Welcome to Netrider ... Connecting Riders!

Interested in talking motorbikes with a terrific community of riders?
Signup (it's quick and free) to join the discussions and access the full suite of tools and information that Netrider has to offer.

Triples - the new flavour of the month?

Discussion in 'General Motorcycling Discussion' started by [FLUX], Oct 22, 2007.

  1. Well, we all know that triples have been around for bikes for ages, but so were twins.

    10 years back, when Ducati was dominating WSBK, V-twins became the flavour of the month for sports bikes, primarily due to the existing capacity regulations at the time.

    Lookin the recent AMCN, and both Benelli and MV Agusta are planning to introduce 675cc triples, apparently on the back of the Triumph Daytona 675 being allowed to compete in World Supersport.

    Anyone reckon we could see a Japanese manufacturer try to differentiate itself from the others and launch a 675cc super-sport triple?
  2. I'd buy one if they did, thats for sure.
  3. Motorcycle sports racing (and the road riding associated with it) doesn't interest me very much, so I can't claim to have anything informed to offer, except to comment that I get the impression that one way to get a wedge in on the competition, when the bikes start to get a bit similar, is to change your engine and so the behaviour of the bike, opening up different sorts of gaps. Does that sound right, might that apply in these sorts of decisions?
  4. Not to forget the famous Laverda, triples, too!

    And the infamous Kawasaki two-stroke triples :roll:.

    My tip would be that if a Japanese manufacturer does it, it will be Honda.
  5. Sounds about right mattb. I gotta say though, I'm becoming a real fan of the triple engine config, after having ridden both twins and I4's all my life. Those who have long appreciated triples will probably roll their eyes at me for taking so long to come to the party and my enthusiasm for the configuration, but I really am surprised that the config hasn't been used more frequently in modern machines outside of Triumph. I guess racing regulations to dare haven't really favored the triple config, and that might explain it.

    Sure, power-per-capacity-per-cylinder wise, you need some extra cc's to make up for the lower number of cyls, but the linear grunt of the config is outstanding.

    I can understand why more modern manufacturers would be willing to dabble with the config.

    I doubt Honda will do it. I reckon Honda would be more likely to move to a V4 than a triple config. I reckon if any Jap manufacturer would do it, it'd probably be Kawasaki.
  6. The decision will be made by economics. If they lose enough market share to the triples, then they'll do it.
    If triumph fluked it with their 675 then there won't be any longevity in the class.
    But if other manufacturers can follow their lead and compete and improve, it stands a chance.
    I think the best thing Triumph has going for it, is it's price.
    Everybody who i've spoken to that's ridden or owns one, raves about the package that's been put together. And it doesn't have a ridiculous European price tag attached. Winner!
    Let's see if Benelli or Augusta can do the same.

  7. I don't know about how good a triple is as I've not ridden one, but since they come with this wrapped around the engine:


    I'm sold.
  8. Dunno about your doubts about Honda, Flux, they've built singles, twins, fours, fives and sixes, the only thing missing is a triple :LOL:.
  9. Grunty, tractable strong power everywhere that doesn't stop until you hit the rev-limiter. Gob-smackingly glorious mid-range, that's smoothly delivered. Can just whack the throttle open stupidly early at lean angles where an I4 would start to power-slide, and instead the tyre will just bite in and propels you forwards like you're being irresistably shoved by the forceful hand of some strong yet gentle giant.

    It's hard to describe in words how it's different from a V2 or a 4-cyl. You really have to experience it. IMO, a well designed triple is able to marry all the best traits of the V2 and I4, and smooths them out.
  10. The Street Triple is my ideal bike, and the one I would have ended up with if there weren't other considerations. I've never ridden one, but from all accounts it sounds like a triple is the most ideal engine configuration for everyday riding...would love the opportunity to jump on one.

    Flux? :p
  11. I'd eat my undies if Honda brought out a triple in the next 5 years. The company is so incredibly conservative these days, the only innovations they've been making have been unpopular crap like mandatory ABS, VTEC, linked brakes etc and they've been the last to follow with stuff people are asking for like slipper clutches and performance nakeds.

    Their litre-capacity V4 has been yacked on about for ages, and the marketing guys tell me they're still two to three years off seeing production. This is not a dynamic organisation.
  12. I would have said the same about the traction between a similarly powered big single and a vtwin (non-bigbang), tear your arms off vs "sedately" powersliding out of corners. Is there something about the triple that goes against the logic of tractability? I've just done a quick google and I know little about triples, but it seems the majority of the Triumph triples fire every 240degrees.
  13. Don't know if I could explain it logically devotard, but here's my theory, which is quite likely wrong. Also, keep in mind that I've never ridden a 120+hp single...

    Firstly, I reckon that the flatness of the torque curve has a lot to do with it. When you dial in your thrust with the throttle, you'll get that thrust as the revs increase with no sudden peaks that could cause the rear to break free.

    I also reckon due to the 3 x 240 degree firing allows for that 60 degrees of "cool-down" after each power stroke, allowing the tyre to hook up better.

    You could, of course, argue that all of the above applies to twins and singles, but in my experience twins tend to taper off rather than hold that same thrust all the way to their peak. I can't comment on singles, as I have no experience other than riding an old dirt bike back when I was 10 around the grand-parents farm.
  14. Triples seem to have the best of everything, nice juicy flat torque curve and still make good power. When you compare a Buell which is all about torque in the lower end of the rev range to a speed triple, they are very similar if not in the triples favour. And then the triumph has a top end as well. What more could one possible want?? :grin:

  15. if I were putting money on which Japanese manufacturer, I would bet Yamaha.

    They are not as conservative as Honda. Kawasaki and Suzuki are set in their i4 way and don't have big budgets. Besides Yamaha are obsessed with knocking Honda of their perch.

    I think tripples are the ideal bike. Not as rough as twin and limited in revs, but have more grunt then 4s where you need them on the street. They are not as wide as 4s either and are more compact then v-twins (lengthways).

    I'd love to see more of them.

    I'm kinda hoping Triumph will update their big Daytona. Put it on a 15-20kg diet.
  16. No 120+hp singles for me either (I wish). The fairest tractability contest I've ridden back to back would be a worked 560cc single with a peaky cam (65hp, 110kg) and a sedately tuned 550cc twin (65hp, 120kg). While the single was a much more brutal beast, it was brutal in the way that it hooked up out of corners over the rear-steering twin. Much the same as my single, albeit a mere 52hp worth.

    Like you're talking about with the "cool down" I've always understood it to be that the further apart the power pulses are the better the hookup (amongst other factors). Pretty much I'd just love to give one a crack. :grin: Hypothesizing is an extremely poor substitute for going for a ride. :LOL:
  17. Man, a 65hp, 110kg single would absolutely fly out of corners. That'd be hard to top for corner leaping grunt, but I mean no offense here when I say this 'cos I know you love your motards, but from reports I've heard, they run out of puff reasonably quickly. Get that sort of bike onto a tight enough road (e.g. Reefton Spur), and all else will be left struggling. Still, I reckon a triple would be right on its tail though.

    Throw in plenty of sweepers though (>90kph) and that's where the triple format really shines, where you can just drive on out right up to the redline on a wave of seamless torque.
  18. Fair call, though a properly sorted SXV550 (a vtwin admittedly) is something to behold all the way up to 13k or so, an amazing motor.

    At the risk of getting further sidetracked, I'll shutup. :grin:
  19. Ok, but I'll also make a conciliatory post too.

    I'm not trying to claim that the triples beat out everything else in what the other configs are really good at, but rather that they appear to offer a very good balanced blend of best traits of the other configs.

    If you want all-out top-end power, can't really beat an I4. If you want stump pulling grunt from down low, a single will do that. If you want gobs of mid-range torque, a twin give you that. The triple config seems to draw a smooth line between all of those configs, and delivers in a tractable manner.
  20. What was it??!

    Can't add much to the discussion, except to say that my SR (stock motor, sitting between 3 and four thousand rpm) seems to have very consistent torquey power till about 100km/hr, at which point it *very quickly* drops away. (Overtaking at that speed is a very planned affair, but what's real fun about it, is that if you lie on the tank, the sudden speed increase is very perceptible.) In the twisties you can just sit in one gear in that rev range, and she pulls very easily out of the corners.

    I rode a Sprint up Mount Donna Buang on Sunday. Yeh, the power seemed to come on easy at the wrist at any point that I wanted it. On the straights I was giving it a hard flick and it always surged forward with no hesitation.