Are water-cooled Monsters really Monsters?

[$Lindz$]

The OTHER heated thread (Old vs. New) got me thinking about this. I didn't want to clutter that thread up and thought maybe we could keep this discussion going on its own.

I own a 2006 Monster S2R 1000. And I also own a 2007 Monster S4RS. I'd gladly trade (or sell... which I am shortly) the S2R1k. I mean... it goes without saying the S4RS is a better, more fun bike. But is it a better MONSTER? That's what I have been thinking about for the last few months.

There are a few camps within Ducati (and Monster) ownership with their differing views about this. Most Monsters are, let's face it: Air Cooled. They came into this world in the early 90s as air cooled 2V naked bikes and many people (Ducati themselves included at present) think they should (and should have) always stay/stayed this way. I used to think the same thing. The 2V bikes are lighter, more nimble. They are cheaper to buy and cheaper to maintain. They are good for beginners but they aren't boring for experienced riders. They really are the embodiment of what we know Monsters for.

However, let's look at what circumstances gave birth to the Monster. This is where I start understanding the water-cooled bikes more.

Miguel Galluzzi was toying with an idea using the 888 rolling chassis, yet aimed squarely at a different buyer to those looking at the SS and 888 . In an almost 'cafe racer' inspired design philosophy, the design of the bike was as minimalist as legality would allow. Referred to as 'il Mostro', the monster was initially nothing more than a sculpted clay tank married to 888 components, though at this time lacking an engine.

The choice of motor finally being decided upon was the 'pompone' motor from the Supersport/Superlights of the era. Resulting in the monster being unveiled to the public at the Cologne motor show in 1992. Galluzzi's philosophy was that all you needed was 'a saddle, a tank, engine, two wheels and handlebars'.

This part of the Monster's history is particularly interesting to me. Part of the reason the Monster is so so successful is that it is based on the 851/888 chassis and suspension, but it has the 'underwhelming' engine from an SS (whose entire bike design was based off of the 70s SS). While Ducati have updated the air cooled motors over the years, the principle has stayed the same: underwhelming power in a superbike-derived frame will make a brilliantly fun bike. They didn't want to cannibalize the 750/900 SS bikes with another naked/cafe-style bike that had more power and better frame geometry. The SS had heritage, style, panache.

Here's where I get into my newfound love of water-cooled Monsters. They take the monster back to it's 851/888 roots. While it might be visually unappealing for some, I think it relates nicely with the beauty of a naked 851/888. This brutal stuff-everything-up-there-and-throw-a-tank-on-it look befits the Monster.




If the S4 dipped it's toes into this realm with it's Desmoquattro hidden in it's trellis and it's rather unassuming look, the S4R really embraced the Superbike history of the Monster (albeit the now-more-modern 996 bikes rather than the 888). Obviously that led to the Testastretta models and the S4RS as the Monster's swan song. An assortment of superbike-inspired (or directly borrowed) parts from the stiffened frame to the 998cc engine to the wheels to the Ohlins suspension to the radial Brembos and appropriate master cylinders and hand-controls. It became clip-ons, fairings, and a rear subframe away from a legit Ducati Superbike. Insanity.

Simply put: I MUCH prefer my S4RS to my S2R1k even on suspension and brakes alone. Add power to that equation and I don't even want to keep the 2V bike. Honestly. Actually, I wrote that wrong. The power makes me want to ride the S4RS. The suspension and brakes make me want to throw the S2R1k off a cliff... and the S2R1k is supposed to have the best suspension and brakes of all 2V Monsters.

Most people will say that to them the Monster is a sporty frame with a 2V air cooled motor. A fun bike on the twisties and not too much of a handful around town. Something to ride around town when you didn't want to raise hellfire and ride your more proper Ducati. Indeed that's how Ducati themselves are treating the Monsters. Now they are even more relaxed feeling and consumer-oriented.

But in all the ownership and experience and realization that has come from the S4RS, I've began to love it more than any other Monster. It's a perfect swan song for the old 888-based bike. A final model utilizing all their then-current Superbike technology and engineering to celebrate the Monster, a bike that we can all agree has made history -no matter what model you own.

Not only do I think water cooled Monsters are REAL Monsters, I think that given their pedigree they are some of the BEST Monsters.




***I still love my 2V bike. It's noticeably lighter than the 4V bike and it's still a blast to ride. I just find it interesting when people say that the only Monsters worth having are the 2V bikes... I say they should ride an S4RS.***

[hillbillypolack]

You know, that's an interesting facet.  I know the original M900 / M750 was derived from the 851/888 (and my M900 was modeled as a lightweight 888 with the updates).

So as the Monster lineage runs from early air cooled 2V through the S4R water cooled, I'd have to say the obvious:  the Monster line is split and both make sense.  Here's why.

The S4R was a return to form if you will, even is they weren't raced as the 815 and 888 were.  They simply went back, added the appropriate powerplant from the superbikes, upgraded the suspension.  Essentially an unfaired racebike.

S2Rs on the other hand are pure to the original Monster lineage.  Not pure to the parents of you will.  But look at what NCR has done with the simple air cooled twin.  'Add lightness' as Colin Chapman might say.  I find myself falling into the 'pure and simple' category instead of wanting for power.

But. . . you're spot on with your observation that the S2R is outfitted with possibly the worst spec suspension, brakes and clutch compared to what the S4R or other companies were offering those years.  The most frustrating thing here is that to upgrade the S2R properly and take advantage of the simplicity and purity of the 'Monster' line, it will cost over 4K to do it properly.  Forks, brakes, clutch slave and minor performance mods add up so I sympathize with you wanting to throw it off a cliff!  In fact, I had this very discussion with a DNA representative this afternoon.  That upgrading any Ducati properly will cost 30-50% of the MSRP!

So yeah.  In the most long winded way possible, I agree with your take on the S4R being the 'odd Duck', but in my mind it just gets back to the racing genetics.  Now the argument would be whether it's only a street pose machine since it never had a race pedigree.

[$Lindz$]

I agree with your agreement.

This kinda came about because I was thinking "What the hell am I doing with 2 of (basically) the same bike?" Why not have a Monster (proper) and a Superbike (996, 998, 999) instead of this bastardized S4RS. I mean honestly... it's a bit heavy (stock) and it's got real weird ergos for hustling around at a good clip.

But then I right away ditched the heavy udder-and-stock-cans for a full Termi, put clip-ons on it (which it should have from the factory, in my opinion) and started riding it real hard. On the rides home from the canyons, it was still a comfortable bike. We could stop somewhere for food and I didn't dread getting back on it. I still ride it to do small errands and never found myself hating the clip-ons, etc.

That's when I was like "Why does this bike work so well?" Besides the obvious: Engine and suspension. I mean it works in a have-1-bike-ride-everywhere kind of way. And well.

Maybe it just fits me nicely. I'm 27 and can't really have a stable of bikes. I'd love to walk into a garage and choose between a 750SS, 900SS, 888, 916, 996R, 999R, 1098S, M900, S4RS, Sport 1000 PS, Multistrada 1200S, Hyper 1100, etc. I don't have the means to do that, nor do most people. In choosing 1 of those bikes to have though, I think the S4RS would be my choice every time (taking into account maintenance costs of older bikes as well as the general riding-and/or-historical-payoff).


As for the last part: Unless you're getting into "R" and "SPS" models, not many of the bikes you can buy bear much resemblance to any race bikes. In this regard, the S4RS excels since it's using Superbike parts with a more street-oriented frame and geometry. Again, as a "I can only have 1-or-so bikes" bike, it's really a nearly perfect choice.

[hillbillypolack]

What I find wanting to do to the S2R is revise / replace the suspension from the forks to the shock.  On the M900 when I did that, the back end COMMUNICATED with me instead of feeling like I was riding on a 4x4.  Then I did R&Ts on the front and it was a different bike (though not without some serious cost).

If the S2R had that same level of Ohlins front and back, I'd wager it would be a choice between raw power and finesse /lightness.  I know there's no substitute for that power hit but I don't ride anywhere where I need more than 90hp and I'd rather have a flickable bike and a suspension I trust.  Doing that simple replacement adds up though and I find myself asking if it's worth changing forks, wheels brakes, triples, lines etc.

[fastwin]

I have no opinion. I have earned the right to have no opinion. I have a '77 900SS (in boxes), a '82 900SS Hailwood Rep, a '97 916SPS, a '99 996S, a '05 999, a '06 Sport 1000 (Back in Black #2, all Ohlins, built by Jeff Nash/AMS) and a '07 S2R1000. Last I checked, Monsters are Monsters.

[TAftonomos]

I love my s4r, especially now that it has a ton of aftermarket goodies on it. 

But when I brought it home, and parked it next to the 999s...I knew the SBK's days were numbered.  For everyday riding, the monster is better for me (until I bring home a mts1200)

[fastwin]

Still no opinion and Monsters are always just Monsters.

[muskrat]

I love my s4r, especially now that it has a ton of aftermarket goodies on it. 
  For everyday riding, the monster is better for me (until I bring home a mts1200)

agreed.

[RAT900]

The originals were pretty much a factory issued "parts bin" jalopy/hot rod of sorts

inspired by the reuse of trashed sport bikes and sport bike parts by the less "monied" street riders

Remember that Galluzzi's inspiration came from what already existed, what was being cobbled together and used on the streets

in the greater sense, Ducati stayed true to the "something borrowed, something new, something old and something true" conceptual soul of the Monster

all the way through the 4V liquid cooled machines including the incorporation of the SSS rear...these things were the sorts of items the street mechanics would love to have salvaged and adapted into their low budget slap-togethers

the more recent partially trellis'd efforts seem/look/are more integrated "purpose-built" machines than the Cagiva era originals, they work and make their owners happy or miserable accordingly

if I were to draw a metaphor it would be along the lines of the old Ford Thunderbird....1955 was the real deal, 1956 was the real deal with tweaks, 1957 was still in the same camp but with a partial re-think on the design esthetics.....

from 1958 onward the T-Bird was completely lost..... off the rails and into the woods with 4 passengers sitting in it

just my .02

[kopfjäger]

No

[Radar]

I guess I'm partial, so I'll say yes...

...S4R and loving every minute of it... Every ride reminds me it's a Monster.

Ducati to ya-

[Javamoose]

I can't keep mine running...that makes it a "real" Monster, yes?   

[lazylightnin717]

Quote from Duck Stew in the 848 Streetfighter thread a while back

1993-2001 Monster frames were based on the 888 SBK frame which was water-cooled.
2002-2008 Monster frames were based on the ST frames which were water-cooled.
2009 & up Monsters don't have frames. 

[Billyzoom]

I'm not sure what to add to keep the discussion going, as I found the original post a bit challenging to follow.  There's the point....no, it's over there!  Ha, gotcha!   Nope, not there either!   

Then again, I'm only halfway through my coffee.   

[RAT900]

I'm not sure what to add to keep the discussion going, as I found the original post a bit challenging to follow.  There's the point....no, it's over there!  Ha, gotcha!   Nope, not there either!   

Then again, I'm only halfway through my coffee.   

that's ok just post the part that you want...or post a reply about something that wasn't even mentioned...I like doing that