R3Touring Pics

From the looks they won't fit at all. Totally different frame on the bike.

Looking at the pictures, I don't know if it's 'totally' different. The headstock area looks the same and the perimeter frame around the rear of the engine looks the same but I suspect the tail section is much different. Besides, the bags would never clear the R3's exhaust. The tourer's exhaust is lower to allow for deeper bags. This summer I'm gonna have to take one for a 'test ride' just for kicks and grins. I have to apply judicious use of the throttle this summer with the 4 buck gas that's coming.

Read for yourself Flipper....


http://www.motorcycle-usa.com/Article_Page.aspx?ArticleID=5443&Page=1

High on the list of changes is a new chassis. The Rocket III previously used a large, tubular steel twin-spine frame, a 43mm inverted fork up front and twin adjustable spring rear shocks out back. Initial reports claim that the frame on the Touring package is new, and the upside-down fork has been ditched for a right-side up version. The suspension is said to have been retuned to make it more touring-friendly.

Click to expand...

Rake is the same at 32 degrees for both models, trail for the Touring is 185mm and the standard 152mm.

B:

If you look at the pictures, the side cast steel side engine mounts are the same as my bike and yours as is the plastic garnish at the headstock buttress. Of course we can't see under the tank as to 'what's what'. The rear section is markedly different and that's obvious. Personally, I've never been a fan of USD forks anyway but that has been the 'vogue' in bikes lately. USD forks dictate some kind of gravel shield to keep the hard chrome (or Titanium Nitride on high end bikes) from getting road dings and leaking seals. I prefer the black rubber gaiters like the bike you just sold.

The bike has a bit more trail which allows easier steering and a better ability to self center at speed. That also makes it a much better bike to mount a sidecar to. Sport bikes with reduced trail and the Rocket 3 steer better in twists but are twitchier on the slab. Obviously the Tourer is meant for the freeway. That increased trail would equate to it being a handful on a road like the Dragon. That much trail makes it an 'easy chair' bike for old 'easy chair farts'. Even at 57, I don't ascribe to that school, yet.

I''m with Gunshots, Triumph should have just called it the Rocket Hard Bagger not a "Tourer". Having ridden the Gold Wing and the Rocket out on the superslabs, the "Tourer" should have had at least a factory cruise control at a minimum. In the race to swing additional "Harley" riders over to Triumph, as has been said, the Rocket lost it's "soul".
The Gold Wing "only" came with 118 HP and a 125 lbs. of torque, the Rocket easily exceeded these even on the "detuned" Classic. The Gold Wing was more than enough bike to haul two pretty big people across the US in style with plenty of speed and torque. I am still mystified on why the HP was decreased (along with the gas tank) and the torque increased to that level. It appears to allow for a more "accommodating" tire but as Flip has pointed out the increased torque will probably negate the so called advantage of the rear wheel.
As for the stereo and fairing on a long cross country haul they came in handy. Flip, I know that you are not a fan of music while traveling on a motorcycle but for some stretches of the highway it is nice to have something to listen to (the Gold Wing also had a dedicated Weather band on the stereo as well), besides if you wanted the quiet to enjoy the scenery you could always turn the stereo off.
Also having an adjustable suspension was very beneficial especially with a passenger (not that I was able to use that very often which is why, for now, I got rid of the GW).
Dennis

Bagger

Yes it is a bagger and the bags will not transfer over from a classic, the mounting points are below the fender bolts. When my mechanic gets one in the 1st thing he wants to do is put a new tune in and dyno the thing, maybe he can get some of the hp back but I don't think the full load. At the school he was forbidden to tamper with or alter any aspect relating to performance due to liability issues period. Now ya'll enterprising captains have managed to bypass just about all of those nagging performance restrictions on regular Rockets and the somewhat detuned Classics. We know what that motor is capable of and I know there are future captains of that will tinker to get every foot noonan they can out of her. Cosmetically it will do it for a lot but like most the mass hasn't changed and that intimidates the hell out of most. Like it or not it is still an animal so HD still makes a nice mid sized over priced bike, period!

Just wait for the forthcoming "baby" Rocket. Newer and thus inevitably higher-tech , injected, 1700cc, forward-tilted, "vertical" twin with Euro-3 "built-in" emission compliance and mecanical/ electronic vibration optimization (vs elimination) , undoubtedly with more off-the-shelf torque and power than any bike in Harley's 2008 line-up (which ain't no major feat)

Also consider highly competitive manpower/assembly costs in Thailand, a terribly depressed British £ (even vis-a-vis the US$) in corporate accounting terms , the number of US Speedmaster's and Bonnevile America's owners (mostly former owners of Japanese wheels, stats show) eager to trade UP but net yet quite ready for "OUR" Rocket...

... and IMO Triumph has got a winner.

Jamie

Exactly! Honestly, if this bike had been out when I bought my RIII I most likely would have ended up with it instead . I'm sure glad it wasn't available!

Went to D&D Cycles today to have the Rocket checked out. While I was there I noticed that they had the new tourer on the floor (just brought out that morning). In addition to what has already been mentioned it appears that the hard bags are "detachable" which in all the publicity I somehow missed out on. I also was under the impression that it was just the two tone black / white and black / blue combination (at $17,299 list), but there (according to the Triumph website) appears to also be a solid black version (cheaper as well at $16,999) and also a Jet Black / Sunset Red (hey the same colors as the one I currently own...well mine was "Phantom" Black not "Jet" Black). One other thing was the gas tank was only 4.9 gallons not 5.7 as I previously thought.

The big dial gage on the tank replaced three of the four gages on my handlebars, you guessed it...no tachometer. There is a button on the right handle bar that has an "i" on it that controls the digital readout on the instrument panel on the tank (miles to empty, odometer, trip odometers(?...one or two?) and time). On the left handle bar they have incorporated the fog light switch on the control pod. Not sure where the heated grips (if available) switch would go unless it is a single toggle switch replacing the current double toggle switch with the fog light included on it.

Also the windshield, in addition to being detachable, comes also equipped with lower wind deflectors.

Just thought I'd pass on my observations. I would almost think about getting this new tourer, at least the rear tire might be a little cheaper(... I mean "less expensive" ... using my Sears appliance selling technique key words here) than the current rear tire offering.

It just bugs me that it has a single headlight...wonder if there is a way to "graft" the dual headlights on it and ditch the single one???
Dennis

Dennis:

You don't need no tacho with a tug boat engine anyway. One of the guys at my old job ordered a new black one from Triumph of Detroit. They told him the new Tourer was the fastest stock cruiser out of the hole. I told him that if we just happened to have a little go, the only 'hole' he was gonna see was the three 'holes' in my mufflers.

I'm thinking you should change your screen name to 'Kenmore'