2015 Triumph Tiger 800 XCx

[Walkabout]

Looking around for information about this particular bike (now that they have been on the market for a short while) I came upon this description of the bike.
Triumph Tiger 800 - Index Page

That index page acts as a teaser of pictures only but there are a few useful links to the left and right hand sides, such as:-

To buy "big or smaller".
Triumph Tiger 800 vs 1200 Compare


"which bike?"
Triumph Tiger 800 - Other Bikes Considered

All in all, not too shabby an assessment of the Triumph offering.

Worth a punt?
Does anyone own one? (apart from the guy who wrote the above).

[Gipper]

Don't own one, but if I had the cash I would buy one tomorrow and have this as my 2up long distance touring bike - wouldn't need anything bigger. By adding the WP suspension and improving the electronics package Triumph have addressed the weak areas the original 800XC had against the F800GS and the KTM's, I took the older 800XC out for a test ride a couple of years ago and loved the engine. It is a shame Triumph didn't go for an underseat tank like the 800 GSA or low slung side tanks like the 990 Adv, the fuel tank is perched quite high, which wont help the off road handling on what is a quite heavy bike for an 800.

[mollydog]

I've only ridden the 800 Tiger XC. Rode it back to back with my 1050 Tiger. Big difference in power ... not even close actually. I loved the handling of the XC on paved roads, never did get to sample it off road, I'm sure it would have been quite good.

But it's heavy for off road.

But reading recent reviews of the new XC-X I see ALL rave reviews.

Even though Triumph has not managed to take any weight off ... apparently the new bike is superior to original XC by a nice margin ... especially off road.

Sounds promising. Love the feel of the motor but miss the torque of my 1050. With the WP suspension ... got to be a nice step up if it's been valved correctly ... and sounds like it has from latest reviews.

But bike to bike tests have yet to be done. Yamaha prove you can take weight off a 800cc triple (FJ-09 Tracer) ... I hope Triumph will pursue this ... and still manage to retain the quality and character of the current bike.

[Walkabout]

Originally Posted by Gipper

Don't own one, but if I had the cash I would buy one tomorrow and have this as my 2up long distance touring bike - wouldn't need anything bigger. By adding the WP suspension and improving the electronics package Triumph have addressed the weak areas the original 800XC had against the F800GS and the KTM's, I took the older 800XC out for a test ride a couple of years ago and loved the engine. It is a shame Triumph didn't go for an underseat tank like the 800 GSA or low slung side tanks like the 990 Adv, the fuel tank is perched quite high, which wont help the off road handling on what is a quite heavy bike for an 800.

I have read the view, elsewhere, that the underseat tanks on the BMWs effect the balance of the bike too much - the fore to aft weight distribution.
Apparently, this is especially felt with the 21" wheel of the 800GS.

I used to ride a F650GS single cyl which had the underseat fuel arrangement - while I did not notice the effect mentioned above, it was still a fairly top heavy bike. I put this down to the presence of the dry sump oil storage tank and the battery in the faux fuel tank on that bike.

I have test ridden a 995i and that was top heavy also - a big fuel tank there of course but it wasn't containing much fuel at the time of testing; all of these Triumphs have "tall" engines which sit relatively high in the frame (and they are scarcely tilted to lower the CoG compared with other marques).

More recently, i have owned a 990 Adv and that held only about 17 litres between the two tanks, from memory - once the novelty wore off it was also somewhat tedious to have two fuel filler caps - after all the fuel transfers between those tanks eventually, right to left IIRC.

Originally Posted by mollydog

I've only ridden the 800 Tiger XC. Rode it back to back with my 1050 Tiger. Big difference in power ... not even close actually. I loved the handling of the XC on paved roads, never did get to sample it off road, I'm sure it would have been quite good.

But it's heavy for off road.

But reading recent reviews of the new XC-X I see ALL rave reviews.

Even though Triumph has not managed to take any weight off ... apparently the new bike is superior to original XC by a nice margin ... especially off road.

Sounds promising. Love the feel of the motor but miss the torque of my 1050. With the WP suspension ... got to be a nice step up if it's been valved correctly ... and sounds like it has from latest reviews.

But bike to bike tests have yet to be done. Yamaha prove you can take weight off a 800cc triple (FJ-09 Tracer) ... I hope Triumph will pursue this ... and still manage to retain the quality and character of the current bike.

About 95 HP for the 800 I think which is enough for most purposes and certainly in the ball park for this kind of website.

Sure, nowadays, there is WP suspension and then there is WP cheaper suspension (on par with other manufacturers).
Even KTM have started to vary the quality of the WP fitted to their bikes.

My 3rd link above gives a view of the 5 bikes that the writer considered when buying his current Triumph (and he is certainly a Triumph enthusiast judging by his own links).
He demolishes the Yam Tracer, in these terms:-

"The main contender was the new Yamaha MT-09 Tracer, it is low, light and the
obvious choice for a shorter rider. A friend of mine came with me and we took the
Tracer and Tiger 800 XCx out for a test ride. The Tracer is light and it has a lower
centre of gravity. It has a fabulous engine, imagine the Tiger 1050 engine in a super
light, low frame. It has a good sports bike feel. However when we rode down some
poorly surfaced, uneven roads and the Tracer just crashed and banged because the
suspension is awfully cheap. On the same road the XCx felt awesome, like a magic
carpet ride, so composed. The Tracer has a hard seat which combined with the
harsh suspension would limit touring potential. Riding both bikes the Tracer is only
slightly quicker, the Tiger has plenty of torque and the Yamaha has to be revved hard
to stay with the Tiger. The Tracer was showing rust in places where Triumphs never
rust e.g Rear shock, exhaust and other fittings. The Tracer is great value at £8,200,
weighs 210 kg fully fuelled and has 113bhp. However it is built to match the price
and it is not a long distance tourer. I would have had to improve the suspension,
replace the seat and do without Cruise and Traction. Real clincher for me was when
we rode both bikes down a road that had just been top dressed with fresh chippings.
The Tiger XCx was a revelation, I was able to cruise at 60mph on lose gravel feeling
totally secure. Here the slim, 21 inch front wheel and light weight really helped. The
Tracer struggled (and my Explorer would have struggled more due to weight)"

[mollydog]

No question Tracer won't do well off road .. even on road needs suspension help. My point simply illustrates an 800 triple can be a bit lighter. The Yamaha is clearly NOT an off road machine, but light for an 800.

If anything, Triumph's higher quality bits should be lighter weight. I think the Tigers weight is mainly motor. The Yam motor is latest generation all new tech, lighter everything. Tiger's design getting on a bit now.

WP has had different quality levels among their suspension offerings from early on ... even before KTM owned WP. KYB and Showa the same. Just look at the gear on Moto GP bikes. Nothing for sale on the street comes close.

Tracer clearly built down to a price. But good basic bike, good value IMO. NOT an ADV bike however.

I'd like to see Triumph upgrade the 800 mill to match current engine standards.
BTW, I believe measured RW HP is "around" 87 on the Tiger. (Tracer around 105 HP)

[JCee]

Hi,

for what its worth, I have just ridden my 2014 XC 24000km from UK to Thailand across all kinds off terrain, on & off road etc. Superb bike for this kind of trip.
I debated waiting a few months and buying the 2015 model but didnt think the differences were significant given the cost increase (especially against the deal I was able to get on a 2014 model). The suspension (and everything else) on the 2014 model is pretty well set up.

For part of the route I rode with a guy on a 2015XCX the only difference we could detect between the two was that he got about 5-7% better fuel consumption on highways provided he kept below 5000 rpm. Above that or off road, there was no difference.

Earlier this year I did a 2 day off road course and alternated between the training school's XCX and my own XC. Back to back I didnt notice any difference in suspension. I thought the throttle was a little crisper (ride by wire) on the first go on the XCX, but later in I couldnt tell any difference in that either.

So great bike overall whichever year you get. 2015 changes are largely cosmetic in my view in real world use, but nice to have nevertheless.

The high centre of gravity is noticable, as is the seat height (ispecially if like me you are coming off a bonneville) but you get used to both and once you are moving you dont notice either.

Cheers

[mollydog]

Another review I just read states 2015 is 30 lbs. lighter weight than '14. Surly the WP suspension is a bit better? Although reviewers complained too soft overall on both bikes, especially when loaded or two up on rough roads. Street bike.

But I'm sure, as you say, not much in it. The Mags always try to "sell" the latest model as being the 2nd coming.

For me bike too heavy for deep sand or rocky tracks, which I ride a lot.
Too old and feeble to wrestle and then crash a $17,000 USD bike fully loaded. Love the character of the motor, the road handling and touring ability ... ON ROAD.

[JCee]

Originally Posted by mollydog

Another review I just read states 2015 is 30 lbs. lighter weight than '14. Surly the WP suspension is a bit better? Although reviewers complained too soft overall on both bikes, especially when loaded or two up on rough roads. Street bike.

But I'm sure, as you say, not much in it. The Mags always try to "sell" the latest model as being the 2nd coming.

For me bike too heavy for deep sand or rocky tracks, which I ride a lot.
Too old and feeble to wrestle and then crash a $17,000 USD bike fully loaded. Love the character of the motor, the road handling and touring ability ... ON ROAD.

Hi,
Exact weight will depend in which 2015 XC model you look at but for the base model its about the same as the 14 (bearing in mind that Triumph seem to quote wet weights for the 2014 & dry weights for the 2015!).

I am sure the WP suspension is technically better, but I couldn't tell the difference - a more skilled or technical rider may be able to. I rode fully loaded (about an additional 50kg including panniers etc), I never noticed any issues with the suspension.

I agree it is a heavy (& top heavy) bike, so for true off road work there are better options, it is well balanced though and so once above jogging speed, tye weight disappears.

I had one accident in the desert near the Kazakhstan/Uzbekistan border when I hit deep sand whilst doing about 40kph on a predominantly rocky road. I broke a finger but the bike was unscathed thanks to the Bumot metal panniers, Adventure Spec crash bars & Barkbuster hand guards. It was sure hard to pick up afterwards though!!

If I did the same or similar trip again, I would take the same bike - its proven in my eyes now, if I was doing a predominantly off road trip, I would take something much much smaller.