You varmints been following this? The new Indian Challenger!

[cowpuc]

Anyone else been following all the hub bub about the new Challenger? Looks like Polaris decided to take a stab at getting away from their 111 air cooled/push rod motor in their latest endeavor to HD and the bagger world. They upped the game (IMHO) by going water cooled and OHC giving them a one up in HP compared to the HD Road Glide..

HD's response so far has been the addition of a 131 inch kit for the 117inch to bring the dyno numbers up above the Challenger.. I can't help but wonder that if (BIG IF) the Challenger actually does induce some decent sales due to a drift away from the air cooled/push rod,, if HD may just redo their more comparable V-Rod (water cooled, OHC) engine (defunct cause of low sales) and up its Cubic Inches and stuff it into a bagger.. It would also be really neat if Mom Yam also responded with a bagger with the V-Max V-4 stuffed in it and got competitive in response too!! One thing for sure,,, got some exciting times happening!!

Would LOVE to see a full blown comparo between the Challenger, RG, Eluder, Beemer, Wing and Vaquro.. Put em out there and let em have at it !! Dont you just LOVE Capitalism:guitarist 2:!!

 

 

 

[Red Ryder]

Bigger, Bigger, Bigger, that's the ticket today Scott.

Back in the day thought I was king of the hill with a 750. Wow, has things changed, Later-

[WildBill1]

Anyone else been following all the hub bub about the new Challenger? Looks like Polaris decided to take a stab at getting away from their 111 air cooled/push rod motor in their latest endeavor to HD and the bagger world. They upped the game (IMHO) by going water cooled and OHC giving them a one up in HP compared to the HD Road Glide..

HD's response so far has been the addition of a 131 inch kit for the 117inch to bring the dyno numbers up above the Challenger.. I can't help but wonder that if (BIG IF) the Challenger actually does induce some decent sales due to a drift away from the air cooled/push rod,, if HD may just redo their more comparable V-Rod (water cooled, OHC) engine (defunct cause of low sales) and up its Cubic Inches and stuff it into a bagger.. It would also be really neat if Mom Yam also responded with a bagger with the V-Max V-4 stuffed in it and got competitive in response too!! One thing for sure,,, got some exciting times happening!!

Would LOVE to see a full blown comparo between the Challenger, RG, Eluder, Beemer, Wing and Vaquro.. Put em out there and let em have at it !! Dont you just LOVE Capitalism:guitarist 2:!!

 

 

 

 

Puc, now lets not leave out Triumphs new entry a Sport Cruiser with like 2500cc three cylinder stump pulling power engine. I enjoy my upper body work out on my Triumph Rocket III. Acceleration improves my grip even though it feels like my arms are about too pop out of their sockets. Well what can I expect at 72 1/2.

[Patch]

Puc, now lets not leave out Triumphs new entry a Sport Cruiser with like 2500cc three cylinder stump pulling power engine. I enjoy my upper body work out on my Triumph Rocket III. Acceleration improves my grip even though it feels like my arms are about too pop out of their sockets. Well what can I expect at 72 1/2.

 

 

I would enjoy a post on why you chose Triumph for sport cruising, and what type of distances make for a full days ride..

 

Puc know we share the thrill of rpm and a fare common ground on cooling when it comes to heat distribution;;; we'd likely then agree that Indian has a sound reason for freeing the moths from our wallets..

 

I have to say I haven't ridden HD since the 70's and quite frankly it bores the chit out of me to listen to beer smelling bars dripping wet with stage this and stage that like its some kind of mystical rainbow they personally discovered;; and usually from guys that can't even plug a tire to get home on... Worser than a utility bill HD seems to be, to me.

 

Now here's our fork in the road: In touring long distance (talking to a guy "you" that has some 1M, miles) I want torque much more than HP. In my riding there is not 1/4 mile finish, no smoken tires, no show and no screaming fans and 15 or 11 secs won't make a lick of difference at the end of my day when touring!

Let me pull away off the torque in the mid T range and, I'll smile all day every day out.

 

Where we meet again is over the pounding the air cooled engines have on its oil. Riders usually do not consider how hard that oil has to work to cool the bottom half from the dark side of the crown down and up again to the heads...

So for a touring I think liquid cooled is the way for me.

 

Too many assumptions I've read in the Star Venture forum about this topic starting with "you know who" on oil requirements for an air cooled unit and, the resistance to pause and view the issues in a dynamic form instead of the a 2 dimensional text/marketing of smoke and mirrors leading to miss guided conclusions. (there now I've said it)

 

I do think tho the Star Venture is a nicer looking bike tho;)

[BlueSky]

Puc, I still like Tweeksis better!!

[cowpuc]

Puc, now lets not leave out Triumphs new entry a Sport Cruiser with like 2500cc three cylinder stump pulling power engine. I enjoy my upper body work out on my Triumph Rocket III. Acceleration improves my grip even though it feels like my arms are about too pop out of their sockets. Well what can I expect at 72 1/2.

 

Right there with ya Wildman!! Only I am thinking they are comparing production "baggers".. Is Triumph offering their triple in a bagger line now?

[cowpuc]

I would enjoy a post on why you chose Triumph for sport cruising, and what type of distances make for a full days ride..

 

Puc know we share the thrill of rpm and a fare common ground on cooling when it comes to heat distribution;;; we'd likely then agree that Indian has a sound reason for freeing the moths from our wallets..

 

I have to say I haven't ridden HD since the 70's and quite frankly it bores the chit out of me to listen to beer smelling bars dripping wet with stage this and stage that like its some kind of mystical rainbow they personally discovered;; and usually from guys that can't even plug a tire to get home on... Worser than a utility bill HD seems to be, to me.

 

Now here's our fork in the road: In touring long distance (talking to a guy "you" that has some 1M, miles) I want torque much more than HP. In my riding there is not 1/4 mile finish, no smoken tires, no show and no screaming fans and 15 or 11 secs won't make a lick of difference at the end of my day when touring!

Let me pull away off the torque in the mid T range and, I'll smile all day every day out.

 

Where we meet again is over the pounding the air cooled engines have on its oil. Riders usually do not consider how hard that oil has to work to cool the bottom half from the dark side of the crown down and up again to the heads...

So for a touring I think liquid cooled is the way for me.

 

Too many assumptions I've read in the Star Venture forum about this topic starting with "you know who" on oil requirements for an air cooled unit and, the resistance to pause and view the issues in a dynamic form instead of the a 2 dimensional text/marketing of smoke and mirrors leading to miss guided conclusions. (there now I've said it)

 

I do think tho the Star Venture is a nicer looking bike tho;)

 

Looks like Indian believes there are plenty of others who agree with you on the TQ thought Patch,,, notice what the official "Challenge" from Indian is (see vid)!! Personally, I never really found the need for TQ in a bike beyond getting the load rolling and maintaining a given speed within the perameter of the weight of the bike + riders + payload.. Beyond that, forfeiting the higher RPM's required to get into HP land (above 5250 rpm's) because of using up reasonable piston speed limitations to aquire massive torque and ending up with a bike you have to shift like Semi Truck to keep it rolling is pointless.. Clearly, what the Indian challenge video shows/reveals does not mean alot to me - from a touring biker stand point,,, in all my riding days I have yet to see anyone towing a Taco Truck behind them on a bike:big-grin-emoticon: BUT I do get it.. IMHO, on bikes, spread the Cubic Inches out between multiple cylinders so you can keep a decent level of torque and are able to maintain piston speed parameters at R's up there (say, 8 grand so you end up with a real wide power band and dont have to shift a lot) so you can produce some awesome HP just in case you want play with the sport bikes:big-grin-emoticon:..

 

[uhfradarwill]

I'd say those two bikes are running neck and neck in the ugly category!!!!!!

[WildBill1]

I would enjoy a post on why you chose Triumph for sport cruising, and what type of distances make for a full days ride..

 

Puc know we share the thrill of rpm and a fare common ground on cooling when it comes to heat distribution;;; we'd likely then agree that Indian has a sound reason for freeing the moths from our wallets..

 

I have to say I haven't ridden HD since the 70's and quite frankly it bores the chit out of me to listen to beer smelling bars dripping wet with stage this and stage that like its some kind of mystical rainbow they personally discovered;; and usually from guys that can't even plug a tire to get home on... Worser than a utility bill HD seems to be, to me.

 

Now here's our fork in the road: In touring long distance (talking to a guy "you" that has some 1M, miles) I want torque much more than HP. In my riding there is not 1/4 mile finish, no smoken tires, no show and no screaming fans and 15 or 11 secs won't make a lick of difference at the end of my day when touring!

Let me pull away off the torque in the mid T range and, I'll smile all day every day out.

 

Where we meet again is over the pounding the air cooled engines have on its oil. Riders usually do not consider how hard that oil has to work to cool the bottom half from the dark side of the crown down and up again to the heads...

So for a touring I think liquid cooled is the way for me.

 

Too many assumptions I've read in the Star Venture forum about this topic starting with "you know who" on oil requirements for an air cooled unit and, the resistance to pause and view the issues in a dynamic form instead of the a 2 dimensional text/marketing of smoke and mirrors leading to miss guided conclusions. (there now I've said it)

 

I do think tho the Star Venture is a nicer looking bike tho;)

 

To answer your question about why I chose a Triumph Sport Cruiser I didn't. I'm riding a Triumph Rocket III Touring model which is 2300cc water cooled as is the Sport Cruiser.

[WildBill1]

Right there with ya Wildman!! Only I am thinking they are comparing production "baggers".. Is Triumph offering their triple in a bagger line now?

 

The Triumph I ride is a bagger Triumph Rocket III Tourer 2300cc or 140 cid. I just referenced the new Triumph Sport Cruiser 2500cc engine which just came out this year.

[Du-Rron]

HD's response so far has been the addition of a 131 inch kit for the 117inch to bring the dyno numbers up above the Challenger..

 

I think that a 131 cuin Harley would just burn you to a crisp in Texas...

[Chaharly]

Man I really like that new fairing they've got!

 

But like you, I'm still waiting for that Liquid Cooled V-4 to really push them dino numbers up!

[gmarshall]

I'll check back in about 15 years when the Challenger is in my price range.

[slowrollwv]

It doesn't matter what they bring out. I have two Yamahas. A V4 water cooled and a V twin water cooled both 1300cc and they will last me till I am done riding.

[Patch]

The Triumph I ride is a bagger Triumph Rocket III Tourer 2300cc or 140 cid. I just referenced the new Triumph Sport Cruiser 2500cc engine which just came out this year.

 

 

 

My thoughts first thing after seeing the mail this morning was to ask if the industry is moving in the right direction?

Remember Busa then the metrics had a pow wow settling on outputs... Or the days of Boss!

 

So this being spring in my mind and as is my tradition, I'll spend much of the next 3 months studying, most of which will be around combustion and, my pet peeve passive/aggressive exhaust designs, yep I'm a stickler for packing ever cc with a fresh charge;)

 

For whatever reason Triumph hasn't been on my list of interesting advances, I have been missing out!

 

from Cycle World:

“The same sort of sleight-of-hand carried over to the Rocket III’s powerplant. Triumph revised the fuel-injection to get more midrange and ended up with 154 ft.-lb. at 2000 rpm, compared to the base Rocket III’s 147 ft.-lb. at 2500 rpm. Yes, horsepower dropped by almost a third—to 106 hp at 5400 rpm—but who cares? There’s no substitution for cubic inches (or torque), so the Touring moves out with an unexpected edge anytime you twist the right grip, most anywhere in the rev range.”

 

I agree with the above! And to find this in a touring bike is special.

Horse Power is not the trophy I look for in a build it is a consequence of… It is expensive and just keeps running cost up, my opinion.

 

Looking up your bike I came across the new 2500cc, WOW! I will be digging into to this feat of parallel curves. I am very excited about what they’ve done and anxious to discover the fluid thinking and engineering behind it.

 

One thing more: I haven’t been a fan of odd crank combos not just because of balance either. This gives me another interesting puzzle to work thru, altho I think I see the fluid potentials from a combustion chamber view;)

 

Thanks for yanking me out of the closet;)

[WildBill1]

My thoughts first thing after seeing the mail this morning was to ask if the industry is moving in the right direction?

Remember Busa then the metrics had a pow wow settling on outputs... Or the days of Boss!

 

So this being spring in my mind and as is my tradition, I'll spend much of the next 3 months studying, most of which will be around combustion and, my pet peeve passive/aggressive exhaust designs, yep I'm a stickler for packing ever cc with a fresh charge;)

 

For whatever reason Triumph hasn't been on my list of interesting advances, I have been missing out!

 

from Cycle World:

“The same sort of sleight-of-hand carried over to the Rocket III’s powerplant. Triumph revised the fuel-injection to get more midrange and ended up with 154 ft.-lb. at 2000 rpm, compared to the base Rocket III’s 147 ft.-lb. at 2500 rpm. Yes, horsepower dropped by almost a third—to 106 hp at 5400 rpm—but who cares? There’s no substitution for cubic inches (or torque), so the Touring moves out with an unexpected edge anytime you twist the right grip, most anywhere in the rev range.”

 

I agree with the above! And to find this in a touring bike is special.

Horse Power is not the trophy I look for in a build it is a consequence of… It is expensive and just keeps running cost up, my opinion.

 

Looking up your bike I came across the new 2500cc, WOW! I will be digging into to this feat of parallel curves. I am very excited about what they’ve done and anxious to discover the fluid thinking and engineering behind it.

 

One thing more: I haven’t been a fan of odd crank combos not just because of balance either. This gives me another interesting puzzle to work thru, altho I think I see the fluid potentials from a combustion chamber view;)

 

Thanks for yanking me out of the closet;)

 

I'm pleased that your taking an interest these new Triumph offerings especially the in line three engines. Also, if you like to maintain your own equipment as much as I do all components are easy to get too. Reading in a service manual it states that the cylinder sleeves are replaceable in the engine block drop in type from the top large o-ring on bottom. I'm thinking this is how they go from a 2300cc to a 2500cc engine and use the same engine block. I've always had a sweet spot in my heart for Triumphs ----had a 71 Triumph 650 Bonneville which I modified into a street flat tracker. Really would like to find her setting and bring that baby back to life again. Triumph held a lot of speed records back in the Day. In my opinion they are pretty tuff bikes and a lot of bike for the money. Haven't had this touring version Triumph long just waiting for the weather to get more agreeable so I can get out on a long trip with her.

[sldunker]

I'd say those two bikes are running neck and neck in the ugly category!!!!!!

 

I agree.