Talk:Triumph Engineering

Engines
"Triumph is now carving out a niche in the motorcycle market based on nostalgic engine technologies and design." - This is complete rubbish. Triumph forced the limited production of Bonnevilles under licence to cease some years before the launch of the new generation models in 1991 - this was a deliberate move to break the link with the past, so that the new models would not be tainted with the faults of the old. The new generation models were deliberately intended to be modern, not nostalgic. It was many years before the 'new' Triumph felt confident enough to produce retro models such as the new Bonneville, but even then their similarity to the engines of the past is cosmetic. Modern emissions and noise limits demand the use of modern techniques even on a retro bike. Triumph introduced technology such as advanced programmable fuel injection/engine management computers to their production bikes significantly earlier than the Japanese. Unsigned comment 02:16, 7 December 2005 83.147.140.57

Workers cooperative
After the workers cooperative collapsed Any more background on that? - FrancisTyers 13:34, 11 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Try it now - much more! Regards, - Trident13 19:05, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

Les Harris
For a Triumph owner's review of the Les Harris products see here: http://autos.groups.yahoo.com/group/BonnevilleOwnersClub/message/6320
 * or read this:" I owned two of the Harris sh*tes (refuse to call them bikes) in 1987. The first one I purchased brand new from White City Motorcycles Manchester and I returned it after just one day and got a refund of my money. Blaming the dealer for the faults (I got it wrong and soon found it was Harris's fault) and for a bad pre delivery inspection I the went to Wileman's of Derby and bought another brand new one. That turned out to be the worst bike I have ever owned. The list of failures/breakages and trips to the dealers for warranty work is so long you just wouldn't believe me if I told you. This included new pistons and barrels despite it still being under 600 miles old and being treated with care. I took the bike on a tour of France and covered over 2,000 miles and below is a list of faults that developed. When I returned from holiday and because I was sick of going to the dealer I trailored the bike the 255miles from my house to the Harris factory in Devon. The bike was just 4 months old and had less than 3,500 miles on the clock at this time. Here's just some of what I can remember of what was on the list of faults I gave them with instructions to put right : crankcase joint leaking oil; alternator rotor nut came loose and the rotor destroyed the stator and wreck the end of the crankshaft; and also burst through the primary case; neutral light faulty (sometimes came on even when in gears); broken spokes in the back wheel; front wheel out of balance; one of the rear dampers collapsed; oil leak rocker box; oil leak tacho gearbox; oil leak kickstart shaft; chainguard rubbed through side wall of rear tyre; ignition switch failed, internals fell to bits; silencer was damaged by rear wheel spindle; horn fell off; offside mirror fell off whilst doing 60mph and hit my mate who was riding behind me; the seat took in water if the bike got rained on; the fuel tank leaked; the brakes were crap despite there being two discs up front; the chrome on the silencers was crap and rust was showing through; the wheel rims also showed rust; the bike consumed more than 10 pints of oil in 2,000 miles. Brian Jones who was the former Chief Design Engineer at the Triumph Meriden factory was working in management at the Harris factory in Devon, and he said he would get everything put back to new condition. Eventually after 12 weeks and numerous telephone calls the bike was delivered back to me. It was during one of these calls that Les Harris himself made the statement that he didn't give a f*ck about me or my bike. The bike came back with almost all the original parts replaced including a new cranckshaft,new crankcases and new barrels and pistons (second set of replacements). New wheels,rear tyre, shock absorbers, ignition switch, seat, petrol tank, new exhausts & silencers;chinguard,brake pads, mirror,etc. etc. etc. I rode the bike only once after I got it back and it broke down at 4am when I was 200 miles from home and on the way to the ferry for another holiday in France. It turned out that a coil had failed. I took the train home and the bike was sold. Good ridance!!!!! Steve NW England

Possible copyright violation?
While poking around looking for some additional information for the pre-Bloor era, I found a webpage with curious similarities to the text in this article, particularly comparing http://www.ianchadwick.com/motorcycles/triumph/time05.html with the sections in subheading 'Cooperative' of this article. Anyone have any thoughts on this? Saturn V 15:39, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

Meriden Triumph and Hinckley Triumph
Surely the two should have seperate articles? The name may be the same, but the companies, as obvious from this article, were not. From my own personal knowledge, there is enough of a distinction (as well as materiel for an article) between New Triumph/Triumph Engineering and Triumph Motorcycles Ltd to warrant a disambiguation.

Comments? -Harlsbottom 03:36, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Concur. Trekphiler 03:01, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Concur. I think it is time to discuss this on the project page. The Bonneville article also contains a reference the to the Hinckley machine which should have its own article. Nimbus227 (talk) 17:27, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure if two articles are needed, in my opinion the existing article should be edited with the Triumph Motorcycles Ltd infobox moving to the top of the page and edited to say founded in 1885. I see Triumph Motorcycles Ltd and Triumph Engineering Company Ltd as the same manufacturer the first being a continuation of the second. In the same way that the current Ducati Motor Holding SpA is a continuation of the original Ducati Meccanica SpA and Ducati under the Cagiva group and motorcycles in the Superbike family like the Ducati 1098 made under Ducati Motor Holding SpA are considered successors of bikes like the Ducati 851 made by Cagiva. Chris Ssk  talk 13:02, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

Clear the fog
A little clarity would be appreciated. What was the displacement of the 5T & 6T? Trekphiler 03:01, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

It was only half a fog. The 6T capacity was already stated in the article, and the 5T and Tiger 100 capacities have now been added.

Post-war Pre-unit: to 1962 Seasalt 09:40, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
 * 5T = 500 cc single carb, iron head, iron barrel
 * 6T = 650 cc single carb, iron head, iron barrel
 * T100 = 500 cc single carb, alloy head, alloy barrel
 * T110 = 650 cc single carb, alloy head, iron barrel
 * T120 = 650 cc twin carb, alloy head, iron barrel

Picture placement
just a question, why do we have a picture of one of the modern bikes besides the 1930's section? to me it doesn't make a whole lot of sense Finbar Canavan 07:10, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

Proposed rewrite
As others have noted, a signifcant part of this article is from work by Ian Chadwick. There are curently only four refernces and even these need checking. I therefore propose to start a rewrite to conform with GA criteria. I concur that the diffrent companies should be split out and cross referenced and all the main people need to have Biog articles. If you disagree please let me know TR001 (talk) 07:31, 12 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Made a start on this today but few refs in original article so any help welcome Thruxton (talk) 09:28, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

Gearshifting
I had a T110 in the early 70's and the feature I liked best about it was the way the clutch could be operated from the gearshift. There was a cam on the gearshift and a rod that passed through the gearbox to the clutch. Press down halfway, rev the engine to spilt the wet clutch plates, press all the way down to move the gears in, and you had a very rapid smooth change down. It was wonderful, and very easy on the hands (no hands !) on twisty roads. It also gave better control than using the hands in fast cornering. I think Triumph were the first people to do this, and if that is so, it should mentioned on the main page as an important innovation. --JamesOfBerkhamstead (talk) 21:22, 13 December 2009 (UTC)

Triumph 3 1/2 hp
There's no mention of the 3 1/2 hp (or 3 hp, for that matter) Triumph, which is a shame given how important that machine was to the industry. I'll see if I can come up with something, unless anyone else wants to have a go? Sarahburge (talk) 15:36, 14 March 2011 (UTC)

Ltd abbreviation
When I saw the Ltd after the company name, I thought it was a typo, but after looking at the other links and articles, they are all Ltd and not Ltd. with the full stop after the abbreviation. Is this British English grammar or is this a typo? It doesn't look grammatically correct. If it is wrong and should be Co. Ltd. instead of Co Ltd or Ltd, then they all need to be changed. - M0rphzone (talk) 01:03, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Triumph Engineering. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090526023748/http://triumphmotorcycles.be/nl-be/over-triumph/timeline/1900/ to http://triumphmotorcycles.be/nl-be/over-triumph/timeline/1900/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 11:11, 11 December 2017 (UTC)