Thanks Hopefully thought provoking Will make people consider that history is complicated People often consider history as one dimensional without really giving it too much thought
Lovely looking machines. I remember my next door neighbour buying a F reg T100, around 76/77, to go with his T160, that he bought new. The T100 looked so light & lean.
In the mid 60's I acquired a rather beat up and customized Triumph Tiger 100-R, 1957 model. It had twin GranPrix Carbs, with velocity stacks, and a remote float bowl. It ran rather poorly as the GP carbs had no idle circuits. After a few months of frustration I installed a set of AMAL carbs from a burned out Bonneville, and the bike then ran much better. I sold the bike in order to attend College, and often wonder what happened to it as it was a rather rare model here in Western Canada.
In the sixties one of my mates had the T100 with the alloy barrels . Lovely bike which i coveted . As i rode a Viper sports . So i upgraded to a DBD 34 Goldie . Happy days .
Lovely bikes. When I was a small boy in the early 60s, our family transport was a 49 Sprung Hub Speed twin with a colour matched Watsonian Palma sidecar, colour matched in Amaranth Red. As a result, I have a soft spot for Triumphs in general, and 500 twins in particular.
I was daft enough to buy a new Daytona 500 in 1973 from Broadway Motors in Stoke, only weeks before the factory closed and the workers had a sit-in. They were not good quality bikes and the valve guides wore out before 12k miles.......... Replaced it with a used BMW R60/6 which was in a different league to the Triumph. I did however, go to the Elephant rally in Germany on it before selling the Daytona but the exhaust fell off on the way home on the M1 and got crushed by a lorry - it had those stupid push in the cylinder head exhaust pipes.
@@bikerdood1100 Yes, they were far better than Guzzis in those days. Have you been to Specsavers lately as I have never seen any BMWs or Guzzis that look similar?
@@bikerdood1100 You can't blame the twin carbs for all the other problems. Triumphs and Nortons were both very poorly built in the 1970s. Yet they thought they could still sell them against the likes of Honda etc. They soon found out just how wrong they were. Denis Poore said that every Triumph sold in the early 1970s were sold at a loss of £100 which was about a quarter of the road price.
Nope but as a general rule it’s yeh way to go 🙄 Very late bikes suffered build quality issues no doubt Demoralised work force Quality control taking a back seat as the money ran out Lots of problems
another great vid
Thanks
Hopefully thought provoking
Will make people consider that history is complicated
People often consider history as one dimensional without really giving it too much thought
Lovely looking machines. I remember my next door neighbour buying a F reg T100, around 76/77, to go with his T160, that he bought new. The T100 looked so light & lean.
They are indeed
We will be following up with a road test of one in the future
In the mid 60's I acquired a rather beat up and customized Triumph Tiger 100-R, 1957 model. It had twin GranPrix Carbs, with velocity stacks, and a remote float bowl. It ran rather poorly as the GP carbs had no idle circuits. After a few months of frustration I installed a set of AMAL carbs from a burned out Bonneville, and the bike then ran much better. I sold the bike in order to attend College, and often wonder what happened to it as it was a rather rare model here in Western Canada.
Those GPs were never intended for road use really
Some people can set them up to work pretty well on road
Buts it’s a dark art
Had a new T 100 R in 1967. Very pretty blue and white. Fitted with a sport fairing saw over 8000 rpm
That’s working the thing pretty dam hard
Thanks, I really enjoy your stuff
Thanks
In the sixties one of my mates had the T100 with the alloy barrels . Lovely bike which i coveted . As i rode a Viper sports . So i upgraded to a DBD 34 Goldie . Happy days .
Nice
Lovely bikes. When I was a small boy in the early 60s, our family transport was a 49 Sprung Hub Speed twin with a colour matched Watsonian Palma sidecar, colour matched in Amaranth Red. As a result, I have a soft spot for Triumphs in general, and 500 twins in particular.
Well I expect you would
Sad the world has followed the US in their car addiction
Very enjoyable. Would have liked a run down of the various models anf their meaning, eg SS, C, T etc.
Tue but that would be an even longer video
I remember riding both the Speedtwin (5T) and Tiger 100 in the 60s .Great times
Glad you enjoyed it
Very interestig vid. thanks dood.
Glad you enjoyed it
I was daft enough to buy a new Daytona 500 in 1973 from Broadway Motors in Stoke, only weeks before the factory closed and the workers had a sit-in. They were not good quality bikes and the valve guides wore out before 12k miles.......... Replaced it with a used BMW R60/6 which was in a different league to the Triumph. I did however, go to the Elephant rally in Germany on it before selling the Daytona but the exhaust fell off on the way home on the M1 and got crushed by a lorry - it had those stupid push in the cylinder head exhaust pipes.
Ahh
Twin carbs
The route to misery in so many cases
BMW
The bikes that look a bit like Guzzis
But Guzzis they are not
@@bikerdood1100 Yes, they were far better than Guzzis in those days. Have you been to Specsavers lately as I have never seen any BMWs or Guzzis that look similar?
@@bikerdood1100 You can't blame the twin carbs for all the other problems. Triumphs and Nortons were both very poorly built in the 1970s. Yet they thought they could still sell them against the likes of Honda etc. They soon found out just how wrong they were. Denis Poore said that every Triumph sold in the early 1970s were sold at a loss of £100 which was about a quarter of the road price.
Nope but as a general rule it’s yeh way to go 🙄
Very late bikes suffered build quality issues no doubt
Demoralised work force
Quality control taking a back seat as the money ran out
Lots of problems