Official photos of the 2013 Triumph Street Triple

Dailies, Galleries -


Since it’s a story we’ve covered laboriously for months, it won’t be a surprise to you that the 2013 Triumph Street Triple is relocating its exhaust down low, a change made possible because they had to alter it to meet stringent new legislation anyways. Nor should the red subframe on the R model — now matching the Speed R and 675 R’s — catch you out. But, the kind of surprise we do like to see is tidied suspension angles on both the regular and R model.

The non R has its rake steepened from 24.1 to 24.3 degrees while trail in decreased from 99.6 to 95.3mm. The 2013 Triumph Street Triple R, he of the red subframe, decreases its rake from 23.9 to 23.4 and its trail increased from 92.4 to 95mm. Those changes should speed steering on the non R while taming instability on the R.

No motor changes. As discussed previously, this was all primarily prompted by the need to meet new EU exhuast regs.


  • Ben W

    Any weight drop on account of the new exhaust?

    • Wes Siler


      • Tim

        Triumph press realease says it is 6kg lighter.

        • Ben W

          I pray it is. Dropping a can and that much piping damn well should lose some weight in spite of how huge the new single can us.

  • robotribe

    I have an ’09 ST3 and really love it; best-feeling bike I’ve ever ridden and owned. This new one catches me off a bit in the looks department, but then again, the one I own didn’t win me over going by looks alone. If it feels and moves every bit as good as my older round-eye (heh) version, than it’s still a winner.

    Anyone know if they’re just going with two colors this time around? They usually have at least three choices. The “usually-awful” cantilever license plate arm is surprisingly “less-awful”. The two-tone radiator cladding is a little on the farkle side for my taste.

    I’m curious about the sound of new stock 3-1 exhaust; the old school 3-2 OEM that on mine sounds amazing as-is; enough so that I haven’t been motivated to go aftermarket like I did with older bikes of mine.

  • Charlie

    I know this is a great bike, but if the red subframe was green it could be Kawa-fugly. We could be entering a period of malaise like the 1980′s. We have a battlestar gallactica regression. Nothing like K1200R bad, but devolution nonetheless. Exceptions would be the new Brutale and the Griso – and Ducati generally. The lights on this bike kill me. Maybe the new Tuono is just as bad. Tough call

    • Mike Brooklyn

      Yeah, agreed. I have not seen any reasons to upgrade or even lust over an upgrade in some time.

  • Patrick from Astoria

    If someone’s got a minute or two, could you explain what’s up with these Euro exhaust regs that necessitates the low/HVAC-sized pipes?

    Not bad otherwise. Wish it had maybe a bikini fairing to let the headlights visually flow in more smoothly.

    • Mitch

      Here’s what I am betting is happening: emissions and noise regs are getting to the point that these exhaust systems are needing an extra-large expansion chamber. The silencer/muffler/can itself can no longer grow enough to provide all the room they need, so designers are hiding the bulk of the size in a pre-can chamber (check out the BMW S1000RR – there is a ‘testicle’ where the lower fairings should be, and the can extension that you think is the muffler is largely redundant). Perhaps it is more difficult to do this two part design with undertail exhausts.

  • szu


  • Johndo

    Ugliest blue color I’ve ever seen. And the Triumph logo on the tank still looks cheap (like if it was types on there with a typewriter. They definitely should include the fly screen specially on the R version…And can’t wait to see a complete redesign…

    • austin_2ride

      So your not a University of North Carolina fan? BMW has a very similar colorway for the S1000RR for the new model year. Also I’ve seen worse color combinations.

    • John

      Gee, I like the blue. Think it looks really sharp, just like it does on the S1000RR.

  • ike6116

    If I wasn’t a BMW zombie, I’d be a triumph zombie.

  • Daniel

    The R looks sexy.

  • Jesse

    In white, with the flyscreen, please. *shakes money*

  • John

    There are elements of this that I really like. The radiator cowls and new subframe look great. They’re a better match for the angular headlights. The downer is that pipe. I have no problem with the silencer itself, it’s all the stuff leading up to the finisher that seems heavy. Looking at the side view of the left side shows a ton of cramped, bulky, rectangular boxes just beyond the belly pan. Unavoidable, I know, but it’s a shame. The good news is you can now ride this and not worry so much about the emissions issues … and, yeah, I do consider that important.

    I thought there were some spy shots of an Arrow branded pipe on one of the test units. I wonder what benefit (if any) it’ll be.

  • Coreyvwc

    Not a big fan of the new additions individually, but the package as a whole looks much more cohesive now. Much better than last year when they just bolted the “new” lights onto the same old streety.

    • John

      Hear, hear.

  • Julian

    Farkletastic update, and i’m honestly really saddened by some of the more subtle changes. they don’t kill this design for me, but they cheapen its distilled British essence with poorly chosen garnish. Somehow the changes which try to add sharpness and anglarity actually detract from the crispness and clean original design. it follows the ‘angular’ theme changes of Asian bikes, but feels like it’s chasing a trend instead of setting one.

    Firstly, the front frame spars by the triple tree used to be organic and meld together, now it’s a weird empty triangle space. If there is a real engineering reason, OK, fine, but it’s not as clean looking.

    Second, the rear subframe is chunkier and looks like a cast piece, it used to look lighter and meet the chassis more elegantly. it used to look handmade and racy, now it looks…not as nice…

    thirdly, new radiator farkle is a farkletastrophy. Never hide a beautiful engine with an cheap plastic nike swoosh. it was already ugly and overstylized, now its more of both, with more signal i didnt want integrated because i’d probably remove it. so, ok maybe a wash since i’d take it off.

    fourth, undertail exhaust was kit but never pretty w/ piping along the way, sidepipe could be nice too…but even the ER6N pulls it off more tidily

    5th. those are some pretty huge looking mirrors. Get those from a honda VFR in the late 90s?

    I come from the camp that appreciated the style of the first SV more than the latter box framed transformers one…the latter grew on me but the first was styled perfectly…so maybe i’m showing my age

    • Miles Prower [690 Duke, MTS 1200]

      “thirdly, new radiator farkle is a farkletastrophy. Never hide a beautiful engine with an cheap plastic nike swoosh.”

      And the add-on super-farkly frame-slider straddling that swoosh in pic #3 is icing on the cake.

      • ~RUSH~

        The frame-sliders were also in the spy photos if you looked closely.

    • NewOldSchool

      What worries me more is the “red” sub frame. It almost looks like a read plastic cover that gives the allusion of a trellis design over what is actually a black colored cast piece.

      • HammSammich

        This is exactly what I was noticing in the pics. I love the red subframe on the Speedy and Daytona, but this looks like tacked on plastic cladding. If this isn’t just a plastic cover, it is at least a cast peice intended to look like a trellis. I’m not saying there’s anything necessarily wrong with that if it still functions well, but drawing attention to it by painting it red seems a bit cheesy.

  • Aaron

    The spec sheet on Triumphs site says 95hp? the 2012 105hp? I hope it’s just a typo!

  • filly-fuzz

    Dem Skid Rimz.

    They look rather light! I hope that’s not an illusion!

    • filly-fuzz

      Fuck sake matt get your own fucking account!!
      It’s free now.

  • Miles Prower [690 Duke, MTS 1200]

    That looks like a lot of exhaust bits to replace after a drop.

  • Tony

    Poor Triumph… the designers murdered it… they dumped the classic design for horrible attempts at “modern” looks… alien bug that it is.
    MV Agusta Brutale, even with its pug face, looks 1000 times better.

  • Slartibartfast

    Triumph really should know better than to have these over-designed elements. F4 and F3 are gorgeous, the Brutale not so much. Except for the headlights, the new Speed Triple looks really nice. This Street Triple, eh. I’ll be holding onto my ’10 Street Triple.

  • incon

    Continued steps into making the bike uglier, sigh.

  • Kevin

    Seat looks quite a bit different, like it would restrict your ability to move fore-aft. Pillion seems much higher positioned vs. last year.

  • filly-fuzz

    Street triple you’ve just been Maganized!


    • filly-fuzz

      as in Japanese cartoons

      Fil you’re an idiot (facepalm)

  • R.Sallee (Ninja 250)

    I consider myself a future Street Triple owner. And this looks dumb as hell.

  • deckard

    Why they want to accentuate the rear subframe is beyond me? “Woohoo, check out this subframe!” Now that’s why I buy a motorcycle, the subframe!

    What other pedestrian part are they going to paint bright red next? The headlight subframe? The rear brake caliper mount bracket? That little doohickey that holds up the front brake reservoir? I await breathlessly.

    A 2009 STR owner.

  • Scott Pargett

    Bummer, was really hoping for something more along the lines of this (with opportunity for further aesthetic refinement) in the 600 class.