All their whingeing about the handling could've been sorted out for them by a couple of turns on the rear ride height adjuster - Voila, a bike that will easily keep up with a new Triumph ST round the twisties and pee all over a Viffer.
I know this because we came across a Triumph ST somewhere between Market Harborough and Melton Mowbray on one of our rideouts a few weeks ago. The guy was hustling it along (on the straight bits anyway) but it didn't take me and Glyn very long to go round the outside of him on ST2's. With the extra 20 bhp of an ST3 we could've despatched him even sooner.
As for the fuelling being rubbish low down how do you like their response to their reader who did the test with them. He'd never ridden a Duke before and they told him all Dukes are like that - Yeah right, so all their tests of every other recent Duke where they talk about perfect fuelling are all crap then?
I am of the opinion that some of the testers on the Staff of Bike Magazine are useless. For instance one of them describes the ST3 as a retro bike with a 992cc aircooled engine. Would you let this man ride your bike? Or could you ever value his judgment?
Yeah, they also insisted for years that the ST2 is aircooled. Seemingly oblivious to the damn great radiator and header tank sloshing around with coolant. You have to wonder, if they can't even check out simple facts like this for themselves what credibility do their other pronouncements have.
Jools
Linear Mode
