I have been riding motorcycles for over forty years now. In that time I have owned many bikes going back to an ancient Vespa Sportique that I rode on the airfield I grew up on when I was about ten years old.
I recently decided to change one of my bikes to join a group of friends on a trip down through France and Andorra to Barcelona, Spain later this year.
Having had most of the modern Triumphs, I decided to visit the local dealer just outside Oxford. I have always liked Triumph's triple engines - loads of torque and some "character" in that the engines have a bit a "burble" sound to them.
In the end I settled on a Rocket 3 Classic. The base bike is fine, but for touring purposes I added a sissy bar and rack, leather panniers, clock, fuel gauge, heated grips, fog lamps, summer screen and fog lamps.
The first thing you notice when you climb aboard is the sheer size of the bike. Fortunately, for me at least, the tank is tapered in such a way so that your knees are not forced wide apart, and your feet sit comfortable on the foot boards, which are set forward, but not so far that you are travelling feet first.
The bars are high and wide, the grips tapering back which is a little uncomfortable unless you ride regularly and get used to it. For an old man like me though, it's far more comfortable than the pressure you get on the wrists from a sports bike.
There is no centre stand, and the one thing you must be careful of, is that the side stand does not have a strong spring. I do not mean it is weak, just that the stand does not snap up, you have to make sure it has fully retracted before moving off.
On the road, Triumph has done an amazing job. The 2.3 litre engine sits next to the gearbox and the balance is superb. At low speeds the bike feels very stable, though it took me awhile to get used to having to actually turn the bars when making a turn at a junction, rather than just leaning the bike over.
The summer screen offers some protection, though the air does hit you in the face and the fact that it is bolted to the forks rather than the frame means there is a little bit of wobble in a strong wind, but nothing a firm but relaxed pressure on the bars can't handle.
Many journalists and pundits like to compare the performance with something like a Hayabusa. I have never had that particular bike, but until recently I did have a Blackbird.
I just don't get it. Why compare, they are completely different bikes and anyone can see that the Triumph is not going to handle like a sports, or sports-tourer bike? It's like comparing grapes and guavas.
However, what I would say by way of comparison is that the Triumph delivers peak power low down in the revs. You don't get that continual urging to go faster with the slight twist of the wrist. What you do get is a sledgehammer in the back when you open the throttle hard, but at the same time it is very user friendly if you just want to go slow and enjoy the view. It's a very relaxed ride.
Low speed stability is awesome, but I won't comment on low speed handling as if one looks at the bike one can see it's not designed for town use.
I am very pleased with the bike, and whilst it takes a little getting used to if you've never ridden a cruiser before, it's great fun. It turns heads and the first time I stopped for fuel I had a man in his twenties asking if I would take a picture of him beside it. That never happened with my Blackbird!
No comments:
Post a Comment