Triumph T120 v CB1100a

[AzBob_imp]

An interesting thread over on the Triumph Forum. Thought I would share.

T120 vs. CB1100a

Cheers :beerchug:

I noticed your posts there, of course, and you exemplified perfectly why the CB1100 is no longer for sale here in the USA.

The perception is that for some reason an air-cooled bike does not do as well in traffic or heat.

I have had a lot of air-cooled bikes and cannot support that notion which is why I call it a perception. I've owned and ridden plenty of air-cooled singles, all dual-sports such as the XL600 Honda and a few XT Yamahas. I was much younger and rode them hard. None ever overheated or failed. I had a 2006 Dyna Glide, air-cooled, and rode in extreme heat and traffic all the time. It never gave me the slightest trouble.

Yesterday I rode my CB1100, hard, 250 miles, in temperatures exceeding 102 degrees F. I bounced it off the rev limiter once and held sustained speeds on the freeway of 80 mph plus, keeping it tached in the twisties between 6-8K much of the time. The bike never hicupped, stumbled, or twitched. It also did not use a drop of oil. The valves were all perfect at 8000 miles as well.

So that is an erroneous perception, but people buy based on perception.

I understand these are the usual way those words are used, but in fact the experience of riding - unless the bike is a museum piece eliciting nostalgia - is what evokes a soulful and emotional response. If the experience is not a good one, the way the bike looks is not going to make up for it.

Soul and emotion can't really be provided by the machine, they are human qualities. What I look for, myself, is a machine that I can interact with effectively and intuitively. I am the one with a soul, I experience emotion. I can describe my experience in those terms but the motorcycle cannot provide them and doesn't have them.

To my eye, the Thruxton 1200 looks cooler than the CB1100. Way, way, cooler. But I'm pretty sure I will be happier riding the CB1100. And like a horse that may be long in tooth, and a bit swaybacked, but is reliable and easy to manage, the CB1100, despite its lack of bling and cache, will eventually win the rider over if given a chance.

That chance is not often given when the solutions aren't readily at hand and the next bike is gleaming on the showroom floor.

I've ridden mine in 115+*F heat and heavy, heavy traffic without the bike having any problem.

The engine does throw off a tremendous amount of heat however, and the tank, if its low on fuel, actually burns it gets so hot (my inner thighs are all red when I get home). Not the most comfortable bike in the heat from my experience.

 

[LongRanger_imp]

I don't think the heat complaint is unique to the CB1100, or to air-cooled bikes in general. Over on the F800ST/GT forum, a number of folks complain about the heat coming from those bikes in hot weather, and they're water-cooled. Because of the fairing design, engine heat tends to be blown onto the rider's legs. I've experienced no such issues, but it is a heated topic (pun intended).

 

[Capo]

I think the heat issue with air-cooled bikes is less about how much heat they throw off than the prospect of damaging the engine via overheating in hot weather/ stopped traffic. I've not had issues with either situation, and have some water cooled bikes that fry my arse and legs far worse than the CB.

 

[rboe]

I don't like riding in the heat, but the CB is better to ride than the Griso - in the heat. The left jug on the Griso heats up my leg pretty good.

If you do "abuse" and aircooled bike in the heat I'd be more worried about the oil holding up and just change oil more frequently.

I was very impressed with the Thruxton R and if I didn't have the Griso already I'd consider it. I'm considering it anyway. Then Harley came out with the Roadster and THAT bike is intriguing. But I don't really need another town bike, I'd like to have an open road machine and neither one fits that bill as well as the Griso (and the aerodynamics on the Griso still need some attention). I still entertain this notion that I'll do some road trips. sigh....

Unlike the 1960's, the choice between a Triumph or a Honda is not made so much on performance as nostalgia, which is going to vary from buyer to buyer. Luckily for Triumph buyers the quality of their bikes is so much better now, they can live the good ol' days without the pain of the good ol' days.

If I had the room and money I'd add an R and that Roadster to the fleet.

 

[Cormanus]

I don't think the heat complaint is unique to the CB1100, or to air-cooled bikes in general. Over on the F800ST/GT forum, a number of folks complain about the heat coming from those bikes in hot weather, and they're water-cooled. Because of the fairing design, engine heat tends to be blown onto the rider's legs. I've experienced no such issues, but it is a heated topic (pun intended).

Without wishing to turn up the temperature, I seem to remember reading of many complaints about the heat thrown off the Honda ST1300. And that is water cooled.

 

[LongRanger_imp]

Yep, and the FJR too.

As long as I'm ATGATT, I don't find engine heat to be an issue, but I don't purposely ride in 115 degree heat either!

 

[Cormanus]

No. The engine temperature is the least of your worries when it's that hot. There's simply no escaping it.

 

[Ulvetanna_imp]

I think the heat issue with air-cooled bikes is less about how much heat they throw off than the prospect of damaging the engine via overheating in hot weather/ stopped traffic. I've not had issues with either situation, and have some water cooled bikes that fry my arse and legs far worse than the CB.

Does anyone really think like that? Aircooled bikes have been around for 100 years. Millions of Harleys, Triumphs, Nortons, Hondas, Kawis, Yamahas, Suzukis and countless others have been ridden hundreds of millions of miles. I have not personally known anyone to balk at purchasing an air-cooled bike if that is the bike that suits their riding. I recall the Yamaha Seca series, Kawasaki GPz, Suzuki Katana, and yep, the Honda CB's. Twins, fours, so many different models.

Suzuki made an air/oil-cooled GSX-R for years and years, used the engine also in the Katana. I had a Katana 750, fantastic bike, ran beautifully.

Another funny point about the T120 vs the CB1100 with respect to authenticity of retro features are the fake fins on the Triumph. It's liquid-cooled, the fins are purely cosmetic. So that's kind of styling-only thang.

The opposite weighs pretty well in the Honda's favor; I have found nothing on the Honda that is not genuinely there for a reason and serves to support the bike's mission. It was built around an air-cooled mill, the fenders are chromed steel, the frame tubular steel, everything is what it seems to be.

That does not take away anything from the function or pleasure of the Triumph, of course, but does indicate Triumph knew its target buyer would not appreciate smooth cylinder jackets. Not exactly disingenuous but might be called "cosmetic" by some.

I noticed that images of the bike from the front are not easy to find, as the radiator does just slightly detract from the classic look.

Then again we've had at least one guy wanting to remove the CB1100's oil cooler, and yet another want to install a fan on it.

No. The engine temperature is the least of your worries when it's that hot. There's simply no escaping it.

Every degree above body temperature starts to create health issues.

I don't like riding in the heat, but the CB is better to ride than the Griso - in the heat. The left jug on the Griso heats up my leg pretty good.

If you do "abuse" and aircooled bike in the heat I'd be more worried about the oil holding up and just change oil more frequently.

I was very impressed with the Thruxton R and if I didn't have the Griso already I'd consider it. I'm considering it anyway. Then Harley came out with the Roadster and THAT bike is intriguing. But I don't really need another town bike, I'd like to have an open road machine and neither one fits that bill as well as the Griso (and the aerodynamics on the Griso still need some attention). I still entertain this notion that I'll do some road trips. sigh....

Unlike the 1960's, the choice between a Triumph or a Honda is not made so much on performance as nostalgia, which is going to vary from buyer to buyer. Luckily for Triumph buyers the quality of their bikes is so much better now, they can live the good ol' days without the pain of the good ol' days.

If I had the room and money I'd add an R and that Roadster to the fleet.

Yep, I like that Roadster quite a bit. Looks like fun, I had a Sportster Sport with the twin disks, it was pretty neat. Agree nostalgia is the key sales point. Explains the cosmetic cooling fins. Looks like a really neat bike though, I'll have to check one out.

 

[riceburner_imp]

Discontinued in USA means heavily discounted Brand New out the door price.Ask me how I know! A water cooled engine with cooling fins the fins will still work and remove heat along with the radiator.May be unnecessary but doesn't hurt either,my Vulcan had both.If i had the bucks i'd walk into the dealer and say give me one of each,all the bikes are eye and mind candy.

 

[Capo]

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

 

[rboe]

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.

 

[Ulvetanna_imp]

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.

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.

 

[Guth_imp]

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

 

[Ulvetanna_imp]

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.

 

[Guth_imp]

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

 

[LongRanger_imp]

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.

 

[dsinned_imp]

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.