Motorcycle Forums

XC

Yes, this one is much more like the standard Tiger 800, but a bit more off-road than the current Tiger 1050 - maybe aimed somewhere between the MultiStrada and GS Adventure.

I wonder wether they feel that an XC version isn't a real practicality? Just how many BMW GS owners actually take their bikes off-road?

MCN you decided to switch the Explorer artical to another week wihout informing your customers on the website.You took advantage of the death of Simoncelli in my opinion to boost paper sales.

STU  SP2.....like 955nism says i'm struggling with a tight buget and your attitude is perhaps understandable,everything pales into insignificance because a guy has died in a sport in which we love.So why did MCN do what they did?

erm???

I came on here to comment on the Tiger 1200cc, but it seems to have turned into a MCN 1200cc Tiger versus Simoncelli debate!

Most important first!

1. RIP Marco! Was gutted and still am! Overshadows any shallow manufacturer's bike release press so MCN wins.

2. I owned a 2005 955i Tiger and did 32,000 miles on it. Loved that bike! The 1050cc Tiger came out. Hated it so went for something different (still 1050cc).

3. This bike may well be superb, but boy, it is very, very ugly, looks terrible. Not in a "before it's time so I don't get it" ugly. It just looks so old. C'mon Triumph, your recent bikes have looked great, but this one looks like a "Triumph Outtake" design from 5 years ago. Daytona 675 looks modern, Speed and Street Triple looks modern, but this 1200cc bike looks very bland. Perhaps that was the plan?

Still, no doubt it will be great and will win many UK tests against the 1200GS etc.

Looks pants though! But then again, with respect to the crowd it will apeal to, that doesn't matter! You'll get a big shaft afterall!

What an absolute bunch of plebs you are. What is MotorCycle News? I'll give you a hint; the name says it all. It is a newspaper that reports the latest news on all things Motorcycling... from new bikes to old bikes, legislation affecting road users and in particular it's target audience; motorcyclists, and of course it covers motorcycle racing too as I would suggest a large majority of MCN's readership are also motorcycle racing fans. What would have happened if MCN had let the untimely and upsetting death of one of the worlds most charismatic and promising motorcycle racers, racing at the sharp end of the pinnacle of two-wheeled motorsport, go under the radar with a less than adequate write-up because it had promised an article on a forgettable, mediocre looking soft-road BMW wannabe? The bike is not due to be unveiled until next month and who knows when it will be available to buy... there is plenty of time for pictures and write-ups and analysis of it's boring features. Marco Simoncelli is/was/has been the biggest news in motorcycling this week, people (and not only motorcyclists) want to read about him, his achievements, his failures, his life... he is at the forefront of the public consciousness around the world as has been proven by the F1 coverage this morning from India, and I would be worried about the motivation of the Editor had he not chosen to work out a way to include a decent article on the guy. People want the news and will find a way to get the information they seek one way or another. You guys want the news about the new Triumph Tiger... you have voted with your feet and not bought this weeks MCN because it doesn't have the information you want and have found it in other places. A lot of people want the news about Simoncelli, they've probably voted with their feet and bought MCN for the write-up. So MCN has lost out on selling 5 copies of it's paper to you chumps, but they've probably sold a lot more copies of the paper to people who wouldn't have otherwise bought it because of the coverage they've given to Simoncelli. Call it profiteering, call it what you like, but if a newspaper doesn't report what it's readers want it will have no readers and therefore no profit. Good journalism if you ask me...

And I rest mine too

If the MCN a#^e lickers on here can seriously refer to the writers as 'journalists' then it says a lot. They might just about get a small column in the Sun or the Sport, but the vast majority of the biking population consider it to be a bit of a fun read, a comic not a factual publication. A bit like Wikipedia but still in paper format. Everyone to their own thoughts, I don't care that the Triumph wasn't in this weeks article, I just don't like the profiteering from such a tragic event, there's even an electronic version to buy now for god sake! Its like their coverage of road racing, it's non existent until a big name hurts themselves and then it's like they've always covered it. Anyway I'm voting with my feet and won't buy again, I'm sure everyone else will make their own minds up. Variety is the spice of life, I just hope it gives the MCN execs some serious indigestion in the near future