I think the Triumph 400 is very interesting. The spec is almost a straight match for an A10 - 40hp, 180kg, 80 mpg or quite a few other 60's bikes.
Its interesting to read shocked road testers saying "its amazing , I only need 40hp even 2 up" or "I can ride faster with 40hp than 90hp on a bigger bike" which of course we all know.
Its also interesting to compare with the BMW 1250 "Adventure" - 98hp, 268kg and 50 mpg. When you look back on the big road trips and circumnavigations they were done on 40hp or less with fully loaded up bikes. Now its seem the min is 90hp and a bike that weighs another 100kg (220lb!!) more before it even gets going. I was watching a video of a guy on one green-laning, it fell over when the stand stand sunk in. He really struggled to pick it up and looked knackered, he was on his own.
I used to ride a '55 B31, all 18hp (and some of those had long gone) I pulled up one day and a guy came out of a big house (I was expecting to be asked to move on
). He was very pleased to see the B31 and told me he bought one new in 1952 and rode it to the Helsinki Olympics the long way, over the channel, up Holland, Denmark, Sweden and back down Finland to Helsinki, then all the way back. In size terms that would be very similar to the T400.
Obviously as a dyed in the wool BSA owner I'd buy the Gold Star but I think the Triumph is a great spec and will shake up the market a bit.