The Thruxton R actually does come with Racing Brembo monobloc calipers.
The H-D is a pretty bike (I wasn't blind when I just bought it), and after changing the shocks (Wilbers) and fork springs (Progressive), it actually handles okay. Other necessities were readily available from H-D (like a fuel gauge for instance, or the digital oil dip stick). The tires, however, should be illegal in the rain.
But no matter how much money I put into it, and it's been several thousand Dollars already, I know now that it will never be the bike I want. Now, if I could transplant its engine into my BMW RR...B.T.W.: I bought the RR not because of its 200 horsepower engine--but because it looked like a modern café racer to me.
My first and true love is my CB750. But not because it is a classic bike--it was not when I bought it 38 years ago--but because we got old together. That's why I don't ride it in the winter anymore--it's too precious to me. If I would have had the money back then, however, it would have been a Laverda 1000 or 900 Ducati Supersport.
Frank, I appreciate your point of view wanting to have your individual bike. But I simply picked the wrong bike as a basis for that while I was--as a friend put it--in a BMW coma because of my terrible experience with that brand. I like the Harley for what it is, but it's not what I need as a first bike. If I could built a motorcycle they way I want it, it would be pretty close to what the Thruxton R looks like with all its modern features--but with a V2 engine. You know, the kind the Harley has. Until I saw the new Thruxton R with its 1200cc engine, the new Norton Commando Café racer was my first choice for a new bike--but a bit pricey for a bike I will ride in the winter. And I never saw one of these on the road. And I don't believe I will spot that many Thruxton R bikes, especially not with the tracker or café racer kit installed. But when I do, I be happy to buy their owners a coffee.
To some others: Those who never drove a modern sport bike, but talk with authority about them and their features, should perhaps try them first before voicing a conclusion. Sometimes the arguments reminds me of: "I would habe bought the Ferrari, but the ash tray was too small. That's why I got a Spectrum."
No, I wouldn't put an upside-down fork on my old Honda, but I appreciate the quality of modern suspension on a 2016 motorcycle. The Thruxton is no fake--it's the real thing. It does not pretend to be what it is not. It's a modern sport bike, traction control and all, in a pretty, classic package. I "dig" the bike and I love its looks very much. When I see a beautiful woman, I don't care if she can cook. I am sure though that the Thruxton will "cook" just fine. Motorcycles don't have to make sense. If I be sensible, I should ride a BMW GS or something like that. But I rather walk than being seen on that type of bike. The RR was the most unreliable bike I ever owned, but I still like its looks--but don't have the money to stock up on engines. When I say "most unreliable", however, I come to this conclusion because I really never took challenging rides with my Triumphs or BSA, for otherwise the result would have been certainly different (Amal, Lucas, and all). They were good for a sunny afternoon ride (a lot of people here don't seem to do much more than that)-but I seriously drive long distances (that's all I do these days)--even in the winter. Therefore, I don't own a house.
Perhaps that is why I appreciate a lot of the new technology, especially when it comes in a pretty package.
Imagine how boring it would be, if all would have the same taste and priorities.
