696 Gearing too tall??!

[BobbyC1223]

I've heard from several people that the gear ratio on the 696 is "Too Tall". Not really sure what this is supposed to mean. I commute about 20 interstate miles each way every day and It seems to be comfortable at about 3.5 to 4 k running about 75ish on the interstate... Do people really hate good gas mileage that much?

[SpikeC]

 I had an M1100S and could not see the problem with gearing even in town. My first one was stock, then my second one had the 14 tooth front, and I could not see a benefit to the 14.

[pesto]

A lot of people tell me to change the front sprocket, but I like my 696 the way it is now. I admit I'm curious though.

[ungeheuer]

I found my M696 gearing too tall.  I also found my M1100 gearing too tall (currently running 15/43, down from stock 15/39).

Do I hate fuel economy?  It's just not an issue worthy of any significant consideration IMO.

If you find your M696 gearing not too tall, then it isn't 

[Kev M]

It feels a tad on the tall side for me (225-230#'s).

It feels just right for Jenn (me - 100#'s). 

So it really depends on the person and usage.

[JamesBill]

I found on the 620 it is tall.  Much taller than the 600cc bikes I am used too. I would not change it to a 14t because I don't spend much time in first gear.

Someone who puts around from light to light, or in traffic etc would do better with a 14t.

If you spend any time on the open road you will regret it.

[Curmudgeon]

I found on the 620 it is tall.  Much taller than the 600cc bikes I am used too. I would not change it to a 14t because I don't spend much time in first gear.

Someone who puts around from light to light, or in traffic etc would do better with a 14t.

If you spend any time on the open road you will regret it.

Not sure how the final drive and overall gearing compare between a 620 and a 696..., but you might be comparing apples to kumquats. 

In the case of my 796, stock final drive is 15/39 which is absurdly tall for any use other than EC drive-by noise testing. 6th in stock form was made useless below 75 - 80 MPH. No way would it pull red line in 6th. With a 14T it just "might".  YMMV

[ungeheuer]

Someone who puts around from light to light, or in traffic etc would do better with a 14t.

If you spend any time on the open road you will regret it.

I completely disagree about the open road regret.  I only ride open road and back road twisties.  The lower gearing suits me and that kinda riding much better than stock.

Not sure how the final drive and overall gearing compare between a 620 and a 696..., but you might be comparing apples to kumquats. 

In the case of my 796, stock final drive is 15/39 which is absurdly tall for any use other than EC drive-by noise testing. 6th in stock form was made useless below 75 - 80 MPH. No way would it pull red line in 6th. With a 14T it just "might".  YMMV

^^ This.

Although all that said....  there's not any correct gearing, there's only suitable gearing.  What suits me may not suit the next bloke.

[Ducatamount]

there's not any correct gearing, there's only suitable gearing.  What suits me may not suit the next bloke.

Amen, brother.

[Howie]

 there's not any correct gearing, there's only suitable gearing.  What suits me may not suit the next bloke.

Bingo!

[LA]

All Ducatis should come with a 14T sprocket wired to the price tag.

[Kev M]

Not sure how the final drive and overall gearing compare between a 620 and a 696..., but you might be comparing apples to kumquats. 

In the case of my 796, <snippity>

696 - 68 rwhp / 30 ft. lbs. torque - 408 lbs wet
796 - 76 rwhp / 51 ft. lbs. torque - 419 lbs wet


So even forgetting huge possible differences in riders, like the 100# sway that occurs on ours whether I'm riding it or Jenn, might comparing a 796 to a 696 be Apples and Pomegranates?    


Though I guess looking at those torque numbers PERSONALLY I'd probably find the 796 gearing more acceptable than the 696 which, though a tad tall, works well enough for the occasions I ride it.

[Curmudgeon]

696 - 68 rwhp / 30 ft. lbs. torque - 408 lbs wet
796 - 76 rwhp / 51 ft. lbs. torque - 419 lbs wet


So even forgetting huge possible differences in riders, like the 100# sway that occurs on ours whether I'm riding it or Jenn, might comparing a 796 to a 696 be Apples and Pomegranates?    

Though I guess looking at those torque numbers PERSONALLY I'd probably find the 796 gearing more acceptable than the 696 which, though a tad tall, works well enough for the occasions I ride it.

Kev,

It doesn't work like that. The 696 has a 15/45 final drive whereas a 796 has the SSS final drive of the EVO @ 15/39 !!!

If anything, a 796 needs a 14T even more! I believe the transmission ratios of both are identical. No surprises there.

I agree with LA. 

[Kev M]

Kev,

It doesn't work like that. The 696 has a 15/45 final drive whereas a 796 has the SSS final drive of the EVO @ 15/39 !!!

SO it's even MORE apples and pomegranates then. 

Like I said, the 696 gearing is fine for us, and I'm sure many other owners too... see comments about ambient conditions, rider sizes, etc.