[DUCeditor]

Motorcycle-USA has a pretty decent comparative review of the Triumph Bonneville and the GT1000 Touring.

To read the whole thing go here: http://www.motorcycle-usa.com/8/4472/Motorcycle-Article/Triumph-Bonneville-vs-GT1000-Touring.aspx

Cutting to the proverbial chase, here is their conclusion:

In a head to head performance test, there really is no comparison between these two. The Ducati excels in every measure, from engine to handling and braking. While the extra performance comes with a premium price tag, the Ducati can’t be beat by it British rival. Even though style plays a huge role in these bikes, in this case we’ll take the performance.​

A good read.

-don

 

[tsmgguy]

. . . Cutting to the proverbial chase, here is their conclusion:

In a head to head performance test, there really is no comparison between these two. The Ducati excels in every measure, from engine to handling and braking. While the extra performance comes with a premium price tag, the Ducati can’t be beat by it British rival. Even though style plays a huge role in these bikes, in this case we’ll take the performance.​

-don

Couldn't agree more!

 

[Guest]

Motorcycle-USA has a pretty decent comparative review of the Triumph Bonneville and the GT1000 Touring.

-don

Hey Don,

Since we are comparing apples to oranges, I thought I would throw another piece of fruit into this mix.

How about the a Royal Enfield Bullet Classic C5 EFI? This is actually a great looking retro bike. I have a local dealer here in Salem Oregon and have always been curious about these bikes. The latest hard copy Walneck's ClassicCycle Trader has a 4 page spread of this bike. This article is not yet on Walneck's online site.

IMHO the comparison between the Triumph Bonneville and the GT-1000 is about the same as comparing the Royal Enfield to the Bonneville. I think each has its place.

The Royal Enfield Bullet G5 Deluxe = $6,400 (27 hp)
The Triumph Bonneville = $9,000 (60 hp)
The Ducati GT-1000 = $12,000 (80 hp)

Horse Power figures are approx....

These prices are for NEW models round up a tiny bit but are an average of what I could find on CycleTrader.

 

[mouse action]

IMO the GT and the triumph have nothing in commom other than 2 wheels.

 

[Cesare57]

Good read, but then you'd expect us to react favorably. I might check out what the Bonnie guys are saying about it on their forum

I don't get the part kinda knocking 5th and 6th gears though. Seems to say you gotta be above 80 to be comfortable in 5th??. Heck, I'm typically fine in 5th at 60 and 6th at 70 unless I'm bucking a strong headwind or steep uphill, and I'm running the stock gearing. I'm in the mid-high 3k rpm range in those gears at those speeds and love the thrust and shudder a little crack of the throttle provides.

 

[tsmgguy]

IMO the GT and the triumph have nothing in commom other than 2 wheels.

Both bikes have strong, clasic styling, ans appeal the the same demographic. Me. Similarities run deep, but the GT has the edge in performance!

 

[Pjay]

Taking the fruit analogy one step further:
Ducati SC 1000 - an apple, crisp and sweet
Triumph Bonneville - a lemon (well, the Thruxton I rode was...)
both bikes are true 'retro' bikes, old styling but more recent technology.

The Royal Enfield? Actually, it's not a retro, as it has basically the same mechanicals as the original. The fruit analogy breaks down here - maybe it's really a vegetable... a potato?

 

[simonknight]

Taking the fruit analogy one step further:
Ducati SC 1000 - an apple, crisp and sweet
Triumph Bonneville - a lemon (well, the Thruxton I rode was...)
both bikes are true 'retro' bikes, old styling but more recent technology.

The Royal Enfield? Actually, it's not a retro, as it has basically the same mechanicals as the original. The fruit analogy breaks down here - maybe it's really a vegetable... a potato?

I'd say the Triumph is the potato and the Royal Enfield is a turnip.

 

[Pjay]

simon knight gallantly suggested

I'd say the Triumph is the potato and the Royal Enfield is a turnip.

:crazy:

 

[DUCeditor]

The Royal Enfield? Actually, it's not a retro, as it has basically the same mechanicals as the original.

That was true. No longer. The "new" Enfield is actually that - a new Enfield. A totally new fuel injected motor, a relatively modern tranny, disc brakes, electric start, etc. Interestingly the appearance is closer to the `50s bike than the one it is replacing.

I'd love to have one. The old all torque, no HP, heavy flywheeled singles were a totally different riding experience. Great sounding. Great feeling. They do everything except - - perform.

Three cheers for the new Enfield!

(And four cheers for the new India.)

-don

 

[brooksie]

I had an '04 Bonnie 790. Nice, fun bike and perfect for after being away from riding for a few years. Plus, I dig the style. I put a Matt Capri 904 kit/cams/ignition (no rev limit)and air box removal in it and I would say it was just short of a stock GT. It had a top end of 138 mph. The total of those mods was about $3,000.00. I won't count the obligatory suspension upgrade that both bikes demand. The GT has much better brakes and chassis for more spirited riding, along with a bit more ground clearance. The Bonnie was more sure footed at highway work. Both bikes seem to be the entry end of an endless money pit of modification for engine and suspension. I like the GT better, stock bike to stock bike. While it may seem like comparing apples to oranges, it is a closer comparison than it may seem.

 

[Cesare57]

I think they're both cool bikes but different sides of the retro coin. The Bonnie (esp. the T100) is for those who want to approximate the '60s look and ride as close as possible, with a bare minimum of modernity (disk brakes, FI, slightly meatier tires, and a fairly modest bump in performance). The GT is for those looking for a retro inspired bike with modern performance, hence the '70s styling cues but more modern wheels and frame geometry.

Given the Bonnie is inspired by the '60s Bonnie and the GT by the '70s GT, the Bonnie is the more retro by default. Judging by the comments I've received, I'd still say the GT looks pretty retro, since most people ask me what year it is.

 

[tsmgguy]

Had the GT parked recently in front of the local Suzuki dealership, and was insided looking at the stock, including a new Hayabusa. A sales unit allowed (unasked) as how he probably could not allow too much in trade on such an old bike, referring to the GT. I guess that it does look pretty retro!

 

[guenelin]

I also get the retro comments/questions all the time.

 

[Cesare57]

I also get the retro comments/questions all the time.

Me too - even when my GT is no where in sight. Guess when your my age it comes with the territory

 

[tsmgguy]

I gotta say, though, that interest in the retro aspects of the GT have been pretty mild. I've had people follow me to a stop when I was mounted on the Bonneville, wanting to have a look, thinking that it was a restored T-120 or -140. They're certainly surprised to find that it's a bit more modern than that!