Triumph Sprint ST 1050

[Fat Angry Scotsman]

Anyone ever owned a Triumph Sprint ST 1050? Seen some really clean ones for only £2,500 to £3,000 on Autotrader and I think they look really fucking nice.

What are the ergos like on them and how are they to handle? I am going from an ER6F which doesn't put me into an aggressive posture and I would prefer to keep things that way

What kind of thing should I look out for?

https://www.autotrader.co.uk/bike-details/202210210946979
____________________
PRESENT: 2018 BMW S1000XR SE Sport.
PAST: 2009 Kawasaki ER-6F. 2021 Zontes ZT-125U.

[Nobby the Bastard]

Handling is okay, average, appropriate, the rear hub can seize, it pops a little on the over run.
____________________
trevor saxe-coburg-gotha:"Remember this simple rule - scooters are for men who like to feel the breeze on their huge, flapping cunt lips."
Sprint ST 1050

[Keithy]

I thought you were after a Katana? Sat on one at Motorcycle live, seriously lush

[Fat Angry Scotsman]

[Evil Hans]

I've got one.

Handling is pretty good, but remember it's a bit of a heavy ol' bus. I think the under-seat exhausts look the nuts, but your bum can get warm on hot days.

Build quality is good by Triumph standards. Common issues are reg/rec failures and seized rear hub-adjusters - but I've had my 2008 for 2 years now and only issue so far has been a failed battery.

Standard luggage is sturdy, but neither the panniers nor the top box fit a helmet. I swapped to an after market top box for shopping runs.

Headlights on all but the last year or so of production (when they went from shit projectors to more standard reflectors) are rubbish. The triple lights look good though. (see also triple clocks, triple tail pipes, triple spokes. Nice touch)

I love the looks, and I love the burbles on the overrun

Edit: ergonomics. Sporty-ish but just upright enough to save an old git like me from discomfort. Some people find the handlebar position a bit low, but risers are available.

The GT has very slightly more upright position, and hasn't got the underseat exhausts - slightly longer, and is probably the better option if you carry pillions much.
____________________
Triumph Sprint ST 1050. And it's Red.

[Zen Dog]

My mate has the Sprint GT (same bike with very slightly longer wheelbase, non-underseat exhaust, matched luggage, other minor changes). Firstly, the engine is an absolute peach (same applies to all the bikes it's used in to be honest), torquey and smooth from tickover, with the triple layout giving it some character. I think I've mentioned it before but you can pull off without using the throttle. Just snick it into gear and slowly release the clutch and it'll just purr along at walking pace. And it's got a fat usable midrange, it's just a great road engine.

Not a lot of faults noted with them (apart from making sure the rear hub doesn't seize as already mentioned). When I rode it back to back with my VFR800, the engine on the Sprint was better, and the handling a bit more nimble and front end feel slightly better on the VFR. Everything else was pretty similar to be honest (understandable as the Sprint was designed as a direct competitor). I didn't feel like the slightly slower steering on the Sprint was really a detriment, it gives it a stability in corners that inspired confidence for me. But I came away thinking I'd happily ride either all day.

I wouldn't trade my VFR in for one as I'd personally choose the better handling over the extra power, and the VFR was half the price, but I wouldn't blame anyone for choosing the other way. My mate loves his, so I don't think you'll go far wrong.

PS - His previous bike was.... an ER6F.
____________________
Current - '94 VFR750FR, '00 VFR800FI Previous - '10 Street Triple R, '92 MZ ETZ301, '05 TTR250, NSR125R, KMX125, "Honda" Win (chinese copy of an old Honda design with a C90 engine)
My bike trip around S.E. Asia 2010/2011

[stinkwheel]

I seem to remember reading somewhere that some have plastic tanks, some steel and that the plactic ones can be prone to swelling on E10?
____________________
“Rule one: Always stick around for one more drink. That's when things happen. That's when you find out everything you want to know.”
I did the 2010 Round Britain Rally on my 350 Bullet. 89 landmarks, 3 months, 9,500 miles.

[Evil Hans]

[MarJay]

The ST is good, the GT is supposed to be an ill handling pig.
____________________
British beauty: Triumph Street Triple R; Loony stroker: KR1S; Track fun: GSXR750 L1; Commuter Missile: GSX-S1000F
Remember kids, bikes aren't like lego. You can't easily take a part from one bike and then fit it to another.

[arry]

Copy pasting. I've ranted about my old one nuff times. Nobby loves his so you'll get both sides.

sshenton1975 wrote:


Triumph ST - again nice balance between sports and touring,


I sold my Sprint because it wasn't that.

It's far too heavy to be sporty and although it's very stable in longer sweeping bends on more narrow stuff it was really hard work. Brakes weren't amazing so you couldn't lean on them particularly. It's an alright handling bike don't get me wrong but agile and able to mix it, it ain't. I dare say it is better through the lanes than a full on tourer but that doesn't excuse the next bit.

It's a crap tourer. The panniers are terrible leaky awkward internally shaped things that are bloody heavy, and you can't easily tie on to the back seat as there's a lack of bungee hooks, along with a hot underslung exhaust. So loading it up is difficult compared to a proper tourer. Further, it's not that comfortable as an overall, let alone for a tourer. It's too hard on knees and wrists and if it were any good at the scratching bit then I'd allow it that, but it ain't.

Essentially it's the worst of both breeds stuck together. Both sides are so far compromised that neither make sense.

My current KTM I'm absolutely sure does both, better. With the exception of stability at 3 digit speeds it outclasses the Sprint in every single way. Why I kept the Triumph as long as I did, I just don't know

[Evil Hans]

I love my ST, but if I'm being honest, I can't really disagree with a word of what Arry wrote.
____________________
Triumph Sprint ST 1050. And it's Red.

[PotatoHead202...]

I had one for about three years in 2015 after owning a Speed Four for the previous seven.

The engine was great, more than enough power, sounded fantastic, reasonable economy - but that's about it.

The brakes were incredibly spongy no matter how many times I bled them - mine was the ABS model but I did buy the tool to bleed them.

Build quality was pretty good but I didn't ride it much in poorer weather.

Suspension was VERY soft and WILL need rebuilding/upgrading as it was never brilliant to start with.

I ended up almost pushing the fucking thing in the river though. I had no end of charging problems - and certainly wasn't alone in that regard. There was a point where I was genuinely bump starting it more than using the button. Now, I'd probably work out what the fuck was wrong with it but I had a windfall at the time and swapped it for another bike.

Oh, and if it's a pre 2007 (?) model you will need to unscrew the seat and lift the tank to get to the battery which is a MASSIVE pain in the arse.

Personally I'd be looking for a sorted VFR as there will be a lot less to go wrong on them.
____________________
Honda VFR1200F, Honda CBF500 ABS, CZ125 now CZ175

[Daves gone riding]

I liked mine.

As above, soft suspension which will need sorting unless you're a lightweight.

Overall, not a sharp sports bike and not a big comfy tourer. But fun enough, I liked mine.