The tail of the three Tigers.

[Nooj]

I did some serious test riding yesterday at Bulldog Triumph, a Tiger 1050 sport, an 800 and a 1200 Explorer.

For saying they are all Tigers, I was surprised at how different they all felt to ride. I was expecting much more similarity between them, all being the same range, but I found that not to be the case.



The new version of the 1050 Sport was first. A big bike, but I felt very confident on it once moving. With the lower, slimmer seat on these compared to the older 1050, I was easily able to get both sets of toes down on the road, and could flat-foot one at a time (5'8" in my boots, with short legs). Not as heavy as it looks, I found it easy to balance at slow speed and hold upright at traffic lights. Slightly too tall to be completely care-free about where I stopped, but manageable in most circumstances.

It rode well, pulled strongly all through the rev range and felt like a very capable machine. Not as arm-wrenching as I was hoping it would be for a 1050cc triple, but overtakes were done nice and quickly. Great brakes with plenty of power and feel. The screen on the new bike is bigger than the older version and I found it created quite a loud, constant, low-pitch roaring wind noise where ever I sat in the saddle which let it down a bit. A 6' plus rider would have no issues with it though, if I stood on the pegs slightly the noise stopped.

The suspension felt a little harsh over small ripples and bumps, but the bike was certainly comfortable with it's big squishy seat and never felt unpleasant to ride. Being a big bike and so not having the sensitive steering of a sportsbike, it took a bit of effort to throw it around at speed. Big wide bars made it easier. Maybe all of this could have been improved with different suspension settings, but I didn't have time to fart around with that.

I did find the bars too high for me, they're higher than the bars on the other two Tigers, which seemed like an odd decision personally. Throttle response was nice, but there was a definite hunting on part throttle at 4000rpm, which as it turns out, is where I spent most of the time on the roads I was on. I expect the after-market end can and map would alleviate this (or roads with less traffic on them).

In all, a big, friendly, capable machine. A few little things I'd have done differently as it didn't have the 'wow' factor I was hoping for, but that gives scope to make the bike your own with a few mods here and there, no bad thing in my book.



The Tiger 800 was next up. Not the XC variant, this one had the alloy wheels rather than the spokes, so sat a bit closer to the ground. The seat was also on the 'low' setting, ideal for my stumpy pins. Though still not midget-friendly, the skinny-ness and lightness of the bike meant that I could easily balance it when stopped.

Right after pulling away I knew this wasn't going to be what I was expecting. An 800cc long-stroke motor in a semi-off-road type bike, I was expecting lazy slow-revving power delivery and bouncy suspension. Surprise! The ride was a little bouncy at the front, but very well controlled, nothing like the rocking horse I thought it would be and the engine revved up much more willingly than I thought it would. The seat was just as comfy as the bigger 1050 item and the lower bars made it much less cruiser-like for me than the 1050 felt.

I've never found it a particularly attractive bike to look at, but within minutes I was at home on it and wanting to see what kind of fun we could have together. When I reached the turning-round point of my test route I went the other way as I didn't want to get off, taking a different, longer route back to the shop. I'm glad I did!

Again the motor would hunt on part throttle at 4000rpm and again the after-market can and map would ease this, but even without them it didn't matter as all the bike wanted to do was rev up and play, so I didn't spend much time there. With less weight to shift, it didn't feel like the rate of acceleration was far off the 1050. Engine braking was nice and strong, so not the low-compression, softly tuned thing I was expecting at all. The extended test ride showed real hooligan potential and put a big smile on my face (though probably not on the faces of the other road users :-o ). I did get one twitch from the front under acceleration, so I shuffled forward on the comfy, well-padded seat, rested on my gooch and rode it super-moto style, and it seemed perfectly happy like that.

Don't let the gangly, geeky-kid looks fool you, this thing is a tool.



1200 Explorer time. This was the one I'd really been looking forward to, the big daddy. So big in fact, that due to the slight incline I'd parked it on, it was all I could do to get it upright off the side stand with my short legs. This was with the low seat height, the issue here was it's weight. Once up it felt fine though with the balls of both feet on the ground. Nice to see that shorties can have a big bike if they want one.

A very comfortable bike to sit on, with the same lower bars as the 800 again and a big soft-yet-supportive seat. It did feel a bit like a big, fat 800 to sit on, but the similarity ended there. Once again, it was not what I was expecting at all. Unfortunately for me, not in a good way.

I found the fuelling very snatchy, the throttle control needed a lot of attention coupled with a high amount of rear brake and clutch work, leading to the big bike lurching around alarmingly a number of times when my concentration was diverted elsewhere, definitely not what I wanted on someone else's £12k bike. On the open road with an open throttle the fuelling was fine, the bike accelerating impressively for it's size, catching up with traffic noticeably quicker than the other two Tigers. This was the performance I was expecting from the 1050. Bizarrely enough, at a walking pace up to 2000rpm the Explorer was one of the easiest bikes I've ever ridden, if not the easiest. It's to do with a twin-TPS set-up apparently, one for very slow speeds, one for everything else. The change-over point being the cause of the snatchyness. Whatever the cause, I didn't like it and expected much better from a bike in this price range.

Another problem for me was helmet-shaking turbulence from the screen at motorway speeds. I tried sitting up straighter and crouching down, moving forward and back on the seat, but nothing got rid of it, it was actually blurring my vision while seeing if I could ride through it at a higher speed.

I also struggled at slower speeds on twisty, narrow, back roads. Partly because of the throttle response, but also due to the size of the bike. Road positioning went out the window as I found it very difficult to gauge where I actually was on the road, especially on corners. I've never had that before and I don't know what was causing it. My best guess would be the width of the tank, noticeably filling my peripheral vision where I'd normally see road. I think this was more about what I was used to rather than a fault of the bike itself though.

I really, really wanted to be impressed by this bike, but I actually found myself looking forward to the halfway point on my route so I could turn round and take it back. Such a shame. If I wanted a bike to ride at under 5mph, this would be my first choice of all the bikes I've ridden, every time. Triumph have balanced it perfectly for this, a massive achievement considering it's size and weight. But how often do you need to do that on a bike? With better fueling, a different screen and 20kg less weight, this would easily be in my top 10 bikes, as it is... bottom 10 I'm afraid.

So, a day of having my expectations completely overturned. I'm glad I made the effort to try them all as it's something I've been wanting to do for a while now. My choice? Obvious really, the Tiger 800, by a long way. This somewhat goofy-looking soft-roader is far more fun than it should be, if I wanted a middleweight all-rounder that could commute, hoon, tour and green-lane (and there aren't many bikes that can do all of that anyway) this would be my No1. Choice. Top bit of kit, can't recommend it enough!

[Falcorob]

Well I now own a Tiger 1050 ('09) and love it. I would kind of agree with your summation, though mine is the old model, but would add that it's good for hundreds of miles a day. I've recently done 410 and 333 miles in a day with no issues at all. On the Falco that would have caused me fairly acute problems in my hands, and a numb bum the next day as well.

I would highly recommend anyone trying one out.

[Aladinsaneuk]

you talk about a numb bum here ?

with some of our members??

I am certain they would have a cure.... you probably would not suffer from constipation afterwards either but....

[D-Rider]

you talk about a numb bum here ?

with some of our members??

I am certain they would have a cure.... you probably would not suffer from constipation afterwards either but....

says the chap that was only bragging on Facebook today



...... bet you didn't even take their phone numbers

[Aladinsaneuk]

I wasn't doing it for them

[fatboy]

Interesting write up, dismisses all the media hype re soopa doopa 1200 as ,erm media hype.
Or even MCN sponsored by Triumph

[Falcorob]

Interesting write up, dismisses all the media hype re soopa doopa 1200 as ,erm media hype.
Or even MCN sponsored by Triumph

That the same MCN that rave about the new GS and reckon the Triumph is aimed more at the touring end of the scale?

The 'old' Tiger 1050 is a bike which, like the Falco, didn't get great press but attracts loyal owners who know a good thing when they see it. Both are truly great road bikes overlooked by a once Sportsbike mad public. I would say that the Falco has more character but is less comfy, though for pillion accomodation the Tiger wins hands down. It handles about the same but has more ground clearance and a far better front end. The standard rear shocks on both are woeful. The Tiger is more comfortable over long distance though it's a more turbulent, and therefore noisier, cockpit. Both are fairly high seating positions for the shorter of leg. The Falco brakes (front - I think mine has a back brake but I've never noticed if it does anything when you press the lever!!) are better when in good condition even though the Tigers are radial, though that may have as much to do with the geometry and riding position as it does to the actual retardation capabilities of the hardware itself. The Tiger has a bigger tank so can go further between top ups. They use fuel at a similar rate when touring. The Falco is faster at the top end but there's nothing in it anywhere until the better aerodynamics come into effect at silly speeds. Looks are subjective and, seeing as I'm on an Aprilia forum, I'll let you decide which looks better. (I prefer the Tiger). I could write a great deal more about both bikes pro's and cons but the end result would always be that I like both equally.

Given both brand new I would end up doing more miles on the Tiger but the miles I did on the Falco would be more memorable.

Just my two pennorth worth.