Both hunter and speed 400 don’t look like a pure retro, speed 400 looks inspired by trident more than the speed twins, while even the new speed twins have been looking a bit modern for quite some time now, but interceptor and z900 RS really look good
I was eagerly looking for this comparison. Thanks for the video. I am a Hunter owner and it has been a pure joy to ride the bike for past 8 months. Speed 400 looks promising to me but definitely price point and after sales service will be make or break deal in India.
Triumph develops it's horsepower at a much higher RPM. (at the same rpm's the power is more closely matched then you would expect). I believe that I saw that at 60 mph the Triumph turns 6000 rpm where as the RE would be much lower.. At slower speeds horsepower is not as much a factor as torque.. Triumph would be more street orientated where as the RE would be more well rounded for a wider variety of roads. Both bikes would find themselves in the 45-55 speed zones most often. in which case either bike would get the job done. The Triumph almost dictates that you need to use high octane fuel because of the high compression ratio, where as the RE can use any octane but is happiest using a lower rating octane (which cost less). And it would be fair to say that the RE gets better gas mileage, simply because at any speeds the engine is turning less RPM's.. High horsepower comes with a price tag too (heat), so the Triumph needs a radiator and to be liquid cooled, something else that could go wrong, get a puncture in the radiator or run low on cooling for any reason and you have a problem. High horsepower can get you into trouble faster, low horsepower just means that you are going to arrive later.. I think the only real advantage with the Triumph has is the top speed which may be around 90 mph and for the RE it would be around 80 mph, but 70 mph is still 70 mph on either bike, and the Triumph would be better suited for passing.. It was once said that if it isn't broken then don't fix it and the other saying is 'keep it simple' because there are less things to go wrong or to break, which would not require fixing.. One last thought - your car may red line at 6000 rpm but you don't go driving it at 5000 rpm all day, you mostly rely on the torque and keep the rpm's down closer to 2500 - reason being is that you get better gas mileage and also to make your engine last longer.. I prefer low rpm motorcycles with adequate torque to get me around.. I cruise mostly county and state roads (45-55 mph).. I believe that the RE would be close to max torque range at those speeds which means hills would not require a downshift..
Thanks for the extra analysis. Let’s not forget the charm and feel of the simple air cooled engine as well. I rode a lot of bikes last year (including the new Himalayan) but one of the most memorable was riding the Hunter 350 in city traffic. Hopefully I’ll get a chance to ride the new Triumphs to see if they are just as enjoyable.
Two valves air cooled simple low cost home maintenance. The Enfield is flying off the shelves at a supetb price point. The Triumph is great little bike but for purists is not even close to real retro and tbe price point is going to kill its mass market sales exactly as the Honda 350 is falling flat.
Truth! I think RE is safe with its bikes still. I think the Triumphs are likely to be priced around $11-13,000nzd going by the specs and the Triumph tax. Is the Honda available outside of India now? It’s not on the horizon for New Zealand as far as I’m aware.
EXACTLY! the dealership is a 5 hour drive from my house and I'm not worried . Because I can work on it myself ! Can't be that confident with the others
Triumph are relying on the perception that it is a British bike (it isn't, but don't tell anyone) and the appeal of the "Triumph" name to win them customers who are willing to pay more for virtually the same bike as the Royal Enfield equivalent - the key difference is the engineering of the power units; Triumph is "water" cooled and Royal Enfield is air cooled, Triumph is a high revving unit while Royal Enfield is more a plodder. In the end Triumph will sell a good number of these new units, but they will never match Royal Enfield numbers simply because of price - Triumph is more in competition with Honda, Yamaha, Kawasaki, Suzuki, KTM, BMW and Benelli, and will cost more than many of those.
Ironically, Hunter 350 looks more like a retro bonnie than Triumph’s new offering
Yep, I reckon it looks like a mini Speed Twin 😂 I really enjoyed the Hunter while I had it on test. I hope the Triumphs will be as enjoyable to ride.
Both hunter and speed 400 don’t look like a pure retro, speed 400 looks inspired by trident more than the speed twins, while even the new speed twins have been looking a bit modern for quite some time now, but interceptor and z900 RS really look good
@@palashkale Personally, my forever bike has always been the T120. Will be some years yet before I can afford her 😆
@@FrancoSousa-ws1nz yup in many ways it looks way better than the speed twin in my opinion
I was eagerly looking for this comparison. Thanks for the video. I am a Hunter owner and it has been a pure joy to ride the bike for past 8 months. Speed 400 looks promising to me but definitely price point and after sales service will be make or break deal in India.
Triumph develops it's horsepower at a much higher RPM. (at the same rpm's the power is more closely matched then you would expect). I believe that I saw that at 60 mph the Triumph turns 6000 rpm where as the RE would be much lower.. At slower speeds horsepower is not as much a factor as torque.. Triumph would be more street orientated where as the RE would be more well rounded for a wider variety of roads. Both bikes would find themselves in the 45-55 speed zones most often. in which case either bike would get the job done. The Triumph almost dictates that you need to use high octane fuel because of the high compression ratio, where as the RE can use any octane but is happiest using a lower rating octane (which cost less). And it would be fair to say that the RE gets better gas mileage, simply because at any speeds the engine is turning less RPM's.. High horsepower comes with a price tag too (heat), so the Triumph needs a radiator and to be liquid cooled, something else that could go wrong, get a puncture in the radiator or run low on cooling for any reason and you have a problem. High horsepower can get you into trouble faster, low horsepower just means that you are going to arrive later.. I think the only real advantage with the Triumph has is the top speed which may be around 90 mph and for the RE it would be around 80 mph, but 70 mph is still 70 mph on either bike, and the Triumph would be better suited for passing.. It was once said that if it isn't broken then don't fix it and the other saying is 'keep it simple' because there are less things to go wrong or to break, which would not require fixing.. One last thought - your car may red line at 6000 rpm but you don't go driving it at 5000 rpm all day, you mostly rely on the torque and keep the rpm's down closer to 2500 - reason being is that you get better gas mileage and also to make your engine last longer.. I prefer low rpm motorcycles with adequate torque to get me around.. I cruise mostly county and state roads (45-55 mph).. I believe that the RE would be close to max torque range at those speeds which means hills would not require a downshift..
Thanks for the extra analysis. Let’s not forget the charm and feel of the simple air cooled engine as well. I rode a lot of bikes last year (including the new Himalayan) but one of the most memorable was riding the Hunter 350 in city traffic. Hopefully I’ll get a chance to ride the new Triumphs to see if they are just as enjoyable.
I don't believe the Triumph is in competition with any RE bike... look more to the KTM 390 duke/adventure.
Power and tech wise I think you’re on the money.
Believe you're right; the Triumphs will surpass the RE I'm practically every way, but you will pay for it.
my confuse ..411 or 400
I'd like a Hunter 411.
When I was riding the 350 I was thinking that the 411 engine or trying to work out other ways to boost performance of it.
No hunter scram 411
It's no surprise that triumph are holding on to the price until the last minute.
Two valves air cooled simple low cost home maintenance.
The Enfield is flying off the shelves at a supetb price point.
The Triumph is great little bike but for purists is not even close to real retro and tbe price point is going to kill its mass market sales exactly as the Honda 350 is falling flat.
Truth! I think RE is safe with its bikes still. I think the Triumphs are likely to be priced around $11-13,000nzd going by the specs and the Triumph tax.
Is the Honda available outside of India now? It’s not on the horizon for New Zealand as far as I’m aware.
EXACTLY! the dealership is a 5 hour drive from my house and I'm not worried . Because I can work on it myself ! Can't be that confident with the others
Hunter 350cc ❤
Triumph are relying on the perception that it is a British bike (it isn't, but don't tell anyone) and the appeal of the "Triumph" name to win them customers who are willing to pay more for virtually the same bike as the Royal Enfield equivalent - the key difference is the engineering of the power units; Triumph is "water" cooled and Royal Enfield is air cooled, Triumph is a high revving unit while Royal Enfield is more a plodder.
In the end Triumph will sell a good number of these new units, but they will never match Royal Enfield numbers simply because of price - Triumph is more in competition with Honda, Yamaha, Kawasaki, Suzuki, KTM, BMW and Benelli, and will cost more than many of those.
Seems like the higher revs of the Triumph make it more versatile? Especially on Freeways
Discúlpame pero No tiene comparación con la hunter