteristics. – So I welcome these new bikes from Triumph. I would buy one if I were younger. As 50 approaches, I am trying to balance the bike budget with retirement saving these days so the used market is king. I do like the Harley XR1200X as well. Not perfect but fun all the same.

  8. S Calwel says:

    The most competitive dual sport or adventure type bike will offer lower weight. Then it will require less power and less expensive suspension for performance equal to or better than the BMW F650GS or F800GS, the current benchmark.
    Give it the great look of the current Tiger, make it sound loud enough with stock pipes to let the sweet sound of a triple out and handle just a little better than the BMW’s. Then put a seat on it that is comparable to what Sargent or Corbin offers and we will be fumbling for our checkbook at the end of a test ride. That’s all it takes.
    I have 5 bikes and all have been modified to get better handling, more comfort and a healthy sounding but not loud exhaust.
    None of them are Triumphs, this is their chance.

  9. Burt says:

    The 675 in an FZ format?
    The Street Triple has been out for a few years.

  10. Mike D. says:

    Screw these ” 2 Wheeled CUV’s do it all wannabees ” and give me my LONG OVERDUE 1200cc+ Triple Daytona or Trophy anytime YESTERDAY.

  11. John says:

    Seat height! Some of us need to know that! No sense getting excited if it requires stilts.

    • jimbo says:

      Me being 6-3 with 34″ inseam, you have no idea my frustration/reaction reading posts like thee, which are legion. Except for bikes with ergos like the KTM Adventure 950/990, my knees are chronically cramped.

  12. jimbo says:

    I just watched the two Triumph videos currently available. After switching back to an image of the HD XR1200, the XR looks awfully boring, especially thinking about the fact that you can keep riding the adventure bike when the pavement ends! Not much fun on a 575 lb curb weight XR!

    P.S. Mr. Bloor,
    Please install a center stand, or NO DEAL!!!!!!

  13. jimbo says:

    The dual sport version may become my most lusted after bike.

    It’s interesting because just in the past week I rode the lovely (really surprised how fantastic it was) 2011 XR1200R and the Triumph 675R naked. I’m still toying with some others: the discontinued Buell 1125CR (probably too small for me) and a 2003 or later Suzuki SV650 with GSXR forks/shocks.

    The Triumph 675 just makes so much power it’s almost hard to believe. The low/mid power delivery is awesome. The front wheel lifted briefly at freeway speed when downshifting. That was a shock. I never wheelied at that speed on flat ground before.

    The space to the bars was a bit tight. Also, I quickly tired of the motor noise, which was just a little too much for me. I suppose these issues would be solved on the larger motor.

    These news Triumphs may be winners. There is really not much sane use on the street for more power than the 675. I suppose the larger motor may give up some of the 675s top end zing for greater low/mid power and increased refinement.

    You gotta ride the 675 first chance you get. It’s simply delicious.

  14. Trpldog says:

    Horsepower is throwing a live chicken as far as you can.
    Torque is twisting his neck just before cooking supper.

  15. John says:

    Torque. That’s what makes the aircooled ducks so much fun STREET bikes. May not breathe as well at top end, but the real world low and mid range put a grinn on your face. How about putting that stroker 675 triple into a nice FZ style standard bike.

  16. Bill says:

    I had a Triumph “Girly” 955 Tiger and now own a DL1000 Strom of the two the node for power went to the Trump, however Trust goes to The DL 1000 which to me puts the DL in 1st place. Should Triumph take care of the Trust issue then I may look into this new bike way down the road as the DL and I have a love afair in progress ! Did I have problems with the Tiger heck yes and lots of them !

    • Chris says:

      What problems did you experience, at what milage, and how much did it cost you? I’m getting interested in these English Tripples, but have come to expect Japanese reliability.

      • morpheus says:

        They don’t all have problems. My Tiger is an ’06 and has had no significant issues in 18k miles.
        Nothing ever made by man has never had a problem, DL1000s for example, while typically very good had significant issues with clutch baskets but not all did.

  17. Ziggy says:


  18. Vroooom says:

    Very cool bike. Might replace my extremely high mileage V-Strom. I want to see it first though. I used to have an 885 steamer Tiger, great bike, but maintenance was a royal pain. Getting that valve cover out was like open heart surgery.

    • James K. says:

      Had a ’98 Steamer myself…don’t forget, dump the oil to change or even check the sprocket!

  19. Thoppa says:

    Are there any other dual sport triples out there ? Doesn’t a triple require a heavier crank and thus have more crank inertia and less agility ? It may have an amazing torque curve but that won’t matter if it doesn’t handle the rough stuff well. I’m not sold on a dual sport triple. I kinda think they should have just stuffed the 675 in a Tiger-style chassis and made some money before trying this.

  20. GMan38 says:

    The definition of a word is based upon it’s current usage. Although not ‘torque’ as originally defined, it’s a power delivery we can all understand. Just as ‘centrifugal force’ is usually used when in fact it’s ‘centripital force’ taking place.

  21. Rick Usack says:

    I agree. Torque has become more of “importance” as of late in advertisements and marketing buzz words. It is as you say, when torque is spoken of it means low rpm engine performance. Lawnmowers have more recently taken on skipping HP numbers and taken on torque figures when putting up their numbers. My guess is that consumers had been shopping HP and the marketing departments started to take liberties with those numbers. Some try to simplify things by stating that multi-cylinder engines are about HP and twins and singles are about torque, and since torque is now being thrown around more fortifies it in their mind. In trucks, for instance, the same thing exists between gas and diesel engines. Gas engines develop HP and diesels develop torque. Funny world!

    • Tom Barber says:

      It makes me happy to know that I am not the only person that realizes these things. Sometimes it seems that hardly anyone else “gets” it. When the concern is with the actual performance at some particular engine speed, it makes no difference whether you make about torque or power, although if you make it about power, you also have to specify the engine speed if you want to fully specify the meaningful performance of the engine at that specific engine speed, because meaningful performance of every sort is always linearly dependent on actual power. Given a specific vehicle speed, performance at that vehicle speed will be entirely the same for two different engine speeds located to either side of the power peak, where power is identical for those two engine speeds. Optimal shift points for maximizing acceleration occur at vehicle speeds where the engine speed immediately before the upshift and immediately after the upshift are equal-power points located to either side of the power power. The same does not happen with engine torque. If it happens that at some particular vehicle speed the transmission will permit you to switch between two equal-torque points to either side of the torque peak, acceleration will be dramatically different in those two different gears, notwithstanding that engine torque is exactly the same in the two gears. Wheel torque depends just as much on engine speed as it depends on engine torque, and wheel torque is the torque that matters.

  22. haggis burner says:


    Torque by any other name would pull as sweet…
    (apologies to Bill S..)

    I want it, and have a check ready.

    • Tom Barber says:

      Especially when it is torque at the wheel, which is always directly proportional to actual power and is maximized by maximizing power, not engine torque.

  23. Motowalt says:

    This bike looks promising and may be real competition for BMW’s F800GS, which is a great all around bike.

    Hopefully Triumph will offer tubeless wire wheels, something lacking on the little GS, but available on BMW’s 1200GS models. All other specs equal, that option could get me to trade in my F800GS on the new Triumph.

  24. Tom Barber says:

    Torque, torque, torque. The marketing departments of car companies and motorcycle companies around the world have redefined the meaning of this word, and in doing so, they have given a lot of people a false understanding of torque and power. They use the word “torque” when what they actually mean is a very specific sort of torque, specifically at low engine speed. They turn the word “torque” into a synonym for low-speed engine performance. The word “torque”, per its correct technical definition, does not favor or imply any particular engine speed over any other. At the drive wheel, there is an affinity between torque and low rotational speed, and I think that this is probably where we get the notion, that sticks in the back of our brains, that torque is specifically about low rotational speed. That effect at the wheel is due to speed reduction through gearing, and does not apply at the engine. Wheel torque is the torque that ultimately matters, and wheel torque is always in direct proportion to actual power. To maximize wheel torque and acceleration at any given instant, you maximize power, which necessarily means that you do not maximize engine torque.

    Anyone interested in a long, drawn out, boring explanation of this, is welcome to read the stuff that I wrote, which, for lack of anywhere else to put it, I posted on a blog on one of the automotive sites. Hopefully the good people at motorcycledaily will not object to my putting this link here:

    • kpaul says:

      Great point. But I think we are making progress. Folks used to just talk about horsepower. At least torque is mentioned but you are right it should be mentioned in terms of what speed. Torque and horsepower graphs are now the norm in written reviews. But coming to the defense of the marketing types it’s hard to flash thos graphs up in a 60 second spot and have the average Billy Bob understand. Thanks for the link.

  25. Brinskee says:

    More tasty deliciousness:

wordscape cheatgun mayhem 2 unblocked games