Ducati Monster Forum

After browsing the monster 20th anniversary thread here, and lookin at the special edition bikes, and reading yet another post about something about the new subframe, it dawned on me that there might be a (small) market for an aftermarket trellis subframe to make the old school guys happier with the looks of the new monster. 

and I thought that might be interesting.  anyone agree? disagree?  should I start a real poll? boobies?   

I might be interested in one, it could be cool i think... I'd also like to see an s*r style high shotgun exhaust for my 1100 evo...but that might be for another thread. 

Not a bad idea, I have no issues with the new subframe, it's not terribly ugly IMO but the fact is that an old school trellis subframe would look a lot better... [thumbsup] [thumbsup]

Boobies.


Also, I would dig a trellis subframe (not that the $2000 per side carbon fibre subrames arent cool..)

I dont think the new subframe looks bad either...but I do think a trellis would look way cooler  [evil]

I'm actually not a fan of carbon anything for the most part - i'd probably end up painting that one, and I'm pretty sure I wouldn't spend 2k on it it...

I'd hope a trellis subframe would cost substantially less too...anyone know a good welder in north NJ who might be interested in a winter project?? [beer]

I've long said that if I was doing any sort of custom based on a new Monster, I'd get a trellis subframe fabbed up.  Combine that with a trellis swingarm like is on the S2R or the MHR900ie, and you'd have a pretty spectacular looking machine.

PhilB

Isn't increased stiffness the main reason Ducati changed the frame design of the current generation Monster?

Not sure why you would want to go throught he expense and decrease the stiffness by fabing up a new frame purely for aesthetic reasons.

I'd love to pick up the carbon subframe for my bike... but man that's a lot of coin.  Maybe someday when I'm rich and famous.   [laugh]

Doubtful. If a full trellis is stiff enough for a SBK, then it sure as hell is for a Monster.

Cost...cast parts are cheaper than ones that need to be welded.

cast may be cheaper than welded, but I was referring to that $2000 carbon subframe...

I cant see the trellis frame approaching anything near that much...

I agree. I wasn't referring to your comment, as I quoted SDRider.  :)

Isn't that the problem that most gp riders complane about that there isn't enough flex in there chassis's

Then why do I always hear that the biggest problem with the S4R is that the chassis isn't up to the capabilities of the motor?

Because that frame isn't up to it. The SBK frames have key differences to the Monster frames. There isn't anything inherently wrong with a trellis frame.

No

That's more of a weight distribution issue, too tail heavy.

And thats a much older style frame than the current sbk ones.  They shoved in a motor much more powerful than it was originally designed for.  The current sbk frames were designed for a much more powerful engine.

The are a couple of issues with the subframe of the new monster that you have to address if you are looking at building one from scratch.

1) The mounting mounts. The three form a the basic triangle, the strongest engineering shape for this type of application. You cannot compromise on the redesign on the strength of this shape.
   - Front engine mount
   - Rear engine mount
   - front frame
2) Rear suspension mount is also a critical point and is offset and carried load wise by the left subframe. It also is in a awkward place as far as building any way to cross brace to this mount from the other side of the subframe.
3) The crossbrace in the center also acts as the fuel tank support and exhaust mount. As well as the closest cross support for the two sides and possibly handling some of the suspension load distribution.
4) The evo subframe presents another issue, the passenger peg mounts, but IMO the project would have to be a SOLO only AL subframe.

To me those are things to be concerned with.
Now the good things.
1) The tail can be simplified and made prettier.
2) IMO an aluminum thin wall tube subframe could be as light as the cast/steel (yes, the crossbrace and  tail are steel) stock.
3) The look would be killer.

and in the end... if Ducati would just smooth out the castings and paint the subframe the same color as the main frame, the bike doesn't look that bad.  ;D

(http://a5.sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-snc7/302249_251976034859132_100001402122676_693236_97026742_n.jpg)

Jenn had wanted a Monster (620 or 695) from before she ever rode one (I think she first rode a demo 620 back in 05 or so).

But when the 696 debuted we both had a serious EWWWWWW reaction to the new cast subframe.

We understood why they did it (mostly cost), but it took a good couple of years to grow on us.

And when we finally got around to buying we spent a good 6-8 months looking for a used 620 or 695 (but she insisted it had to be red/red and we just couldn't find one in the right condition at the time).

So we eventually gave in and the new look has grown on us BUT WE STILL PREFER THE LOOK OF THE FULL TRELLIS.

Nom...

There's no question it wouldn't be as simple as welding a couple of tubes together, but I think you're right raux that an aluminum subframe could be just as light/possibly lighter than the stock sub frame - these are all valid points you bring up, but i think the most important is

that too  [evil]