Wednesday 20th August 2003

2.3 litre Triumph Launched

Triumph USA unveils the Rocket

---

[victormeldrew]

Not sure I'd like to ride that through a greasy UK city centre, the torque would be a distinct liability!

[sagalout]

Silly, very silly, must be the weather. Wouldn't like to have to pick it up after the aformentioned greasy road either.

[robbo1]

2.3 litres - are they mad?
Might be worth slapping a turbo on as well...

[docevi1]

holy moley Triumph. Jees, 2.3 Litres? Flippin' Heck.

Stefan

[Steve_T]

Hertsbikers next bike?

[Mon Ami Mate]

By God that's fugly.

[hertsbiker]

Steve_T said:

Hertsbikers next bike?

nahhh, SV1000 or GSXR750 for me peeps!

2.3 = about 100bhp, 200ft/lb torque.
0-60 3.5 sec, but top speed of "only" about 145.

It won't be a rocket.

[A J]

I feel sick........ Fugly is right, not my cuppa tea.

Got to hand it to triumph though trying to corner different angles of the market. Only in america springs to mind! I guess the name has more weight in that sort of market over say a cromed kwacker harley type rep?

[FourWheelDrift]

It is designed for the rather larger proportioned American rider.

But then I can't see them giving up their Harley's for it.

[pesty]

hertsbiker said:

Steve_T said: Hertsbikers next bike? nahhh, SV1000 or GSXR750 for me peeps! 2.3 = about 100bhp, 200ft/lb torque. 0-60 3.5 sec, but top speed of "only" about 145. It won't be a rocket.

It wont be a Rocket? all that torque?

MCN recon it will pull more G force accelerating than a gixxer 1000

not my kind of bike but if it was one of those or a haley I'll take the triumph

[tuffer]

America fine ..... UK would be mental! Oh-Oh here comes a corner (slow down, stop, get off, push around bend, get back on, ride away).

[goodlife]

And they are going to release a 33bhp for the newly-passed...

[Apache]

too much torque? bit like too much sex bring it on, let the silliness begin, kin ugly fecker though

[ninjaboy]

240 rear tyre,i bet they cost a bit then

[Dodge]

Doesn't sound like it'll need revs as such, with 2.3 litres pushing it along... what's it gonna be - idle at 4 rpm, max torque at 8 rpm, power at 12, redline at 14 rpm?

[hwassall]

pesty said:

hertsbiker said: Steve_T said: Hertsbikers next bike? nahhh, SV1000 or GSXR750 for me peeps! 2.3 = about 100bhp, 200ft/lb torque. 0-60 3.5 sec, but top speed of "only" about 145. It won't be a rocket. It wont be a Rocket? all that torque? MCN recon it will pull more G force accelerating than a gixxer 1000 not my kind of bike but if it was one of those or a haley I'll take the triumph

Yep, according to MCN, GSXR1000 1.0g, Rocket III 1.2g. From a bike weighing 340kg, that's a Caterham isn't it?

[eliminator]

I want one
I want one
I want one
I want one
I want one
I want one

[v8thunder]

Come on Triumph, put two of them in a lightweight sportscar. And call it the TR9...

[dorin]

Who said that a monster should be beautiful?
Who said that this "ugly thing" will make most of the serious bikes look like mopeds?
The more you look at it the more you like it. It just happened to me. Yesterday, I decided that I definitely have to own one. Black...to be even uglier!

[dorin]

Who said that a monster should be beautiful?
Who said that this "ugly thing" will make most of the serious bikes look like mopeds?
The more you look at it the more you like it. It just happened to me. Yesterday, I decided that I definitely have to own one. Black...to be even uglier!!