|
There's no issue seeing it with direct sunlight on it.
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2013 07:53
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 27, 2024 17:22 |
|
|
Stugazi posted:Yamaha does a direct comparison on the Street Triple. Is it actually surprising that both bikes have a 120 degree 3-cylinder motor? Seems that 120 degree would be the only way to do a 3-cylinder bike which makes any sense... And I've gotta say, personally, the FZ-09 isn't a patch on the Triumph in the looks department, overall. Granted, the rear fender on the Triumph is pretty ugly, but how many bikes can't you say that for? I just look at the FZ-09 indicators and wonder what they were thinking, they don't suit the bike at all IMO. And the instruments on the Triumph are way nicer-looking to me. Here4DaGangBang fucked around with this message at 13:04 on Nov 10, 2013 |
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2013 13:00
|
|
|
Yamaha automatically wins because it doesn't have those godawful lights like the street triple.
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2013 15:07
|
|
|
front wing flexing posted:Yamaha automatically wins because it doesn't have those godawful lights like the street triple. They're an acquired taste, no doubt.
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2013 15:17
|
|
|
Has anyone done a direct comparison of handling, without regards to price? Obviously there is a power difference, but with most of the Yamaha reviews I keep reading there is an issue with feel from the suspension, etc.
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2013 15:31
|
|
|
Here4DaGangBang posted:They're an acquired taste, no doubt. They are terrible. This is fact, not opinion. The new ones are less terrible than the older ones "hey look what we found lying around in the warehouse" look, but the new ones are still terrible. Mister Duck posted:Has anyone done a direct comparison of handling, without regards to price? Obviously there is a power difference, but with most of the Yamaha reviews I keep reading there is an issue with feel from the suspension, etc. That wouldn't surprise me, Japanese manufacturers only seem to care about putting good suspension on their top-end bikes, and all the rest just get whatever. There are exceptions of course.
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2013 15:38
|
|
|
Since it seems to be critize the fz09 day I'll jump in. What's with the horrible fueling Yamaha? The FZ-1 and R1 have both taken a lot of flak for horrible on/off fueling, so why didn't you fix it for the fz-09? All the other manufacturers seem to have it figured out.
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2013 17:03
|
|
|
The luckiest squid ever: http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=e69_1384052615
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2013 18:19
|
|
|
"Unable to stop?"  Even my 40 year old bike with drums could have stopped without hitting the van at any point in that video.
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2013 19:02
|
|
|
I never saw him lift his fingers over the brake lever, so he pretty much panicked and could only focus on 1 thing, steering. Lucky for him he spazzed in the right directions. His first mistake (in the video, not life) was clearly getting tunnel vision on the 2 cars in front of him and not seeing the light go to yellow. Lucky squid indeed.
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2013 19:38
|
|
|
KodiakRS posted:Since it seems to be critize the fz09 day I'll jump in. What's with the horrible fueling Yamaha? The FZ-1 and R1 have both taken a lot of flak for horrible on/off fueling, so why didn't you fix it for the fz-09? All the other manufacturers seem to have it figured out. Triumph sucks at fueling too... maybe it's something to do with emissions and the triple layout.
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2013 19:56
|
|
|
The difference is the trumpy has a cable controlled throttle whereas the Yamaha has fly by wire. If Yamaha weren't lazy they could disguise the choppy fuelling with creatively mapped throttle openings, like a lot of manufacturers do. But they didn't because it's a somewhat budget bike, I guess? I don't know.
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2013 20:24
|
|
|
BlackMK4 could have a theory there since the MV F3 has had the fueling be the major knock against it as well. I've heard they worked on the electronics this year and fixed it though.
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2013 20:25
|
|
|
The only complaints I have about the fueling is when you are in First or second at a constant low speed, maybe 2-3k rpm it feels like the bike is constantly surging, like its right on the edge of running lean to running fine. Other then that, there's no issue. The throttle is responsive, and a retarded amount of fun. One thing I will say, is it comes with a stupid amount of throttle play, once you adjust that down to 1-3MM, all is well.
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2013 20:33
|
|
|
I haven't noticed anything with the fueling on my street triple (2012), but a friend of mine just got a 2013 (which has a different ECU I am told) and keeps complaining about some sort of strange dead spot at 5k.
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2013 20:49
|
|
|
What's wrong with you people the Street Triple's headlights are awesome. Totally unlike anything else.
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2013 20:55
|
|
|
Covert Ops Wizard posted:What's wrong with you people the Street Triple's headlights are awesome. Totally unlike anything else. This. Lets all run around on bikes with a single round headlight or a generic trapezoid one because bikes are all about being exactly the same as eachother and poo poo. Toyota should release a hybrid bike with totally neutral looks, it would sell like hotcakes 
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2013 21:25
|
|
|
Mister Duck posted:I haven't noticed anything with the fueling on my street triple (2012), but a friend of mine just got a 2013 (which has a different ECU I am told) and keeps complaining about some sort of strange dead spot at 5k. All modern (stock) bikes have a hole at 6k where they run ultra-lean to con emissions testing, that's probably what he's talking about. Also going from an older, particularly carbed, bike to a modern EFI+catalytic converter bike will really show up lean surging and stuff as the ECU tries to keep the mix as lean as it can possibly can without damaging the engine. That's why O2 emulators/eliminators are A Thing. Don't talk to me about O2 emulators right now, it's a sore subject
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2013 21:29
|
|
|
I wish that more bikes had the two little circular lamps in a fairing. That always looks cool.
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2013 21:29
|
|
|
More bikes need vertically stacked cyclopean lights. Everyone was so butthurt when the 999 era ducatis came out because they dared to make something that didn't look like it was designed in 1991 that the awesomeness of the headlight design got overlooked. Now everyone who makes a sportbike has to have the same automotive-style symmetrical eagle eye lights. Bmw can buck the trend because their bike has to look like a BMW, and KTM are just KTM I guess. edit: in fact, let me elaborate on this with pictures: This is what a ducati 998 looked like in it's last year of production, 2002:  The competing bikes that were worth a drat looked like this in the same year:    And the 999 that came out immediately thereafter looked like this:  It looked like the loving future and was a clear and definitive attempt to stop riding the crutch of a decade-old design language and do something new and striking and contemporary. Slavvy fucked around with this message at 21:51 on Nov 10, 2013 |
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2013 21:38
|
|
|
goddamnedtwisto posted:All modern (stock) bikes have a hole at 6k where they run ultra-lean to con emissions testing, that's probably what he's talking about. Also going from an older, particularly carbed, bike to a modern EFI+catalytic converter bike will really show up lean surging and stuff as the ECU tries to keep the mix as lean as it can possibly can without damaging the engine. That's why O2 emulators/eliminators are A Thing. Makes sense. I think maybe because I came from an ER6N and he came from a Hornet 599, maybe that's the difference in us noticing it. I haven't been able to ride his triple, but when I was on his Hornet I did notice it was much smooth (which maybe is down to the 4 in the Hornet).
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2013 21:57
|
|
|
Slavvy posted:And the 999 that came out immediately thereafter looked like this:
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2013 22:01
|
|
|
I will one day own one. When I saw a red and white one at a trackday a few weeks ago it looked new. As in, it looked like a bike that could be released today and no one would think twice. The tail section even has the beginnings of the (much more boring looking) 1098.
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2013 22:09
|
|
|
Slavvy posted:This. Lets all run around on bikes with a single round headlight or a generic trapezoid one because bikes are all about being exactly the same as eachother and poo poo. There is a middle ground between a generic round lamp and the growth that's on the naked Triumphs. Those things have a face only a mother could love.
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2013 22:10
|
|
|
BlackMK4 posted:Ugh, I LOVE the 999 front end. I always hated the front end, just for not being a 916/996, but in retrospect I actually quite like it. But that just might be because there's so many uglier front ends around these days. (I also quite like the new Street Triple lights, certainly compared to the old parts-bin ones, but they still look like they're ordered out of a catalogue rather than actually designed to fit the bike)
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2013 22:29
|
|
|
The Triumph pentagon lights look better with the optional little fairing. I do like the old round light look but those old lights (one or two) put out poo poo for light, and it doesn't matter what bulbs you throw in them. The pentagons are... somewhat less poo poo. Honestly I'm disappointed more bikes in 2013 don't have projector beams.
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2013 22:34
|
|
|
Covert Ops Wizard posted:What's wrong with you people the Street Triple's headlights are awesome. Totally unlike anything else. Slavvy posted:This. Lets all run around on bikes with a single round headlight or a generic trapezoid one because bikes are all about being exactly the same as eachother and poo poo. Yeah, put the "but it's different you sheeple!!" card back in the deck. poo poo is ugly as hell, there is a reason it's unlike anything else, because everyone with functional retinas can see how terrible it is and would never replicate it. Good styling gets copied. Don't see a ton of copies of that out there Beve Stuscemi fucked around with this message at 22:44 on Nov 10, 2013 |
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2013 22:42
|
|
|
Slavvy posted:
as much as everyone likes to make fun of the 999 and it's looks were universally panned when it was released, look carefully. Almost all the new Ducati's have the tank and tail from 999. The head light was a failure but the rest of the design def survived.
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2013 22:43
|
|
|
goddamnedtwisto posted:I always hated the front end, just for not being a 916/996, They could have made the most beautiful bike in the world and it having to follow the 916/996 would have meant it was universally panned. The 999 is one of the best looking bikes ever made. It's actually a new, novel design, and people flipped their poo poo because it didn't look like a 916. Then the 1098 came out and everyone poo poo themselves because ducati made a yamaha. Stupid.
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2013 22:52
|
|
|
Jim Silly-Balls posted:Yeah, put the "but it's different you sheeple!!" card back in the deck. poo poo is ugly as hell, there is a reason it's unlike anything else, because everyone with functional retinas can see how terrible it is and would never replicate it. They were basically in a corner design-wise. It had to look like a triumph triple, but round headlights were starting to look really old-fashioned. Wasn't many ways out and it isn't to everyone's taste. I have no strong opinion one way or the other. HNasty posted:as much as everyone likes to make fun of the 999 and it's looks were universally panned when it was released, look carefully. Almost all the new Ducati's have the tank and tail from 999. The head light was a failure but the rest of the design def survived. Z3n posted:They could have made the most beautiful bike in the world and it having to follow the 916/996 would have meant it was universally panned. For once you're both right at the same time and it's strange.
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2013 23:07
|
|
|
Z3n posted:They could have made the most beautiful bike in the world and it having to follow the 916/996 would have meant it was universally panned. I think Terreblanche deliberately set out to make it look as little like a 916 as possible, which is understandable given the rancour with which Tamburini left - even the features he chose to keep like the underseat exhausts he deliberately defaced (the plastic heat shields were a particular dig at Tamburini). I still think the 916 is the better-looking bike but yeah the 999 is drat nice.
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2013 23:16
|
|
|
Jim Silly-Balls posted:Yeah, put the "but it's different you sheeple!!" card back in the deck. poo poo is ugly as hell, there is a reason it's unlike anything else, because everyone with functional retinas can see how terrible it is and would never replicate it. Counterpoint: R1200GS and the swarm of knockoffs including the new, awful looking -Strom Re: Triumph, the Triple's lights are supposed to look like a wrecked superbike. The original (actually 2nd gen, but no one remembers the first) double round headlights looked like a wrecked Daytona 955, which had double round headlights under a fairing (the early Triples are very much naked Daytonas with bars and cheaper engine internals.) This time when they decided they wanted a new look they had no superbike to strip, and they weren't going to get a good look from the Sprint or Tiger. They should've adapted something from the Daytona 675. It may have required a vestigal fairing, but the S3's major competitors (Duc Streetfighter, Z1000, Tuono) all have way more plastic, and that didn't keep Triumph from putting the goofy/fragile little radiator wings on.
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2013 23:33
|
|
|
I don't actually understand why triumph don't make a literbike. The Daytona proves they're more than capable of making a great sportsbike. And logically, if a striple is a naked Daytona, shouldn't the speed triple be a naked ______? Like, the frame and suspension and engine are there, just throw some fairings and clip-ons on it, get slightly fancier brakes/suspension, add more horsepower and you have a no-brainer sportsbike that would sell. I don't understand why they didn't go this route a few years ago; now it will be much harder because of the way horsepower figures have skyrocketed and the added costs of developing good electronic aids.
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2013 23:36
|
|
|
Slavvy posted:I don't actually understand why triumph don't make a literbike. The Daytona proves they're more than capable of making a great sportsbike. And logically, if a striple is a naked Daytona, shouldn't the speed triple be a naked ______? Like, the frame and suspension and engine are there, just throw some fairings and clip-ons on it, get slightly fancier brakes/suspension, add more horsepower and you have a no-brainer sportsbike that would sell. The Daytona used to have a 955 engine.
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2013 23:38
|
|
|
Yeah no poo poo but that was over a decade ago and the bike was porky and not that quick. I'm meaning since they've entered the 675 era.
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2013 23:40
|
|
|
Two horizontally stacked round headlights are my fave. poo poo looks like a cyborg.   ^ Don't bother trying to find the last one. Guy took em off a ferarri.
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2013 23:45
|
|
|
Snowdens Secret posted:(the early Triples are very much naked Daytonas with bars and cheaper engine internals.) M42 posted:
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2013 23:49
|
|
|
I was talking Speed, not Street. It's still mostly pistons and cams, though. Lord knows Triumph fanboys want a literbike, but that's a -very- competitive and expensive market to compete in. Throwing a fairing on the Speed with its heavy frame would be uncompetitive, and good luck getting a few thousand more revs and 50-80+ more horse out of an engine design that dates back to the mid-90s 885. The Tiger's 1200 is a lower-revving stroker so no usefulness there. I liked how the later 955s stopped chasing race winning performance in favor of comfier ergos, but that big sport-tourey market is deader now than it was then. Snowdens Secret fucked around with this message at 00:01 on Nov 11, 2013 |
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2013 23:58
|
|
|
Slavvy posted:Yeah no poo poo but that was over a decade ago and the bike was porky and not that quick. I'm meaning since they've entered the 675 era. A 1000cc triple is always going to be outclassed by a four, so either they go up to 1100 or so (and run head-on into the most competitive part of the European bike market without even being able to take it racing) or leave their customers short-changed in the dyno-based willy-waving contest that is literbike ownership. I have a vague recollection that the 955 was originally meant to be a 900 aimed at SBK racing (along with the Benelli Tornado:  )but was never felt competitive enough to race so they bored it out to 955 intending to base a whole range of bikes around it, but just didn't sell enough to make the production-line space worth it. The 675 is different because it was okay for SS racing (BSS racing is now single-make around it) so they have a guaranteed baseline of both sales and marketing, and I think even they were astonished at how much the Street Triple (which was just a copy/paste of the Speed Triple at first of course) has sold.
|
|
#
?
Nov 11, 2013 00:00
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 27, 2024 17:22 |
|
|
If you can run a 1200cc twin in WSB presumably the rules do or can allow for 1100cc Triples. Good luck finding development money.
|
|
#
?
Nov 11, 2013 00:02
|
|