I like the Mamba style BSTs more than the 5-spoke style, but both perform far better than stock Marchis. All things considered, I prefer whatever performs the best at the end of the day regardless of aesthetics. The convenient thing about that philosophy is that usually the best performing is also the best looking.
Huh. I'm quite the opposite - I like the 5-spoke over the Mamba (despite them being slightly heavier so I read). If you end up with a 749999/848/1098/1198 5-bolt rotor style wheel that's 5 spoke and you want to get rid of it, let me know. I prefer it over the 7 spoker.
As I said on Duc.ms, I just hate BSTs. Stock wheels on this thing would be rad.
Well that makes only one of us. I love the set I have and if I had the money, would be all over a 2nd and even a 3rd set for bikes in the garage. The only negatives I've heard that were remotely tied to science and reality (and it was
quite remote, at that) were technical claims from a
biased party - a Marchesini rep. - none of which I have found true in real world application. Hard to trust any salesman's rhetoric who has a stake in the decision.
Guess we just have different views... I don't think carbon wheels offer much benefit when weighing in how much more fragile they are for road use.
I'm also a designer though, so I have a hard time succumbing to what I consider to be poor design/aesthetics. Just saying... it's already a SSSA Monster... carbon wheels are the least of the worries in regards to form over function. That SSSA is heavy as hell (think 999 and D16). SSSA is purely an aesthetically pleasing Ducati-esque design feature to please customers. Keeping with that, I just would have gone with appropriately pleasing wheels. Forged Mag, etc.
I've had my BSTs for a few thousand miles now and I bought them 2d hand. Not only have I not had any problems, my setup employes a lightweight
aluminum front axle. The environment is more extreme than most as North Texas may have among the worst road surface conditions in the country (orders of magnitude worse than Middle Tennessee). Potholes galore, every pavement seam most closely resembles the beginning of a stairway, uneven bridge-to-road matings and random partial-lane low-spots from ground settling. The wheels are fine. You can bounce the naked rim off a cement floor without braking it.
I don't believe a person's occupations don't really have any legitimate leverage or place in the discussion - it cannot 'better qualify' one to have an opinion on the factory's engineering choices or as-delivered looks than another. To do such would require a ranking of occupations and the strength of their relation to the contested element's design or looks. How does a designer's opinion of fragility compare to, say, an chemical engineer or a composite aircraft component tester? Likewise, aesthetics are subjective. I don't like double-headlights, but apparently people do as triumph manages to sell their naked bikes somehow and there are even people who bolt them onto Monsters.
In my opinion, there's nothing wrong with a SSSA when looking at the totality of the product. The benefits are substantial in the SSSA platform: increased ease of maintenance for frequent maintenance-related tasks makes them ideal for road going bikes, like this Monster. I loathe chain adjustments and wheel alignment issues in the standard, non-eccentric DSSA designs used by most manufacturers. Whether or not it is the 'best' platform for race-only machines is something to be debated in the offices of Ducati Corse, HRC, among others. Comparing to what works in former generation / WSBK models (749/999) and prototype race bikes is misplaced. If that was appropriate, every manufacturer producing a wet-clutch road-bike would be in error, as clearly the dry clutch is superior - after all the dry clutch is what every manufacturer runs in MotoGP. Likewise, the 916 was tested with a DSSA setup as well as the SSSA design and the SSSA was what was used when results of testing the DSSA were not satisfactory. (Picture at bottom).
For more bickering regarding swingarms with a few nuggets of wisdom sprinkled in, as it is somewhat out-of-place in the midst of a person's build-thread (sponsor or not), perhaps try this thread:
http://www.ducati.ms/forums/11-ducati-motorcycle-chat/63206-single-vs-double.html You'll notice discussion of why the DSSA was employed on the 999, tire wear concerns, rather than flexibility concerns in the SSSA, change in head designers and contractual rights associated with the change, tunability of the partially cast/partially sheetmetal/partially forged DSSA in the 749/999 'good swingarms' and D16RR swingarms, changes in manufacturing capabilities and improvements for the 848/1098/1198 and much more.
Now, if you are such a fan of magnesium (note: you have conveniently forgotten the magnesium oxidation and fatigue issues in your criticism of carbon fiber wheels for road going bikes...) and will remain steadfast in belief that the additional weight of the SSSA is not overcome by the conveniences inherit in its design, it just so happens that there are off-the-shelf magnesium SSSA options - especially useful in higher output 4v applications such as this - because of their increase to overall wheelbase and resulting enhanced stability. Beyond that benefit, they are also lighter and stiffer than the original cast aluminum 748-996 versions and tubular Monster S2/S4R versions. There are also aftermarket, off-the-shelf
aluminum and/or
carbon fiber SSSA that are similarly more rigid and lighter than the OEM design. The obvious counterpoint is "but those are costly" - but this matters not - it is a "project" bike rather than a production-line model, and the owner/builder's choice in spending and budgetary constraints would be personal choices, rather than a manufacturer's decisions based on price-points and potential sales volume.
Since it is up to the individual builder in a project bike, some builders may feel that the oxidation and fatigue issues in cast or forged magnesium components - be it swingarms, wheels, valve covers or engine case covers - interferes so substantially with the bike's road going purpose as to choose alternatives.
BOOM:
