Who's going to buy a Triumph Daytona 675?

  • Thread starter Thread starter ClearwaterBMW
  • Start date Start date
Nice looking bike, but doesn't do anything for my blood.

If I wanted a good fast bike I would just pop down to Ming land and get a zxr12 and leave everything else for dead.

I could really get my head around the 600 market as I always felt it was for "kids"

The fact that I am way to big for them does put me off.
 
i understand what you are saying
but, according to the early reports
at 5'6" and having a 28" inseam..... i'm too SMALL for this bike

that underseat exhaust, as trick as it is..... has jacked the rear end up SO FAR that someone of my compromised vertical size can't even mount it

now i've seen everything:
a 600-class bike that short folks can't ride

hmmmmmmmm

greg
 
A lot of 600 Sports bikes are tall in the seat to give ground clearance with yer legs tucked under your bum most of the clearance is only usfull on the track. My 2001 gsxr has a 830mm seat height. The triumph is 825. Easy to waddle around as they are very light......like 12 stones lighter than the r1150gs!! The triumph looks class. :thumb
 
Mzokk said:
A lot of 600 Sports bikes are tall in the seat to give ground clearance with yer legs tucked under your bum most of the clearance is only usfull on the track. My 2001 gsxr has a 830mm seat height. The triumph is 825. Easy to waddle around as they are very light......like 12 stones lighter than the r1150gs!! The triumph looks class. :thumb

where did you get that seat height number?
greg
 
ClearwaterBMW said:
where did you get that seat height number?
greg

The Bike magazine supplement quotes 825mm seat height. If you want the supplement Greg, PM me and I'll send it over to you.
 
ClearwaterBMW said:
Here in the US.... we are going crazy over thoughts of this british marvel.
i have my GS.... and love her
but who's in for this Daytona 675?

greg

Not me Ive got one of the old bruisers, 48,000 miles and still goes ballistic..........................in a straight line :D
 

Attachments

  • daytona 1200.JPG
    daytona 1200.JPG
    80.2 KB · Views: 103
JAY said:
The Bike magazine supplement quotes 825mm seat height. If you want the supplement Greg, PM me and I'll send it over to you.

Jay,
i would love that supplement
i tried to PM you, but the system wouldn't allow me for some reason

my email is
[email protected]

thanks so much in advance

greg
 
Unfortunatly you need to be a sponser to use the pm thang. This involves sending money to Paul BHT. (Don't ask me where the button is cos I'm too p*ssed to find it - the keyboard is a struggle at the mo...)
 
i found the way to send money
now i'm just waiting for paypal to fix my account
some suspected unauthorized use....
the usual garbage

i'll send it as soon as they fix it

greg
 
New Triumph

Well it's got to be good 'cos Bike mag said it was the "Most Important Bike in 10 Years"
Don't magazines write some b0llix...
Pat.
 
and i thought that BIKE magazine hated Triumph

so, that means even more, i think
greg
 
Greg - not sure why PM is not working as we seem to both be site sponsors! Anyhow, I've just e-mailed you! Take this supplement off my hands before I fall to temptation!
 
i sent in the money through paypal about 3 hours ago....
they finally got that worked out

greg

thanks for the offer....
i will save your from temptation, my son !!!!!!!!!
 
Rob Farmer said:
Personally I'm waiting for the new off road styled Bonnie :cool:

I can't wait for a 680cc Tiger with a power to weight ratio to beat both the current 955 Tiger and the GS12! i.e. 100bhp & 175kg. Should be possible since they are claiming 123bhp in the Daytona.
 
And you really think they will make such a beast? Mind you, you think that Triumphs build quality is better than BMW's :D :D
 
Howard might be right. I'm not convinced that uncomfortable sports bikes are the way to go but that engine in a wee-giant-trailie might be very interesting. Of course, they'd probably lose their bottle and tune it for torque rather than power, which would be a shame, so the power to weight ration wouldn't be as spectacular as Howard muses. I'd like to see them try it. Couldn't call it a Tiger, though, perhaps a Cerval?
 
Pressurized said:
so the power to weight ration wouldn't be as spectacular as Howard muses. I'd like to see them try it. Couldn't call it a Tiger, though, perhaps a Cerval?

If they used 100bhp with 175kgs the power to wieght ratio is (as I wrote earlier)better than the 955i Tiger & the GS12.

How about "The Tiger Cub"?
 


Back
Top Bottom