Thirsty Guerrilla

[peebee]

Last week there was a comparison test between the Triumph 400 and the Guerrilla in the weekly bike rag known here in the UK as MCN (motor cycle news) . Despite the R.E. getting rave reviews last month in another magazine this tester said the triumph was the better machine and while everyone has their own opinion the guy who tested it is a well known lover of sports bikes. These 'professionals' of the tabloid industry decide to give a bike with a certain position within the biking world, which is certainly not sports bike territory and thrash the living daylights out of it in the way the manufacturers never intended, if you don't believe me, how the hell did they manage to get the fuel consumption down to 53 mpg .! Also they came out with the Trumpet handled better than the 'G' , and had better tyres, for Gawds sake it wasn't intended to be thrashed up and down the road and I find the tyres more than ok and the handling just as good if not sharper than my old KTM 690 Duke. When are these testers going to learn to ride a bike as the makers intended , years ago in the same paper one idiot tried to ride a big Japanese cruise like a sports bike and grounded it throwing him arse over tit , O how I laughed . The only mag that will really tell you how it is will be Motorcycle Sport and Leisure with real world seasoned testers .

 

[ddavidv]

Andy, who goes by The Missenden Flyer on YouTube, is one of the more unbiased guys doing reviews. (I also like Ian from Big Rock Moto) He is an unapologetic Triumph fanboi, but admitted in his Guerilla video he'd have it over the 400. That is high praise.
I trust the opinions of independents like those above vs the 'journalists'.

 

[ChampRoyal]

I will reserve comment until mine is bedded in but any bike with overuse of the giggle stick will drink like an Irishman on St Patricks Day

I will say the demo bike had a thirst but I was merciless through the gears.

People often ask me what I get to the gallon and I always reply "I don't know but I do know it's too heavy to push, so top up when needed"

As for MCN I binned that toilet paper journal years ago as it spent all its time lamenting the doom of motorcycling and 'deep throating' the big players for free fleet bikes, nuff said

 

[Scott Free]

My first three tanks on the H452 have returned 65, 63 and 57 mpg. About halfway through the second tank, I hit the 300 mile point and was allowed to wind the bike to 6000 rpm. The third tank was done on windy days with a lot of throttle, but it did surprise me to be so low. However, the bike is brand new, still breaking in, and in my experience things like mpg don't settle down until I've got a couple thousand miles on the bike.

I should note this is miles per US gallon, which equates to 78, 76 and 68 miles per Imperial gallon. If that's what MCN used, it's even weirder that they were able to thrash a Guerrilla down to 53 mpg. But where there's a will, there's a way... I am reminded of the "Top Gear" episode in which they were driving across Ukraine and the goal was to run out of gas before they entered the Chornobyl exclusion zone...

Just keep in mind that all motorcycle reviews are going to tell you more about the reviewer than the bike.

 

[2LZ]

Same thing happened with the CSC (Zongshen) RX3 when tested by a video reviewer here. He thrashed it almost like a motocross bike and did nothing but complain about it. Not even near what the bike was intended for. We loved our RX3's. The new owners are still riding the piss out of them with no problems but replacing gas and tires.
The new "journalists" are a joke.

 

[Scott Free]

Same thing happened with the CSC (Zongshen) RX3 when tested by a video reviewer here. He thrashed it almost like a motocross bike and did nothing but complain about it. Not even near what the bike was intended for. We loved our RX3's. The new owners are still riding the piss out of them with no problems but replacing gas and tires.
The new "journalists" are a joke.

Fixed it for ya...

I can recall way back in the '80s, when I was getting 50+ mpg out of my Evo Sportster, the "testers" at Cycle World and such would claim to have only gotten 35 mpg out of the bike. Yeah, I said, ever heard of, y'know, upshifting?

 

[2LZ]

Fixed it for ya...

I can recall way back in the '80s, when I was getting 50+ mpg out of my Evo Sportster, the "testers" at Cycle World and such would claim to have only gotten 35 mpg out of the bike. Yeah, I said, ever heard of, y'know, upshifting?

....and another thing. Back in the day, they tested (remember "shootouts"?) similar sized bikes. 250's against 250. 400's against 400 or 450's. Today? They compare bikes like the Interceptor 650 against 900cc and 1200cc Bonneville's? WTH?

 

[Acedoc]

Fixed it for ya...

I can recall way back in the '80s, when I was getting 50+ mpg out of my Evo Sportster, the "testers" at Cycle World and such would claim to have only gotten 35 mpg out of the bike. Yeah, I said, ever heard of, y'know, upshifting?

when pushed the himi 452 will drink almost like an evo 1200. i was getting 20-22 kpl on a sporty and around 23 on a himi 452 when pushing it hard (e10 vs e20 fuel). the himi returns close to 28 kpl on 95 ron.

i have a fuel x on it so that may drop the kpl a bit.

 

[2LZ]

when pushed the himi 452 will drink almost like an evo 1200. i was getting 20-22 kpl on a sporty and around 23 on a himi 452 when pushing it hard (e10 vs e20 fuel). the himi returns close to 28 kpl on 95 ron.

i have a fuel x on it so that may drop the kpl a bit.

Not sure about the new 452 engine but the FXL on my Scram really ate at my MPG. It dropped like almost 20MPG on some fills.

 

[Acedoc]

I tried playing with the fuel x settings on my longer trip but did not notice a difference in stock (3) vs rich (5) setting.
may be remove the damn thing to see the difference one day

 

[2LZ]

I tried playing with the fuel x settings on my longer trip but did not notice a difference in stock (3) vs rich (5) setting.
may be remove the damn thing to see the difference one day

Mine is still on the bike but unhooked and switched back to stock. With the cam, it runs far better without it. It was like having a rich flat spot mid-range after the cam.

 

[Acedoc]

Maybe we will see a cam for the 452 soon. Wondering whether to free flow the intake and exhaust while at it or get better rubber. Only one thing is gonna happen

 

[Scrammy]

Last week there was a comparison test between the Triumph 400 and the Guerrilla in the weekly bike rag known here in the UK as MCN (motor cycle news) . Despite the R.E. getting rave reviews last month in another magazine this tester said the triumph was the better machine and while everyone has their own opinion the guy who tested it is a well known lover of sports bikes. These 'professionals' of the tabloid industry decide to give a bike with a certain position within the biking world, which is certainly not sports bike territory and thrash the living daylights out of it in the way the manufacturers never intended, if you don't believe me, how the hell did they manage to get the fuel consumption down to 53 mpg .! Also they came out with the Trumpet handled better than the 'G' , and had better tyres, for Gawds sake it wasn't intended to be thrashed up and down the road and I find the tyres more than ok and the handling just as good if not sharper than my old KTM 690 Duke. When are these testers going to learn to ride a bike as the makers intended , years ago in the same paper one idiot tried to ride a big Japanese cruise like a sports bike and grounded it throwing him arse over tit , O how I laughed . The only mag that will really tell you how it is will be Motorcycle Sport and Leisure with real world seasoned testers .

I pay very little attention to MCN these days. They have made it quite clear that they are Triumph biased. I suspect if you follow the money there will be some support for MCN from Triumph.

 

[Geezer]

Last week there was a comparison test between the Triumph 400 and the Guerrilla in the weekly bike rag known here in the UK as MCN (motor cycle news) . Despite the R.E. getting rave reviews last month in another magazine this tester said the triumph was the better machine and while everyone has their own opinion the guy who tested it is a well known lover of sports bikes. These 'professionals' of the tabloid industry decide to give a bike with a certain position within the biking world, which is certainly not sports bike territory and thrash the living daylights out of it in the way the manufacturers never intended, if you don't believe me, how the hell did they manage to get the fuel consumption down to 53 mpg .! Also they came out with the Trumpet handled better than the 'G' , and had better tyres, for Gawds sake it wasn't intended to be thrashed up and down the road and I find the tyres more than ok and the handling just as good if not sharper than my old KTM 690 Duke. When are these testers going to learn to ride a bike as the makers intended , years ago in the same paper one idiot tried to ride a big Japanese cruise like a sports bike and grounded it throwing him arse over tit , O how I laughed . The only mag that will really tell you how it is will be Motorcycle Sport and Leisure with real world seasoned testers .

Don't expect MCN to give a good review of anything Royal Enfield, it ain't an R6, unless it's a Triumph of course

 

[Pickaxe]

MCN has always been regarded as 'The Comic'.