Bruce obviously rides and corners harder than you do then. He's just about worn his peg -rail away from scraping it. The Standard peg-rails don't droop at the front like the Roadsters do.
Bruce obviously rides and corners harder than you do then. He's just about worn his peg -rail away from scraping it. The Standard peg-rails don't droop at the front like the Roadsters do.
Not anymore T.C. slowed down a little since my little off. Try not to put the rail on the ground anymore as thats what lifted the front tyre off the road. Lookin at fabricating new rails from scratch tucked up close to the engine cases at the front and about 2 inch's higher all over. I read somewere in the Roadster specs that the footpegs are 6 inch's back and 2 inch's lower than the standard. Triumph must have figured it was a bit cramped when they moved them back so decided to drop them a bit.
Do you think Triumph was trying to attract younger riders by moving the pegs back? It appears they shot themselves in the foot by alienating the more mature riders who actually can afford to ride an R3. If I had known of the similar discomfort as expressed by the other youth challenged here, I most certainly would NOT have bought a Roadster.
They obviously wanted to project a "street fighter" image - agressive - as if the freakin' engine isn't agressive enough. The old adage applies - newer is worser - but not too bad in this case.