I test rode a T120 today. My first impression was the engine sounded like a 2-cycle and the bike shook unpleasantly -- but then I ride a six cylinder Honda 1800c. Those who are upset because Triumph changed the piston angle needn't be concerned that this engine is too smooth!
I was impressed with the bike overall, although the brakes are weak. The acceleration is, perhaps, better than the CB1100 but much more importantly, the bike begins to really come alive as you move up the rpm range. Since it was an escorted ride, I never had a chance to red-line it but I think the result would have been satisfying. The gear indicator was a welcome addition -- especially on a bike that I'm not used to.
I also sat on a Thruxton. This is a bike I've always ruled out because of the low handlebars, but for me the riding position was actually pretty upright. I'm going to have to do some research on it.
I can't edit my post above so I'll just add this. One thing I forgot to mention is that the T120 is a very comfortable bike for someone my size -- 6'1", 190 pounds, 31" inseam (34" pants). I'm not cramped up on it at all like I was on the CB1100 a bit. But after sleeping on it, my impression is that I would never be satisfied with an engine that rough and primitive sounding (I know they did this on purpose, but it isn't something I like.) I guess I favor inline fours. Who knows, another CB1100 may be in my future?
My brothers New T-120 has that designed in " character throb" as I call it. I don't like it at all. My brother finds it endearing. He doesn't care for my smooth I-4. He finds it boring. I'm glad we have options.
(07-25-2017, 02:48 AM)postoak_imp Wrote: [ -> ]I test rode a T120 today. My first impression was the engine sounded like a 2-cycle and the bike shook unpleasantly -- but then I ride a six cylinder Honda 1800c. Those who are upset because Triumph changed the piston angle needn't be concerned that this engine is too smooth!
I was impressed with the bike overall, although the brakes are weak. The acceleration is, perhaps, better than the CB1100 but much more importantly, the bike begins to really come alive as you move up the rpm range. Since it was an escorted ride, I never had a chance to red-line it but I think the result would have been satisfying. The gear indicator was a welcome addition -- especially on a bike that I'm not used to.
I also sat on a Thruxton. This is a bike I've always ruled out because of the low handlebars, but for me the riding position was actually pretty upright. I'm going to have to do some research on it.
It makes me wonder, the CB has more horsepower.
I often read 4 or slightly more seconds for the acceleration from 0 - 100km/h. Mostly the time for the EX. I once read a value of 3,9sec for the 5speed model, which I drive.
However, don't think the T120 accelerates that fast.
But I never took the time, it doesn't matter much to me as being a smooth accelerator.
Wisedrum
The T120 has less HP but more torque, maybe that makes the difference.
Found some values and post them for comparison and to get things right.
Triumph T 120 2017 model
pulling power 50-120km/h (in 6th gear) : 7,6s
acceleration: 0- 100km/h : 4,7s
from 'Motorradfahrer' July 2017
Honda CB 1100 2013 model
pulling power 50- 120km/h (in 5th gear) : 8,5s
acceleration 0- 100km/ : 4,0s
from 'TOURENFAHRER' November 2013
Triumphs 6th gear revs 6.550 U/min at 245km/h
Hondas 5th gear revs 7.500 U/min at 225km/h
Triumphs max. torque: 101,5 Nm at 3.500 U/min and 73,8HP at 5.600 U/min tested
Hondas max. torque: 93,2 at 4.500 U/min and 90 HP at 7.500 U/min tested
All this explains a lot.
But the first CBs accelerate better than the T120.
At least on paper.
Wisedrum