President Donald J. Trump‚ 45th President of the United States of America‚ will hold a rally in Durham‚ New Hampshire on Saturday‚ December 16‚ 2023‚ at 2:00 p.m. ET. Speakers… The post LIVE: President Donald J. Trump to Hold a Rally in Durham‚ New Hampshire – 12/16/23 first appeared on Right Side Broadcasting Network (RSBN).

  Canister rounds or even loading random metal objects into a cannon barrel is not a modern idea or strategy. This type of cannon ammunition was reportedly used as early as 1410 to protect the artillery piece and its crew‚ as they were relatively unprotected at close range. By the time of the Napoleonic Wars and the American Civil War‚ the artillery had become an extremely effective battlefield force‚ integrating new technologies and production methods. These improvements would extend the range and effectiveness of the artillery and‚ combined with improved canister shells‚ could devastate infantry formations at close range. By the 20th and 21st centuries‚ tanks would become the primary weapon system of the US military to utilize the canister round on foreign battlefields.   Early Artillery: A Battlefield Beast The Fall of Constantinople‚ 1453‚ via Today in History   Early artillery‚ such as those produced in the 14th century‚ were known as bombards; they were large‚ heavy‚ and therefore only mobile with great effort. The Ottomans produced some of the most fearsome and sizable bombards; these cast-bronzed giants weighed in at 19 tons (38‚000 pounds or 17‚236 kilograms) and could hurl a 600-pound stone seven times a day (Manucy‚ 1949‚ p. 4). Just one of these Ottoman bombards required “… 60 oxen and 200 men to move…and the difficulty of transporting such heavy ordnance greatly reduced its usefulness…” (Manucy‚ 1949‚ p. 4). While immensely destructive and terrifying‚ weight and the rate of fire would not permit such large pieces to be used as a tactical weapon.   Artillery under Napoleon Napoleon at Lodi by Keith Rocco‚ via Keith Rocco Official Website   By the time Napoleon Bonaparte was at the helm of the Grande Armée in 1804‚ cannon artillery had changed greatly. Advances in “… metallurgy aided…new developments and gun tubes could be made just as strong with half the weight of the older guns” (Kiley‚ 2004‚ p. 34). Additionally‚ the weapon’s size is immediately noticeable; when compared to a Turkish bombard‚ the standard Napoleon 12-pound cannon was essentially a rowboat compared to a destroyer (in naval terms). Similarly‚ improvements in sights would allow for greater accuracy‚ and firing tables enabled the gun commander to quickly determine the correct angle of the cannon‚ as well as the best shell for the fire mission; this led to the greatest and most destructive effect upon an enemy force.   While engaging an enemy formation or assaulting a fortification‚ the artillery batteries had several different types of projectiles to choose from‚ depending on situational opportunities. The oldest was round-shot (or solid-shot). As the name implies‚ this was a solid‚ spherical‚ cast-iron ball. The fused shell was another option. This was similar to a round shot‚ with the exception that its core was filled with black powder. Upon firing‚ the fuse would ignite‚ and the projectile could explode over an infantry formation raining down sharp metal fragments or explode in front of them if it ricocheted off the ground (a tactic of artillery commanders). The final option was the canister shot‚ as described by Canfield (1956):   “Canister consisted of a number of cast-iron balls‚ usually 27…and packed with sawdust into a tin cylinder to facilitate loading into the piece. It was truly the dismay of the infantry‚ and was effective up to 600 yards‚ although best results were obtained at about 300 yards.” (p. 437).   This diagram displays the various types of rounds that were fielded by artillery crews of the American Civil War‚ via Military Trader   Canister shells were typically reserved for the final phase of an engagement if the enemy infantry were bearing down on friendly lines or in the desperate final defense of an individual artillery crew or battery. When used‚ the canister shell was particularly devastating‚ as the canister was loaded with the twenty-seven 1.5-inch cast-iron balls‚ effectively turning the artillery piece into an enormous shotgun. Under periods of extreme duress‚ the artillery crew could load two canister rounds at one time for an even greater destructive effect. When fired‚ the canister itself would break apart‚ allowing the cast-iron balls to fan out in a conical formation‚ allowing them to maim or kill far more soldiers than a solid cannonball.   While the canister round could be used effectively to defend one’s battlefield position‚ Napoleon tactically and offensively utilized canister shells. Rather than being content to sit back and have his artillery pound his opponent’s position in preparation for attack‚ Napoleon directed his artillerymen to quickly advance to just out of musket range. Once in place‚ they would shatter the ranks of enemy infantry with canister shells (Manucy‚ 1949‚ p.12). Employing canister shells in this way would blow holes in the enemy formation‚ preparing the approach for his infantry and cavalry to strike the decisive blow.   The Battle of Friedland: An Imperial Russian Catastrophe Marshal Ney at the Battle of Friedland by Alexander Yurievich Averyanov‚ via ArtHive   This tactic was aptly demonstrated at the Battle of Friedland in 1807 in modern-day Kaliningrad. At this location‚ Napoleon’s Grande Armée clashed with the army of the Russian Empire‚ as the latter we in a position of great vulnerability. In one engagement under the cool leadership of General Senarmont‚ two batteries (about 12 cannons) were deployed to within 150 yards of the Russian position at a point where the terrain narrowed‚ thus bringing to focus their destructive firepower. At 150 yards‚ the use of canister rounds did their destructive work‚ as Kiley (2004) clearly depicts:   “Rapid fire started to take the Russian center apart‚ and at this range the gunners simply could not miss: out of effective range of the Russian muskets‚ they blew the center out of the Russian line‚ round after accurate round going down range into the massed enemy infantry. In twenty minutes the Russia center was ruined‚ 4‚000 mangled corpses marking the position.” (p. 198)   Russian Line Infantry‚ 1812-1814‚ via Gaming ASP   The final effect of this combined use of artillery and infantry was decisive‚ the Russian army was forced to retreat‚ and the French infantry units under the direct command of Marshal Nay and General Dupont were able to both trap the disorganized Russian soldiers up against the Alle River and mount an assault on the town Friedland itself.   As a result of this action‚ many more Russian soldiers met their fate in a frantic attempt to cross the river‚ which turned Friedland into both a bottleneck and‚ subsequently‚ a deathtrap‚ as the town was the only gateway for the fleeing soldiers to access their pontoon bridges. This frantic exodus of Russian soldiers again became easy targets for Senarmont’s bloodthirsty cannons‚ which began to sweep the streets of Friedland. In sum‚ the Corps artillery (about 50 cannons) under General Senarmont expended 2‚600 roundshot and 400 canister rounds in a period of thirty minutes (Kiley‚ 2004‚ p. 200).   Artillery &; Canister Shells in the American Civil War Brothers of Ireland by Don Troiani‚ via Mutual Art   Moving forward just fifty-four years from the route of the Imperial Russian Army at the Battle of Friedland to the American Civil War‚ it can be seen that the battlefield tactics had not changed in a significant way. If one were to have a spectator’s view of a US Civil War battlefield‚ they would still see masses of men arrayed in long lines marching towards their enemy‚ presenting themselves as choice targets for their respective foes. While this was a typical tactic of the day‚ slight changes were made to the formation of the assaulting infantry forces in order to lessen the impact of annihilative firepower offered by the artillery.   One such change in tactics involved the way in which the infantry was arrayed while marching toward the opposing force. This rearrangement would have the soldiers march in a “…succession of lines‚ containing two ranks each‚ with a prescribed distance of thirty-two inches separating the ranks” (Mahon‚ 1961‚ p. 62). This modification would attempt to ameliorate the issue of bunching soldiers together‚ which had occurred at Friedland.   A Union Army artillery battery composed of 12-pound Napoleon cannons‚ via Library of Congress   Despite the alteration to the marching formation of the soldiers‚ problems remained. One glaring issue was that only the first or second rank could effectively fire‚ while all the ranks were equally susceptible to an artillery barrage. In like manner‚ the weapons of the artillery had not undergone extreme change. To highlight this‚ the “12-pound Napoleon” remained in use and was the primary workhouse of the artillery for both the Confederate and Union Armies. To highlight this point‚ at the Battle of Gettysburg‚ of the 320 Union artillery pieces on the field that day‚ 142 were of the 12-pound Napoleon variety (Greer‚ 1936‚ p. 16). Despite the lack of great advancement in weaponry‚ massed artillery during the Civil War still could shape a battle. During the Atlanta campaign in late Spring 1864‚ just twenty-nine cannons could hold off 12‚000 Confederate soldiers‚ utilizing both spherical and canister rounds (Mahon‚ 1961‚ p.67).   Thunder at Dawn by Mark Maritato‚ via Saatchi Art   Perhaps one of the most vivid descriptions of the horror of an artillery strike during the Civil War is in a personal account of the Battle of Franklin. Crownover details the recollection of Confederate General George W. Gordon. As General Gordon’s soldiers pursued the retreating Union forces‚ they were met by the unexpected and destructive rebuke of combined Union artillery and small arms. General Gordon states:   “When it became no longer safe for themselves to reserve their fire‚ they opened upon us…such a hailstorm of shot and shell‚ musketry and canister‚ that the very atmosphere was hideous with the shrieks of messengers of death. The booming of cannon‚ the bursting of bombs‚ the rattle musketry‚ the shrieking of shells‚ the whizzing of bullets…and the falling of men in their struggle for victory‚ all made a scene of surpassing terror and awful grandeur.” (in Crownover‚ 1955‚ p. 305).   The Pacific Theater of World War II &; the Utility of the Canister Shell Photograph of soldiers advancing behind a Sherman tank on Bougainville Island‚ via World War Photos   During World War II‚ numerous new and terrible weapons made their debut on the field of battle. Among these weapons was the “Buckshot” shell developed for tanks (itself still a new weapon). This was a newer version of the canister round developed for tank crews to use against enemy infantry units. This weapon was put into effective use by US Marines in the Pacific theater of operations‚ as the Japanese soldiers would attack in massive suicidal waves in an attempt to overwhelm the attacking Marines.   Photograph of Japanese soldiers‚ via Warfare History Network   On the island of Bougainville —northeast of Australia — Marines would use their medium tanks (most likely Sherman’s) as bait in order to draw out Japanese soldiers while they were approaching their positions. As the medium tank approached‚ the Japanese soldiers would swarm “…over the tank to emplace a charge in order to destroy it‚ an unseen companion light tank would fire the “buckshot” round directly at the heavier one. The thumbnail- size projectiles would slaughter the attackers…” (Fuquea‚ 1997‚ p.114) while not doing any damage to the medium tank.   Modern Warfare: A New Home for a Weapon Hundreds of Years Old M1A1 Abrams Tank taking part in the Battle of Falljuh‚ December 8‚ 2004. Photographed by Sergeant Jonathan C. Knauth‚ via PBS   A semi-recent use of canister ammunition occurred on the night of October 9th‚ 2006 in the Iraqi city of Diwaniyah (situated approximately 150 kilometers south of Baghdad). After midnight‚ the American tank platoon (comprised of four M1A2 Abrams tanks D21-D24) from Company D‚ 2nd Battalion of the 8th Infantry was conducting a raid into a hostile section of the city in response to inter-tribal violence; the raid morphed into a battle that would last for over four hours (Cameron‚ 2017‚ p. 406).   During this melee‚ tank D24 was targeted by a rocket-propelled-grenade (RPG) team; in response‚ D24’s gun crew loaded an M1028 canister round. This round‚ produced by General Dynamics Ordnance and Tactical Systems‚ is possibly the most lethal canister round that has ever been in the US Military arsenal. Once fired‚ the canister opens in mid-flight and sprays out 1‚200 quarter-inch tungsten balls‚ which can effectively neutralize exposed enemy combatants as well as light vehicles (Cameron‚ 2017‚ p. 410).   Specifications sheet for the M1028 Canister round‚ via General Dynamics – Ordnance and Tactical Systems   While the other members of a separate Shi’ite RPG team fled the moonlit battle space unscathed‚ one fighter did not. He decided to take on the Abrams personally in the hopes of disabling it‚ as another group had already done to D22‚ which was spewing out three-story tall flames. On the opposite end of the street within the turret of D24‚ the tank-commander and his gun crew had the greater reaction-time. Among their other duties‚ the gunner of an Abrams tank identifies targets and selects the round best suited for the mission at hand. As such‚ following target identification‚ the gunner selected the M1028 canister round which was then loaded into the breech of the 120mm main gun.   The effect was catastrophic‚ as the flight path of the 1‚200 tungsten balls was unobstructed due to the vacant street. As a result‚ they achieved maximum impact‚ detonating the RPG on the insurgent’s shoulder while simultaneously destroying the insurgent’s body‚ leaving little in the way of identifiable remains (Cameron‚ 2017‚ p. 412). This action demonstrates the violent effects of the modern canister round as used by US tank crews and‚ for the foreseeable future‚ will ensure its place on the modern battlefield.   Warfare necessitates morbid creativity‚ as technology and tactics are continually evolving. For this reason‚ weapons manufacturers and military tacticians‚ if they are wise‚ will continually be aware of the ever-changing conditions of the battlefield. In doing so‚ newer and ever more efficient tools and strategies for killing the greatest number of combatants will be developed in order to gain the desired edge in combat. As such‚ canister shells have been continually adapted over time in response to dealing with the threat of massed groups of assaulting infantry‚ they will likewise continue to be employed into the future‚ as they have proven to be effective killers.   References   Cameron‚ R.S. (Ed.) (2017). Armor in Battle: Special Edition for the Armored Force 75th Anniversary. U.S. Army Armor School. https://www.benning.army.mil/armor/historian/content/PDF/Armor%20in%20Battle.pdf   Canfield‚ E. B. (1956). Civil War Artillery. Ordnance‚ 41(219)‚ 436–440. http://www.jstor.org/stable/45361483   Crownover‚ S. (1955). The Battle of Franklin. Tennessee Historical Quarterly‚ 14(4)‚ 291–322. http://www.jstor.org/stable/42621252   Fuquea‚ D. C. (1997). Bougainville: The Amphibious Assault Enters Maturity. Naval War College Review‚ 50(1)‚ 104–121. http://www.jstor.org/stable/44642941   Greer‚ A.J. (1936). The Roaring Guns from the Seven Days to Cold Harbor. In D. Hudnutt (Ed.) The Field Artillery Journal‚ 26(1)‚ 5- 30. https://tradocfcoeccafcoepfwprod.blob.core. usgovcloudapi.net/fires-bulletin-archive/1936/JAN_FEB_ 1936/JAN_FEB_1936_ FULL _EDITION.pdf   Kiley‚ K.F. (2004). Artillery of the Napoleonic Wars 1792–1815. Greenhill Books. https://prussia.online/Data/Book/ar/artillery-of-the-napoleonic-wars-1792-1815/Kiley%20K.%20Artillery%20of%20the%20Napoleonic%20Wars‚%201792- 1815%20(2004)‚%20OCR.pdf   Mahon‚ J. K. (1961). Civil War Infantry Assault Tactics. Military Affairs‚ 25(2)‚ 57–68. https://doi.org/10.2307/1984988   Manucy‚ A. (1949). Artillery Through the Ages: A Short Illustrated History of Cannon‚ Emphasizing Types Used in America. U.S. Department of the Interior: National Park Service. http://npshistory.com/series/interpretive/3-1985.pdf

When it comes to end of world preparation‚ you're mostly likely a Travis Denning or a Luke Bryan‚ although you could be a Luke Combs. Continue reading…

The Triumph Bonneville Bobber delivers a pure motorcycling experience with a unique look and confident attitude. The Triumph Bobber is the kind of bike that stops you in your tracks when you see it. It has the personalized look of a custom bike with the coherence and harmony of a factory model. Not long after picking up our test bike‚ I found out the Bobber will help you make new friends wherever you ride it.  The Bobber enjoys sunny afternoon rides on favorite roads. Who doesn’t? When I see a bike that looks as cool as the Bobber‚ I think‚ Nice‚ but how does it ride? I wonder if the builder‚ or in this case the manufacturer‚ sacrificed attention to ride quality‚ comfort‚ or performance for the sake of appearance. Fortunately‚ Triumph took measures to ensure that function was not the sacrificial lamb of form.  The Bobber’s unique appearance stands apart in the parking lot. If you don’t like people approaching you to admire your bike‚ this one isn’t for you. Bare Necessities  The “bobber” style emerged in America in the 1940s. Motorcyclists stripped their rides down‚ threw out everything that wasn’t essential‚ and tuned motors for a more exciting zero-to-full-power experience. These bikes were the simple bare necessities of motorcycling‚ and they appealed to riders who wanted a pure motorcycling experience without anything bogging them down.  The fat front tire and bar-end mirrors are additional styling elements that give the Bobber a custom look straight out of the factory. Triumph’s attempt at a bobber-styled factory bike also involved cutting down and tuning up. Although it’s not a lightweight motorcycle – claimed wet weight is 553 lbs – the stripped-down look comes in the form of well-hidden cables‚ a solo tractor seat‚ and of course‚ bobbed fenders. Adding to the look of an old-school bobber are the battery box wrapped in a stainless-steel strap and the twin throttle bodies that look like carburetors.   Extra space around the 1‚200cc parallel-Twin paired with the throttle bodies disguised as carburetors add to this bike’s stripped-down old-school aesthetic. The Triumph Bobber is powered by the liquid-cooled 1‚200cc parallel-Twin with 4 valves per cylinder – the same engine found in Triumph’s popular Bonneville T120 model. However‚ the Bobber version of the engine gets a special tune and taller gearing. Adding to the experience is a set of slash-cut exhausts that direct sound to the rider for a powerful and pleasant rumble.  A 3.2-gallon fuel capacity and 61 mpg give the Bobber a range of nearly 200 miles. When the Bobber was introduced in 2017‚ we were there for the press launch in Spain. Although our overall impression was positive‚ we noted some shortcomings. The small fuel tank had a limited range‚ and the single-disc front brake was mediocre. The Bobber Black remedied one issue by adding dual-disc front brakes‚ along with an up-spec 47mm KYB fork‚ a fat front wheel‚ and other extras. In 2021‚ the Bobber got an update that moved those Bobber Black components to the base model‚ as well as adding a larger fuel tank‚ LED lighting‚ cruise control‚ and new instrumentation.  On the front end‚ the bobbed fender pairs with fork boots and the round headlight for a dose of nostalgia. Take Me Higher  My first day on the test bike would take me through the Appalachian Mountains of Georgia and North Carolina. The Bobber is easy to pick out in a parking lot‚ not because it’s super bright or super big (it isn’t either) but because it sits with a poise of cool confidence‚ ready to be admired. The solo tractor seat is a focal point of the Bobber‚ appearing to float above the hardtail-looking rear. Add in the blacked-out components‚ brushed steel slash-cut dual exhaust‚ chunky front tire‚ bar-end mirrors‚ and fork boots‚ and it’s hard to look away.  The ergonomics were comfortable for my frame‚ and riders can slide the seat back for a more long-and-low seating position. The hardtail-looking rear hides a monoshock below the floating seat. Gear Up  Helmet: Arai Regent-X  Jacket: Fly Racing Women’s Butane  Gloves: Fly Racing Brawler  Pants: Alpinestars Daisy V2 Women’s Riding Denim  Boots: Highway 21 Axle Leather Waterproof  The ergonomics of the Bobber provide a long and low riding position. The seat is adjustable fore and aft‚ which also changes the seat height from 27.6 inches in the forward position to 27.2 inches in the rear position. The seat is deceptively comfortable‚ appearing too thin to offer much support while actually providing plenty. The handlebar is a bit of a stretch for my arms‚ even with the seat positioned as far forward as it’ll go‚ but I became accustomed to the reach after a few miles‚ and it didn’t result in any discomfort or achiness after long hours.  The floating seat’s brushed-steel underside adds some contrast to the blacked-out components. The black arm underneath the seat allows for quick seat position adjustment. Upon turning the key and starting the Bobber‚ the bike comes to life with a satisfying rumble befitting the Triumph name. The engine got an upgrade in 2021 with lower emissions and a lift in power at 5‚500 rpm. In the Bobber tune‚ this engine is claimed to make 76.9 hp at 6‚100 rpm and 78.2 lb-ft of torque at 4‚000 rpm. There’s always grunt on tap in any gear.  Great for a cruise around town or a jaunt away from traffic‚ the Bobber has both looks and performance. Upon picking the Bobber up in Atlanta‚ I had to wade through traffic for what felt like forever before I could get out of the city and see what it’s capable of. While my impatience grew as the pleasing rumble reached my ears and low-end torque pulled hard off the stoplight‚ the crazy Atlanta traffic gave me the chance to test out the brakes. As cars darted around like pinballs‚ I was relieved to find abundant stopping power at the ready. Dual 300mm discs up front with Brembo 2-piston calipers‚ paired with a 255mm rear disc and a Nissin single-piston caliper‚ were up to the task and shed speed quickly.  Twin Brembo front brakes provide plenty of stopping power‚ and ABS comes standard. When I finally got out of the city‚ I headed for higher ground. The Bobber’s tall gearing and smooth delivery allowed for both relaxing and sporty riding – a great combo for someone who likes to do both. I could cruise down the two-lane country roads with my hair in the wind‚ or I could twist around curves through the mountains with plenty of gusto. The Bobber is easy to maneuver and handles tight turns with grace – the downside being that the pegs often meet the pavement when ridden aggressively.  A wide handlebar provides leverage for responsive handling – a pleasure for an afternoon ride on your favorite curvy road. Where the original Bonneville Bobber had a fuel capacity of 2.4 gallons‚ resulting in a frustrating number of gas stops required‚ the current Bobber bumps capacity up to 3.2 gallons. During my time with the bike‚ my average fuel consumption was 61.1 mpg‚ netting nearly 200 miles from full to empty.  Sometimes extra gizmos and gadgets just get in the way. The Bobber’s simplicity invites the rider to enjoy the ride and the view. The Bobber’s handling was an absolute pleasure – as long as the roads were smooth. When I got to a bumpy road‚ I discovered the first and perhaps only change I would make if I owned a Bonneville Bobber: the suspension. The monoshock with linkage at the rear didn’t soak up bumps well enough for me‚ and I found myself lifting up on the pegs when I saw inconsistencies in the road ahead to save my spine. My only other complaint about riding the Bobber is that speeds past 75 mph produce a strong gust of wind at my upper body and helmet‚ but I’ll take the excuse to stay off the highways rather than dilute the muscular attitude of the Bobber with an unsightly windshield.  The 47mm Showa fork and monoshock handled well on smooth pavement‚ but additional rear travel would be a welcome addition for bumpier roads. K.I.S.S.  While the soul of the bobber style is stripping down to the basics‚ the Triumph Bonneville Bobber comes with some electronics that are simple and easy enough to use that they don’t take away from that pure motorcycling experience but rather enhance it. Two ride modes (Road and Rain) can be selected with a toggle on the right switchgear to change the throttle map. The Bobber also has cruise control‚ operated with a single button on the left switch. Switchable traction control and ABS are both standard.  The Bobber’s simplicity is one of its virtues. A single round speedometer with an inset LCD display provides enough functionality without distracting from the ride. The dash is graced by a beautiful round analog speedometer with an inset LCD screen that shows fuel level‚ gear indicator‚ and ride mode. A round button on the left switch is used to cycle through extra information‚ including two tripmeters‚ odometer‚ rpm‚ average fuel consumption‚ fuel range to empty‚ and a clock.  The Bobber is equipped with full LED lighting‚ and the round headlight adds a classic touch. The 2023 Triumph Bonneville Bobber comes in four color options with a starting MSRP of $13‚795. Our test bike was in the Matte Storm Grey / Matt Ironstone color with an MSRP of $14‚295. For 2023 only‚ Triumph is also offering a Bobber Chrome Edition with chrome treatment on the gas tank.   The Bobber handles well on smooth pavement‚ and its 1‚200cc parallel-Twin in the High Torque tune is a treat out on the road. Keeping true to the history of bobber-styled bikes‚ Triumph also offers a list of accessories for customization‚ including an ape-hanger handlebar‚ a diamond-stitched comfort seat‚ a forward-controls mounting kit‚ footboards‚ saddlebags‚ heated grips‚ a Fox rear suspension unit‚ and more.  Although far from a touring bike‚ the Bobber makes for a fun sight-seeing cruise‚ like my trip to Fontana Dam in North Carolina. I tested the Triumph Bonneville Bobber over the span of a few weeks‚ and it continued to grow on me during that time. When the sunlight hit the Bobber upon opening my garage door before a ride‚ I knew I had a fun time ahead of me. I had people sticking a thumbs-up out of car windows as I rode by and plenty of compliments about the bike at gas stops. Whenever someone asked me if it rode as good as it looked‚ I was pleased to be able to say‚ “Yes‚ absolutely.”  Check out more motorcycles in Rider’s 2024 Motorcycle Buyers Guide. 2023 Triumph Bonneville Bobber in Matte Storm Grey / Matte Ironstone 2023 Triumph Bonneville Bobber  Base Price: $13‚795   Website: TriumphMotorcycles.com   Warranty: 2 yrs.‚ unltd. miles   Engine Type: Liquid-cooled‚ parallel-Twin‚ SOHC w/ 4 valves per cyl.   Displacement: 1‚200cc   Bore x Stroke: 97.6 x 80mm   Horsepower: 76.9 @ 6‚100 rpm (factory claim)   Torque: 78.2 lb-ft @ 4‚000 rpm (factory claim)  Transmission: 6-speed‚ cable-actuated assist wet clutch  Final Drive: Chain   Wheelbase: 59.1 in.   Rake/Trail: 24.5 deg./3.6 in.   Seat Height: 27.2-27.6 in.   Wet Weight: 553 lb    Fuel Capacity: 3.2 gal.   Fuel Consumption: 61.1 mpg  The post 2023 Triumph Bonneville Bobber Review | First Ride appeared first on Rider Magazine.