Triumph's answer to Japanese 600s has cheated a bit and seems to be based on the principle that the best way to get more umph from a 600 is to make it a 675. And not a bad idea at that. Apparently it's all offset by the triplyness of the motor, but whatever it is, it's a brilliant 600, or rather it isn't.

Sit on it and it feels rather plank-like in it's hardness of the seating area. And it's very narrow. And quite high. Bars are not too far away so you don't get the big stretch but you do get a rather sore backside after a while. This is the advantage of being American - you could shove a Cowboy and Lardy Lady seat on the thing and be comfy.

Engine is amazing - you'd never guess it was 675cc. It pulls well, helped by really clean fuel injection and often that extra downchange so beloved of 600 riders is not required to maintain brisk forward motion (© Motorcycle Mechanics 1968). Yeah, and the controls fall easily to hand ...

Triumph go for the current exhaust-shoved-up-the-arse look with a real spacey tail pipe unit thing straight out of Dan Dare, who was a very old comicbook hero, children; in the days when Triumph stood for something noble and bold, with a pipe full of Mitchell's Naval Brigade to take the edge off a cold winter's kickstart.

Looks are, as everyone seems to agree, good, well away from the usual Triumph sportsbike stamp we have come to pass by with ne'er a glance. This bike looks the part, razor sharp front end and the scary Mekon backend plus an attractive if rather uncomfy middle bit go to make up a motorcycle of distinct Britishness, which uncannily looks very Japanese in an Empirical sort of way. Anyway, well done us for making a bike people under 30 may actually buy.

Cockpit has all the usual things, the only problem being a great big clock just where you expect to see a speedo, so I spent most of my time travelling at speeds between 10:15 and 10:47 ...

Steering. Now this is supposed to be sharp as mustard (?) But it felt a bit odd to me, quickish to turn in but then it kinda slowed down and you have to be careful not to run out wide. So one winds up riding the thing with a fair bit of body assistance to make sure it stays down - then it feels top heavy. Perhaps it's that really crap steering damper out of the Suzuki parts bin. Must try it again with a decent Toby or whatever fitted.

Suspension was 'especially softened' for back road scratching but it was bloody rock hard, particularly amusing when there was a nice deepish rut mid corner. Instead of absorbing same in an effortless squelch of White Power loveliness, the front end just bounced about and made one a bit uncertain about the ensuing direction of travel. And then the back end dropped into the hole and somehow straightened the bike up again. I'm being unfair, but it could do with being a bit more compliant for SE England B roads - we don't all benefit from Och Aye the Noo Labour largesse!.

So, all in all Triumph have produced a top middle range bike, the real successor to the legendary Bonneville - a café racer for the 21st century. This is the bike they should call the Bonneville, not that wheezing old shed that currently bears the moniker. I mean, take their present ad line: "Released early, due to high demand, the 2007 Bonneville has an increased but manageable engine size of 865cc, perfect for the new rider". The NEW RIDER??! What's all that about? The Bonny was a firebreathing (OK, so 47 bhp seemed a lot in 1968) monster, tamed only by race heroes and that bloke down the street who worked at Dodson's sheet metal and was always trying to shag your sister. 'Cept his wasn't really a Bonny, it was a Saint with unpaired Amals. But 15 second quarters was the preserve of hard as nails rockers, not bloody New Riders!

Get it sorted, Triumph ....