handling

I wouldn't necessicarily agree that a narrower rear 'handles' better, per se, but would agree that it feels, initially at least, easier to throw around. The 240 rear takes a bit of effort - or rather, getting used to - but once you are used to it you won't have an issue with the handling because of tyre size. More important is tyre selection.

Having ridden M109s and a Harley Rocker (both have 240 rear), it's a far better proposition on a bike as big as an R3 than those others. I found the M109 in particular a tough bike to manoeuver but not so the Rocket. The T'Bird has a 200 rear and, IMO, handles MUCH (infinitley) better than a Harley with same size (eg Fat Boy), so I guess as long as you are riding a quality machine with proper set up for the tyre size, it shouldn't matter what size that is.
 
Canberra makes a great point, and why I said "all else being equal". The chasis setup has as much to do with it as the tire size. The R3T handles VERY well for a bike its size, especially low speed handling. And yes, the TBird is a GREAT handling bike. Triumph, IMO, built the best handling cruiser on the market with the TBird.
 
If you've ever ridden the metz low on air just once ... you will be paranoid for the life of the tire. It's unforgiving when low on pressure and I'm always checking it so I never have that 8lbs low feeling again.
 
its funny to me that you all are talking about how important the air pressure is. it is because my dad gave me a digital tire pressure monitoring system for christmas, I determined that my current bike (77 goldwing) is not good enough so had to buy the roadster to use the monitoring system on
 
All of the ride reviews on the various Rocket configurations have noted the difference in handling due to the narrower tire and shorter swingarm of the Touring.

As I research this model as a possibility for my next bike, I am building up a wish list. Would love to have the Touring wheelbase and narrower tire but the Classic dual headlights and instruments on handlebar. Also would like the larger Roadster fuel tank for extra range.

The saddlebags on the Tourer look nice but the poorly placed locking hardware makes the practicality of the bag clumsy. Maybe a nice set of Jesse bags would work better from a practicality point of view.
 
RocketDaryl said:
C... Triumph, IMO, built the best handling cruiser on the market with the TBird.
Click to expand...

You are just a bit prejudiced, though. I think that Victory's Cross Country has better ergos, but that is as subjective an opinion as any others'!

As for air pressures, I run my Metzelers at 40-41 lbs up front and 42 lbs in the rear. It's important with this setup to check and adjust your pressure very regularly!
 
I love my bike a 2007 r3 standard, but would say that the thunderbird handles better, I took a thunderbird out for a test ride for about an hour, and the bike is a wonderful bike and handles better, but so does a gsxr 750,ninja's, and a lot of other bikes I bought my rock cause it was the biggest badest bike at the time, and it handles pretty good for its size. Have your dad go take both for a long spin if they say no, go to a more reputable dealer who will.
 
The Thunderbird is definitely better than the Rocket in the handling department. The Rocket is a log wagon in comparison. That said, the Rocket isn't as bad as some would have you believe. In fact, I've ridden a couple of Standard Rockets and was, overall, impressed both times. Besides, you have to keep things in context when evaluating these things. My Tbird handles like a log wagon compared to my Tiger.

The Rocket wasn't designed with carving up twisties in mind. It was designed to kick pretty much anything on the road's ass from light to light. I think it's safe to say Triumph was pretty successful in accomplishing that goal. The Thunderbird is a different animal that was designed for completely different purpose.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Impressed with handling
2
Replies
11
Views
2K
KingOfFleece
Menu
Log in
Register