Hello all,
I currently own a harley superglide, but may trade it in on a black 696. It all depends on how the financial numbers work out. Any words of wisdom or advice? I test rode the 696 yesterday, and it was a blast and way faster than my 1600cc harley.
Also, my wife likes to ride with me, but said she probably wont ride with me if I trade. I think she is scared of the pillion and lack of comfort. FWIW, she has taken a MSF coarse and knows how to ride, so she may take the 696 for a spin or two even though she refuses to drive the 700 pound harley.
Oh yeah, what are the service intervals, and what do they cost/consist of? Thanks.
Valve services are slated for every 7500 miles for 2007 and newer ducs. Though someone who's got something newer might chime in with different info.
Valve checks are 2-3 hours of labor usually.. so find out what your local shop charges per hour.
696 will be a big, but fun change. The bike weight half or less than your HD, it'll sure feel more lively. I don't blame your wife for being skeptical about riding pillion. I love monsters... but they weren't really built for riding 2 up in America... sure if you're a pair of tiny Italians it might be different. But careful how much you let her ride it... you might end up with 2.
Wisdom? Don't behave too badly on your new tires...
i had a buell and traded for a 2007 695. the best decision i ever made. sounds great rides awesome. would really love to add the high mount exhaust, but big$$$! anyway the service is pricey, but you won't notice a big change from the harley dealer. i am a woman and after your wife rides it a little she will want her own. besides riding 2 bikes together was always more fun than riding with my hubby.
tara [thumbsup]
We can't afford a second bike for her right now, so the monster would be "both of ours". Hopefully in time, she would want the 696 and I could get a bigger bike. She really wants a Triumph Scrambler though. I love that scrambler as a SECOND bike!
scrambler.....I will own one some day!
Yeah that scrambler is pretty cool. I just think the duc would be more fun. I'm in the military, so I can't just stop what I'm doing and jump on my harley for a 1,000 mile trip whenever I want. That leaves local FUN riding for me, and while my harley is a blast...it handles like a tank.
we are in the military too so we here ya on the short term fun. the 695 has been awesome for me commuting and even with the high grade gas it has been way cheaper than my jeep! i looked at the new triumph street triple but it was a bit too high, but the scrambler is bad ass!
tara
I here you on the jeep!...My jeep gets 14 mpg with BFG all terains! What branch are you guys? My wife and I are in the (ch)air force, lol.
Based on the screen name I'm guessing Navy. Riding EC-130's, by any chance? :)
Quote from: whidbeymonster on July 20, 2008, 05:02:57 PM
even with the high grade gas it has been
Threadjack - most monsters are happy on 87 or 89 octane - no need for premium.
mitt [thumbsup]
navy its true... but my hubby is in a small squadron that does dc-9 passenger jets. i am an emergency room nurse. but my 695 definately gets snotty on the cheap gas much to my chagrin. it occasionally misfires when i put in 87 or 89. is there some kind of additive i can put into it to make it run well on the cheaper stuff?
tara
I also own a HD (RoadKing) and a Monster. I'd say do it and kick it up to the 1000 cc Monster. ;D
I haven't ridden harleys on a regular basis, but Dad and I traded bikes for a bit this weekend and I couldn't WAIT to get back on my Monster (that's what she said). He has a Fat Boy with big ass highway pegs on the front and platforms that scrape when you lean into a turn. The Harley also sounded clanky and clunky to me. Maybe it just took some getting used to, but there were all sorts of odd noises coming out of that thing. I think it comes down to how much you want your wifey participating with you and what kind of riding you're really gonna be doing. I don't mind ass-numbing long rides on the Monster, but my dad had all sorts of complaints about riding position and rearset location, etc, and I'm sure the Fat Boy with the highway bars and the windshield would be much much better for long rides. If you don't ride over distance too often though and you just wanna clunk around town, maybe the Duc is for you. Oh, and how could you not trade in a Superglide and then get a new Monster with scratch left over. What year is the HD?
i say go for it. and it's sounds like you're already sold on it ;D
Quote from: whidbeymonster on July 20, 2008, 05:49:40 PM
navy its true... but my hubby is in a small squadron that does dc-9 passenger jets. i am an emergency room nurse. but my 695 definately gets snotty on the cheap gas much to my chagrin. it occasionally misfires when i put in 87 or 89. is there some kind of additive i can put into it to make it run well on the cheaper stuff?
tara
Thread jack
We can't find anything above 91 octane here in MO so I chuck in octane boost they sell at the local Harley shop. It can also reputedly be found at Walmart, but I've had no luck there. The owners manual asks for 95 octane, and that's really what the engine likes. It runs smoother, it definitely got rid of my back fire problem on decel, and I've even been getting better gas mileage. Well worth the $1.xx you pay for it, IMHO.
End Thread Jack
Ditch the hog, pick up a duc!
Quote from: bulldogs2k on July 20, 2008, 03:57:09 PM
scrambler.....I will own one some day!
they're cool looking, but they weigh about 500lbs. seems ridiculous for a scrambler.
seriously, i like that whole bonneville line, but they just don't seem to have the right numbers.
I'm pretty sure that the 95 octane rating that is in the manual is in European ratings. There is a really good thread on this on TOB you might want to check it out.
Quote from: metallimonster on July 21, 2008, 07:20:01 AM
I'm pretty sure that the 95 octane rating that is in the manual is in European ratings. There is a really good thread on this on TOB you might want to check it out.
true. they have a different standard. i think it works out to about 89 here
Quote from: Jarvicious on July 20, 2008, 08:03:26 PM
Maybe it just took some getting used to, but there were all sorts of odd noises coming out of that thing.
so logically, a bike with a dry clutch is our recommendation for a "step up." ;D
Quote from: zarn02 on July 21, 2008, 07:54:42 AM
so logically, a bike with a dry clutch is our recommendation for a "step up." ;D
Touche zarn, never thought of it that way! In response, the noise out of the dry clutch is a much healthier "bad noise" than whatever crank case/gear box/exhaust sounds you get out of an HD. I may, or may not be an irrational Ducati fanatic here.
I did just remember though, one of the guys who does local weekly rides here in town just traded his 848 in for a new CBR1000RR and says he will never go back to Ducati. I guess it's whatever floats your boat.
Quote from: Jarvicious on July 21, 2008, 06:42:30 AM
Thread jack
We can't find anything above 91 octane here in MO so I chuck in octane boost they sell at the local Harley shop. It can also reputedly be found at Walmart, but I've had no luck there. The owners manual asks for 95 octane, and that's really what the engine likes. It runs smoother, it definitely got rid of my back fire problem on decel, and I've even been getting better gas mileage. Well worth the $1.xx you pay for it, IMHO.
End Thread Jack
Yep, 95 is based on Euro ratings, which are different than US (MON vs RON). There is no precise conversion (octane grading is not precise anyway), but most owners generally report no problems with 87 or 89.
Unless an engine has ping detection, and adjusts timing accordingly, there is no mpg advantage in higher octane gas. The higher the octane, the less energy per unit volume the gas has.
mitt
Quote from: mitt on July 21, 2008, 12:03:51 PM
The higher the octane, the less energy per unit volume the gas has.
mitt
My local guy explained it to me as such:
Gasoline burns extremely quickly (duh) and even more quickly when it's compressed and has the proper chunk of oxygen mixed in with it. The lower octane rated gasolines basically have a quicker burn time (higher energy) than the higher octane ratings (remember this is just what the tech told me, please correct me if I'm wrong). The problem with the lower octane gas is that it burns the entirety of the gas that has been injected into the cylinder before the piston has completed its full down stroke. So in other words the piston is finishing xx% of its travel on momentum/compression/vacuum alone whereas the higher rated gasoline burns through the whole piston stroke and therefore forcing the piston down as opposed to letting it "coast". The only problem here is if you get a gasoline that is still burning when the engine is trying to re-compress the chamber and push the piston back up into its top dead center position, or conversely when you have a gas that ignites due to compression before the spark plugs/ ignition system are ready to fire.
The octane rating is not the percentage of octane to heptane, or whatever other additives they add to a gasoline mixture, it's simply a measure of how much compression the gasoline can stand before self igniting (knock). The lower octane gas can handle less compression before self-ignition than the higher level octane. I don't know how whichever kind of gas could relate to the stock compression ratio of the monster though. I'm sure all this differs per engine style (vtwin vs. inline) and it also depends on what rpm you're running at and whether you're just putzing around or on the throttle hard. I guess the only way to be able to tell for certain is to do some more exact lab testing as opposed to "well, I get 48 here and 52 there". I think I'm going to do some week by week comparisons. 87, 91, and 91 plus octane boost. Does anyone have a pretty regular route to work they can use as a control? I just ride around at random so it's just that, random.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Octane_rating
http://auto.howstuffworks.com/question90.htm
Quote from: mitt on July 21, 2008, 12:03:51 PM
Unless an engine has ping detection, and adjusts timing accordingly, there is no mpg advantage in higher octane gas. The higher the octane, the less energy per unit volume the gas has.
mitt
umm... thats not really true. maybe with alcohol based fuels, but not gasoline.
higher octane, means its less pron to pre ignition because its more difficult to burn and according to wikipedia, premium (95 ron @ 39.5MJ/liter) has more energy then regular (91ron@ 3.48 MJ/liter.)
the better mileage in modern vehicles is for a few reasons, one is more energy, the other is modern fuel injection adds fuel as a strategy to reduce combustion temps and pre-ignition.
but, I'm sure what octane to use in your bike has been beaten into submission. considering its high compression, and air cooled, I won't run less then 90 in mine and prefer higher up to a point.
Quote from: Jarvicious on July 21, 2008, 03:36:28 PM
My local guy explained it to me as such:
Gasoline burns extremely quickly (duh) and even more quickly when it's compressed and has the proper chunk of oxygen mixed in with it. The lower octane rated gasolines basically have a quicker burn time (higher energy) than the higher octane ratings (remember this is just what the tech told me, please correct me if I'm wrong). The problem with the lower octane gas is that it burns the entirety of the gas that has been injected into the cylinder before the piston has completed its full down stroke. So in other words the piston is finishing xx% of its travel on momentum/compression/vacuum alone whereas the higher rated gasoline burns through the whole piston stroke and therefore forcing the piston down as opposed to letting it "coast". The only problem here is if you get a gasoline that is still burning when the engine is trying to re-compress the chamber and push the piston back up into its top dead center position, or conversely when you have a gas that ignites due to compression before the spark plugs/ ignition system are ready to fire.
Not exactly how I understand it. The initial ignition occurs before TDC (5 to 30degrees), and continues until max pressure is achieved when the piston & rod have the best (90deg) mechanical advantage on the crank pin. What happens when there is knock, is that the spark plug still ignites the mixture normally, but a portion of the mixture burns too quickly, and the pressures are way too high while the piston is at poor mechanical advantage, causing destructive forces and the 'knock' noise. So, an engine that senses this can change the ingnition from say 15 degress before TDC to 5 degrees TDC, delaying the whole burn sequence, and preventing the entire charge to burn before the piston can apply force effectvely to the crank. In addition, the ECU can richen the fuel ratio, thus getting worse fuel mileage than a higher octance fuel in the same engine. But, our ducs, at least now, don't do that.
mitt
Quote from: acalles on July 21, 2008, 04:15:45 PM
the better mileage in modern vehicles is for a few reasons, one is more energy, the other is modern fuel injection adds fuel as a strategy to reduce combustion temps and pre-ignition.
but, I'm sure what octane to use in your bike has been beaten into submission. considering its high compression, and air cooled, I won't run less then 90 in mine and prefer higher up to a point.
Again, anything higher than the minum you bike needs to avoid knocking is wasted money, and lower performance, unless the engine can adjust for it.
The higher miles per gallon with higher octane comes from advanced ignition timing, causing higher pressure, more force on the crank, therefore less fuel for the same speed, not more energy in the fuel. Using a lower octane gas is like advancing the timing without adjusting actual timing.
If you don't knock with 87, then in theory, you should get more power at the wheel with 87 gas than 91 assuming the engine can't adjust timing or air fuel ratios.
mitt
Quote from: mitt on July 21, 2008, 04:36:19 PM
What happens when there is knock, is that the spark plug still ignites the mixture normally, but a portion of the mixture burns too quickly, and the pressures are way too high while the piston is at poor mechanical advantage, causing destructive forces and the 'knock' noise.
well, there are a few things that cause it, one is from timing too advanced causing the flame front to hit the pistion while its still rising, this is very destructive. very hard on the bearings, but also very audible (sounds like a rattle).
another has to do with octane, compression, cyl head design, ect. As the piston moves up and compresses the a/f charge, it also heats up. If it heats to a point above the flash point of the fuel, or if theres any small hot spot in the engine, it can combust, this is a very dangerous situation, because opposite to this, the spark plug is firing, creating another flame front. when the two fronts meet, the pressure goes VERY high the resulting explosion tends to blast off little pieces of cyl head or piston top. this sounds a bit like spoons clacking together and can be more difficult to hear..
After years of building turbo cars, I've seen my fair share of it, and ignition timing isn't the whole story.
QuoteThe higher miles per gallon with higher octane comes from advanced ignition timing, causing higher pressure, more force on the crank, therefore less fuel for the same speed, not more energy in the fuel. Using a lower octane gas is like advancing the timing without adjusting actual timing.
a faster burning charge may cause a more violent explosion, but it doesn't mean theres more energy released.
using a lower octane fuel isn't like advancing the timing, it just causes the fuel to burn easier, to explode rather then burn at a controlled rate.
when you advance timing, you start the process sooner along with using higher octane making it burn slower allows more energy to be released over a longer amount of time.
the combustion process isn't starting any sooner with lower octane, its just burning more violently.
I get what your saying, it just isn't really true. I look at the engine on my bike, no different then any engine.. 10.5:1, high performance, and air cooled = heat. best way to keep it running for a long time is to reduce the accidental explosions.. and that to me is worth the $.35 at the pump and loss of maybe 2 hard to prove HP.
Quote from: whidbeymonster on July 20, 2008, 05:49:40 PM
navy its true... but my hubby is in a small squadron that does dc-9 passenger jets. i am an emergency room nurse. but my 695 definately gets snotty on the cheap gas much to my chagrin. it occasionally misfires when i put in 87 or 89. is there some kind of additive i can put into it to make it run well on the cheaper stuff?
tara
Sounds like the Totems. I was in the same VR wing long time ago.
make the switch [evil]
come on...you know you wanna [evil]
my dad has a HD, and he loves to get on my 620 when I go visit to tool around. He says it's way more fun than his for just scootin around town on.
Maybe check out a multi for riding 2 up? they're pretty fun. Some say they're ugly, but I like em'.
just...whatever you do....don't take a hypertard for a test ride [evil] [moto] [leo] :'(
Well, the dealership told me they would call me when they got the numbers from the bank, but when I called them yesterday, I was told: "who is this again?...Oh yeah we still haven't heard anything. We'll call you back." It's been four days now. They were closed sunday and monday though. Is this waiting period normal? I have traded cars before and it happened on the spot, not four or five days later. [bang]
eh....waiting sucks man
I was in at 10am and out by 1pm with a new bike.
It'll be worth it though [moto]
Quote from: devils haircut on July 20, 2008, 01:47:32 PM
Any words of wisdom or advice?
Just because you *know* how to ride you rHarley, do not assume that you *know* how to ride a Ducati. They are two totally different breeds of bike and on opposite ends of the spectrum. I rode dirtbikes for years and logged over 50k miles on my HD before getting my first Ducati....a '99 SS750.....I have a 15" rod down the center of my right femur because I didn't respect the new machine and its capabilities because I thought I *knew* how to ride......
DesmoDemon,
That is exactly the type of response I was looking for...the type I could use! I'm aware that riding ponies doesn't prepare you for bull riding.
Quote from: devils haircut on July 23, 2008, 09:54:24 AM
That is exactly the type of response I was looking for...the type I could use! I'm aware that riding ponies doesn't prepare you for bull riding.
It was so disillusional....I thought that since I was riding 400-500 cc 2-stroke dirtbikes and my HD was modified with more HP and torque than the SS750 that it would be a piece of cake.....i was rudely awakened 3 months and 3000 miles later when I smacked into the side of a mountain at 60 mph. The light-weight, rev'ing capabilities, better brakes, and quicker acceleration just didn't sink into my stubborn head. I look back at the way I was riding back then, and I was definitely an accident just waiting to happen....unfortunately, I didn't have to wait too long.
Here's the story I wrote on the wreck...
http://www.desmodemon.com/dead_duck.html
And a picture of the poor SS750...
(http://www.desmodemon.com/deadduc2.jpg)
Hey Desmo. I read your story. That would have happened on any bike. U miss judged the road. True, going from a 700 lb MC to a 400 Lb MC is going to be a change. The riding styles change as well. U changed to a sport bike because U were riding beyond what your HD was meant for. It was a cruiser.
Sportbikes are good short commuters (IMO) Easy to handle around town, easy to flick back & forth. Not that great for long hauls. BUT, the MAIN reason I have one is "FUN" They are fun to ride.
Hopefully if Devils HC get his Duc he wont have the same outcome as U. If I can add anything to this. I would say that the sportbikes are safer. BUT, they do promote a tendancy to speed,,,,,,in my case. Speed alot :). WTF,,, its a sportsbike. Thats the way they are meant to be driven.
Good luck on whatever U decide. Just dont drive beyond your limits.
NOTE: Desmo,,, I am not knocking U on anything U said. I have been down this same path twice now. Going from Sportbike - Cruiser, Back to sportbike, then Cruiser, & now Sportbike,, I guess 2.5 times :) You just had a unfortunate accident. It cant be blamed on bike choice, or riding ability.
Just my 5cents worth,,, fricking inflation [roll]
Quote from: JDS 07 S4Rs on July 23, 2008, 10:54:28 AM
You just had a unfortunate accident. It cant be blamed on bike choice, or riding ability.
I still view it as a bike/ability issue. The bike is capable of so much more than the cruiser and never having an accident on a cruiser and none that resulted in serious injury on a dirtbike gave me a false sense of my riding abilities. When I first got on the sportbike, I knew practically nothing about such phrases as counter-steering and looking through a curve. Those are two terms that really don't exist in the cruiser world....or at least not in the one I was coming from.
Looking back at the times leading up to the accident, I was riding too fast, hitting the brakes too hard and inconsistantly, I was chosing very bad lines through curves, I wasn't looking through a curve but only a few feet in front of me, my judgements of speed were skewed from the smoothness of the Duc compared to the vibration and rough ride of the HD, I was doing stupid passes because the bike was more capable than what I was used to, and many, many other things that, now, I know were proving my lack of riding ability....at least sportbike riding ability. The largest problems I had were with over confidence and not riding the bike long enough to get to know it.
I look back to the size of my chicken-strips ad how slow I was really riding in the curves and am almost embarassed to think I wrecked. I go past my crash site probably at least once a month and for several years, I made sure to give the curve the "bird". One day, I surprised my wife by giving it the thumbs up. She asked me why I did that, and I told that if it hadn't been for the crash, I probably wouldn't be the rider that I am today......chances are, I would have kept riding faster, but not smarter, and probably would have eventually killed myself.......not like I'm not heading in that direction any way. [laugh]
Well it didn't work out last year when I started this thread, but after almost a year I still haven't lost the bug. I'm gonna try agian this year (better credit score and new home owner) but I think the 1100 may be a better idea.
How does the 696 compare to the 1100? Sorry for the dumb questions...I will answer any harley questions you might have, lol.
Quote from: Desmo Demon on July 23, 2008, 09:12:26 AM
Just because you *know* how to ride you Harley, do not assume that you *know* how to ride a Ducati. They are two totally different breeds of bike and on opposite ends of the spectrum. I rode dirtbikes for years and logged over 50k miles on my HD before getting my first Ducati....a '99 SS750.....I have a 15" rod down the center of my right femur because I didn't respect the new machine and its capabilities because I thought I *knew* how to ride......
I agree, I just got my first Duc and coming from a Dyna it was quite different. as Desmo said Respect the Machine and take your time getting to know it.
On a second note, 696 might be too "small" I almost got one until a buddy wanted to upgrade to Superbike and sold me his S2R 1000. The extra 300 CC are nice.
It seems that there are a couple of us Dyna riders here that have either traded to a Duc or are planning on it. Since you have experience with both, what (if anything) do you feel you have sacraficed by trading the HD for the Duc?
Quote from: devils haircut on June 21, 2009, 09:17:35 AM
It seems that there are a couple of us Dyna riders here that have either traded to a Duc or are planning on it. Since you have experience with both, what (if anything) do you feel you have sacraficed by trading the HD for the Duc?
Obviously two different machines, I ride solo more often since the Mrs is not as comfortable (she's 5'8 125 lbs) The Duc is much more nimble, awesome speed, incredible brakes. I can tell you that I'm more alert riding the Duc. I'm getting to know the bike so I have not pushed it much. Maybe some track time is in order.
Quote from: devils haircut on June 21, 2009, 08:24:43 AM
Well it didn't work out last year when I started this thread, but after almost a year I still haven't lost the bug. I'm gonna try agian this year (better credit score and new home owner) but I think the 1100 may be a better idea.
How does the 696 compare to the 1100? Sorry for the dumb questions...I will answer any harley questions you might have, lol.
Funny you should ask - there's a thread that started the other that's right along the lines of what you watnn to know
http://ducatimonsterforum.org/index.php?topic=25613.30 (http://ducatimonsterforum.org/index.php?topic=25613.30)
Quotethey're cool looking, but they weigh about 500lbs. seems ridiculous for a scrambler.
seriously, i like that whole bonneville line, but they just don't seem to have the right numbers.
I think your post is maybe a year old, but I agree. I have a '66 Bonneville that's (IMHO) a lot more fun to ride than the new ones. I don't think they got the new ones quite right.