Ducati Monster Forum

a buddy of mine was looking at buying a 750 the other day and I suggested not to but I couldn't quantify it for him. 
Other than the 620 making basically the same HP and having better brakes I didn't have any facts for him.

I thought the subject had come up here, I distinctly remember reading someone saying "they don't go very well, and they don't stop very well" but I couldn't find it while searching.


Are they any quantifiable reason to not buy one or am I just mis-remembering and maligning a fine bike?

I LOVE my '99 M750.  I've ridden friends' 620s and a 696, but I just didn't get the same feeling from them. Sure the 696 was quicker, but it just didn't feel as powerful, for some reason. ??? 

My bike just seems more raw, more visceral, and just meaner. [evil]

Like you said, it's not a quantifiable, tangible thing, just a feeling.

  I upgraded my front rotor to a BrakeTech ductile iron rotor (about $300) and my front forks from the Paiolis to a set of Showas off of a '97 M900 (about $200). They have RaceTech goldvalves installed.  These mods were done around 40,000 miles.  The more I ride her, the better she gets...  [thumbsup]

just my $0.02   ;D

My wife started on a 750 and I will say they are good bikes all around.  I also started on a 620 and felt it to be a little more potent IMO.  We've moved up so if the price is right and she feels good jump on it.  I've seen the prices on both be very reasonable, in fact downright cheap at times.  Oh, they both stopped very well I thought.

I'm currently on a 750 and I've ridden it back to back with a 695. Overall the 750 has always felt like a bigger bike without feeling heavier. If that makes any sense. Specifically the hand/foot controls feel bigger on the 750 and the engine has more torque  As far as the brakes go I always thought the 620 and 750 came with the same gold 4 piston calipers found on the older superbikes and the 695 came with the crappy black calipers.

Like Bacon Junkie stated my 750 has always felt meaner then the others.

I'm also of the opinion that all of these bikes are faster then what we need for the street.

didn't the 750 come standard with oil coolers and the 6xx bikes didn't?

we had a 02 M620 and a 97 M750 at the same time.
620 is now gone.
peak hp may have been similar, but the extra torque made the 750 more fun to ride.
In fact if i had to get rid of either the current M900 or M750...i might be tempted to get rid of the 900 first.
the 750 has been lightened a bit, and it is so fun to throw around on at twisty road

Don't stop well?  The monster 750 is still in the MCN top ten for shortest stopping distance,  2001 and 2002 750s have the same calipers and rotors as the 900s. 

I'll second that, I've had to panic stop my '00 750 and it'll try to rip your eyes out if you brake hard.

Also, I'll chime in, I've ridden a much newer 620 for about two weeks.  I prefer my 750.  [thumbsup]

I've only ridden a 750 so I have no comparison point. I've never had any issue stopping (or starting for that matter). I am at my limits in riding it long before the bike is at its limit.

I was going to say I liked the 750 as well, but in this specific regard, you lost me. Foot controls are identical. hand controls are essentially the same as well.

More to add after yesterday's ride....   The only time my 750 couldn't hang with the M900 was coming off the line from a stoplight in the middle of nowhere.  Being lighter, I'm able to brake a little later, carry a tad more corner speed, and get on the throttle a bit earlier for the exit.  With her carbon Termi high mounts, the sounds she makes when you ride her hard....... Whooooo.  [evil]  So you all can get a taste...
(http://i415.photobucket.com/albums/pp231/tazios/photo-2.jpg)
(http://i415.photobucket.com/albums/pp231/tazios/_DSC1707-Edit.jpg)

 ;D

[bacon]

sorry I must've gotten some wires crossed.

wasn't trying to offend anyone, only trying to help a friend and clearly I was misinformed (or mis-remembered).



thanks
andy

The 750 originally came with a dry clutch, making it extra extra cool. Uses same cams as M900 I believe, so you can put in go fast(er) cams in.

An issue is a 900 that has 750 heads (W stamped heads) (which don't flow as well as the 900 heads - V stamped heads). I don't know of any instances in which 900 (V stamped) heads have been put on a 750, but that would be interesting to see.

Paging Brad Black & Chris K.

i've never seen a dry cluch on a 750 (except for Stu's)
first 750 in the US was the 97 M750.
definitely wet clutch

Hmm... I'm pretty sure I've see another... "less custom" 750... with dry clutch than Stu's, but without doing any research to back that up, I'll just post up Chris's FAQ's that list that some did come with it:

http://www.ducatitech.com/2v/monster_faq.html (http://www.ducatitech.com/2v/monster_faq.html)

Has anyone mentioned that, officially speaking, the coolest monster ever is a 750?

http://www.flightcycles.com/flightcycles/HotrodM750/Originals/Hotrod_3317.jpg (http://www.flightcycles.com/flightcycles/HotrodM750/Originals/Hotrod_3317.jpg)

Also, I just got rid of my 750 today.   :'(  I will now be riding the wife's '05 620. I would describe the 620 as a bit more zippy. It will certainly get you where you want to go just as fast as the 750. But the 750 seems to pull better/smoother out of corners. Either more torque or the power just comes on smoother or something. The braking on both is fantastic. All in all I like the 750 better. This could be just my perception but the weight seemed lower and the bike just more well balanced over all. Plus I like minimal things and having a carbie with no red key was a plus in my book.

I miss my bike already. Luckily, the genius that built that bike pictured above will fix her up and find a good home for her.

sac

I've only seen Stu's with a dry clutch

Here's a link to my former 1999 m750. Not much stock on that bike. I never should have sold it. Terrible terrible mistake.

Awesome bike. It was carbed and gave up some hp to the i.e. models but it just sounded MEAN

http://i47.tinypic.com/978nqx.jpg (http://i47.tinypic.com/978nqx.jpg)

I, for one, wasn't offended....  ;)

I just get really really really excited about my bike and riding it!    ;D [bacon] [bacon] [bacon]

I hope my enthusiasm helps with your decision...   [beer]

[bacon] Junkie

To ato memphis: NO Monster 750s ever came with a dry clutch.

In a drag-race between a 620 & a 750, it would be really close, but as posted already, a 750 has more drive at lower rpm so more torque.

I'm currently assembling 2 750's with 900 'V' cams and valves.  Both engines will be running the Mahle 799cc kit so the comparison to a 748cc motor won't be direct, but it should be fun!!!

a) I stand corrected. Somebody update the DucatiTech page then.

b) That will be neat to see - is the 750(748) a different stroke than the 800(803)?

edit: I see its 61.5 and 66. Are those 91mm pistons?

Both engines are 61.5mm stroke (stock 750 crank) and 91mm overbore pistons.  Should still have a good mid-range but have a much stronger hit from 5K up!  [evil]

I'm confident this will yield a long, strong pull through the rpm band...  Yummy....  Flat torque curve...

One bike is EFI, the 2nd will be sporting 40mm Dell-Orto's.

My first Duc was a 1999 M750 Dark. I bought that bike new a kept it for 8 years. I loved that bike. I wish I could have hung onto it , but it got traded in on my Sport.
I had changed alot on the Monster over the years, pipes, clip-ons...etc. Great running motorcycle.

I know the 750's are pretty bullet proof. I was not impressed with the power though. I used to ride with a buddy with one and I could toy with him on my 695, I could pull him at will whenever I wanted.  ??? I'd go for a 900.

Perhaps friend was a bit of a weenie?

The newer fuelies, like the 695, have excellent fuelings and such so that has made a big difference. The 696's power is gobs more than the close-in-displacement 600, 620, etc.

perhaps, I also have the full Termi set-up with ecu and he was a stocker. I was also shocked by the difference between a 620 and my 695, would have believed the power difference would be so apparrent. Of course even 7hp is a 10% gain.

when you have only a few apples, an extra is more noticeable. If you have an orchard, a few extra apples isn't as meaningful.

This is true.  [cheeky]

A 620 is about as powerful as a 750 (620 has more high-end power, 750 has more mid-range but it's about a wash).  695's, however... MUCH mo' betta' than a stock 620 or a stock 750.  696's are awesome little motors in my book...

I'm kinda waiting to find one cheap and slap some 39mm FCR's on it.  [evil]

Thats why I said they feel bigger. I'm not totally convinced they actually were. My 750 has a heavy clutch pull, heavier then any other I've come across. The 695 has a clutch that feels like pudding in comparison.  I prefer the 750.

I would like to believe the foot controls are the same. Looking at them side to side I thought they were. But at the very least the one I rode could only be shifted if I slid my foot about an inch farther back on the peg then I usually do. Felt a similar thing with the rear brake lever.

Overall the 695 I rode felt like it was a monster set up specifically for a small rider. Perhaps it was. 

I put 695 rearsets directly onto a 2001 750 yesterday.  That's one of the parts that hasn't changed from 1993-2008.

Perhaps the 695 you rode had the low-seat?  That'll change the whole feel of the bike for sure....

I doubt it.

I had a fuelie 750 SS.

It was a dog. ;D

well, all i know is the new-fangled robot lookin' 696 has got some zip.

i'd be interested to see the wheel-weights on the newer dss monsters compared to the older monsters - not sure if they were the same.

That would make a good bit of difference in feel.

The 750 is a good motor, I always felt like ducati set it up for smooth power delivery.  The low compression ratio, small valve heads, and mild cams do make it a smooth motor with very even torque.  620's do make about the same horse power, but they have higher compression and more agressive cams in almost the same head as the 750.