Triumph Street Triple R old versus new in the top test

Posted on by admin

Menus

Triumph Street Triple R old versus new in the top test
Jahn

Triumph Street Triple R old versus new in the top test

Triumph Street Triple R old versus new in the top test

Triumph Street Triple R old versus new in the top test

Triumph Street Triple R old versus new in the top test

18th photos

Triumph Street Triple R old versus new in the top test
Jahn

1/18
Stefan Kaschel and Karsten Schwers in conversation.

Triumph Street Triple R old versus new in the top test

2/18
All good: The Nissin system is still convincing, rims with red stripes are R features.

Triumph Street Triple R old versus new in the top test

3/18
Everything extra: The frame protector (161 euros) and the LED indicators (138 euros) cost an extra charge.

Triumph Street Triple R old versus new in the top test

4/18
Everything different: The headlights moved up and closer to the steering head.

Triumph Street Triple R old versus new in the top test

5/18
As usual: Except for the rev counter graphics and the new fuel gauge, everything stayed the same.

Triumph Street Triple R old versus new in the top test

6/18
The new Triumph Street Triple R being tested.

Triumph Street Triple R old versus new in the top test
Jahn

7/18
The new Triumph Street Triple R being tested.

Triumph Street Triple R old versus new in the top test
Jahn

8/18
The new Triumph Street Triple R being tested.

Triumph Street Triple R old versus new in the top test
Jahn

9/18
What distinguishes the new from the old R is above all the noticeably firmer chassis.

Triumph Street Triple R old versus new in the top test
Jahn

10/18
The predecessor set the bar very high.

Triumph Street Triple R old versus new in the top test
Jahn

11/18
Street Triple R is still Street Triple R, and that’s a good thing.

Triumph Street Triple R old versus new in the top test

12/18
Only the optional gel bench (189 euros) brings permanent seating comfort.

Triumph Street Triple R old versus new in the top test

13/18
At an angle from behind: The differences are most obvious from this perspective.

Triumph Street Triple R old versus new in the top test
Jahn

14/18
Plenty of ground clearance: the new Street Triple R can also be moved diagonally again.

Triumph Street Triple R old versus new in the top test
Jahn

15/18
What’s different, what’s better? If you are already at such a high level as the old Triumph Street Triple R, only a direct comparison helps.

Triumph Street Triple R old versus new in the top test

16/18
Tire warmers: At a cold eight degrees, top tester Karsten brings the rear tire up to temperature.

Triumph Street Triple R old versus new in the top test

17/18
Everything down: Because the ABS modulator needs space, the coolant expansion tank moved next to the silencer.

Triumph Street Triple R old versus new in the top test
Jahn

18/18
At eye level: The old and new Street Triple fight each other on the top test course.

2012 model year of the Streety versus the new 2013 model

Triumph Street Triple R old versus new in the top test

What do you do when you have a model in your range that actually doesn’t have much to improve? One pounces on the little things. The handling is a little sharper, the weight a little lower, the styling a little more exciting – something like that. In that sense, it’s good news that the new Street Triple wasn’t a new bike despite the new outfits.

Na, it’s not what it looks like from behind. And yes, the Street Triple is still a Speed ​​Triple despite echoes of the Kawasaki ER-6. Even if it looks very different now. Somehow more Japanese, say those for whom the angular headlights already meant turning away from pure teaching. For them, not using the characteristic underseat silencers is sacrilege.

Buy complete article

Triumph Street Triple R old versus new in the top test

2012 model year of the Streety versus the new 2013 model
Triumph Street Triple R old versus new in the top test

Everything extra: The frame protector (161 euros) and the LED indicators (138 euros) cost an extra charge.

You can of course see it differently, more commercially. For example, flat from the side, preferably from the exhaust side. And imagine the revised Daytona next to the new Street Triple. Then you notice the high technical affinity (engineering jargon). Or the same parts strategy (accountant jargon). Tank, frame, rear frame, wheels – all the same. And therefore cheaper to produce. The future Street Triple clientele shouldn’t care.

On the contrary. The technical proximity to the athlete is precisely what defines a street fighter in its own right. And in this regard, the Street Triple has clearly moved closer to the thoroughbred athlete Daytona. This manifests itself not only visually, but also in weight (Triumph promises six kilos less for the Street Triple, while the new Daytona weighs only 1.5 kilograms less than its predecessor). The incoming check on the MOTORRAD scales weighs five kilograms less than the old Street Triple. 188 kilograms with a full tank are an absolute top figure. More importantly, the wheel load distribution has changed dramatically. With the heavy underseat exhaust, exactly 50 percent of the weight was on the rear wheel, now it’s only 48 percent. Or, in absolute numbers: the new Street Triple weighs seven kilograms more on the front wheel. This makes it more front-heavy than some superbikes.


Jahn

The Triumph Street Triple in the test.

This clearly shows where the journey of the new triple is headed. Namely, towards more driving stability, more precise steering behavior, better feedback despite the high handlebars – and unfortunately away from the light-heartedness, the irrepressible desire to stand on the rear wheel every time the clutch clicks lightly. Yes, dear Street Triple Community, it has to be said so clearly: Anyone who likes to wheelie at every opportunity must now initiate the climb with a more decisive gesture. More revs and, above all, a more robust throttle are now necessary, which is not only due to the changed weight distribution, but also to the fact that Triumph wanted to improve the engine’s response in the partial load range. The plan: In order to achieve a smooth response behavior in stop-and-go operation at small opening angles, the kinematics of the throttle valve actuation was designed to be highly progressive. With the result mentioned above – but also with the result that as a side effect, the fuel consumption was noticeably reduced, especially in city and country roads.

In normal driving, you can feel this through the no longer quite so spontaneous response behavior; it pays off at the petrol station. With 4.7 liters on country roads, the Street Triple is noticeably lower than in previous measurements – and also significantly below the consumption of an old triple traveling along for comparison purposes. But the gear ratio was not only changed between the throttle grip and the throttle valve, but also in the gearbox itself. The first gear is now longer in terms of racing (to 110 instead of 99 km / h). Triumph Germany man Uli Bonsels (the only press spokesman who puts his brand cup in his own showcase instead of leaving it to one of his customers) and his colleagues are happy because they can finally cull in first gear in front of the Hockenheim hairpin. In the stress of the top test course with its tight turning points or the courageous start of the traffic lights, however, things are not so favorable. More gas and a slipping clutch – that’s the recipe if the triple should really start brushing.

Once on the move, this little mishap is forgotten, because what makes Street Triple driving so unique comes to the fore immediately. This engine remains an entertainer, as it is in the book, even with the throttle valve opening more cautiously and a longer first gear.

Tire warmers: At a cold eight degrees, top tester Karsten brings the rear tire up to temperature.

At least if you are not looking for the ultimate kick in the speed sky, but robust thrust in all positions. The linear power delivery, paired with the exact throttle response – that is and will remain a combination in 2013 that will cast a spell on both beginners and professionals. The fans of the brand will be pleased that nothing decisive has changed with regard to the whistling Triumph background noise despite the new exhaust and a newly designed airbox, while everyone else should at least make an audio test. It is worth it .. Which brings us to the central question. What has happened with the chassis where Triumph decided to lend a hand, donated a new frame, new wheels and a completely new chassis set-up?

To put it in a nutshell: The new one is noticeably different – but here, too, the differences crystallize above all when you make a direct comparison. If you only ride the new Street Triple R, you will experience a motorcycle that continues to shine with impeccable rideability in all situations. The slightly steeper steering head angle (now 66.6 instead of 66.1 degrees) has not changed anything, while the slightly longer caster (95 instead of 92 millimeters) in combination with the front-heavy weight distribution, contrary to the original Triumph intention, has a negative effect on maneuverability. Before panic arises: 30 out of 40 points are still an excellent value, the Street Triple no longer scurries so playfully through the winding curves of the slow top test slalom, but thanks to the significantly tighter suspension set-up, it beats the front section in the fast slalom in particular even a little better than its already very good predecessor.

Triumph Street Triple R 2012/2013 wheelie.

This also applies on the country road. The Street Triple takes fast, long radii with razor-sharp precision and fine feedback, and is now even more of an athlete than a naked bike. It is hardly surprising that such a design is inevitably at the expense of comfort. Pothole slopes are not exactly one of the top disciplines of the newcomers. And even when measuring the brakes on the top test course at a cool eight degrees Celsius, the well-damped Kayaba 41 fork operated at the limits of its possibilities on the bumps and left the front wheel standing still here and there. For all those who are now stumbling and asking about the new Nissin ABS, which is extremely light with an additional 1.5 kilograms of additional weight and can be switched off: At the time of the test, this option, which is crucial to purchase (400 euros surcharge) was not yet available for many people. MOTORRAD will deliver the corresponding values ​​at the beginning of next year (the ABS version will be available from January).

If you want to drive Street Triple R beforehand, you have to look for the delay limit yourself in an emergency. Fortunately, in this regard, the radially attached four-piston calipers from Nissin in combination with the first Pirelli Rosso Corsa tires are a powerful duo on board. The performance of the stoppers is convincing across the board. Finely dosed, brutal in effect – that the British left everything as it was in this regard is absolutely understandable and welcome.

The same goes for pricing. 9090 euros plus 370 euros ancillary costs – the old Street Triple R wasn’t available for less money either. But be careful: Naked like Triumph created it, the new Street Triple will probably never be delivered. A lot of accessories are already installed in the test copy. Instrument cover, engine spoiler, anodized brake fluid reservoir, frame protector, LED turn signal – all of this costs a lot extra. And for those who love it even more individually: From the radial lever kit made of aluminum or the padock stand to the tank bag or the heated grips, the Triumph accessories range has everything you can imagine. Precisely because the new Street Triple R again covers an immensely wide range of uses despite its sportier suspension setup. Basically, everything is included, from picking up bread rolls to lap on the racetrack. And if the R is still too sporty for you: The standard triple comes in January. More convenient – and 1000 euros cheaper.

MOTORRAD points evaluation / conclusion

The new Street Triple benefits from the firmer chassis and the sportier weight distribution.

engine
A clear tie, but very subtle differences. When it comes to pulling through, the new Street Triple can achieve a very small advantage, while the predecessor scores with its livelier response. The bottom line is that the Street Triple engine remains a brilliant drive for all situations, only the gnarled gearbox is not convincing. The optional and well-functioning automatic gearshift (345 euros) helps.

landing gear
The point deviations are minimal, but they are clearly noticeable. The tighter coordination of the new ones ensures more stability and a different driving experience, while the old one is just ahead in handling. And the 2012 Street Triple also deserves one more point when it comes to the responsiveness of the fork, which makes it easy to win this chapter.

everyday life
Less consumption, greater range. This essentially reduces the lead of the new Street Triple in the everyday standings. The ergonomic progress due to the slightly better padded bench is marginal, while the one point advantage in handling results from the noticeably larger steering angle. In addition, the new one looks a little more lovingly processed here and there.

security
Nothing, absolutely nothing, has changed. But this will change. Namely when the ABS is finally on board. Then the new old Street Triple will mercilessly pull away.

costs
And once again the consumption, this time in pennies. Burning less fuel means lower costs. Point.

Price-performance
Almost the point lead, just under the price-performance rating. Perhaps a previous year’s triple at a special price would not be a bad tip either.

Max points 2013 model 2012 model Overall rating 1000 669 661
Price-performance note 1.0 1.2 1.3

Conclusion
Street Triple R is still Street Triple R, and that’s a good thing. After all, the predecessor set the bar very high. What distinguishes the new from the old R is above all the noticeably firmer chassis. This will please the experienced and sporty customers, while a softer set-up for beginners and normal drivers would probably be the better choice. But for them there is the standard triple.

2012 model versus 2013 model

At an angle from behind: The differences are most obvious from this perspective.

The Triumph Powerpoint presentation on the occasion of the Street Triple presentation left nothing to be desired in terms of clarity. “The old Street Triple still wins all comparative tests,” read there. Nevertheless there is now the new one.

What does the direct comparison look like? The customer doesn’t care that the new frame now consists of eight instead of eleven parts. And the variable swing arm mount (here the swing arm pivot point can be varied with inlets) should be more of a theoretical nature on a naked bike. Just like the swing arm itself, which is 600 grams lighter.

In general, the weight. Triumph saved an impressive five kilograms during the revision. That is a whole chunk that should make itself felt in terms of handling. But it doesn’t, at least not tangible and measurable, as the diet regimen was flanked by other measures that are counterproductive. Above all, the heavily front-heavy weight distribution should be mentioned here, which, in conjunction with the tighter suspension setup, especially in slow slalom, lacks the smoothness when turning with which the predecessor wags through the course.

That means: For the same time (27.3 seconds), the driver has to use more force, while in the fast slalom the fuller damping of the spring elements has a positive effect and the new of the old Street Triple R is a blink of an eye (0.2 seconds) ahead is.


Jahn

At eye level: The old and new Street Triple fight each other on the top test course.

These are not worlds, but they set the direction in which the new Street Triple R marches, at least in terms of its chassis. Away from “Everybody’s Darling” to more performance, more stability. This is exactly where the longer first gear, which is actually at home on the racetrack, hits. It is all the more astonishing that Triumph went exactly the other way when it came to engine setup. In the endeavor to make the response behavior even more gentle, especially in city traffic, unfortunately a little of the spontaneity with which the old Street Triple literally jumps on the gas with the smallest impulse fell by the wayside. This is also not something that can be expressed in numbers or that spoils driving fun, but it is definitely a relevant factor in a direct comparison. The same applies of course to the fuel consumption, which – as promised by Triumph – is actually significantly lower, especially on country roads (0.5 liters).

Another positive aspect of the newcomer: if a passenger is on board, you can still smell it even after a long country road tour, because it doesn’t smell penetratingly of exhaust fumes like the previous one. Otherwise, the passenger comfort remains rather poor, especially the lack of suitable handles in the second row. For the driver, on the other hand, comfort has become better because the seat is better padded than that of the predecessor. But good is different. But seating comfort is certainly not what is at the top of the specification sheet for a radical naked woman.

Technical specifications

Triumph Street Triple R 2013.

Triumph Street Triple R (values ​​in square brackets: 2012 model)

engine
Water-cooled three-cylinder four-stroke in-line engine, a balancer shaft, two overhead, chain-driven camshafts, four valves per cylinder, bucket tappets, wet sump lubrication, injection, Ø 44 mm, regulated catalytic converter with secondary air system, alternator 402 W, battery 12 V / 7 Ah, mechanically operated multiple discs – Oil bath clutch, six-speed gearbox, O-ring chain, secondary ratio 47:16.

Bore x stroke 74.0 x 52.3 mm
Cubic capacity 675 cm³, compression ratio 12.65: 1
rated capacity 78.0 kW (106 PS) at 11850 rpm [11700 rpm]
Max. Torque 68 Nm at 9750 / min [9200 / min]

landing gear
Bridge frame made of aluminum, upside-down fork, Ø 41 mm, adjustable spring base, rebound and compression damping, two-arm swing arm made of aluminum, central spring strut with lever system, adjustable spring base, rebound and compression damping, double disc brake at the front, Ø 310 mm, four-piston fixed calipers, disc brake rear, Ø 220 mm, single-piston floating caliper.
Cast aluminum wheels 3.50 x 17; 5.50 x 17
Tires 120/70 ZR 17; 180/55 ZR 17
Pirelli Diablo Rosso Corsa tires tested

Dimensions + weights
Wheelbase 1410 [1405] mm, steering head angle 65.9 [66.1] degrees, caster 95 [93] mm, spring travel f / r 115/135 [120/130] mm, permissible total weight 377 [381] kg, tank capacity 17, 4 liters.

Service data
Service intervals 10000 km
Oil and filter change every 10000 km 2.6 l
Engine oil SAE 10W40 / SAE 15W50
Telescopic fork oil SAE 10
Spark plugs NGK CR9EK
Idle speed 1100 ± 100 / min
Tire pressure (with pillion passenger) front / rear 2.5 / 2.9 (2.5 / 2.9) bar
Two year guarantee
Colors gray, black, white [gray, orange]
Price 9090 [9090] euros
Price test motorcycle 9993 * [9548] ** Euro

*Incl. Instrument cover (219 euros), engine spoiler (249 euros), aluminum brake fluid reservoirs (2 x 69 euros), frame protectors (159 euros) and LED indicators (2 x 69 euros) ** incl. Instrument cover (229 euros) and engine spoiler (229 euros)

 

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *