Honda CB1000R vs Triumph Speed Triple R

This may seem one sided as the Triple R is a lot more money than the Honda but in terms of prices, you can pick up an ex demo R for not much more than a new Honda.

Anybody ridden both and can comment..... to be used to get to work and of course general usage on the road (no track use_.

 

Never ridden the Honda... But for me a no brainer. The T all day long, the Honda doesn't have the soul or character of the triumph.

Personally if you are using as a second bike get an 08 ish model. I've ridden the 08+ and new one and not a lot in between them and the 08 in black with a lowboy is one handsome bike and a lot less £££££

 

Not as a second bike but as the one and only bike.

 

I traded my 07 blade in this summer for a 2010
Triple bright orange with full arrow lowboy and I luv it
Great fun bike

 

Speed 3 all day. The engine is a stonker, and the chassis is brilliant. The cb1000r is boring in comparison.

 

Prob still get the 08 model one - think they are lovely.

New one is a better bike though

 

Yup it would be the T for me also. Really like the look of them. Especially in black like the 1 Jimbo posted.

 

I am almost certain to know of an early 2012 SPeed triple made into an R by a Triumph factory mechanic - white - will not be till spring as owner has to keep for 1 year plus

 

I had the old T509 Speed triple and that was an amazing bike, so these new ones are supposed to be much, much better so I rekon if it was up to me, it would be the speed triple.

The reason I parted with the speed triple was because Triumph wanted £600 to service it, the older Triumphs were not designed to make servicing easy, due to having to drop or tip the engine in the frame to get to the shims and ontop of that Triumph give them a lot of hours to work on them for a full service. However the new ones are much better, I think the price is around £350 for a full service.

 

i had a 2009 cb1000r
i never managed to get the suspension right on it. i even took it to a suspension guy to set up and he said that it had very limited suspension settings, it was wearing out a rear tyre every 2000 miles (i get 4500 out of my blade rears.)
it really stood out in repsol colours ,but it was a right pain in the neck at anything above 70mph due to the wind trying to pull my helmet off.
i also put a gel seat on it as the standard seat is a pain in the ass after 100 miles. (a very common complaint on the cb1000r)
i sold it after going to the i.o.m and realising that the 150mph max speed was not enough for me any more.
when i went out on a new blade i realised how slow the cb1000r felt , i also road tested a tuono v4 , i was very impressed with the tuono, go for a road test on one if you can ,they handle brilliantly and the engine pulls like a train,only managed 27mpg on the road test though.

 

Well pretty convincing for the Triple R, I have read a few reviews of the newer 2012 bike and they all say it is a marked improvement over the older model, but the R is really for those who like tracks etc..... for me, even for the road the R would still be the one, the reason being.... there would be fewer of them, thus making them semi exclusive.. i like that. Cheers for the comments.

 

Just to add I test rode a cb1000r, its a very plain bike in comparison, good but as said above the suspension didn't feel good, it felt slow and the Superduke I rode after it was miles better, have not ridden the trumpet but have spoken to a few that have them and they all love them to bits...... Look better as well IMO

 

Cb1000r Not a great bike at all.Had one for a week and I hated it.Like previous posts the suspension is limited and felt wooden.There was no confidence with it at all.At motorway speeds it was wandery and through the lanes it was ponderous with me fighting it to go where I wanted it to go.I was surprised that Honda built this bike like this without looking at the competition.I think the Kawasaki er6-n was miles better on handling than the Cb1000r.They are not very powerful but through the lanes it would leave a Cb1000r for dead.Imagine what a Triple could do.
My mates Triple r rode very well.That was a 2010 model with all the right bits on it. Very flickable, comfortable and enough power to enjoy yourself with. Confidence from the first ride is probably why they sell so many.Triple r by a long way.

 

Agree with the above on the looks, in the flesh they look even better. I thought Honda would have updated the CB by now its now over 5 years old without any really changes but colour.

 

I've just sold a 2010 Triumph Street Triple on which I put 22k miles over 2.5 years and am looking to buy a second hand Blade as I think the blade is a better bike than the Street or the Speed Triples. I've ridden a Speed Triple on three occassions including the latest tarted up 2012 R version and my conclusion was the smaller Street Triple was a better bike (better accelleration, more flickable and manageable in town and twisties) and that a Blade was the best of them all thanks to the fantastic acceleration, good top speed and a good comfort). I agree that Triumphs have more character thanks to vibrations of the triple cylinder engine and the odd mis-fire etc. and also the brand reputation but at this point of life I want a well engineered, proven and reliable litre engine in a sportsbike packaging.

 

My mate test rode a CB1000R (on my insistence, coz I think they look ace) and hated it... too boring. Then test rode a Street Triple R with the Arrow system, and fell in love... much more character and a stonking exhaust note with the occasional pop on the overrun.

Mind you, by the time he had spec'd it up with Arrow system, belly pan, fly screen, and odd thing that goes over the pillion seat, it is one PRICEY purchase!!!

 

Yeah the Street Triple 675 is fantastic though it's not got the balls of a litre sportsbike and feels a bit small - as if meant for a kid. The Speed Triple 1050 hasn't got the balls either, it's an old underpoweredand overpriced heavy lump that needs updating (engine and gearbox designed in 2005). If I was after a a big naked I'd rather go Kawasaki Z1000 than a Speed Triple (more power, modern engine and gearbox, modern styling).

 

have you rode the 1050? i spent an afternoon on my pals in the black forest and thought it was more than quick enough!? had loads of grunt and had no problems keeping up (and leaving behind) guys on latest litre sports bikes.

i thought it was an awesome bike. one think i would never say was that i thought lacked power?

 

The Speed lacks power / torque compared to a litre sportsbike and on a standard gearing it even feels slower than a Street on -1 front / +1 rear. Could be the extra weight and the old engine. But don't get me wrong I'm not saying it's a boring bike.