1971 Triumph Bonneville

[scra99tch]

I had tried searching but could not find a solid answer.  I have a chance to buy the Triumph for about $2k.  I figured this was a little bit too much as I would turn around and try to make a nice profit.  As far as I can tell the bike is stock except for the handle bars.  The problem is it is on my trailer at the moment as I had lent it to this individual.  He went out and bought a custom Harley and now wants to get rid of the bike.  I figured I would offer him $1k (he got it for free from a cousin). 

What do you think I could get from it running?  I will try and get pictures tomorrow but I have a feeling I am storing it at home whether I buy it or not.

[Lannis]

I had tried searching but could not find a solid answer.  I have a chance to buy the Triumph for about $2k.  I figured this was a little bit too much as I would turn around and try to make a nice profit.  As far as I can tell the bike is stock except for the handle bars.  The problem is it is on my trailer at the moment as I had lent it to this individual.  He went out and bought a custom Harley and now wants to get rid of the bike.  I figured I would offer him $1k (he got it for free from a cousin). 

What do you think I could get from it running?  I will try and get pictures tomorrow but I have a feeling I am storing it at home whether I buy it or not.

There's not going to be a solid answer!

Really depends on what it's going to take to get it running.   If the bike's running, not clattering, shifting good, tinware in good shape, then $2500 would be what you'd expect to pay or get.   

If it's not running, it's likely not because "needs battery" or "carbs need cleaning"; it's more likely to be a spun main bearing or something, and the bike is good for $1200 in parts maybe.

Lannis

[stmike]

I may be wrong, but I believe that 1971 is the year they went to the oil-in-frame models, and those aren't as in demand as the earlier ones, especially the '69 and '70's.  But I would think that if it doesn't require too much work to make it running and presentable, $1000 would probably leave you some room for some profit.  Check on triumph rat.net

[tpeever]

Yep , first OIF , first year conical (coMical) front brake , gas tanks that split , suspension that is anything but ... stop me anytime 

  Dusty

OIF Triumphs get no respect. They are better bikes than the previous generation but don't look near as pretty. I had a '72 TR6C that was a much better bike than the '67 TR6C I own currently but the latter is worth 4 times the former. Go figure. OIF Triumphs are climbing slowly in value but I still wouldn't pay more than 1.5K for a non runner OIF. You could put 4K into this bike easily to get it roadworthy.

[dl.allen]

I have a 72 tr6 that I bought for 1500.  I put about 3000 in it and its perfect now.  It will likely need the cases split, new bearings etc.  If you get it perfect running and looking they are still only worth 5 or 6k.  I put retro side covers on mine so it looks like a 1970. 

[tpeever]

I have a 72 tr6 that I bought for 1500.  I put about 3000 in it and its perfect now.  It will likely need the cases split, new bearings etc.  If you get it perfect running and looking they are still only worth 5 or 6k.  I put retro side covers on mine so it looks like a 1970.

Did the same with mine. Here are a few photos:

[oldbike54]

 The TR6C look is cool , love the color scheme 

  Dusty

[Kiwi all]

I can't comment on the price but my main ride is a 71 bonnie, mine has engine And frame number starting GE and is one of the first 5 speeds made, I think the 71's have their issues but all in all aren't a bad bike. Might be worth checking that the numbers match which will make it a little more valuable.
You can sink some money into them though, I have just completed a full engine rebuild on mine due to a broken con rod and the bill was in excess of $2000 for parts alone.

[lrutt]

If motor is not toast (ie sludge trap not blocked and crank ruined) and if the chrome is decent, and if it has a title and gauges etc. $2k might be ok.

I got hold of (as in free) a 71 Trophy and put a whopping $700 in it to get it going and road worthy, that was 15 years ago and have not had to do a single thing to it since.

The tricky part is that  you plan on flipping it. If you were keeping it then I'd say go for it. But for a flip I'd pass as the $$ made probably won't be worth the $$ and time put in it.

Those OIF's just still aren't quite bringing the money of the pre-OIFs.

[tpeever]

The TR6C look is cool , love the color scheme 

  Dusty

Thanks! The stock colors for this bike were blue (can't remember what it is called) and white. The '67 colors (Sea Mist Green, Arctic White) are my favorite Triumph colors so that's what I went with. I also like the Aubergine/Arctic White combo on Triumphs.

Here's a shot of my '67 TR6C:

[oldbike54]

Thanks! The stock colors for this bike were blue (can't remember what it is called) and white. The '67 colors (Sea Mist Green, Arctic White) are my favorite Triumph colors so that's what I went with. I also like the Aubergine/Arctic White combo on Triumphs.

Here's a shot of my '67 TR6C:

 Ahh , I see you have a thing for C models . Yeah , Edward Turner liked to use "colorful" names for paint , Amaranth red , Alaskan white, etc . That is a lovely motorbike . Who did the front brake conversion ?

  Dusty

[lrutt]

a 71 TR6C would be Pacific Blue. Here my original, complete with folding foot pegs and skid plate, wire frame headlight holder, and single gauge as per standard. I did upgrade it with a Norton Commando oil filter, as I did with my 70 Tiger. Must have modification for any Trumpet IMO.

[tpeever]

Ahh , I see you have a thing for C models . Yeah , Edward Turner liked to use "colorful" names for paint , Amaranth red , Alaskan white, etc . That is a lovely motorbike . Who did the front brake conversion ?

  Dusty

Yes, I really like the "C" models. I think they are very pretty bikes. This bike is matching numbers but had a '69-'70 BSA/Triumph front end on it when I bought it about 8 years ago. I learned a LOT about the subtle differences between BSA and Triumph triple trees, fork diameters, axle lengths, etc. when I converted it back to all Triumph parts. The brake is highly effective for a drum brake so I kept it instead of going back to the '67 brake.

[oldbike54]

Yes, I really like the "C" models. I think they are very pretty bikes. This bike is matching numbers but had a '69-'70 BSA/Triumph front end on it when I bought it about 8 years ago. I learned a LOT about the subtle differences between BSA and Triumph triple trees, fork diameters, axle lengths, etc. when I converted it back to all Triumph parts. The brake is highly effective for a drum brake so I kept it instead of going back to the '67 brake.

 Yeah , that generation of twin leading shoe brake is a good design . Combined with a shuttle valve fork makes for a nice front assembly .
Several years ago , stopped at the top of a canyon road aboard a '70 TR6R ,an Aussie approached and said "Nice bike , and I see you have the GOOD front brake" . Dunno what an Aussie was doing in Oklahoma , no Roos here 
 Oh , and yes , BSA's ain't Triumphs , despite what lots of people think .


  Dusty

[tpeever]

a 71 TR6C would be Pacific Blue. Here my original, complete with folding foot pegs and skid plate, wire frame headlight holder, and single gauge as per standard. I did upgrade it with a Norton Commando oil filter, as I did with my 70 Tiger. Must have modification for any Trumpet IMO

Yes, Pacific Blue, that's the name!! My OIF TR6C was an interesting specimen. As I indicated above, I think it felt stiffer and had superior handling to the '67 I own now but wasn't nearly as pretty as the '67. The VIN put it as one of the very last TR6C's made and was '72 model year but had a mixture of '71 and '72 parts on it, presumably from the factory. When I mentioned this to another Brit bike enthusiast he wasn't surprised as he thought the Triumph workers would probably just use up the parts from '71 before starting in on the '72 parts bin!! There were some fairly subtle changes from '71 to '72 that I can't remember now. Were the '72 models also Pacific Blue/Arctic White? My bike was pure white when I bought it.

[radguzzi]

Gee I hate to be that guy but I have done a number of Triumphs over the years including the '71 & '72 TR6s and Bonnevilles and I believe the '71 would have been Polychromtic Blue and the '72 would have been Pacific Blue...  both with Alaska White seperated by a Gold stripe.

I'll look it up when I get home.

Best,
Rob

[rodekyll]

My '71 TR6R had an oiler frame and a 5-speed.  It was blue and white.  I 'upgraded' it at different times with a Fairbanks Morse magneto and again with an electronic ignition that ran off a pin pickup installed in the alternator.  It was a fun bike until it got stolen and the only one I routinely did intentional wheelies with.

[Rough Edge racing]

 I work on Triumphs all the time and have a successful race bike...If it's old and the engine hasn't been disassembled in many years...There's a good possibility the crankshaft sludge trap is plugged...I see it all the time.....It's a grenade that may or maynot explode...Kinda like a chrome bore Guzzi...
 The market right now is strong for bone stock ,cafe and bobber Triumphs. So there might be money made on a stocker flip sale if you buy cheap. I recently have tried to sell my 70 modified Triumph Bonneville, 750 kit, modern forks, set back pegs, everything new, blah blah...Never went over 3200 on Ebay and zero call from Craig's list...no one wants a hot rod right now

     
     

[scra99tch]

That's it there's some corrosion, seat thread is detaching, fender looks like it was repaired.

Also after getting her started there was a squeaking coming from the right Amal carb.  After I open the throttle it goes away.  Thought it was metal on metal but am not sure.

[scra99tch]

Easy to get to sludge trap?  I'll look on triumphrat.net for the answer in the mean time.

[Kiwi Dave]

There were some fairly subtle changes from '71 to '72 that I can't remember now.

Two, I can remember.  One was the fork lowers were polished and without the ridge that ran down the side of the earlier ones.

The second was the seat height was abnormally tall on the '71 model.  Dunno what the factory did, but the '72 and later the seat height was back to normal.

Back in those days, I owned a '70 Bonnie, a '71 Trident, and then a '73 Trident (one at a time).  Later I purchased a '73 Bonneville followed by a couple of '79 Bonnies.  I think the '70 Bonnie was my favourite.

[oldbike54]

Easy to get to sludge trap?  I'll look on triumphrat.net for the answer in the mean time.

 Unfortunately no . Requires splitting the cases and removing the crank , and that is the easy part . Most shops charge one price for rebuilding a bottom end , twice as much if they have to clean the trap .

  Dusty

[tpeever]

Easy to get to sludge trap?  I'll look on triumphrat.net for the answer in the mean time.

Not easy to get at

[tpeever]

Two, I can remember.  One was the fork lowers were polished and without the ridge that ran down the side of the earlier ones.

The second was the seat height was abnormally tall on the '71 model.  Dunno what the factory did, but the '72 and later the seat height was back to normal.

Back in those days, I owned a '70 Bonnie, a '71 Trident, and then a '73 Trident (one at a time).  Later I purchased a '73 Bonneville followed by a couple of '79 Bonnies.  I think the '70 Bonnie was my favourite.

Was method to attach exhaust to heads slightly different as well? It was a while ago but I think that is what tipped me off that I had a '71/'72 model!!

[oldbike54]

Two, I can remember.  One was the fork lowers were polished and without the ridge that ran down the side of the earlier ones.

The second was the seat height was abnormally tall on the '71 model.  Dunno what the factory did, but the '72 and later the seat height was back to normal.

Back in those days, I owned a '70 Bonnie, a '71 Trident, and then a '73 Trident (one at a time).  Later I purchased a '73 Bonneville followed by a couple of '79 Bonnies.  I think the '70 Bonnie was my favourite.

 They shortened the forks . Yeah , the OIF was a BSA design , dreamed up at their new design headquarters , Umberslade Hall , by guys that had never designed motorbikes . When the first frames arrived in Meriden the engines would not fit the frames , Required a change in rocker box design to allow the boxes added after engine installation .

  Dusty

[Kiwi Dave]

Was method to attach exhaust to heads slightly different as well? It was a while ago but I think that is what tipped me off that I had a '71/'72 model!!

It's been a long time ago, but I think the earlier ones had exhaust clamps that secured the pipe to a protruding flange out the head.  The later versions had ornamental clamps that did nothing, the pipes were a push fit into the head.

[dl.allen]

Here is my 72 TR6RV
with the retro side covers right before I painted and cleared them.

[tpeever]

Here is my 72 TR6RV
with the retro side covers right before I painted and cleared them.

Nice!! Makes we want an OIF T'rumph again!!

[Lannis]

The later type relied on the crossover to keep the pipes pulled into the splayed exhaust ports .

  Dusty

You sure?   That was always the BSA system but all the Triumphs I remember had stubs onto which the pipes slid and were clamped .... ?    Hard to imagine Triumph would change to what BSA was doing once BSA was gone.   

They might have, I'm just asking ...

Lannis

[Lannis]

BSA didn't disappear until 1975 , and at the time of the design change to the push in pipes , BSA still owned Triumph . The OIF , comical hub brakes , internal spring Ceriani style forks , and even the abandoned Fury/Bandit project were all basically BSA designs . Edward Turner was spinning in his grave .

 Dusty

I don't know about "disappear", but I do know that BSA was coughing up blood in 1972, the factory was shuttered, and anything produced after that (like the T-65) were BSA-badged Triumphs from Meriden not even TRYING to look like BSAs ...

Lannis