|
Title: 1100S vs. 1100. Is it Worth the Extra $$? Post by: drspencer on January 21, 2011, 04:47:23 PM New to Ducati, thinking about buying an 1100 Monster.
Is the 1100S worth the extra money over the 1100? What are the best year(s) to look for? Is ABS a must? How much would a Corse shell kit cost to buy? Thanks Title: Re: 1100S vs. 1100. Is it Worth the Extra $$? Post by: LoneStar on January 21, 2011, 05:40:22 PM many say no. as evidenced by the 1100S being cut from the ducati line-up.
i say it's worth it if you get a really good deal on the S model. looks better and has better suspension. but $14,000! yikes! Title: Re: 1100S vs. 1100. Is it Worth the Extra $$? Post by: drspencer on January 21, 2011, 05:59:36 PM many say no. as evidenced by the 1100S being cut from the ducati line-up. i say it's worth it if you get a really good deal on the S model. looks better and has better suspension. but $14,000! yikes! What would it cost to add the 'S' suspension to a standard 1100 model? Thanks Title: Re: 1100S vs. 1100. Is it Worth the Extra $$? Post by: emanon on January 21, 2011, 06:06:57 PM If you are considering the 1100 non "S" version, unless you are dying to have the dry clutch, you should also look at the 796, only 8hp less and about $3k cheaper.
Title: Re: 1100S vs. 1100. Is it Worth the Extra $$? Post by: drspencer on January 21, 2011, 06:14:02 PM If you are considering the 1100 non "S" version, unless you are dying to have the dry clutch, you should also look at the 796, only 8hp less and about $3k cheaper. Do both the 1100 & 1100S have a dry clutch? Thanks Title: Re: 1100S vs. 1100. Is it Worth the Extra $$? Post by: zarn02 on January 21, 2011, 06:19:09 PM Do both the 1100 & 1100S have a dry clutch? Thanks Yeppir. Title: Re: 1100S vs. 1100. Is it Worth the Extra $$? Post by: drspencer on January 21, 2011, 06:23:36 PM I'm new to Ducati, but presently have 2 Harleys (each with a wet clutch).
Briefly, what are the advantages/disadvantages of a dry clutch set up? Thanks Title: Re: 1100S vs. 1100. Is it Worth the Extra $$? Post by: emanon on January 21, 2011, 06:31:52 PM Ducatis are notorious for their dry clutches and the sound they make, kind of like a band of gypsies all shaking their tamborines.
Title: Re: 1100S vs. 1100. Is it Worth the Extra $$? Post by: drspencer on January 21, 2011, 06:37:26 PM Ducatis are notorious for their dry clutches and the sound they make, kind of like a band of gypsies all shaking their tamborines. Aside from the tambourine symphony, what are the advantages of a dry clutch? Thanks Title: Re: 1100S vs. 1100. Is it Worth the Extra $$? Post by: jc.cyberdemon on January 21, 2011, 07:30:54 PM look at some picture of the dry clutches around here...they looking make the beast with two backsing awesome! cant really achieve that with a sealed clutch cover.
Title: Re: 1100S vs. 1100. Is it Worth the Extra $$? Post by: derby on January 21, 2011, 08:03:14 PM Aside from the tambourine symphony, what are the advantages of a dry clutch? Thanks This article is from the Ducatis Motorcycles FAQ (http://stason.org/TULARC/vehicles/motorcycle-ducati/index.html), by Duke Robillard duke@io.com with numerous contributions by others. 15. "Are dry clutches inherently finicky? If so, why did Ducati put them ontheir bikes?" (from a discussion by Godfrey DiGiorgi (ramarren@apple.com), with comments by Michael Nelson (nelson@seahunt.imat.com), and Tom Dietrich (txd@mkt.3com.com) From: Godfrey DiGiorgi "The 750SS has a wet-clutch -- much less "grabby" and sensitive (especially in traffic)." I've heard this same myth over and over again, relating to more than just Ducatis, and I'd like to set the record straight. A dry clutch is not more grabby or more sensitive than a dry clutch, nor can you slip a wet clutch more. The reason that race machines went to dry clutches was to *improve* disengagement, reduce the amount of clutch material infiltration into the lube system, and to allow cleaner, smoother engagement through better cooling and less inter-plate stiction. Clutch friction material is very abrasive and a major source of bearing wear if it gets around the filtration in the lube system, a major cause of worry in older engines without full flow filtration systems. Wet clutches when slipped expand more because they can't shed heat as quickly, and the oil stiction masks the chattering of disk/plates as well as some characteristics of overheating. Just because you can't feel it doesn't mean it isn't happening. Typically, a wet clutch capable of equal power transmission at the limit requires more spring pressure to prevent slippage and longer travel to ensure disengagement. "Ducati clutches are particularly grabby" The old bevel driver wet clutches were great, until the 900SS which produced just enough more torque that there was inadequate spring pressure to keep them from slipping under hard (ab)usage and inadequate mechanical advantage to correct that without making them unbearably difficult to operate for long periods. The solution was to go with a dry clutch for the lighter spring pressure and cleaner disengagement; this was only done in racing aftermarket kits and special factory racing fitments, however. Ducati's clutches since the Pantah have been both wet and dry. The dry style were typically fitted to the higher performance machines, the wet to the economy models (it costs more gaskets and housings to isolate the clutch). It's always been a light clutch for the power output of the engine, and handicapped by the nearly ideal sporting gearbox (closely spaced gears with a tall first) and the tall street gearing fitted (for noise reasons). The detail implementation of the clutches has always been problematic, both in actuation mechanism and in clutch pack design. As such, none of them tolerate brutal slippage like an motocrosser well. Not that kind of design; an motocrosser doesn't have as large a set of power pulses to deal with, being a two stroke motor anyway. A clutch should NOT be slipped unnecessarily in any case: just enough to get off the line, just enough to get gears to mesh without strain or clashing. Slipping the clutch on any machine is throwing the engine's output away as heat which will affect some portion of the mechanical bits. Small factors in the detail assembly of an individual clutch still make a big difference. The clutch in my bike was actually quite good as delivered, it would chatter only when oil wet and hot (failure of a small seal accounting for that) but had a slightly harsh final engagement. It was also quiet. The repair done to correct the oil seepage and the factory clutch pack upgrade has now improved the clutch action to perfect, as best as ever I've had on any bike. It does not chatter, even when abused through nasty traffic, lever pressure is slightly reduced, engagement is broad but secure. The downside is it's somewhat noisier. I spent probably 1.5 hours just examining the clutch plates and assembling the pack into place -- very small detail differences can make a big difference here. I spent a lot of time making sure it was right, according to factory spec and my experience as a mechanic. It works to my complete satisfaction. Please, let's not propagate myth that dry clutches are finicky and wet clutches are not. Dry clutches, from an engineering design standpoint, have several advantages. Detail design implementation and individual assembly make for large variances in the quality of an individual unit. With modern materials and techniques available, you can design a clutch of either type to suit the needs of the application well. How well you implement the design, how well the assembly is completed will affect greatly the overall quality of the component. I opine that a novice rider on a modern Ducati will notice no difference at all on a properly setup 900SS clutch vs the 750SS unit, it's just not a valid criteria of differentiation for selection of a new machine. The 750SS was the price leader in the '92-'93 range (now they have the 600SS in europe as well, but the US market has dictated the 900SS CR instead). The wet clutch was fitted as a cost-reducing measure, period: they already had the design from several previous generations of wet-clutch Pantah motors. But Michael Nelson disagrees: Even the Ducati World SuperBike riders such as Polen and Fallappa have trouble with THEIR Ducati dry clutches. I've read interviews with Polen where he blamed the dry clutch (which incidentally on HIS bike was a specially modified billet aluminum jobby.... the BEST one Ducati and Fast By Ferracci know how to make, and LOTS more expensive than the ones that come on the production bikes), for his consistently bad starts. The Ducati dry clutches supplied on recent manufacture rubberband head motor bikes are NOTORIOUS among the motorcycle press and among a large percentage of owners as being quite funky in design and execution. While I agree that a proper multiplate dry clutch CAN be designed (all the 2 stroke 125/250/500cc bikes use them), Ducati has yet to do so. These dry clutches are especially silly on streetbikes. Heck, all the Japanese manufacturers seem to be fully capable of designing and executing wet clutches that are capable of reliably withstanding LOTS more horsepower on MUCH heavier bikes (ie: the Kawasaki ZX-11, the Honda CBR900RR, the Suzuki GSX-R1100, ad nauseum). And they still provide smooth, progressive, easy to use operation with much less lever effort. The Ducati dry clutch design is difficult to assemble correctly (even Ducati themselves can't seem to get it right, and they've even revised the design) , noisy, and it literally beats itself to death with all that rattling. I had to replace my friction disks at around 5,000 miles, not because the friction material was worn out but because the tangs on the edges of the plates were mushroomed and flattened out. As they rattle, they cause the mushrooming of the edges, that creates more clearance, which creates more vigorous rattling, which creates more clearance, and so on. In effect, they beat the crap out of themselves, the steel clutch basket, and the aluminum clutch hub. You can't have all that rattling and banging going on without SOMETHING getting damaged in the long run. It's a poor implementation of a questionable design for a streetbike. And Tom Dietrich chips in: ... the one point nearest and dearest to the hearts of race bike tuners everywhere. The beloved and much sought after horsepower. Not having the clutch spinning in that heavy oil frees up a couple of ponies for duty at the rear wheel that were previously lost in the oil. Free ponies! It's enough to make a grin come to the most stone faced tuner/builder. Michael responds with: True, and that's probably an advantage worth having on a racebike. Especially because most roadrace bikes only have to start from a dead stop once during a race, and they have the $$$ and time to tear the bike down after each race and correct whatever may be wrong with the clutch. However, I still maintain it's a silly feature for a streetbike, where reliability and smoothness are considered more important by most people than a couple extra ponies. Finally, Godfrey rebuts: ... I didn't say that *Ducati's* clutch, any of them, was not finicky. I said that a dry clutch was not in and of itself any more finicky than a wet clutch, and that a properly installed and adjusted dry clutch was indistinguishable to a novice from a wet clutch.... By the way, I've had plenty of experience with blown and improperly assembled Honda, Kawi, Suzuki and other clutches. I was a parts manager and freelance mechanic on those machines for a total of about 3 years. They ain't poifect neither... ;) My VFR, Hawk, and CB750F clutches all needed 'clearing' first thing in the morning, just like the Norton, and I managed to get the Hawk clutch to slip a couple of times when I was being particularly abusive. BMW, Guzzi and Morini are three other companies whose dry clutches I have owned that come to mind immediately. The older BMWs have a somewhat sudden engagement characteristic, the Guzzi a little less so, due to the high rotational speed and the mass of the pieces not the fact they are dry. The Morini I rode for about three weeks before I discovered it had a dry clutch. It all depends upon the individual design. The 'finickiness' is not endemic to the type. With a proper design the action is indistinguishable. On the Ducati, the clutch design is light and somewhat weak. When properly fitted and adjusted, no novice can tell the difference. Again, I opine that a novice rider on a modern Ducati will notice no difference at all on a properly setup 900SS clutch vs the 750SS unit. It works like a clutch should work, at least in street use. The myth is that "dry clutches are finicky and wet clutches are not." The fact that Pantah and later Ducati clutches, both wet and dry, are problematic does not contradict this. Nor does the fact that a wet clutch masks chattering and over-heating problem more effectively from the operator. "The beloved and much sought after horsepower." Tom raises the point that a wet clutch will absorb more horsepower from sloshing about in the oil. Again, this is a design detail problem, not an factor inherent in the type. On certain machines where the clutch was chain-driven from the crankshaft around the clutch basket, it was essential that the chain dip into the lubricant, and the oil sling would indeed cost some hp if you overfilled the lubricant. On most designs, this is not much of a factor (note that very few wet clutches really sit in an oil bath, they are just made such that oil splash necessary for lubrication to portions of the drive mechanism can be in with the friction components. A wet clutch will absorb horsepower but by adding heat to the oil more likely. "My dry clutch has lasted practically forever" Mikhail reports that his modified clutch is hanging in there for 15000 miles so far. I report my 750gt clutch in my original long distance traveler was in perfect condition condition at 60,000 miles (3mm acceptable wear limit, less than .5mm measured at that point), and the last I heard was that this same original 1975 clutch was still running strong at 100,000+ miles when last I heard from the bike's owner somewhere in 1988. At 13,000 miles, the 907's clutch (all original pieces with the exception of one new spring plate for the update and one oil seal) is in as new condition with regard to wear: no warpage, no reduction in plate thickness, springs at spec, just a little bit of chatter marking on the center driven hub. I'll report how it fares over the next 13,000 miles. I use the bike pretty hard but I don't abuse the clutch unnecessarily. "The Pantah I have has a wet clutch and has hardly been touched for more than 15K miles, while my 851's needed replacing after just 4K." A 40 hp engine using a clutch of essentially the same design as a 90 hp engine, and the 40 hp clutch doesn't wear out as quickly... sounds to me like the design was probably set up for the 40 hp engine, and the reduced longevity in the 90 hp case was a compromise result of wanting the same weight and layout in a similar motor... Such is as it is. I don't consider these machines to be perfect in any way... if they were, why would I be looking forward to the next one? I expect continuous improvements as new designs come around. Hopefully they'll address the clutch someday soon and give the same perfect action that mine has now with a bit more longevity and perhaps a little quieter operation soon. Although I have little complain about, it'll appease those who do. Beth W. Dixon sez it best: "I don't care what's happening as long as I like the feel (tm) of what's happening. A wet clutch may not be any better/worse than a dry one, but I really didn't want one more thing I wasn't used to when learning the Duc." I simply purport that if you have a properly setup clutch on any Duc, Beth would be unable to tell the difference. Title: Re: 1100S vs. 1100. Is it Worth the Extra $$? Post by: zarn02 on January 21, 2011, 11:07:45 PM And Derby both has an answer, and shows his work.
Title: Re: 1100S vs. 1100. Is it Worth the Extra $$? Post by: Raux on January 22, 2011, 01:23:05 AM I'm new to Ducati, but presently have 2 Harleys (each with a wet clutch). Briefly, what are the advantages/disadvantages of a dry clutch set up? Thanks I had heard Harleys are dry clutches as well. is it certain models? Title: Re: 1100S vs. 1100. Is it Worth the Extra $$? Post by: Oldfisti on January 22, 2011, 07:52:28 AM I had heard Harleys are dry clutches as well. is it certain models? Never heard of a Harley with a dry clutch. Title: Re: 1100S vs. 1100. Is it Worth the Extra $$? Post by: Raux on January 22, 2011, 01:15:00 PM Never heard of a Harley with a dry clutch. Older models? Saw some info about Panheads... Not like I research them alot, just read it somewhere Title: Re: 1100S vs. 1100. Is it Worth the Extra $$? Post by: sbrguy on January 22, 2011, 01:49:04 PM much much older harleys did have dry clutches
Title: Re: 1100S vs. 1100. Is it Worth the Extra $$? Post by: drspencer on January 22, 2011, 03:12:47 PM What are the best year(s) 1100 Monsters to look for?
Is ABS a must? How much would a Corse shell kit cost to buy? Thanks Title: Re: 1100S vs. 1100. Is it Worth the Extra $$? Post by: stopintime on January 22, 2011, 03:38:46 PM I'm not a new-Monster expert, but I can't remember hearing many, if any, negative stories about things going wrong - which would make a specific year less attractive. (I'm assuming you know about the differences to the '11 Evo?)
Just look for the best deal you can find. ABS is considered a nice safety feature. It takes another ~ third gallon off the fuel capacity and maybe it's making brakes a little more complicated to work on (?). My guess is that future customers (also of your bike, down the road) will ask for them and it can attract more potential buyers. About your S suspension question - I think Ducati asked about $ 5,000 for Öhlins forks as an accessory, but you would have to know the price of a non-S Showa to decide the difference. The S Öhlins shock would probably just be a couple of hundred more expensive than a non-S Sachs shock. The real value of the S features are in the handling (which you may or may not need) and the resale value. I'm not convinced you'll get your money back, but it will be easier to sell if you're willing to take a hit. What's a Corse shell kit? The plastic body pieces? I don't know the price, but I've seen it and would get it if I had a new Monster. Very nice! Title: Re: 1100S vs. 1100. Is it Worth the Extra $$? Post by: drspencer on January 22, 2011, 03:46:44 PM I'm assuming you know about the differences to the '11 Evo? Sorry, I don't. Care to explain? What's a Corse shell kit? The plastic body pieces? I don't know the price, but I've seen it and would get it if I had a new Monster. Very nice! Yes, the Corse is a style of shell kit. Any idea how much these are going for? Thanks again Title: Re: 1100S vs. 1100. Is it Worth the Extra $$? Post by: Bishamon on January 22, 2011, 04:09:01 PM Yes, the Corse is a style of shell kit. Any idea how much these are going for? I've seen them for ~ $800-$1000. Title: Re: 1100S vs. 1100. Is it Worth the Extra $$? Post by: stopintime on January 22, 2011, 04:14:06 PM I searched here on the DMF and someone mentioned around $ 750.
Again, not the expert, but it has different exhaust, new two-piece peg hanger system, traction control, ABS as standard and 100bhp vs 95 on the 2009/'10 http://www.ducati.com/compare/index.do?op=add&year1=16&year1_new_value=false&bikeFamily1=22&bikeFamily1_new_value=false&bikeModel1=29&bikeModel1_new_value=false (http://www.ducati.com/compare/index.do?op=add&year1=16&year1_new_value=false&bikeFamily1=22&bikeFamily1_new_value=false&bikeModel1=29&bikeModel1_new_value=false) Title: Re: 1100S vs. 1100. Is it Worth the Extra $$? Post by: Outlaw1100 on January 22, 2011, 07:20:19 PM Maybe a different angle on the OP's question...do you typically ride out to the edge of your tires? If so, you would absolutely, definitely, notice a big difference with the 1100S and that top-of-the-line suspension. If not, you probably don't ride at the level where it would make a lot of difference.
With my own experience, my 1100S is just as confidence-inspiring in the twisties as my old R6 and CBR600RR were. That suspension is just so smooth. Worth every penny, IMO... Mike B Title: Re: 1100S vs. 1100. Is it Worth the Extra $$? Post by: Outlaw1100 on January 22, 2011, 07:21:49 PM Oh, and you were asking about years...you can still find new '09s and '10s 1100S in dealerships - and they are dealing on them.
Mike B Title: Re: 1100S vs. 1100. Is it Worth the Extra $$? Post by: iRam on January 22, 2011, 07:47:16 PM If your going to be on track a lot of times then the extra $$$ for the ohlins will be worth every penny. But if your just going to use your monster for commuting and some occasional backroad twisties then the showas will be more than capable of handling those.
Title: Re: 1100S vs. 1100. Is it Worth the Extra $$? Post by: drspencer on January 22, 2011, 07:49:38 PM Thanks for all the great replies.
Let's take this from a different angle: 2010 1100S (w/ABS) vs. 2011 Evo. What would you do, and why? Title: Re: 1100S vs. 1100. Is it Worth the Extra $$? Post by: Raux on January 23, 2011, 01:05:04 AM The Evo has more power, better rearsets and traction control.
yes you don't get Ohlins, but you still get adjustable suspension. and you get the ability to just swap out the forks and shock from an 1100S to make it an S this is a no brainer to me Get the Evo, save up to pick up some used Ohlins Title: Re: 1100S vs. 1100. Is it Worth the Extra $$? Post by: derby on January 23, 2011, 01:23:32 PM Get the Evo, save up to pick up some used Ohlins ...or just spend that money getting the showas tuned for ya. Title: Re: 1100S vs. 1100. Is it Worth the Extra $$? Post by: drspencer on January 23, 2011, 01:41:03 PM I also don't care for the 2-1-2 exhaust on the Evo. What can be done about that?
Thanks Title: Re: 1100S vs. 1100. Is it Worth the Extra $$? Post by: Armor on January 23, 2011, 05:34:54 PM The evo has Marzocchi forks.
Title: Re: 1100S vs. 1100. Is it Worth the Extra $$? Post by: Raux on January 23, 2011, 09:20:20 PM adjustable Marzocchi forks... and just because the one model had some Marzocchi forks that were impossible to even work on, doesn't make them crap forks. they sell some incredible works forks and more.
and exhausts can always be changed. probably could even mount the full termi system from the 2010 model. Title: Re: 1100S vs. 1100. Is it Worth the Extra $$? Post by: Jarvicious on January 24, 2011, 05:38:36 AM Wow. I hadn't even really looked at the 1100 until now, but I'd go with the Evo, hands down.
Like Raux said, the forks are fully adjustable and I'd be willing to bet the same, seasoned rider on either an Evo or an S would run the same-ish lap times at a track with each bike's respective suspension. Take that and give the Evo a better price tag, muuuuuuch better rearsets and (imo) that beautiful shotgun exhaust. As far as the exhaust is concerned, there's always a way around that and you're not going to be able to avoid the cat, lamda sensors, etc on a new bike. Period. Buy the bike that better suits you and looks better to you and worry about the little shit later on. Title: Re: 1100S vs. 1100. Is it Worth the Extra $$? Post by: drspencer on November 13, 2011, 09:39:58 PM .........As far as the exhaust is concerned, there's always a way around that and you're not going to be able to avoid the cat, lamda sensors, etc on a new bike. Are you suggesting that even after installing aftermarket exhaust, you're still stuck with a cat? I looked at a 2012 1100 Evo. I liked everything about it, except the look of the low, 2-1-2 exhaust. The dealer said that while exhaust can be changed, the 2012 stock exhaust is the best for street riding. He further explained that when you change this type of exhaust, the heat given off by aftermarket products is unbearable when stopped in traffic. Oh, they also want $12.5K for the bike. Can anyone comment on that? Thanks Title: Re: 1100S vs. 1100. Is it Worth the Extra $$? Post by: Raux on November 13, 2011, 10:03:09 PM all the Monsters have the Cat in the exhaust cans... so change cans=remove the cat.
as far as heat from aftermarket vs stock... stock cans will be hotter due to cats inside. Title: Re: 1100S vs. 1100. Is it Worth the Extra $$? Post by: drspencer on November 13, 2011, 10:07:37 PM all the Monsters have the Cat in the exhaust cans... so change cans=remove the cat. as far as heat from aftermarket vs stock... stock cans will be hotter due to cats inside. If I don't like the look of the 2012 Evo 2-1-2 exhaust, what would you recommend replacing it with, and how much $ would it cost to do so? Thanks Title: Re: 1100S vs. 1100. Is it Worth the Extra $$? Post by: Raux on November 13, 2011, 10:10:45 PM Take a look at this thread
http://www.ducatimonsterforum.org/index.php?topic=50168.0 (http://www.ducatimonsterforum.org/index.php?topic=50168.0) |