Posts: 3,093
Threads: 64
Likes Received: 6 in 2 posts
Likes Given: 7
Joined: May 2013
It's kinda funny about that oil cooler on the CB; back before I took my break from motorcycles guys were putting oil coolers on their high performance inline fours. I remember one brand of cooler that got a poor review in one of the magazines and the owner was bent out of shape. So in my mind, the oil cooler fits the retro look. 
I do wonder if some clever engineer will come up with a better cooler idea to "hide" them.
Posts: 1,527
Threads: 78
Likes Received: 0 in 0 posts
Likes Given: 0
Joined: Mar 2016
(06-29-2016, 09:06 PM)Capo_imp Wrote: The fins on the new WC Bonnie line are not cosmetic, they actually assist in cooling the engine, which allows the radiator to be small...one by two inches larger than the oil cooler on the CB, which is far more of an eyesore than the Bonnie/ Thrux 's well- hidden radiator. Cycle World: 'You have to look no further than the cooling system to see the lengths to which Triumph went to make the machines look right. While the engine is conventionally liquid-cooled, with full water jackets around the cylinders and valve seats, it is finned as heavily as an air-cooled engine, and the fins actually provide significant cooling, allowing a smaller radiator. Water is routed internally in the engine to two central ports, right on the bike centerline, that plug directly into a skinny radiator in front of the engine that masquerades superbly as an oil cooler. The radiator cap is remote and hidden.'
Look only to BMW and Harley for similar moves to partial liquid cooling for any number of reasons. The CB is very well- engineered, mild- mannered machine with a shocking amount of work done to deliver a modern air and oil cooled motor, already Euro 4 compliant. I do hope they continue to produce and evolve it, rather than slap some checkerboard stickers on it for Canada only.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Partial liquid cooling, yes; but all engines are only partially liquid-cooled, oil does some of the job, and air the rest.
I recall this conversation from decades ago when Honda first introduced its Shadow line, and claimed the fins actually did some of the cooling. This somehow assuaged the fear that they were "fake" and only there for style. Agreed, there must be SOME effect, but miniscule. They could have been dispensed with altogether. The Hawk GT and Pacific Coast (I had one of each) used exactly the same engine with nary a fin.
The question I would pose is this: would the bike sell as well without the fins, regardless of whether they have any function? The answer would have to be no. The bike must look correct, nostalgic, if you will. The radiator is an eyesore to some "purists".
I think the really neat thing about the CB1100, and the earlier Triumphs such as my 2000 Bonneville 800, is that they are in fact a true air/oil cooled design. We can't get as much power from them, but I like the idea they don't have a cooling system and they are somewhat simpler because of it.
The CB1100 is designed in complete accord with the technologies and limitations of the era it heralds, something I also deeply appreciate, not philosophically, but every time I twist the throttle to the stop. Its limitations help me overcome my own.
(06-30-2016, 02:21 AM)Rboe_imp Wrote: It's kinda funny about that oil cooler on the CB; back before I took my break from motorcycles guys were putting oil coolers on their high performance inline fours. I remember one brand of cooler that got a poor review in one of the magazines and the owner was bent out of shape. So in my mind, the oil cooler fits the retro look.
I do wonder if some clever engineer will come up with a better cooler idea to "hide" them. LOL, heck yeah.
Posts: 2,542
Threads: 125
Likes Received: 0 in 0 posts
Likes Given: 0
Joined: Mar 2013
I finally saw a Thruxton and a Thruxton R in person yesterday. Both are nice bikes. Smaller than I was imagining even after reading others comment on the same. I can't say that I personally found the radiator on the Triumphs to be any more attractive than the oil cooler on the CB1100., but they did a decent job of tucking it away. I'm surprised to read that the Triumph's radiator is actually smaller than the oil cooler on the CB1100 - it actually looked larger to my eyes, perhaps due to the vertical configuration. From my perspective, I classify both as visual disappointments on otherwise good looking bikes.
Understanding that the Thruxton's fins actually aid in cooling goes a long way with me. They definitely look appropriate. (But then they go and stick with the rather cheesy fake carb housings.)
The dealership with the Thruxtons also had an older Triumph on display which once again reinforced my appreciation for the design work behind those old bikes. Almost everything appearing on the bike was nice to look at. They didn't attempt to hide things, instead they worked to make what was there look as good as possible. The cumulative effect has a notable impact.
If someone could actually design a decent looking radiator they wouldn't need to try so hard to hide it. While no attempt was made to hide the oil cooler on the CB, it too could use some fresh thought. Fuel injection systems could easily be made better looking without trying to make them look like something that they aren't. Simply covering them up like Triumph did with the Street Twin is another option and it lends a clean look to things.
I realize that some of this is nitpicking which in a sense is a testament to how nice looking these machines are, overall. I also realize that there are performance benefits that result from these visual trade offs (aside from the fake carbs).
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
One more thing to add...
In the past I felt that the pictures of the Thruxton R reminded me quite a bit of Ducati's GT1000. In person I felt that the Triumph was a far better looking motorcycle. Even though I do see some similarities, I didn't once think about the Ducati when looking at the Triumph in person. That comes as quite a surprise to me.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Posts: 1,527
Threads: 78
Likes Received: 0 in 0 posts
Likes Given: 0
Joined: Mar 2016
(06-30-2016, 12:24 PM)Guth_imp Wrote: I finally saw a Thruxton and a Thruxton R in person yesterday. Both are nice bikes. Smaller than I was imagining even after reading others comment on the same. I can't say that I personally found the radiator on the Triumphs to be any more attractive than the oil cooler on the CB1100., but they did a decent job of tucking it away. I'm surprised to read that the Triumph's radiator is actually smaller than the oil cooler on the CB1100 - it actually looked larger to my eyes, perhaps due to the vertical configuration. From my perspective, I classify both as visual disappointments on otherwise good looking bikes.
Understanding that the Thruxton's fins actually aid in cooling goes a long way with me. They definitely look appropriate. (But then they go and stick with the rather cheesy fake carb housings.)
The dealership with the Thruxtons also had an older Triumph on display which once again reinforced my appreciation for the design work behind those old bikes. Almost everything appearing on the bike was nice to look at. They didn't attempt to hide things, instead they worked to make what was there look as good as possible. The cumulative effect has a notable impact.
If someone could actually design a decent looking radiator they wouldn't need to try so hard to hide it. While no attempt was made to hide the oil cooler on the CB, it too could use some fresh thought. Fuel injection systems could easily be made better looking without trying to make them look like something that they aren't. Simply covering them up like Triumph did with the Street Twin is another option and it lends a clean look to things.
I realize that some of this is nitpicking which in a sense is a testament to how nice looking these machines are, overall. I also realize that there are performance benefits that result from these visual trade offs (aside from the fake carbs).
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
One more thing to add...
In the past I felt that the pictures of the Thruxton R reminded me quite a bit of Ducati's GT1000. In person I felt that the Triumph was a far better looking motorcycle. Even though I do see some similarities, I didn't once think about the Ducati when looking at the Triumph in person. That comes as quite a surprise to me.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk The difference here is that the oil cooler is absolutely period-correct, there isn't anything about it that suggests a more modern technology needed to be applied to get things to work.
The mere existence of the radiator is what could be off-putting to purists and necessitated the fins. From the images it certainly appears to be larger than the oil cooler on the CB1100, but that's an irrelevant point anyway. The bike needs it to function.
Do the throttle bodies have some kind of cover that makes them appear to be an old-school carb? I saw an image of the bike and it looks like they're trying to get the look of vintage Dellorto's.
Another plus to liquid cooling is that the water jackets deaden sound quite effectively, whilst the fins amplify it. Thus the bike can pass sound tests better and make more power.
I don't think there's a thing wrong with the liquid cooling, but obviously the Triumph marketing team didn't want to take a chance on not having the bike look mostly correct.
Posts: 2,542
Threads: 125
Likes Received: 0 in 0 posts
Likes Given: 0
Joined: Mar 2013
I was coming at things primarily from the standpoint of aesthetics. Whether period correct or not, cooling systems tend to be eyesores. Advances to solve this would require some very creative engineering and thinking that would definitely be out of the box.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Posts: 3,454
Threads: 129
Likes Received: 0 in 0 posts
Likes Given: 0
Joined: Jul 2015
(06-30-2016, 01:10 PM)Ulvetanna_imp Wrote: (06-30-2016, 12:24 PM)Guth_imp Wrote: I finally saw a Thruxton and a Thruxton R in person yesterday. Both are nice bikes. Smaller than I was imagining even after reading others comment on the same. I can't say that I personally found the radiator on the Triumphs to be any more attractive than the oil cooler on the CB1100., but they did a decent job of tucking it away. I'm surprised to read that the Triumph's radiator is actually smaller than the oil cooler on the CB1100 - it actually looked larger to my eyes, perhaps due to the vertical configuration. From my perspective, I classify both as visual disappointments on otherwise good looking bikes.
Understanding that the Thruxton's fins actually aid in cooling goes a long way with me. They definitely look appropriate. (But then they go and stick with the rather cheesy fake carb housings.)
The dealership with the Thruxtons also had an older Triumph on display which once again reinforced my appreciation for the design work behind those old bikes. Almost everything appearing on the bike was nice to look at. They didn't attempt to hide things, instead they worked to make what was there look as good as possible. The cumulative effect has a notable impact.
If someone could actually design a decent looking radiator they wouldn't need to try so hard to hide it. While no attempt was made to hide the oil cooler on the CB, it too could use some fresh thought. Fuel injection systems could easily be made better looking without trying to make them look like something that they aren't. Simply covering them up like Triumph did with the Street Twin is another option and it lends a clean look to things.
I realize that some of this is nitpicking which in a sense is a testament to how nice looking these machines are, overall. I also realize that there are performance benefits that result from these visual trade offs (aside from the fake carbs).
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
One more thing to add...
In the past I felt that the pictures of the Thruxton R reminded me quite a bit of Ducati's GT1000. In person I felt that the Triumph was a far better looking motorcycle. Even though I do see some similarities, I didn't once think about the Ducati when looking at the Triumph in person. That comes as quite a surprise to me.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk The difference here is that the oil cooler is absolutely period-correct, there isn't anything about it that suggests a more modern technology needed to be applied to get things to work.
The mere existence of the radiator is what could be off-putting to purists and necessitated the fins. From the images it certainly appears to be larger than the oil cooler on the CB1100, but that's an irrelevant point anyway. The bike needs it to function.
Do the throttle bodies have some kind of cover that makes them appear to be an old-school carb? I saw an image of the bike and it looks like they're trying to get the look of vintage Dellorto's.
Another plus to liquid cooling is that the water jackets deaden sound quite effectively, whilst the fins amplify it. Thus the bike can pass sound tests better and make more power.
I don't think there's a thing wrong with the liquid cooling, but obviously the Triumph marketing team didn't want to take a chance on not having the bike look mostly correct.
Amals, I believe, not Dell Orto's. Regardless, I like the treatment.
I find the Thrux R to be a stunning motorcycle, and even had a deposit on one a few months ago. I was overwhelmed when I finally saw the bike in the flesh, but at 6'6", it would have had fleeting utility and would have required that I sell the CB. I tried to rationalize the purchase but couldn't, especially considering I like what I have in the garage already. Still, I love the bike.
Posts: 257
Threads: 22
Likes Received: 0 in 0 posts
Likes Given: 0
Joined: Apr 2016
I have a 2015 T100 and personally, I like "the look" of the fake carbs, the old school pea shooter mufflers and skinny tires (similar to CB1100), but the fully exposed air cooled engine looks like its 50 years young!
What Triumph has done so successfully on their Bonnevilles is come up with lots and lots of OTC accessories, and I'm certain they make more money on those than the bikes themselves. Honda's latest CB is quite lacking in this regard.
|
