Thruxton R details

I enquired about the Thruxton R recently, " quite a few pre sold" " lots of interest"
" have you go any actual bikes I can ride"?
"no"
" unlikely I'll be paying out $25 000 NZ for one then" ( an R9T is the same price but its awful looking)

Thinking I can spend a few K on my 1994 Ducati 900 Superlight and not bother till the early adopters sell up :roll:

swooshdave said:

Fast Eddie said:

Well, Triumph seem to be doing one of the worst new model launch campaigns in history! Unless something unbelievable happens, they have exceeded my ability to stay interested.

Personally, my thoughts are that they are struggling, the bike is either too heavy or too low on power and they are desperately trying to squeeze more out of it to match the 'hype' and general expectations that are all over t'internet.

Me... I took an R nine T for a spin again the other day... we had a really good fun blast... the design seems to grow on you... the overall quality is faultless... its looking tempting...

Click to expand...

They are launching the Street Twin, then the Bonneville and lastly the Thruxton. Considering how much work it takes to launch a new model, let alone three new models it's not surprising they are staggering it.

Click to expand...

I understand that Dave and totally agree.

It is their inability to share the basic specs that I find unacceptable. Basic specs like torque, weight, power, fuel consumption, emissions, etc would have been set as design targets at the very beginning of this process. We amateurs work by tuning our lumps using guesswork and testing the output after (with our fingers crossed)! The pro's don't do it like that. The figures CANNOT possibly be unknown to Triumph.

So, the fact that they are not sharing them would appear to be either a deliberate strategy to get us talking about it (if so, its working, but now starting to backfire) or they are choosing not to for some other reason, ie they aren't happy with them and are desperately trying to make some last minute changes / tweaks.

Glen, I so admire your optimism. When a dealer says 'a few weeks' it could mean anything from 2 weeks to 52 weeks!

I'm with you though and really hope you get it soon... We're awaiting your detailed ride reports !

Fast Eddie said:

It is their inability to share the basic specs that I find unacceptable. Basic specs like torque, weight, power, fuel consumption, emissions, etc would have been set as design targets at the very beginning of this process. We amateurs work by tuning our lumps using guesswork and testing the output after (with our fingers crossed)! The pro's don't do it like that. The figures CANNOT possibly be unknown to Triumph.

So, the fact that they are not sharing them would appear to be either a deliberate strategy to get us talking about it (if so, its working, but now starting to backfire) or they are choosing not to for some other reason, ie they aren't happy with them and are desperately trying to make some last minute changes / tweaks.

Glen, I so admire your optimism. When a dealer says 'a few weeks' it could mean anything from 2 weeks to 52 weeks!

I'm with you though and really hope you get it soon... We're awaiting your detailed ride reports !

Click to expand...

When Triumph first announced the bike in October, they included the dyno curve. I'm not sure if I've seen another manufacturer do that. Usually just two points along the curve are given, Max HP and Max torque. Sometimes only one of the two is offered. The torque curve is clearly taken right from a Dyno and tells us all we need to know about the engine's performance. Anything more will have to come from riding it.
Some on the Triumphrat site are unwilling to do the simple math to calculate hp at whatever point, but it's right there.

They did change the official Max torque number briefly to 120 NM then back to 112, so you are probably right, they may have tried a tweak that wouldn't meet Euro 4 or CARB requirements.
On delivery, I realize that the bike might not materialize when promised, however we aren't there yet so I really can't fault them.
I wouldn't mind if it did show up a little later, there are some old bikes here that need my attention.
I'm sure that when the new one arrives the old ones will sit unattended for awhile. That happened when the Daytona 955i first arrived, but after awhile the newness wears off and the old bikes draw you in all over again.

Their strategy on not releasing weight and other pertinent data is a bit of a strange one alright. I have sat on the bike and hefted it, it's certainly not an overly heavy machine. I wonder if they are withholding this data in order to attempt to outwit or trump a competitor.
One of the main competitors to the Thruxton R is the BMW R nine T. I don't know, can you imagine the Brits using rumour and misinformation to fool the Germans?
The Brits are preprogrammed to do this, they can't help themselves.
Glen

I just read today that Motor Cycle News (a weekly publication in UK) will be road testing the Thruxton R in next Wednesdays edition!

I'll have to try and get the online version as I won't be in UK then.

It seem the 1200s are going to be ready ahead of schedule. Some of the US dealers are notifying their pre order customers that their T120s have landed. None are in owners hands yet as far as I know, but this is a couple of months ahead of the promise dates.
I'll keep a look out for the MCN Thruxton R review, thanks for the heads up Nigel.
Glen

The 1200s are on test in Portugal right now. Triumph has finally released the HP and weight numbers on the bikes and the Thruxton R numbers are very good, right about what I was hoping for. The Thruxton makes 97 din HP (95.6 sae) and 83 ft. Lbs
of torque. Weight is good as well at 203 kgs/dry for the R spec Thruxton. The factory race kit is said to add 15 Hp, several pound feet of torque and knock off about 10 kgs by getting rid of the cat.

Glen

http://www.motorcyclenews.com/news/firs ... irst-ride/

450lbs dry, isn't that close to what the old bikes weighed? I saw 470-500 listed as wet weights for the 2015 model.

The old Thruxton is listed on the Triumph site at 504 lbs wet, so the Thruxton R is probably a bit lighter than the old Thruxton.
The new bikes have ABS, traction control , water cooling and some other doodads plus an additional 300 CC and a six speed trans. So considering all of that, the Thruxton R comes in OK for weight. Also, the race kit will drop a fair bit of weight by deleting the catalytic converter.

The T120 is going to be heavier than the old T100.

Glen

worntorn said:

The 1200s are on test in Portugal right now. Triumph has finally released the HP and weight numbers on the bikes and the Thruxton R numbers are very good, right about what I was hoping for. The Thruxton makes 97 din HP (95.6 sae) and 83 ft. Lbs
of torque. Weight is good as well at 203 kgs/dry for the R spec Thruxton. The factory race kit is said to add 15 Hp, several pound feet of torque and knock off about 10 kgs by getting rid of the cat.

Glen

http://www.motorcyclenews.com/news/firs ... irst-ride/

Click to expand...

Yes they are good numbers Glen... I'm back to being interested...!

Interesting that the tester owns an R1 Yamaha Superbike plus a 916 Ducati and describes the Thruxton R as a "really rapid bike"

Glen

worntorn said:

The old Thruxton is listed on the Triumph site at 504 lbs wet, so the Thruxton R is probably a bit lighter than the old Thruxton.
The new bikes have ABS, traction control , water cooling and some other doodads plus an additional 300 CC and a six speed trans. So considering all of that, the Thruxton R comes in OK for weight. Also, the race kit will drop a fair bit of weight by deleting the catalytic converter.

The T120 is going to be heavier than the old T100.

Glen

Click to expand...

What makes you say that about the T120?

The number that was given today in Portugal was 224 kgs dry for the T 120. That is right around 500 pounds dry, considerably heavier than the T 100.

The T120 doesn't have the alloy wheels and swing arm of the Thruxton, nor does it have the lightweight Showa, Ohlins and Brembo components that the R has to make up for the added weight of the bigger engine and all of the electronics vs the 865 bikes. They haven't listed the reg. Thruxton weight anywhere yet, but it will likely be some heavier than the R version.

Glen

From the MCN test, here are some great photos of the Thruxton R

Video review

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=cI9jfqsVK ... e=youtu.be

worntorn said:

Video review

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=cI9jfqsVK ... e=youtu.be

Click to expand...

I think he liked it Glen...!

Well I'm certainly looking forward to test riding the Thrux and T120 soon, and you must be like a kid at Christmas waiting for yours Glen!

But, sadly, Triumph have still left me a little stuck in the middle. I don't want a sports bike or Café Racer... but that doesn't mean I want to go slow. I surely can't be the only bloke wondering why on earth I can't have a T120 with a Thruxton motor !?! The High Torque motor has got me flummoxed... The High Power motor has more power AND torque... Its not a High Torque motor at all... Its just slow!

From that perspective the R nine T still trumps the Triumphs, its a two up bike with a great 'roadster' riding position yet has more engine performance that the Thrux and a chassis pack comparable to the R.

But I'll keep my cheque book locked away until I've at least ridden the Triumphs.

Nigel, there's a dual seat and pillion pegs available for the Thruxton and Thruxton R. Surprisingly reasonable in price as well. $300 for the seat, which is a fairly standard price for any good seat.
Like you, I wonder why they didn't at least offer the high power engine as an option for the T 120. Perhaps next year. Some are saying that the 2016s are/sold out and any new orders now will arrive in the fall as 2017 models.

With the race kit fitted the Thruxton will at least equal the r nine t for engine output and has the r nine t beat by miles on electronic safety features.
Then there's the power loss of a shaft drive as compared to a chain....
But in reality either bike will have a large excess of power for roaduse anyway.

Glen

worntorn said:

Nigel, there's a dual seat and pillion pegs available for the Thruxton and Thruxton R. Surprisingly reasonable in price as well. $300 for the seat, which is a fairly standard price for any good seat.
Like you, I wonder why they didn't at least offer the high power engine as an option for the T 120. Perhaps next year. Some are saying that the 2016s are/sold out and any new orders now will arrive in the fall as 2017 models.

With the race kit fitted the Thruxton will at least equal the r nine t for engine output and has the r nine t beat by miles on electronic safety features.
Then there's the power loss of a shaft drive as compared to a chain....
But in reality either bike will have a large excess of power for roaduse anyway.

Glen

Click to expand...

Yes, I know there is a dual seat accessory, I haven't seen one fitted yet though, so don't know what it does to the looks of the bike. Or, what is like to sit on.

Anyhow, it would then still be a two up cafe racer, not a 'roadster' hence my desire for a High Power (HP) T120. Having slept on this, I've concluded that a HP T120 is probably already in the pipeline at Triumph, to be launched after the first wave of hype has diminished, ie next year.

Like I say though, I'm still interested to ride both current versions and see what they're like. It is possible the T120 is better than has come across in the initial reports having been overshadowed in testers minds by the R.

And getting back to the R... Are you still thinking of fitting the race kit to yours? I gotta say it would seem on the verge of unnecessary if the testers initial reports are anything to go by.

I'm predicting that your Egli will accumulate very few miles once you taken delivery of your R...!

It will be interesting to compare the two bikes. The Egli is 100 lbs lighter than the r and it's made to fit me. It handles beautifully and has great brakes and suspension. The hit of power it produces makes my Sportbike feel sluggish.
I've ridden 600 miles in a day on it and gone out for an evening stroll afterward. It might take some work to get the Thruxton R there. You are probably asking, "Why on earth go for this Thruxton then?" :?:

The big problem I have with the Egli is starting it. I sometimes run out of leg strength if it doesn't fire on the first attempt.
The only way to get it thru is to use the valve lifter to position the engine just over compression on the front cylinder. As you likely know, with the unevenly spaced Vincent, this gives the biggest rotational space until next compression. I then leap on the kick start with all of my weight (230 lbs) and let my knee bend just a little going down. Just before compression I straighten my leg out to really whip the engine thru. A straight jump on the kicker is not enough, it just bounces back on compression. A couple of the kicks bending then straightening like this and the leg muscles lose some strength, then it's futile.
Terry P warned me that it would be very difficult to kick over and he was correct, of course.

With my 1000 cc Rapides, one of which is nine to one, I can start them while sitting on the seat with a passenger behind. Some of the smallish Vincent owners have an awful time managing to kick them over even when parked on a centre stand. With the 1360, I'm about as effective as those small fellows kicking over their regular Vincents. Not great.

With the twin plug Pazon Smartfire ignition, it starts very easily if I can get it to roll through compression. At 10.5 to one with those big squish bands and 1360cc, it takes a lot just to roll it over.
One of my clubmates who thought I was going about it all wrong gave it a try and was unable to roll it thru compression after many tries. Another friend in Norway has a 1200 CC 9 to one version of this engine and he has never been able to kick start it, nor have any of his buddies. So I guess I'm fortunate that I can get this thing to start on the kicker.
It is getting a little easier as the engine gets some miles on it and friction drops a bit.
I always manage to get it to go, but it does take every bit of strength and weight I can muster to do the job.
One day I'll need to fit an estart.
I nearly had the Godet setup that you had on your 1330, then Godet changed his mind on supplying me with the cases and starter.

I'm not fitting the race kit to the Thruxton for now. I'll let some other owners go first on that. I'm concerned that the full kit with cam will generate extra power at top at the expense of the midrange, which from the early reports, is quite fantastic now.
And it might be nice to have one bike that isn't an ear splitter.

Well, I have always been astonished you can kick start your big un at all! Godet point blank refused to sell me a kickstart only 1330, even if it meant losing a sale. In the end I knew he was right, the convenience and confidence of the elec leg was great!

I never bothered finding the right cylinder on my 1000, my method was to find TDC (whichever came first), then give a full swing with the valve lifter open, releasing it just as I got to the bottom of the stroke. So I didn't really start it, I just got the flywheels moving and they started it! Would this work on yours?

Sure your Egli will trump the R in terms of brute force and beefiness, but the R is refined, with a nice convenient electric start, whilst still being a 'cool' cafe racer... So my prediction remains!

Do you have a delivery date yet?