I've sold the Sprint now, and got a F650GS instead. It was the same 955i engine as yours, although in a slightly different state of tune. It was an awesome motor, useable from city commuting to blasting the autobahns with equal ease. The only issue I had was oil consumption, which I believe is a problem with some of the 955 bikes (not sure about the 1050s). With high-speed use, it was drinking a litre every 1000 miles, less with more moderate use. Although Triumph argue that this is 'within acceptable limits', I would say it was unacceptably high for a modern bike. My XT (30k hard miles, 800 bodging owners before me) uses precisely zero litres between changes, so it can be done.

I would think twice about taking that bike on a RTW trip just on the oil issue, but if yours is a good one (luck of the draw, I think), then I would agree - brilliant motor and excellent overall build quality. Triumph have got it right, pretty much.

__________________
2006 XT660R daily ride, 1994 XT600E about to be reborn, Blog: http://goingfastgettingnowhere.blogspot.com/

Wow.. that is high.. I have read people experiencing this. It tends to be a lottery. The general consensus (aka forum talk), seems to suggest an over gentle running in period and/or the type of oil.

Mine hasn't burnt a drop since I've had it. And I ride it like it should be

I wouldn't take mine RTW either. For a start it's too heavy and top heavy at that. As a road bike and a tourer though, I LOVE IT !!

__________________
Did some trips.
Rode some bikes.
Fix them for a living.
Can't say anymore.

I think 'lottery' sums it up. Bike magazine had one on long-term test ( I think a 955 Tiger, but not certain) and thought that modern bikes didn't need the oil checking. They ran it dry and wrecked it, and Triumph weren't too pleased. Bike argued that a modern bike shouldn't use that much oil (and I agree). Triumph responded that a competent owner should check the oil in any case (and I agree with that too). But then Triumph tried to argue that one litre per 1000 miles was an acceptable (and even an 'industry standard') level of consumption. I call BS on that. I have owned a long string of old, knackered, neglected bikes in my time, but I have never had a bike that used oil at that rate.

To be fair, that rate of oil consumption was achieved 2-up on French and German motorways, moderately hot weather, and cruising for the most part between 90 and 110 mph. In normal use, it used about half as much. I posted a query on the Triumph RAT forum (mainly US-based) and got a variety of responses from 'mine uses none at all' to 'mine uses more than yours, but it's a Triumph and that's the price of character'.

If yours is a good one, it's a keeper, as it is possibly the best real-world road-bike motor I have ever had - with the possible exception of Ducati's awesome 992 cc Desmodue V-twin. But 1 cc of oil per mile travelled was a deal-breaker for me. I realised that for the next extended trip I would need to plan for oil supplies as well as everything else, and it would be easier to take the oiltight XT instead

(Funnily enough, it seemed to use less oil, and run better, with semi-synth rather than full synth. Full synth ruined the gearchange.)

__________________
2006 XT660R daily ride, 1994 XT600E about to be reborn, Blog: http://goingfastgettingnowhere.blogspot.com/