Ducati Monster Forum

I was thinking about this when I saw the SS SL on another thread.

Bruce Meyers put together an aircooled deepsump SBK framed 2V for a demo purpose.
I think it could be a prototype for reentry into the SS market since the SBKs are moving to the Superquadro with frameless.

It's more of the soul of Ducati.

Good point.
You may have noticed I just bought a '96 900 SS/SP. 80hp can get the job done just fine. Who can use all that uber-horsepower and Star Wars crap on the street? That's why you see so many for sale. Sure Ducati needs a flagship but an SBK for normal human beings would be nice. But would it be considered a Duc for wussies? A "baby" Duc? An 1198 is considered way more badass than an 848 even though there's only a handfull of riders in the world that can get the extra out of the 1198. And only on a track.
Everybody wants the biggest and most badass.
Common sense says there should be a 2 valver. Even a 796 powered SBK would be more than most riders are really capable of handling on the street.
But, would it sell?

All true, but look at it from a marketing perspective. What has and has not sold over the last 20 years? Logic has little to do with it. Meanwhile the Monster has "kept the lights on" because it's a canvas to make your own idea of a Ducati.

I'd love to have a small, LIGHTWEIGHT, comfortable Monster-based 796 ST, but that ain't happening. The overall European market has been heading toward multis and roadsters for volume sales for quite some time. I don't see that changing anytime soon.

^
word!

You got a link to Bruce's build Raux?

"Bottom line: an 1176cc torque-monster (about 90 ft.-lbs. at 3800 rpm, on the Dynojet dyno at WyoTech, DNA’s training partner), asked to produce a mere 115 horses at moderate revs (9000), managed by a catalog Ducati Performance ECU. Since the entire machine weighs just 300 pounds, more powerful bikes will sweat to keep up during track days and club racing, particularly in the vital 0-120-mph speed bracket. As LaForte puts it, grinning ear to ear, “a truly sick bike.”"

http://www.motorcycledaily.com/2011/05/re-made-in-the-usa-dnas-hotrod-frankenbike/ (http://www.motorcycledaily.com/2011/05/re-made-in-the-usa-dnas-hotrod-frankenbike/)

Quite an exercise (and expensive), but what's it good for? Useless as a "road weapon". If I still folded up that way, I'd take a TT2 any day. THAT is the epitome of Ducati soul. http://www.ducati.com/history/80s/tt2_/index.do (http://www.ducati.com/history/80s/tt2_/index.do)

Would people buy it though?  That is the question.

Interesting question.

There are (roughly) the same amount of tubes to weld together to make a trellis frame, all 2V motors have the same number of moving parts (ST2 excluded), and all the machining to put an SBK chassis together are already purchased..  It wouldn't be hard to make a case that it shouldn't cost more than an M1100 does currently.

An 1100evo motor in the 1198 chassis as a standard catalog offering from Ducati factory?!?

I, for one, would seriously consider that hardware!!!

The issue is also regulatory.  Air-cooled bikes are going to go eventually, at least big bore ones (over 4-500cc) due to noise and emissions rules.  It's getting very hard to control those in light of tightening regs.

Water cooled bikes eliminate most of the motor noise and emissions are much easier to modulate.

No reason they can't make a water run SS bike.  ST2 engine was nice imho. 

I'll start off by saying I'd love to see a new SS bike.  [thumbsup]

However, I don't think they'd sell very well because in order for it to be competitive with any of the superbikes (which it would need to be) it would have to weigh a maximum of 325lbs (in road trim - no fuel). It would also have to have good components.

In order to be competitive on the race track it would need to be 300 lbs ready to ride.

I don't think they can make it that light at a price point that mere mortals can afford. That's the problem as I see it.

Get an NCR Milona or a Pierobon F042 if you really want a new Ducati SS. They aren't cheap though, especially the NCR. I'd love to have a Pierobon as a race bike...but I'm too cheap, knowing that eventually I'll throw it down the track.

The ST has been fully replaced by the Multi's and GS of the world. You just need to look at Triumph's sales of the Tiger vs ST. The SS would only be feasible with the numbers Triple J describes and a considerably cheaper price tag comparaed to the 848. That's the problem. You would need to find room between the Monsters and the 848. How do you bridge that gap?

Make a different bike altogether.

Not sure how to differentiate that though..

I think the 848 could be the modern SS.  There is nothing that says an SS has to be bevel, or carbed, or efi or air cooled.

Well, if things go as in the past, they should be replacing the 848 with a 1199 based bike. Take the 848 motor and put it on an SS along with the SF? I think that would definitely mark the eventual death of the air cooled bikes.

I don't think it would mean the death of them -- I thought that was the split ,that the monster and hyper would remain air cooled and the SBKs and other bikes watercooled.

I just don't think there is enough interest in what an air/oil cooled bike offers for them to sell enough SS bikes now.

Definitely do a sportclassic version.

So stay the course. I'm sure that if the SS were selling back in the day, they would have continued to make them. It would be a cool concept, but not a financially sound decision.

I have a pic somewhere showing the sales for each bike model in 2005 -- I think it was around 1000 for the entire year, worldwide, all models.  They continued to sell the 800ss in the USA thru 06 or 07, using up parts or inventory, but that was pretty much it.  I think it was 50% the new look and 50% the performance of the bike.  Not enough people fell in love with the Terblanche design.

This:
(http://throttleyard.com/wp-content/plugins/PostviaEmail/images/1998_Ducati_900SS_FE_Silver_For_Sale_resize.jpg)

versus this:

(http://cdn.tradebit.org/usr/remanuals-ceo/pub/9002/148731562_2001Ducati900ss.jpg)

I don't think there's much market for that in the U.S.  It would be a sensible useful bike, good for general purposes, and few people in the U.S. want to buy that.  95% of bikes here are toys, used just for fun and rarely as general useful transportation.  And those who do want a bike for general useful transportation usually buy something sturdy and easy to deal with, with a reputation for longevity, like a V-Strom or BMW.

The ugly (as usual) Terblanche design didn't help, I'm sure, but the SS was already way behind the curve as an actual sportbike, and sold ever more poorly each year.  Making it pretty again would have helped a bit, but not changed the eventual outcome.

I've got the Monster, because I like naked bikes; if I liked faired bikes, the SS (or ST) would be my perfect machine, because I ride every day for every purpose.  But that's not the market for bikes in the U.S. in general, much less for specialist marques like Ducati.

PhilB

Here's a Monster 796 that a local dealer converted to a SS using D16RR fairings. Very cool looking IMO.

(http://i114.photobucket.com/albums/n258/JJGeo/796RR.jpg)

with the spy shots of what appears to be a liquid cooled hyper floating around the internet, and the statement about moving away from desmo valves for  the "entry level bikes" (what could that mean other than monsters?)  I would say that the days of the high performance air cooled ducati motors are coming to a close within the next  year or two.

as Ducatiz said, it has more to do with the legalities involved with motor (emissions and noise) than with what people would actually want to ride. aircooled may very well become the new 2-stroke...

I like that  [thumbsup]

+1

i'll eat my shoe if they come out with a non-desmo head on a DUCATI branded bike.  I could see them buying another marque (Morini or Malaguti) and doing it and using the other label as way to move away from the L twin/desmo design, but they've invested so much in the DESMO branding, it would be idiocy to do that.

Moreover, there is no reason to.  With modern belts, valve adjust intervals have extended significantly and there isn't that much more involved cost wise to make a desmo vs springer head. 

However, I would not be surprised at all if they picked up a smaller label and started churning out singles and parallels with spring heads.  Why not?

maybe the aircooled sticks around for the sub/1000 range bikes.
but non-desmo... BLEH... Audi needs  to squash that shit.

that Italian guy who cares nothin for tradition is to blame for all this shit.
desmo and trellis frames gone from Ducati is a way to cut manufacturing costs.
it will just take it to a aprilia level where it doesn't have the mystique. sure it will cost more cause manufaturing costs + higher MSRP = money in the bank for those greedy bastards.

Here in Australia (well Queensland anyway) with no real environmental restrictions two-strokes and air-cooled big bore bikes will still be for sale as long as there is a market for them! The manufacturers are the ones pulling the pin on certain models (two-strokes in particular) due to environmental restrictions and pressure from their larger sales markets.

What is sad IMO is looking at the Panigale with its clothes off.........so much crammed into such a small space and part of the soul (trellis frame) is lost all together. Looks like any other till its dressed again! With this in mind I would hope they continue some kind of traditional Trellis framed SBK or re-invent the SS! 

Here's a question -- do y'all think Ducati should (a) strive to be leading edge, to be the most advanced and competitive and high-performance bikes they can be, or (b) stick to "tradition" and market "lifestyle" and become an Italian Harley?  You can probably tell by the wording of the question what my opinion is.  The role of quirky traditional Italian bike is already filled by Moto Guzzi, and they are and will ever be a tiny niche product.

Desmos are a trademark Ducati feature, and have some advantages over spring valves (but also some disadvantages).  Not all Ducatis have been Desmos.  My opinion on that is that Ducati should make the most of those advantages rather than reverting to spring valves.  But if they can develop a technology that is better than either (say, be the first to bring pneumatic valve actuation to a production bike), then they should move forward rather than stick to "tradition" for no other reason than it is tradition.

Likewise with the frame.  The trellis frame has plusses and minuses compared to the aluminum twin-spar that others use, and I'm fine with them (again) maximizing the benefits rather than switching to be the same as everyone else, for as long as they can stay competitive that way.  But at the leading edge of performance, the trellis is up against its maximum potential.  I would MUCH rather that Ducati, for the highest performance bikes, make the effort to stay competitive, rather than accept a lesser ability and become a second-rate performance bike.  I was very disappointed when the MotoGP effort gave up on the monocoque and settled for copying the rest (and then having to play catch-up with a tech that is new to them but already very well developed by the others).  At least they did get it well enough developed to put it in a production bike, so they can continue to develop it now in WSB.  Maybe they will learn enough there to bring it back up to MotoGP at some point.

The way forward for Ducati should be forward.

PhilB

The other reason they might move away from desmo on the "entry" bikes is the widespread (and IMHO, inaccurate) perception that it's expensive and fiddly to maintain. I was in the Victory dealer the other day picking up an oil change kit (?) for my brother in law (oddly enough, there's one here in semi-rural Arizona but not in LA); as I was handing over $60 for what amounted to an oil filter, some crush washers and some non-synthetic oil, the guy was giving me grief about how expensive it is to do valves on a Duc - which I suppose it could be if I took mine to a dealer. I think Ducati is sensitive to that perception, as evidenced by their marketing push in recent years to call attention to the longer service intervals on the valve train.

I also could imagine some marketing whiz kid pitching the idea as a ladder for aspiring owners: Stretch to buy your first, entry-level Duc, but dream about and move up to a "real" desmo Ducati later.  New ownership & Audi engineers and marketers looking over Bologna's shoulder adds another wild card that we can't quite predict.

Ultimately, though, I agree with you - I think we'd see things like the 90 degree L go before the desmo valvetrain on Ducati-branded bikes - it's just too much of the brand identity, and letting go of it just dilutes the entire brand.

See my post above:


1.  Trellis frames only go back to about the mid 70s.  Dry clutches were not on street bikes until 85.  The last spring head they sold was the GTL -- 78.

The solution "forward" would be a second brand for them to expand their base in.  People who don't care about desmo or L twin or trellis, and it would give them a second face under which to experiment.

The Ducati brand is wound up with desmo and trellis and such.  Pick up one of the demised brands and revive it with and do everything else on that brand.  It could attract lots of people who have no interest in an L twin or desmo.

I disagree.  The Ducati brand is wound up with high performance, high style, high tech, and Italian exoticness.  The man on the street (even your average biker on the street) looks at a Ducati, even a 620 Monster, and thinks "wow, that must be really fast", or "that guy must be rich", or something like that.  He doesn't think about the technical details.

Desmo and trellis contribute to that currently, but changing those to something better/more exotic won't detract from that.  OTOH, getting left behind certainly would tarnish the brand.  If you want a bike that sticks to their "trademark" configuration long past it performing competitively, buy a Guzzi.  I like Guzzis.  I will probably have one at some point.  But they aren't anything like current with regard to performance, and can't be as long as they value tradition over function.  It would be a real shame to see Ducati pigeonhole itself into the same corner.

You sound exactly like some Harley "faithful" who thinks it can't be a Harley if it has water cooling or a new shape or a better engine configuration -- the guys who keep Harley from getting anywhere with anything but traditional cruisers.  Ducati doesn't need a "second brand"; they need to take good care of the brand they have, which has an excellent image these days (despite the plastic tank debacle).  That means (a) keeping the quality high, (b) good customer service and standing behind their products, and (c) keeping up with performance and technology.

PhilB

I'm going to leave these here.....


http://www.asphaltandrubber.com/oped/first-ducati-1199-panigale-assembly-line-factory/ (http://www.asphaltandrubber.com/oped/first-ducati-1199-panigale-assembly-line-factory/)


http://www.asphaltandrubber.com/oped/ducati-diavel-business-case/ (http://www.asphaltandrubber.com/oped/ducati-diavel-business-case/)

very good reads and they talk about how ducati is moving forward

Well, Ducati has in fact tried to follow the Harley marketing model.  They said that explicitly.

I am all for them innovating.  Having a second brand would let them try things under a different marque and then incorporate it into the Ducati brand once it's proven itself.

For supplementing their income by marketing accessories and "lifestyle", yes.  Which is OK if done carefully, so as not to cheapen the brand and become a laughingstock.  I'm not sure if Ducati is doing that quite right; some of their choices are a bit questionable, but I'm basically OK with the concept.

However, again, the brand image they are going with is Ducati's own image -- high fashion, high tech, high performance.  NOT Harley's image of tradition and nostalgia.

And to "try things under a different marque and then incorporate it into the Ducati brand once it's proven itself" is the wrong message for a brand that is to be seen as innovative and leading edge.  You don't get that brand image by being timid.

PhilB

Firstly I love the new 1199 and would give my left one to have it in the stable and would think a smaller capacity version with the same tech would suit me even better as the older I get the less boundaries I push and could not get even close to matching the ability of the Panigale.

I can't see why if there was a market for it there couldn't be another model offered in one or two engine capacities utilising aesthetics of the trellis frame and either a water cooled 4V or air cooled 2V! If for whatever reason you can't or don't want to ride an 1199 an SS or ST could be more then enough bike to satisfy the masses.

Right now I'm guessing the Multi is filling this market but it isn't everyone's cup of tea and the price is up there as well.

For me a fully faired bike with better ergonomics then a Sport classic and a bit more modern but dialled down from a Panigale and keeping some of the stand back and stare at it's sheer beauty aspects would make for an outstanding bike! But I am but one! 

;D

Read my comment on pg. 1. Like the S-ST idea but don't need 4V anymore. We are out of luck. Fairly certain Ducati has the pulse of the market. Who'd have thought the Diavel would fly? Not I..., but it does.

Limited SBKs, Multis and Roadsters = full order books for a niche marketer.

I am one of two............ [thumbsup]

 Anybody read this story in cycle world,

http://touch.cycleworld.com/cycleworld/# (http://touch.cycleworld.com/cycleworld/#)!/entry/on-the-record-claudio-domenicali-ducati-general-manager,4fd890d74b672622b8353ead

this is an interesting interview with Ducati general manager about the future of Ducati.

Speaking as an older guy(60), the SS style platform just won't get it for me and my buds. Neck, back, shoulder, and knee issues make them impractical, I'm two of four   ;D  The Multistrada, GS can do so much so well, the SS is almost redundant. I love my S2R1000 for what it is, and is pefect in that role. My long hauler, a K1200S is relaxed, smooth and powerful, and has bags. Just don't see how Ducati would profit.

My experience is just the opposite -- I have back and neck injuries from my crazy life and the only time I hurt during or after a ride was on the Monster with the stock bars -- I put on clipons to match my SS riding position, voila, no more pain.

For a long hauler though, I would want the Multi or something similar, but for afternoon rides, I need to lay down a little

That's a fascinating interview, with fairly definitive answers about a lot of the questions raised in this thread; I couldn't get there on a desktop through the link above, but this should work:

http://www.cycleworld.com/2012/06/13/on-the-record-claudio-domenicali/ (http://www.cycleworld.com/2012/06/13/on-the-record-claudio-domenicali/)

And to boil down one word his response to the title of this thread?

No.

He actually said based on the failure of the SS redesign that he didn't think it would do well.


That could mean a couple of things.

1.  he's only thinking of a new SS that picks up with the old design
2.  he can't accept that even Ducati can make a turkey
3.  he isn't thinking out of the box.

Seems to me they could use the Monster as a base, design a new tank and good looking fairings and they are done.  I think they could have a new bike line with a minimum of fuss that doesn't cost a crazy amount to develop.

Or sell it as a kit.  Swap the tank and mount these fairings and voila.  1 million dollars please.

Lying down?  ;D You're still a relative youngster. Wait until a few more parts fall off and you'll understand we still speedy old farts better!

Having assisted in the introduction of two successful niche vehicles into the U.S., his comment about the SS was "polite".  ;)

The Diavel was "out of the box" IMO.

Based on Logomania, your kit idea has merit! I'd rather see an ST fairing though which was as carefully wind tunnel tested as the stock new Monsters because the headlight/bikini fairing/mirror combo is seriously "quiet" at speed. Unfortunately, the high pipes don't easily lend themselves to an attractive quick release soft bag solution. Pity...

Anyway, who knows for sure, but I'd wager an ST kit would outsell an SS kit 5:1. Not enough sales for them to invest the time though.

  A 1200cc  2v SS street fighter might work for a bad boy look and sound .

I battle that on a regular basis.  The general problem I see among people comparing duc to jap i4's is the unfamiliarity of the shim system and the increased service interval.  Add on that the extra cost of belts and it starts adding up.  Not a lot, but more than an I4.

it seems if it doesn't net a noticeable performance increase it's hard to argue against.

Isn't that basically the sport classics?

???

Et tu Brute?!

Since you could probably write your own book on the pros and cons, do it again and find me another Twin which has similar low CG characteristics and powerband. Intuitively, at least to me, a springer alternative which WORKED might cost even more.

Sure, springs are more reliable that in "olden time" but you still have to deal with all the frictional losses and a valve train which can't be controlled with the same accuracy. IMO there is no advantage, and I've ridden springer Ducatis, 250 (owned), 350 and 450 from the last batch Ducati made.

Want to ride my T-100? Better yet, try a F-Series Rotax. Agreed however, no real advantage in an I-4. Always wanted to try that 90 degree Laverda V-6 though.  ;) One-of-a-kind Laverda V6 in action (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jpiC1RNoM-w#)

;D

A Sport Classic is a little bit TOO close to a REAL classic.  ;) Nothing like your old 796 chassis really which handles much more like my 600 SL.

no.  im talking about using the EXACT same bike except for the tank, headlight and fairings.  probably have to change the seat too.

it could be an aftermarket kit even...

when all people do is look at HP, quarter mile, and 0-100 times they don't really give a crap about that other stuff.

I actually sat down with someone and calculated out all the 'extra' cost of owning a duc.  At least on a 2v, it all came down to 12k valve adjustment(opposed to 15-20k for varying i4's), belt changes, and a slightly more frequent chain/sprocket replacement.  The unfamiliarity of some systems just freaks people out.  I had someone completely against the idea of a hydraulic clutch no matter how much evidence I had to their advantages.

I think the biggest stigma is 1) lack of parts availability both from the dealer, from the aftermarket, and used (ebay, CL, etc) and 2) fewer (or zero, based on your location) independent mechanics who work on them.

Add the additional problems of a perceived lower parts spec on the 'smaller' bikes, even if there is no performance advantage, and you have a pretty easy argument AGAINST buying a duc for someone with a more frugal budget.  My contention is that most people don't own a particular bike long enough to really see a considerable difference.

:-)

Laverda V6  [drool]