Triumph TF 250-E 2026 vs. Beta RR 400 2009

Triumph TF 250-E 2026

Triumph TF 250-E 2026

Beta RR 400 2009

Beta RR 400 2009

Loading...

Technical Specifications Triumph TF 250-E 2026 compared to Beta RR 400 2009

Triumph TF 250-E 2026
Beta RR 400 2009

Engine and Drive Train

BoreBore78 mmBore89 mm
StrokeStroke52.3 mmStroke64 mm
TransmissionTransmissionChainTransmissionChain
DisplacementDisplacement249.9 ccmDisplacement398 ccm

Chassis

FrameFrameAluminiumFrameChromium-molybdenum
Frame typeFrame typeDouble cradle, Central tubeFrame typeDouble cradle

Brakes Front

PistonPistonDouble pistonPistonDouble piston

Brakes Rear

TypeTypeDiscTypeDisc

Dimensions and Weights

Front tyre diameterFront tyre diameter21 inchFront tyre diameter21 inch
Rear tyre diameterRear tyre diameter18 inchRear tyre diameter18 inch
WidthWidth836 mmWidth813 mm
HeightHeight1,264 mmHeight405 mm
WheelbaseWheelbase1,488 mmWheelbase1,500 mm
Seat HeightSeat Height955 mmSeat Height940 mm
Fuel Tank CapacityFuel Tank Capacity8.3 lFuel Tank Capacity8.5 l

Pros and Cons in comparison

Pros and Cons in comparison

Triumph TF 250-E 2026

Triumph TF 250-E 2026

The TF 250-E offers a strong overall package for ambitious enduro riders and hobby riders. It impresses with a powerful, revvy engine, a very well-balanced suspension and high-quality components. Thanks to its manoeuvrability and well-tuned geometry, it is a reliable partner both on technical trails and on fast trials. Its character allows for sporty riding without overtaxing the rider - ideal for less experienced pilots.

Well-balanced and stable chassis, very good balance

Powerful and revvvy engine with good usable mid

speed range

High-quality features (Brembo, Galfer, Pro Taper etc.)

Tuned driving aids (traction control, two mappings etc.)

Radiator fan and 6-speed transmission as standard

Lengthy maintenance intervals for pistons (90 h)

High entry-level price compared to the market

Quickshift function does not always work reliably

Beta RR 400 2009

Beta RR 400 2009

Unfortunately, our editors did not test this model.

Alternative Comparisons