Ran across these specs for 2016 Bonnie Speed Twin (900cc)

[ohiorider]

From TriumphRat web forum.  Don't know the original source .... presumably from Triumph.  Might be fun to compare with V9 specs:


Engine and Transmission
Type
Liquid cooled, 8 valve, SOHC, 270° crank angle parallel twin
Capacity: 900cc
Bore/stroke: 84.6 x 80 mm

Compression ratio:  10.55:1
Maximum power:  55 PS / 54 BHP (40.5kW) @ 5900 rpm
Maximum torque:  80Nm @ 3230 rpm
Fuel system:  Multipoint sequential electronic fuel injection
Exhaust:  Brushed 2 into 2 exhaust system  with twin brushed silencers
Final drive:  O ring chain
Clutch:Wet, multi-plate assist clutch
Gearbox:  5-speed

Chassis
Frame:  Tubular steel cradle
Swingarm: Twin-sided, tubular steel

Front wheel:  Cast aluminium alloy multi-spoke 18 x 2.75in
Rear wheel:  Cast aluminium alloy multi-spoke 17 x 4.25in

Front tyre:  100/90-18
Rear tyre:  150/70 R17

Front suspension   Kayaba 41mm forks, 120mm travel
Rear suspension    Kayaba twin shocks with adjustable preload, 120mm rear wheel travel

Front brake   Single 310mm disc, Nissin 2-piston floating caliper, ABS
Rear brake   Single 255mm disc, Nissin 2-piston floating caliper, ABS

Instrument display/functions
LCD multi-functional instrument pack with analogue speedometer, gear position indicator, fuel gauge, range to empty indication, service indicator, clock, trip computer, scroll button on handlebars, TPMS ready, heated grips  ready, fuel consumption display and traction control status display.

Dimensions and weights
Length  2090 mm
Width (handlebars)  785 mm
Height Without Mirrors  1114 mm
Seat Height  750 mm
Wheelbase  1439 mm
Rake  25.1º
Trail  102.4 mm
Dry weight  198 Kg
Fuel tank capacity  12 L
Fuel consumption  Constant speed 56 mph: 87.4 MPG
Constant speed 75 mph: 62.4 MPG
Mixed riding*: 76 MPG
* Figures obtained according to the emissions procedure GTR2 of the World Motorcycle Test Cycle (WMTC).
Emissions  EUR4 Standard: CO2 - 87.0 g/km

Standard equipment
ABS, traction  control, ride-by-wire, immobiliser, USB socket, LED rear light

[Kev m]

From TriumphRat web forum.  Don't know the original source .... presumably from Triumph.  Might be fun to compare with V9 specs:


Maximum power:  55 PS / 54 BHP (40.5kW) @ 5900 rpm
Maximum torque:  80Nm @ 3230 rpm
Dimensions and weights
Length  2090 mm

Seat Height  750 mm
Wheelbase  1439 mm

Dry weight  198 Kg

Also good to compare to the previous Bonnie:

Bonnie vs. Bonnie Street


dry weight 461 vs. 437  ----> Street 24# lighter

length 83.3" vs. 82.3" ----> Street 1" shorter

wheelbase 58.7 vs. 56.7 ----> Street 2" shorter (same as old Thruxton)

seat height 29.1" vs. 29.5"  ----> Street is 0.4" taller at seat.

Crank hp  68 vs. 54 ----> Street makes 14 hp LESS than previous Bonnie, but also peak is 1600 rpm less (INTERESTING CHOICE OF TUNING, especially if comparing to the V9 which is essentially listing the same hp)

Torque (based on crank) 50 vs. 59 ----> Street makes 9 more or 18% more than the last air-cooled base Bonnie. And again, the new Street makes it's peak torque at almost 2600 lower an rpm.



Now V9

V9 Bobber vs. Bonnie Street


Don't have dry weight only Wet 440 WET vs. 437 DRY ----> V9 probably slightly lighter

length 83.6" vs. 82.3" ----> Street 1.3" shorter

wheelbase 58.3 vs. 56.7 ----> Street 1.6" shorter

seat height 30.3" vs. 29.5"  ----> Street is 0.8" SHORTER at seat.

Crank hp  55 vs. 54 ----> Street makes 1 hp LESS @ 350 less rpm

Torque (based on crank) 46 vs. 59 ----> Street makes 13 more @ 230 more rpm.



That's pretty competitive.

[PeteS]

 I am guessing those are Imperial Gallons, 5 qts. Still pretty impressive.

Pete

[professor]

Kev Very Well Done. Very insightful. Now this makes some sense of things. Guzzi has a target.........it seems. Thanks for the conversions.

[ohiorider]

Playing with the torque numbers (double check me .... math wasn't my strong suit!).  To calculate hp at specific rpm, take torque in ft/lb times rpm, divided by 5255.

Street Twin:
80nm (60 ft/lb) *3230
___________________  = 36hp@3230
               5255

V9:
62.3nm (46 ft/lb) * 2880
___________________ = 25 hp@2880
                5255

Be interesting to know the torque each engine produces as it winds up past its max torque rpm.  Max hp-wise, they're about the same.  Have an idea the S Twin might have a bit more oomph through the midrange.

EDIT: Corrected V9 hp calculation

[PeteS]

Given the new bikes have a 270 degree crank it might be more useful to compare torque and HP readings with the old Scrambler which also has a 270 crank. Not sure why Triumph decided on the 270 crank in their road bikes. I was never impressed with the Scrambler power even compared with the original 790 twins.

Pete 

[ohiorider]

Pete, I may have the intro dates confused, but I think the 270 engine was first used in Triumph's mid-range cruisers (SpeedMaster and America) and was designed to produce more cruiser-like torque down low vs the Bonnie's higher revving design.  Probably as likely, the 270 was built to produce a v twin sound, similar to our Guzzis and a 90 degree Ducati.  When the Scrambler was introduced, I imagine Triumph engineers felt the 270 was more suitable for a bike that 'might' see some dirt duty.

EDIT:  After a little Wiki:
Introduction dates
Speedmaster - 2003
Scrambler - 2006

[PeteS]

I was aware that the early "Cruisers" had the 270 crank. Wasn't sure if they were 790s or 865s. I know the 270 crank is torquier but not sure the road bikes are the best application. I like these bikes and have ever since I rode a friends hotted up 790 with upgraded suspension. If I ever sprang for a retro Triumph it would likely now be an older one.

Pete

[Kev m]

Playing with the torque numbers (double check me .... math wasn't my strong suit!).  To calculate hp at specific rpm, take torque in ft/lb times rpm, divided by 5255.

Street Twin:
80nm (60 ft/lb) *3230
___________________  = 36hp@3230
               5255

V9:
46nm (34 ft/lb) * 2880
___________________ = 18hp@2880
                5255

Be interesting to know the torque each engine produces as it winds up past its max torque rpm.  Max hp-wise, they're about the same.  Have an idea the S Twin might have a bit more oomph through the midrange.

You've got a problem there. The Specs I gave were FT. LBS. Not NM.

If you'll notice I compared the Street at 59 to the V9 at 46.

So you've castrated the V9 in that calculation by reducing torque

Answer should have been 25 hp

[ohiorider]

Wasn't even a math problem.  I need to learn to read

[Kev m]

Wasn't even a math problem.  I need to learn to read

I'm sorry, I didn't make it easy, I could have listed the units. For some reason I hate repeatedly typing Ft. lbs. Of Torque and have adopted the ambiguous Top Gear "Torques" as shorthand.

 

[ohiorider]

l should've picked up on the low hp number as soon as I saw it.  With the hp figure I calculated for the V9, it'd be neck and neck between it an a RE Bullet!

[lucydad]

Kev,

Thanks for the compare figure.  The T120 is the more interesting bike, at least to me. 

Smaller Bonnies sound interesting though.  Next year with the V9 out and Bonnies out and tested will be "fascinating" to quote a green pointy-eared Science Officer.

[tazio]

Yes, Kev and Ohiorider.
Thanks for effort.

[Shorty]

Looks like no pressing reason to "upgrade" from the 790s.

[professor]

In the current issue of Motorcyclist they interview the engineers behind the new Bonneville. A rather young guy I might add. He was asked why the 270 crank? His answer surprised me. Triumph asked owners (focus group) which configuration they favored 360 or 270. The majority like the cadence and sound of the 270 over the 360 so it was decided to go that way. In the current issue of Cycle in the Service section/Ask Kevin a good discussion of the supposed advantages are discussed. Has to do with traction and exchange energy. Kevin is not clear there is an advantage. 

[Aaron D.]

I imagine it is mostly for sound. The advantages in grip with a sliding tire really don't apply.

[ohiorider]

I would have skewed their numbers re preferred exhaust note.  To me, nothing sounds better than a vertical twin with 360 degree firing order.  Sooooo British!  The 790 and 865 Bonnies make a lovely sound running Triumphs TORs.  Triumph specifies they are for off road (T   riumph, O   ff, R   oad) only, but in the world of motorcycle mufflers, they are about a 2 or 3 on a scale of 10 re loudness ..... they sound about like a stock Bonnie from the 1960s sounded with stock pipes.

[Kev m]

Looks like no pressing reason to "upgrade" from the 790s.

I was thinking about this and went looking for a reason.

I think my conclusion is you may be right (or not) depending on what you want.

I mean, do you want carbs or EFI, do you care about a little more hp.

Maybe you want the Thruxton (air-cooled) with the better suspension (and more power in later years).

If you're strictly talking the Street vs. a carbed 790 - I think it's preference - air-cooled vs. water, carb vs. efi.

I haven't looked closely but I bet the brakes have been upgraded since the 790.

The suspension might be a little better too.

For me the answer is simple, the T120 for the dual disc brakes, factory heated grips, and a little more oomph but still reasonably sized/powered with decent economy.

But for someone else, sure, could go either way!

[jlburgess]

Something looks wrong to me with the 54 bhp spec.  A modern 900 cc liquid cooled 4 valve pc engine should be more like 80 rwhp at least.  I know it depends on tuning but this is just my gut feeling.  Plus the manufacturers generally claim 10% more hp and 10% less weight than actual figures.  Just a guess...

[skromfols]

I have both an 08 Triumph America and a 04 Moto Guzzi Nevada and will be looking at both the new Triumph cruiser and the MG V9.  Luckily I have a dealer within riding distance that carries both brands, so I can do a real world comparison when both new models are out.  My preference in riding is with a windshield and saddle bags, so after market accessories will be important to me.  I don't plan on giving up either of my cruisers, but rather adding to them if either of the new bikes really stands out.

[Kev m]

Something looks wrong to me with the 54 bhp spec.  A modern 900 cc liquid cooled 4 valve pc engine should be more like 80 rwhp at least.  I know it depends on tuning but this is just my gut feeling.  Plus the manufacturers generally claim 10% more hp and 10% less weight than actual figures.  Just a guess...

They did both increase torque AND lower the peak of the torque curve by 2600 rpm, that's pretty significant.

I think power wasn't the real goal with the Street. I think economy and easy tractability, especially for newer riders, was a priority.

[ohiorider]

It appears Triumph could have taken the same direction they took with the original Bonnie .....  more top end hp vs mid range.

This entire new range of smaller bikes (V7, V9, Speed Twin, etc,) could develop more top end hp than they do currently had that been the primary target of the designers.  It looks like Triumph may have targeted higher torque/hp in the engine's mid range.  They're claiming 18% more torque than the current 865 engine.  Think we'll need to see a dyno graph for the new engine side to side with the 865.

One set of specs for the 865 calls for:
68hp@7500rpm
50 ft lb @ 5800rpm
So the old mill was more of a revver

Perhaps the mid range tuning and lower end hp is as much a marketing decision as an engineering one.  Haven't seen the specs yet on the T120 engine, but pushing the Speed Twin engine's hp into the 75-80hp range may have made it too close in performance to the 1200cc bikes, at least the T120.  Plus the thought that they may be banking on a younger less experienced rider who may be spending more time around town, where mid range torque may be preferred over sheer top end hp.

[canuguzzi]

Numbers don't always tell the whole story. Chains are proved to deliver more of the produced power to the rear wheels than shafties. There is also a lot less unsprung weight with a chain.

The best solution? Own both, how could you go wrong? The Bonnie for the overcast days of winter, the Guzzi for the bright sunlit days of summer. For Spring and Fall, either goes.

[Kev m]

It appears Triumph could have taken the same direction they took with the original Bonnie .....  more top end hp vs mid range.

This entire new range of smaller bikes (V7, V9, Speed Twin, etc,) could develop more top end hp than they do currently had that been the primary target of the designers.  It looks like Triumph may have targeted higher torque/hp in the engine's mid range.  They're claiming 18% more torque than the current 865 engine.  Think we'll need to see a dyno graph for the new engine side to side with the 865.

One set of specs for the 865 calls for:
68hp@7500rpm
50 ft lb @ 5800rpm
So the old mill was more of a revver

Perhaps the mid range tuning and lower end hp is as much a marketing decision as an engineering one.  Haven't seen the specs yet on the T120 engine, but pushing the Speed Twin engine's hp into the 75-80hp range may have made it too close in performance to the 1200cc bikes, at least the T120.  Plus the thought that they may be banking on a younger less experienced rider who may be spending more time around town, where mid range torque may be preferred over sheer top end hp.

Good points.

Actually, the funny thing is it wouldn't be the MOTOR of the T120 that would get me to buy it over the Street. It would be the ancillary things like the dual discs, dual instruments, heated grips etc. Though I guess I wouldn't kick the extra hp out of the bed for eating crackers if you know what I mean.

[Rough Edge racing]

In the current issue of Motorcyclist they interview the engineers behind the new Bonneville. A rather young guy I might add. He was asked why the 270 crank? His answer surprised me. Triumph asked owners (focus group) which configuration they favored 360 or 270. The majority like the cadence and sound of the 270 over the 360 so it was decided to go that way. In the current issue of Cycle in the Service section/Ask Kevin a good discussion of the supposed advantages are discussed. Has to do with traction and exchange energy. Kevin is not clear there is an advantage.

 It's a parallel twin and vibration is annoying with the usual 360 or 180 crankshafts ...The 270 design has been used for maybe 25 years by the "hot rodders" of old Brit bikes with 360 cranks. They cut the cranks and change the rod journal postions along with the cams and ignition modifications...The end result is less vibration felt by the rider.....

[ohiorider]

re vertical 360 twin vibes.  I still remember how my BSA Spitfire Scrambler would 'walk' backwards on its center stand if I goosed the throttle.  Seemed just as bad on bikes built by Yamaha years later (XS650.)  However, by the time Triumph introduced the 'New' Bonneville with 360 crank in 2001, the engine incorporated twin balance shafts, and could fool one into thinking they were riding an extremely smooth multi.  I imagine that without balance shafts in either, the 270 could have been made smoother than the 360, but with the balance shafts in both engines, it was a moot point.  The Bonnie 790 and 865 360 engines are smooth as glass.

[Shorty]

I was thinking about this and went looking for a reason.

I think my conclusion is you may be right (or not) depending on what you want.

I mean, do you want carbs or EFI, do you care about a little more hp.

Maybe you want the Thruxton (air-cooled) with the better suspension (and more power in later years).

If you're strictly talking the Street vs. a carbed 790 - I think it's preference - air-cooled vs. water, carb vs. efi.

I haven't looked closely but I bet the brakes have been upgraded since the 790.

The suspension might be a little better too.

For me the answer is simple, the T120 for the dual disc brakes, factory heated grips, and a little more oomph but still reasonably sized/powered with decent economy.

But for someone else, sure, could go either way!

Yep. After owning a couple 790s, my only complaint is really not a fair one. They do not give the same level of confidence , stability, power or comfort that a big block Tonti Guzzi gives out on the highway at speed. The Speed will solve none of those problems, but the T120 will be a big step forward with power, brakes, and hopefully suspension.

I've had no real trouble with the Triumph carbs as yet, and the chain does surprisingly well, even tugging a sidecar. I'm in the process of getting a title for my 2001 Bonnie (my second), and it was a long term storage bike, so let's hope I don't eat those words, ha ha .

[kingoffleece]

Plenty of stories avail now with the Triumph guys behind the new bikes.  They give a overview of why the 270-one of which was mentioned earlier that the focus groups liked it better.  There were other reasons cited.

I'd wager that sales of the new bikes will surpass the numbers of the previous version.  Most riders don't ride the spec sheet in my experience working with a dealer for several years.  They ride them, they like them, they buy them.  Of the 100's we sold I can only recall two that came back because they weren't fast enough0and those two traded them in on a Speed and Street 3-so the Bonnie was not the right bike for them to begin with.

Kev showed in another post how many small blocks were purchased by forum members.  I don't think any of us who bought them are really unset that the bikes are "slow".