Mid-sized Monster 796 Coming to USA

[orangelion03]

So in order to take off the sprocket, one must have to configure the stand to hold the other side of the wheel? 

A stand designed for SSS is used.  My Bulldog stand has interchangeable pins that insert into either side of the hollow rear axle.  Insert into left side if you want to remove the wheel, or insert into right side if you want to work on the chain and sprocket.

[bulldogs2k]

Thanks for clearing that up guys! 

[ducatiz]

you and i both know that a ground-up design doesn't birth a cheap motorcycle. If they aren't take off components from the other bikes, there's little money savings because of tooling, etc. I will note that the new vacu-cast moldings for engine cases and such is making the new gen of bikes much lighter. The wet weight of the 1198 is a good 30lbs lighter wet than a GSXR-1000, and uses larger, superior rotors. (I believe its 300 to 330 still).

it could be done.  like i said, take a look at the 96-98 600ss.  it is the lightest production 2-cyl bike Ducati has made to date.  it uses the same frame as the 900ss of the same years, but has a smaller swingarm, smaller rear wheel, smaller forks/triple, only one front rotor and a 2:1 exhaust.  it also uses the smaller pantah based engine, which i think is a bit lighter.

(if they had put in carbon fibre for all the fenders and fairings they could have dropped another couple of lbs, and with aftermarket wheels, forks, exhaust and some machining on the engine, another 20-40 lbs)

all they did was swap out components (and not for weight, but for price!)  i think the same could be done with a current model monster, but i'd still want at least a 600 cc engine in it.  the 696 is a fine place to start. 

the problem with sleeving the engine down to 400 cc is that smaller pistons mean thicker-walled cylinders (if you use the same crank case with the same holes).  that's the problem with the M400 -- 70.5 x 51, so it an oddball crank as well.

Ah. I was unaware. That does indeed suck. A lighter 400 would be pregnant dogin' but as you said, a complete retool for a new platform would weigh a light bike down with too big a price tag. Bummer. 

sac

they could do it.  judicious use of existing stuff.  the biggest problem for such a bike is the engine, imho.  it would be MUCH nicer as a 400cc single, with engine size/weight to match.

[Triple J]

Like the 696?

Maybe. I'm not sure how rigid the 696 DSS is since it doesn't need to be all that rigid compared to the 1098 SSS, which is what all the current SSSs appear to be based on. But ya, presumably Ducati could make a new SBK DSS lighter and stiffer than a new SBK SSS.

[Raux]

Maybe. I'm not sure how rigid the 696 DSS is since it doesn't need to be all that rigid compared to the 1098 SSS, which is what all the current SSSs appear to be based on. But ya, presumably Ducati could make a new SBK DSS lighter and stiffer than a new SBK SSS.

would love to see how light the D16 swingarm is compared to the SBK

[hcomp]

Raux,

Go find a 696 DSS swingarm and way it! is yours back on your bike yet?

[Raux]

Raux,

Go find a 696 DSS swingarm and way it! is yours back on your bike yet?

i'll take a scale to the shop tomorrow.

[bluemoco]

IMO, this Monster 796 isn't a question of "can" they build it, it's a question of "should" they build it.  If Ducati continues to offer the M1100 bikes (with the higher-spec "EVO" engines), they're still going to be comparison shopped against the Streetfighter - introducing the 796 doesn't change this scenario.

If this bike hits the US showrooms at less than $10k, the 796's biggest competition is the 696 on the other side of the showroom.  Seems like an up-rated (higher-HP) 696 with higher-spec suspension would have been a better product-positioning move at this price point.  Even if it actually displaces 796cc, I'd call it a 696s or 696r, rather than confuse the portfolio by adding the "mid-range" 796 bike.

So, I guess my solution is to call this bike the 696s.     Should be interesting to see how this is ultimately marketed.

My $.02

[junior varsity]

The 836 Monster. 40cc's bigger than the 796 motor. That would be your better bet at having a middle-weight monster. HP around 90 would put you squarely between the 696 (80) and the 1100 (95+whatever evo makes)

[GLantern]

IMO, this Monster 796 isn't a question of "can" they build it, it's a question of "should" they build it.  If Ducati continues to offer the M1100 bikes (with the higher-spec "EVO" engines), they're still going to be comparison shopped against the Streetfighter - introducing the 796 doesn't change this scenario.

If this bike hits the US showrooms at less than $10k, the 796's biggest competition is the 696 on the other side of the showroom.  Seems like an up-rated (higher-HP) 696 with higher-spec suspension would have been a better product-positioning move at this price point.  Even if it actually displaces 796cc, I'd call it a 696s or 696r, rather than confuse the portfolio by adding the "mid-range" 796 bike.

So, I guess my solution is to call this bike the 696s.     Should be interesting to see how this is ultimately marketed.

My $.02

I like your idea, that type of marketing would be a better way to put it.

[Betty]

IMO, this Monster 796 isn't a question of "can" they build it, it's a question of "should" they build it.  If Ducati continues to offer the M1100 bikes (with the higher-spec "EVO" engines), they're still going to be comparison shopped against the Streetfighter - introducing the 796 doesn't change this scenario.

If this bike hits the US showrooms at less than $10k, the 796's biggest competition is the 696 on the other side of the showroom.  Seems like an up-rated (higher-HP) 696 with higher-spec suspension would have been a better product-positioning move at this price point.  Even if it actually displaces 796cc, I'd call it a 696s or 696r, rather than confuse the portfolio by adding the "mid-range" 796 bike.

So, I guess my solution is to call this bike the 696s.     Should be interesting to see how this is ultimately marketed.

My $.02

Bingo!

That is what I was trying to say ... my uncertainty (being an Aussie) was whether they could get it to market for under your magical $10k in the US. Slightly over will actually improve the spread but may hurt sales.

The other problem you have (as I was alluding to) was that existing owners (read: those in the know) would undersatnd the reason for such a machine and the cost differential ... but how many would upgrade? The main issue is that the 696 and/or the 796/696S would still be viewed (especially in the huge US market) as an entry level bike ... and as such a higher level of suspension, better torque curve and potential a slightly lesser weight are not selling points - a SSS on the other hand may well be.

[ducatiz]

just for comparison, the S2R (800) sold for $8495

[crimsoncloak]

A 2006 CBR600 was $9,499

A 2010 CBR600 is $11,199

So $8,499 vs $9,999 isn't too unexpected.  If I recall, the S2R 800 didn't have adjustable levers either.

[junior varsity]

or suspenders, right?

[ducatiz]

or suspenders, right?

no, mine came with a fine set of braces.