Learn me Triumph sprint st

Comfortable for a 34" inseam?

Good/Bad?

They keep catching my eye.

They are better than a Sportster

And Cotton will tell you that chicks dig Triumphs.

I've heard the build quality is questionable on certain years based on which factory they were made in. Some Triumph guys may know more specifics, but for some reason I want to say the early 2000ish years are not as quality. Of course this coming from the guy that bought a cheap Kawasaki...

That's all I got man. But I do like them more than the Sportster.

Singleslammer might be of some help with this topic.....he has one that has been in pieces for awhile and is putting back together.

Also, just remember, while the turn of the century triumph stuff isn't on the same par with the post factory getting torching stuff, its still most likely to be more reliable than similar vintage ducati, buell, and carb harleys

Someday, I'll buy a TT600 to do a fisher price litrebike. They look amazing but were unfortunately slow and such.

I like the looks of the early ones the best. The ones with the dual round headlights. I think those where 98-2000 or something like that. I've seen a couple being advertised at 3k. Seems like the kind of bike I need. When I get some time I'll have to do some research.

The early ones are arguably better bikes. I have a couple of triumph fans for friends and they both agree that the early ST is a better bike overall. Less sporty looking but similar mill and the seat is tons better as they didn't put an exhaust under there.

Seems the brakes aren't the greatest. The front rotors on my buddies ST were warped when he got it at around 20k miles. Triumph didn't do any better on the newer stuff because the brakes on my 09 Speed Triple aren't really any better....warped within 3k-4k miles from new, but mild warpage and have not got worse with 14k or so total miles now. It's not my riding style either because none of my other bikes had brake issues. Other than that they're real nice bikes, I think height-wise you'll be fine, but you might have to cut some foam out of the seat. I know my buddy with his ST has around the same inseam, but I can't remember if he modified the seat or not. Again, nice bikes, very comfortable, make a sweet sweet noise with a decent aftermarket pipe, and yes chicks dig them.

Look into the Aprilia Falco or Futura instead.

In reply to rotard:

Any particular reason?

Or just to live up to the GRM motto of suggesting something other than what the OP asked about?

In reply to Nick_Comstock:

He's on an Aprilia binge. Not that it is a bad thing, as I'm sure they're just as good.

Another bike to cross-shop are the VFR800's. I think the Triumph is a decent bike, having spent no time around them, so I can only go by reputation. But I think Honda's build quality is better and the parts supply is probably a bit better as well.

I like the idea if the vfr and have done more research about them. It seems the Triumph would have slightly less sporty ergo's comparatively,which appeals to me. I guess it's down to my prejudices about Japanese things. They may well be the much better product but for whatever reason there is no real want there, whereas something British, or German, or even Italian really hit those want buttons.

I've owned an 2000ish one for a short while in the UK and rode it to the south of France. Big issues are fuel injection leaks - if it still has the plastic quick disconnects, budget on replacing them because you don't want to find yourself standing in a puddle of flameable liquid at a stop light. Don't ask me how I know.

Other than that it was reasonably comfy for a sports tourer, handled well but also had a bit of an appetite for oil. I think the VFR750 I had a couple of years later was the better bike but the Triumph has more character.

In reply to BoxheadTim:

I guess that's what I'm saying, I'd rather have the slightly lesser bike with character than the better bike without any. And for the most part that's why I'm down on Japanese bikes. All of the Japanese bikes I have ridden have all handled well, had good power and well, just did everything right. But they lacked something I can't really name. It may be all psychological, there really isn't any want there. Unless it's older, but I'd still rather have an old BMW. I do like the noises a VFR makes though.

See, and I think the Spirit is more of an appliance than the VFR, especially if you talk about the 5th gen 800 with gear driven cams, or maybe a VF500F or really any of the early VFR family members. If you said the VFR1200 didn't seem very soul-full I could probably agree. Eh, different horses, etc. I honestly never thought the Sprint was much more than appliance myself, like it was a Brit effort to show that they could make their own Japanese sport-touring bike, just in a different part of the world.

And sometimes it's nice to just get on a Honda and ride the thing. But unless you want to hear more I'll stop trying to derail your thread about the Sprint.

The Aprilias are more sporty and the Rotax engines are pretty sweet. Quality on the Aprilias is better. Think Italian Honda.

In reply to pres589:

I haven't had the opportunity to ride either of the bikes in question. My impressions are more general and entirely in my head. I've ridden a couple GSX-R'S if various displacement, an old Honda 450 and an old Kawasaki. Those and my sporty make up my entire riding experience.

Nick_Comstock wrote: In reply to BoxheadTim: I guess that's what I'm saying, I'd rather have the slightly lesser bike with character than the better bike without any. And for the most part that's why I'm down on Japanese bikes. All of the Japanese bikes I have ridden have all handled well, had good power and well, just did everything right. But they lacked something I can't really name. It may be all psychological, there really isn't any want there. Unless it's older, but I'd still rather have an old BMW. I do like the noises a VFR makes though.

I recommend never riding a 04-5 10r then.....if you think it can't have character and ignore what it has, it'll kill you like it did all those squids over the last decade. To be honest, no matter what you choose, you'll be in for a surprise in what you've been missing(POWER)

In reply to yamaha:

It's funny, I'm completely content with the power of the sporty, what it's severally lacking in is handling and ride comfort plus the fact that I don't really fit it. It was designed for someone around 5'7" and 160lbs. I'm considerably larger than that. But I'm sure I won't complain about having more power.

I'm still keeping the sporty, and I have a plan for how I want to build it. It's still never going to be the right tool for the type of riding I like to do, but a sport bike would be just as ill suited.

Nick_Comstock wrote: In reply to BoxheadTim: I guess that's what I'm saying, I'd rather have the slightly lesser bike with character than the better bike without any. And for the most part that's why I'm down on Japanese bikes. All of the Japanese bikes I have ridden have all handled well, had good power and well, just did everything right. But they lacked something I can't really name. It may be all psychological, there really isn't any want there. Unless it's older, but I'd still rather have an old BMW. I do like the noises a VFR makes though.

I wouldn't say the Sprint is the lesser bike at all. They're both good choices, but it's up to your wants and needs in the end. Triumph's are all ate up with character though....that's for sure. They're fun bikes to own.

In reply to Nick_Comstock:

Weren't sporty's built for women?

And I think you misunderstood my first comment. I was saying never to ride a first gen if you believe no japanese bike can have "character".....they have it, and its an evil, ill tempered mistress.

Don't worry, I have no interest in anything like that

I'm not saying they have no character, I know the numbers and have read the riding impressions. It's just the idea of one doesn't excite me. I don't know it's hard to explain, especially to a fanboy I guess it's the same way a classic British sports car has way more appeal to me than a new super car.

Rode a late 90s Sprint last weekend. It was alright. Coming from all carbed Japanese bikes(ZX6R, GSXR), it definitely wasn't as sporty as the Jap bikes, but fairly comfortable. However, my current bike, 2002 Speed Triple, is all about character and being different than the Japanese bikes. I've done some work to it and plan to do more. The Triumph brakes were soft, the gas tank connectors suck, it needs some work on the charging system. But, it's fun as all heck to ride.

I know nothing about triumphs except I want a triple someday based on irrational thoughts. How bad could the Sprint be? If it is tiger tall though (35" stated above iirc ...) that's an issue for me.

I can say that a VFR of late 90s vintage has enough character, handling, brakes, and porn engine noise to embarrass my much newer Teutonic litre bike badly.

It is also one of the most standard seating sport bikes you will come across. You can day trip into the hundreds of miles without needing oxycontin. I miss mine badly.

rotard wrote: Think Italian Honda.

I'm having a hard time wrapping my mind around that statement.