If a bike is not in the running like the first guy said about the Guzzi i want some specific reasons why it's not a contender. It sounded like your prejudices were your reasons. Even if it is the slowest i'm sure it's got good power off road. The problem is he didn't give any reasons. It seemed like just an across the board dismissal. Also, a 744cc engine is a 750 regardless of the models name. The name harkens back to the V7 of the mid to late 60's. I watch a lot of reviews and that first guys "It just doesn't quite cut it." That explanation doesn't cut it. The Moto Guzzi is the lightest and they always handle good. Suspension can be upgraded. It's 744cc's. How can it not be a bike adequate for daily use? Guy is just full of shit. In any scrambler comparison it's likely that one bike is going to be the best on the road and another will be best off road. I think the Triumph would likely be the best on road and the Moto Guzzi the best offroad IMO. Also the Moto Guzzi is the mid price bike in this group yet much of the criticism is regarding the price. Sounds like B.S. reasoning and you are just testing the wrong bikes. $10,700, $11,190, $13,000. So the Moto Guzzi is $1,800 less than the BMW and is $500 more than the cheapest of the lot. That is not a price that should be a disqualifying factor in a comparison of these 3 bikes. Once again it's a 750 (744 actual) Not a 700! I know i sound like a M.G. fan boy but i have owned a BMW and a Triumph before and the Triumph was a scrambler. It's pathetic when you all dismiss the Guzzi based on price. at the end of the video and makes no sense. If you didn't like the power delivery you should test one with 5 or 6,000 miles on it but the price? It's within $500 of the cheapest of the 3. I think you all believing it's a 700 skewed your judgement. Nothing new. 30% of moto vloggers don't even know the products being tested. Obviously none of you knew it wasn't a 700. It still is the smallest engine and only has one disc up front but it's also the lightest of the 3.
I couldn't agree more. Those guys liked the Triumph best, which is acceptable since it is certainly a beautiful bike, and then treated the other two like shit. Poorly sponsored review.
You can tell right off the bat it's a totally biased review. Even at the end, the Moto Guzzi was at the back almost hidden. A solid, unbiased review places the bikes on the same level and gives reasons for all Pros and Cons, for each bike. This is so evident they all say the same things predominately promoting Triumph and talking shit about the competitors. The BMW is one of the best motorbike they came up with reacently. Opsie dopsie they forgot to mention that Moto Guzzi is made in Italy, BMW is made in Germany and Triumph is made in Thailand were labour is cheap and some member of the british royal are collecting and sharing the profits. For this reason alone, I'll never buy Triumph! I totally respect when the manufacturer of a Country keeps the factory in their own Country promoting the local economy. Nothing against Thailand, just to be clear.
Guzzi for me. Italian made,true to its origin! Triumph..made in Thailand,but wears a 'Union Jack'! BMW looks like the rear end was bolted on as an afterthought?
I’ll take the Guzzi any day despite its shortcomings. If I want a real bike to take off road, I’ll get one that’s purpose made. These are street bikes with minor fire trail capabilities and incredibly expensive to fix should you drop it. You’d be dumb to take these anywhere but tar.
V7’s are going for about 8k where I’m at in the US. Cannot beat that. The Ducati is also going for about 9k. Excellent bang for your buck. The street scrambler is still hovering around 11k unfortunately. The Ducati is an insane amount of fun for the price and that 800 LTwin is proving very reliable for a Ducati.
The very same Guzzi, #170 is in garage. Almost 10k on it and runs great considering all the beating press bikes take. Look for her in America’s Dairy Land scrambling around cow pies.
I've seen you guys ride review together a few times on here and I will say that I value you honest opinions about the bikes you review... But... As veteran riders you should also add some advice to these manufacturers. BMW, well it's a R1200R pretty much. IMO, it shouldn't have been a choice here because, let's face it, it's just another Beemer - to me. I've ridden my share. To me, they're pedestrian, mundane. Now their inline-fours is a different ballpark! But this bike will sell to the Beemer enthusiast, period. As far as advice? BMW should have designed their twin 800cc motor for this job. Drop the weight. Would be A MUCH more manageable power to weight ratio for sure. Hell, you could even ask the 'german engineers' to fin the heads (weird retro look for sure), keep an oil cooler, and put shaft drive on something other than a damn 1200! (but, of course, they'd cheap out and stick with their belt drive IF they were to do this.) That's why I went with a 2006 Honda Interceptor over trying the BMW F800 sport tourer. Triumph - belt drive and off-road ain't a brilliant idea, really. But I do like belt over chain as far as maintenance. Just not impressed with styling. I think it's not that great to think of this bike as retro when it hasn't changed in design at all since it's inception. I mean, there's nothing retro if you've always been retro...lol. It's just the norm! Like trying to tell me that there's really much difference in any of their speed triples as far as specs and performance. Little improvement, to me, is none. I can take an old one, build it for less, and whip a new one. Motorcycle Guzzi - I'd pay their higher price just for the biggest gas tank! What you failed to mention about such a low powered, heavy bike - is the same old saying - 'It's more fun to ride a slow bike fast.' (That's because ANY true Cafe apprecionado will tell you, torque rocks!) I have a 1986 Yamaha SRX 600. It's a blast. It weighs 287lbs wet! I put 40,000 miles on it in 3 years as my daily rider. Highway and canyon riding. It's a TRIP to switch from that to my 2011 Ninja 1000. Big smiles, both ways. Personally, the Moto wins in spades in the style department. Suspension can be fixed easy. That engine has been around decades now. You better believe there's aftermarket in the engine/transmission department. Yeah, I'd buy this one over the 'tractor' look of the Triumph. Did I piss people off with my thoughts? Just my opinion, man. But that's the fun of debate.
Talking about the price of the guzzi and moaning that it’s not worth the price. Then praises a triumph LOL...we know who paid the most for this video. Guzzi all day long for a REAL motorcycle with a soul, not some hipster gimmick
Triumph started the game about 60 years before the 2000's. It is easy to find a Moto Guzzi for less than MSRP. Maybe not one of one thousand limited edition but the V9 Roamer should have been the M.G. entry here. I'm not sure the Roamer is the right model but the most scrambler oriented V9 anyway would have been a better choice since these are all more like desert bikes to me. I just can't see any of these being much fun on a trail through a forest of Noble For. Fire roaders is what these are. Just as the first and only brand new bike I have ever bought. A 1973 Triumph Trophy Trail 500 for around $1,650 in March 1974.
I am wondering u have not reviewed the ftr 1200 as u are reviewing these motorcycle , i am expecting a comparison of ftr 1200 vs bmw r9t scrambler from cycleworld
If you are a reviewer that cannot pronounce Guzzi correctly and cannot seem to remember how large the motor is in the bike, your opinion means nothing. Great bikes, all three, and I think you chose the right one (I own a BMW and a Triumph and lust after the Guzzi so I have no bias here), but get your shit right before judging.
And no mention that the Triumph is water cooled with an unprotected radiator directly behind the front wheel, not good if it is to be taken on the trails.
I love the aesthetics of the scrambler class. REALISTICALLY THOUGH, are these all hell to ride off pavement? I own a FT500 Ascot and it's the right tool for anything unpaved. I feel like the scrambler class is a bit of a lie. Thoughts?
I'm kinda biased ever since I found there was a bike with an engine that achieves automotive like longevity. Plus I'm pretty sure I don't want or need a 1200cc "Scrambler." Or even want one. Just too much weight, power and I just don't find big engined scramblers very practical but give me the smallest engined bike of this bunch with agricultural torque curve and big tank and I'll manage. An airhead BMW strikes me as the basis for a decidedly odd off road bike. Triumph? Well, what can you say? Until the Japanese invaded motorcycle land Triumph and BSA were the most common scramblers here in the U.S. This would have been a better comparison if the M.G. entry had been the V9 Roamer or whichever one has the luggage package and crash bars. You would then have engine size grouped more closely and probably weight and maybe price too.
I thought your review was realistic even though you seem to be getting a lot of hate for it in the comments. I love the Guzzi V7 lineup and the BMW looks trick but I thought the Triumph was the obvious winner given your criteria. Probably wouldn't buy one now though. Made in Thailand is no longer a Triumph and I think I speak for many. The Guzzi would probably get my money simply for it's authenticity. That still carries weight with me.
Lets use a bike that's only available for 1000 customers... Bwahahahahahaha!!! I own the BMW Scrambler and I chose it because I wanted the power and ride quality of a BMW with the good looks as well.
The Moto Guzzi V7III Rough is now available and all you have to do is put the Arrow Scrambler exhaust on it. The BMW Scrambler looks cool, but I would take the Urban Enduro over it for the classic GS look.
What a trash video. Did you really just say the Triumph is the "quintessential modern scrambler"...I don't even like Ducati but the Duc Scramble woule slap every bike in this lineup. Especially the desert sled.
I own a r nine t and I agree with them 100% my T is great in the city I drive it 45 min a day very very often. And I would never drive a different bike. I also ride around the world with my bodies with our ADV and my KTM 1290R will F*** any bike on and off road any day of the year. So I am lucky in life to own a few bikes that I can bounce for the occasion. But, If u want an solid bike that U want to drive every day for anything that u got going on, triumph scrambler is the bike to go with 100%. One thing exhaust will heat your leg. I didn’t care for that though. But it could annoy ppl.
![I.N "HALLUCINATION" | [Stray Kids : SKZ-PLAYER]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/n5B5q1Hwt_U/mqdefault.jpg)
thank you for the honest criticism, so many motojournos are afraid of burning bridges or getting blackballed
I own a Triumph Street Scrambler but Moto Guzzi with Arrow high exhaust is a pure sex to me 👍🏼👍🏼
If a bike is not in the running like the first guy said about the Guzzi i want some specific reasons why it's not a contender. It sounded like your prejudices were your reasons. Even if it is the slowest i'm sure it's got good power off road. The problem is he didn't give any reasons. It seemed like just an across the board dismissal. Also, a 744cc engine is a 750 regardless of the models name. The name harkens back to the V7 of the mid to late 60's. I watch a lot of reviews and that first guys "It just doesn't quite cut it." That explanation doesn't cut it. The Moto Guzzi is the lightest and they always handle good. Suspension can be upgraded. It's 744cc's. How can it not be a bike adequate for daily use? Guy is just full of shit. In any scrambler comparison it's likely that one bike is going to be the best on the road and another will be best off road. I think the Triumph would likely be the best on road and the Moto Guzzi the best offroad IMO. Also the Moto Guzzi is the mid price bike in this group yet much of the criticism is regarding the price. Sounds like B.S. reasoning and you are just testing the wrong bikes. $10,700, $11,190, $13,000. So the Moto Guzzi is $1,800 less than the BMW and is $500 more than the cheapest of the lot. That is not a price that should be a disqualifying factor in a comparison of these 3 bikes. Once again it's a 750 (744 actual) Not a 700! I know i sound like a M.G. fan boy but i have owned a BMW and a Triumph before and the Triumph was a scrambler. It's pathetic when you all dismiss the Guzzi based on price. at the end of the video and makes no sense. If you didn't like the power delivery you should test one with 5 or 6,000 miles on it but the price? It's within $500 of the cheapest of the 3. I think you all believing it's a 700 skewed your judgement. Nothing new. 30% of moto vloggers don't even know the products being tested. Obviously none of you knew it wasn't a 700. It still is the smallest engine and only has one disc up front but it's also the lightest of the 3.
I couldn't agree more.
Those guys liked the Triumph best, which is acceptable since it is certainly a beautiful bike, and then treated the other two like shit.
Poorly sponsored review.
You can tell right off the bat it's a totally biased review. Even at the end, the Moto Guzzi was at the back almost hidden. A solid, unbiased review places the bikes on the same level and gives reasons for all Pros and Cons, for each bike. This is so evident they all say the same things predominately promoting Triumph and talking shit about the competitors. The BMW is one of the best motorbike they came up with reacently. Opsie dopsie they forgot to mention that Moto Guzzi is made in Italy, BMW is made in Germany and Triumph is made in Thailand were labour is cheap and some member of the british royal are collecting and sharing the profits. For this reason alone, I'll never buy Triumph! I totally respect when the manufacturer of a Country keeps the factory in their own Country promoting the local economy. Nothing against Thailand, just to be clear.
Looks like they were all for Triumph, but the Guzzi is the best bike in the lot for on off riding. Best un the lot .
Guzzi for me. Italian made,true to its origin! Triumph..made in Thailand,but wears a 'Union Jack'!
BMW looks like the rear end was bolted on as an afterthought?
Brought to you by Trumph Motorcycle ©.
Yes clearly.
People saying Guzzi’s are for hipsters have never actually ridden one, hipsters shy away from things with actual soul 😂
lol! good to know! Cause I want one! :)
@De Sign love this! Thank you!
Abe Lincoln was a hipster
@@robotjeans literally who?
Most the guzzi guys and gals I see are the people you’d expect to be a door greeter at Walmart’s if you went by looks lol
I’ll take the Guzzi any day despite its shortcomings. If I want a real bike to take off road, I’ll get one that’s purpose made. These are street bikes with minor fire trail capabilities and incredibly expensive to fix should you drop it. You’d be dumb to take these anywhere but tar.
V7’s are going for about 8k where I’m at in the US. Cannot beat that. The Ducati is also going for about 9k. Excellent bang for your buck. The street scrambler is still hovering around 11k unfortunately. The Ducati is an insane amount of fun for the price and that 800 LTwin is proving very reliable for a Ducati.
The very same Guzzi, #170 is in garage. Almost 10k on it and runs great considering all the beating press bikes take. Look for her in America’s Dairy Land scrambling around cow pies.
I've seen you guys ride review together a few times on here and I will say that I value you honest opinions about the bikes you review... But... As veteran riders you should also add some advice to these manufacturers.
BMW, well it's a R1200R pretty much. IMO, it shouldn't have been a choice here because, let's face it, it's just another Beemer - to me. I've ridden my share. To me, they're pedestrian, mundane. Now their inline-fours is a different ballpark! But this bike will sell to the Beemer enthusiast, period. As far as advice? BMW should have designed their twin 800cc motor for this job. Drop the weight. Would be A MUCH more manageable power to weight ratio for sure. Hell, you could even ask the 'german engineers' to fin the heads (weird retro look for sure), keep an oil cooler, and put shaft drive on something other than a damn 1200! (but, of course, they'd cheap out and stick with their belt drive IF they were to do this.) That's why I went with a 2006 Honda Interceptor over trying the BMW F800 sport tourer.
Triumph - belt drive and off-road ain't a brilliant idea, really. But I do like belt over chain as far as maintenance. Just not impressed with styling. I think it's not that great to think of this bike as retro when it hasn't changed in design at all since it's inception. I mean, there's nothing retro if you've always been retro...lol. It's just the norm! Like trying to tell me that there's really much difference in any of their speed triples as far as specs and performance. Little improvement, to me, is none. I can take an old one, build it for less, and whip a new one.
Motorcycle Guzzi - I'd pay their higher price just for the biggest gas tank! What you failed to mention about such a low powered, heavy bike - is the same old saying - 'It's more fun to ride a slow bike fast.' (That's because ANY true Cafe apprecionado will tell you, torque rocks!)
I have a 1986 Yamaha SRX 600. It's a blast. It weighs 287lbs wet! I put 40,000 miles on it in 3 years as my daily rider. Highway and canyon riding. It's a TRIP to switch from that to my 2011 Ninja 1000. Big smiles, both ways.
Personally, the Moto wins in spades in the style department. Suspension can be fixed easy. That engine has been around decades now. You better believe there's aftermarket in the engine/transmission department. Yeah, I'd buy this one over the 'tractor' look of the Triumph.
Did I piss people off with my thoughts? Just my opinion, man. But that's the fun of debate.
You Nailed it man! I'm with you!
would love to see guzzi make a real modern competitor to the nineT
Talking about the price of the guzzi and moaning that it’s not worth the price. Then praises a triumph LOL...we know who paid the most for this video.
Guzzi all day long for a REAL motorcycle with a soul, not some hipster gimmick
the Moto Guzzi is 750cc not 700cc
Triumph started the game about 60 years before the 2000's. It is easy to find a Moto Guzzi for less than MSRP. Maybe not one of one thousand limited edition but the V9 Roamer should have been the M.G. entry here. I'm not sure the Roamer is the right model but the most scrambler oriented V9 anyway would have been a better choice since these are all more like desert bikes to me. I just can't see any of these being much fun on a trail through a forest of Noble For. Fire roaders is what these are. Just as the first and only brand new bike I have ever bought. A 1973 Triumph Trophy Trail 500 for around $1,650 in March 1974.
Guzzi for me. A simple air cooled engine.
I am wondering u have not reviewed the ftr 1200 as u are reviewing these motorcycle , i am expecting a comparison of ftr 1200 vs bmw r9t scrambler from cycleworld
what kind of helmet is the red one with the silver
Cool helmets. What makes are they?
Title should mention which bikes that are included.
Which best?
If you are a reviewer that cannot pronounce Guzzi correctly and cannot seem to remember how large the motor is in the bike, your opinion means nothing. Great bikes, all three, and I think you chose the right one (I own a BMW and a Triumph and lust after the Guzzi so I have no bias here), but get your shit right before judging.
It is a shame that the Ducati scrambler didn’t make the lineup
Great video 👍🏽
...the moto guzzi, foo me shes a beauty and am inlov..
...u know right now, am imaginin myself a badass mascular young man ridin my sweet guzzi..
You guys should have picked the BMW GS Urban... -way better suspension-
And no mention that the Triumph is water cooled with an unprotected radiator directly behind the front wheel, not good if it is to be taken on the trails.
Wow a review where someone actually criticises a bike. Amazing.
I love the aesthetics of the scrambler class.
REALISTICALLY THOUGH, are these all hell to ride off pavement? I own a FT500 Ascot and it's the right tool for anything unpaved. I feel like the scrambler class is a bit of a lie. Thoughts?
BMW R Nine T: Make your overcompensated midlife a ride.
Love it
I can’t hear you over the music
Guzzi forever
winner MG
I'm kinda biased ever since I found there was a bike with an engine that achieves automotive like longevity. Plus I'm pretty sure I don't want or need a 1200cc "Scrambler." Or even want one. Just too much weight, power and I just don't find big engined scramblers very practical but give me the smallest engined bike of this bunch with agricultural torque curve and big tank and I'll manage. An airhead BMW strikes me as the basis for a decidedly odd off road bike. Triumph? Well, what can you say? Until the Japanese invaded motorcycle land Triumph and BSA were the most common scramblers here in the U.S. This would have been a better comparison if the M.G. entry had been the V9 Roamer or whichever one has the luggage package and crash bars. You would then have engine size grouped more closely and probably weight and maybe price too.
Nice
Um, Guzzi.
I think Ducati would of been the winner of this shoot out.
“Still get scrambly on the weekends?” #smh
Choosing the right hipster bike, brought to you by three hipsters.....
You're too young to test a Guzzi.
No way I could listen to this with the constant noise in the background.
Meanwhile, the Japanese and KTM are still making real scramblers, and no, I don't mean the Bolt.
Where's the Ducati Scrambler? Ducati is European, right?
snoopdoug he said at the beginning it fell through
Thanks. I missed that. Probably when my kids were pestering me while I was trying to watch...#parentingfail
I thought your review was realistic even though you seem to be getting a lot of hate for it in the comments. I love the Guzzi V7 lineup and the BMW looks trick but I thought the Triumph was the obvious winner given your criteria. Probably wouldn't buy one now though. Made in Thailand is no longer a Triumph and I think I speak for many. The Guzzi would probably get my money simply for it's authenticity. That still carries weight with me.
Lets use a bike that's only available for 1000 customers... Bwahahahahahaha!!! I own the BMW Scrambler and I chose it because I wanted the power and ride quality of a BMW with the good looks as well.
The Moto Guzzi V7III Rough is now available and all you have to do is put the Arrow Scrambler exhaust on it. The BMW Scrambler looks cool, but I would take the Urban Enduro over it for the classic GS look.
230kg Scrambler my ass.
I hate when magazines bring in these outside commentators who add nothing but whining and negativity about brands or models they don’t understand.
What a bad video. Uninspired, too loud background music and why no Ducati scramber?
What a trash video. Did you really just say the Triumph is the "quintessential modern scrambler"...I don't even like Ducati but the Duc Scramble woule slap every bike in this lineup. Especially the desert sled.
There's no point doing this video and leaving out the best bike.
Opinions...
Without the Ducati this review is for second best.
🙃
3 of the most boring presenters on RUclips. A guy like Lemmy is heads, shoulders, and beards above these hipster doofuses.
Pewdipie?
I own a r nine t and I agree with them 100% my T is great in the city I drive it 45 min a day very very often. And I would never drive a different bike. I also ride around the world with my bodies with our ADV and my KTM 1290R will F*** any bike on and off road any day of the year. So I am lucky in life to own a few bikes that I can bounce for the occasion. But, If u want an solid bike that U want to drive every day for anything that u got going on, triumph scrambler is the bike to go with 100%. One thing exhaust will heat your leg. I didn’t care for that though. But it could annoy ppl.
R nine t with 900cc?