Not Suzuki Related---73 Triumph 750

jkevinlilly · Post by **jkevinlilly** » Wed May 05, 2010 3:22 pm

One of my neighbors put a handpainted sign in his yard the other day that says "Biker Stuff for Sale", then listed some of it, including a 73 Triumph 750. Anyone on here familiar with them, and the pro's an con's that go along?

Kevin

rbond · Post by **rbond** » Wed May 05, 2010 4:11 pm

If the price is cheap and you are ready for some quirky and continuous maintenance, BUY it. Triumphs will always be a sought after bike make only because of their uniqueness and performance. After reading of several long term ownership, I like to work on bikes some, but not that much.....

tz375 · Post by **tz375** » Wed May 05, 2010 4:16 pm

Triumph twins are crap. Not worth anything. I'll take it off his hands and save you a pile of pain and suffering.

They are easy to work on and have character.

Craig380 · Post by **Craig380** » Thu May 06, 2010 2:11 am

The 650 twins were sweet, the 750s had to be detuned a little by fitting a milder cam as the extra cubes made them tough on their main bearings.

They handle brilliantly and are good fun to ride, with lots of character. They are also a pig to service, because the engine is a 1930s design stretched 50% beyond its intended capacity.

They're full of shims, gaskets, badly-fitting seals etc so even good ones leak, vibrate and clatter.

If it's a good deal, go for it and convert it to a TT replica

johnakay · Post by **johnakay** » Thu May 06, 2010 3:10 am

they weren't called slugs for nothing. you can all ways tell where a british bike has been or where its going by the tell tale trade mark OIL!

H2RICK · Post by **H2RICK** » Thu May 06, 2010 8:26 am

Well, a Triumph 750 could ALSO be a Trident Triple......the most complicated multi of its day....although it's a pushrod engine.

When you see one of those engines apart you have to wonder why ANY engineer would design an engine like some kind of demented Lego set. IMO, there's very little logic in that design.....

jkevinlilly · Post by **jkevinlilly** » Thu May 06, 2010 5:35 pm

Went and looked at the bike yesterday evening then, researched it some. Biggest problem I see is the availabilty of parts to keep it running long-term. Looks about 70-80% to me. Does not have original paint, but does have a nice paint job in what looks like the original blue color. It is a Triumph Tiger. No tach, but I don't know if they came with one. Otherwise, very little rust, clean and looks well maintained. Guy was not sure on the actual miles on it, the speedometer is new, only shows 140 on the odometer. Some oil drips under it, but no puddle. $3,000. I'm gonna pass on it, but if anyone is interested let me know, I'll get contact info for you. I probubly would have room to haul it to the Gap Meet if anyone is serioius about it.

Kevin

tz375 · Post by **tz375** » Thu May 06, 2010 10:48 pm

I loved my 1972 Rocket 3. It was incredibly fast with a little work in the right places.

Complicated? Well I guess so, but once you ride a good one, you don't forget.

Craig380 · Post by **Craig380** » Fri May 07, 2010 10:29 am

jkevinlilly wrote:Went and looked at the bike yesterday evening then, researched it some. Biggest problem I see is the availabilty of parts to keep it running long-term. Looks about 70-80% to me. Does not have original paint, but does have a nice paint job in what looks like the original blue color. It is a Triumph Tiger. No tach, but I don't know if they came with one. Otherwise, very little rust, clean and looks well maintained. Guy was not sure on the actual miles on it, the speedometer is new, only shows 140 on the odometer. Some oil drips under it, but no puddle. $3,000. I'm gonna pass on it, but if anyone is interested let me know, I'll get contact info for you. I probubly would have room to haul it to the Gap Meet if anyone is serioius about it.

Kevin

The Tiger had no tach, and was single-carb. Actually a sweet ride and virtually no difference in performance compared with the twin-carb Bonneville.

cyclebuster · Post by **cyclebuster** » Fri May 07, 2010 12:10 pm

I have the 245th BSA triple.
when the engine is apart, it fills 3 workbenches.
amazing, 65 aluminum castings alone in that mill.
along with a 5 gallon pail of screws.
Smoothest, best handling bikes ever made.
Ride all day long no issues.
Any bike can leak oil. its all in the assembly
I lap my cases with emery paper on glass.
mine dont leak near as bad as most.
just too many places to leak.
Jap bikes split top to bottom, leaving a cast bowl
to hold oil.

rngdng · Post by **rngdng** » Sat May 08, 2010 3:22 am

Most single cylinder Jap bikes are split down the middle and don't leak oil. They used something called sealer....three-bond. It would do wonders for a Brit bike as well.

Lane

tz375 · Post by **tz375** » Sat May 08, 2010 7:23 am

Lane is right.

On my last couple of Triumph twins, I made sure all the mating faces were flat, countersunk all the screw holes and assembled them with Hylomar and they did not leak at all.

The Rocket 3 did not leak and neither did the 62 T120 I used to race.