I had been slow to wash off the muck from the last ride I had on the 1200 before winter. Partly, I guess it was disappointment after the fuelling problems I was beset with at that time. Well, the bike is running well again - not flawlessly, but really very well. She has the odd hesitation just off idle when hot. Anyway, well worth rewarding with a wash.
Meanwhile, my hard working Daytona 900 had been all through the winter with just the odd hosing down so had also earnt a good wash. I got them out together for a splash. It was fun to have them side by side. The 1200 looks a lot slimmer from the front - an illusion given by the single headlight.
It never ceases to amaze me how well the 900 comes up with a hosepipe and a bucket of soapy water. The finish on the T300s of that time is amazingly durable - '93 model year onwards benefit from coatings applied at purpose-built factory facilities. Paintwork etc. was outsourced at the start of production. I've had some issues with the original powder coat lifting from the cases, where chips have allowed water to attack the alloy and corrosion has crept under the coating. I have had the timing, balancer and crank end covers refinished. I also had the wheels done two winters ago in a satin black powder by Wessex Metal Finishers of Wilton near Salisbury. It has resisted the salt-encrusted roads to good effect so far.
The T300 family resemblance is clear from a rear three-quarter view. Bearing in mind that the chassis is identical, they each give a rather different riding experience. I have them on identical gearing at the moment. That means the 900 is overgeared and the 1200 could pull a higher ratio probably. I like enjoying the low-to-mid range tractibility of the motors.
After hosing down, I took them for a spin around the local bypass to dry the bikes off before locking them away. The Daytona is like an old slipper to me now. I've covered 60,000 miles on her since 1995 so gear changing, throttle control, steering and braking are all but automatic to me. The 900 is a torquey, soulful engine. It always feels ready to play from the off.
Well, if the 900 is torquey, I don't know how to describe the 1200. 'Thrusty'? It is so much more potent than the 900 whilst its responsiveness follows a similar pattern through the rev range. I'm just addicted to riding it. To me, it's like a magic carpet. I get on and it feels just so easy to motor around. The steering isn't as good as the Daytona but it is perfectly manageable for all that. It is noticeably slower. The front end is harsh by comparison to the Daytona too. This may be because the oil I put into the 1200's forks was too thick. The ambient temperature here is still around 10 degrees C so the oil will no doubt thin as temperatures increase. Both bikes require rider input to change direction. I like that, personally. For me, riding should make demands on the rider or else the experience is uninvolving. The difference is in speed of response. The Daytona is not instant. I'd say millisecond responsive. The Trophy 12 is about half that speed in reacting to my input at the bars.
But then this is where the riding experience is just different. The 1200 has silky thrust the picks up ever more through the rev range. The 900 has a grittier character with power that (currently) tails off as the revs rise through 6000rpm. It needs attention, no doubt. The Daytona's bars are mounted below the top yoke - about 2 inches lower than the original Trophy bars. That means more rider weight forward on the arms, head closer to the clocks and screen. The air blasted off of the screen is difficult to avoid. The Trophy fairing is narrower and has a screen that directs a smooth air blast beneath the level of the helmet so is much quieter than the wind roar of the Daytona.
I wasn't expecting to write a comparison but there we are. Similar but quite distinct to ride and both bring me big smiles. Right now though, I just want to get on my shiny Lancaster Red Trophy 1200 and ride to the moon. She is just mag-ni-fi-cent.
No comments:
Post a Comment