Diavel testride

[PhilB]

Sep12 – Ducati Diavel

At the Larz Anderson Museum, Brookline, MA – European bike day.  Duc Truck in attendance.

The Duc truck is full of only Diavels these days – big company marketing push.  Fortunately, that’s one of the two Ducs I wanted to try (the other is the Panigale; another day for that one).

First, I will say the thing that every Duc guy says after riding it: I liked it a lot better than I thought I would.

It does have that “for a cruiser” factor.  It handles really well – for a cruiser.  It’s really light – for a cruiser.  Etc.  But it really is a comfortable and nice bike, with some good sporting capability, and would make a fine toy/funbike.

First impressions:  It’s visually bulky from the rider’s seat.  There’s lots of bike out there in front of you.  This is a completely opposite feeling from the HyperMotard or the StreetFighter, both of which visually disappear under you leaving you feeling like you’re flying headfirst into the wind – the bike is a method of getting that feeling and does not get between you and the environment.  This instead is more like a V-Rod or some such; the feeling is very much that you are riding a motorcycle.  It’s in your face; you never forget that – you’re viscerally connected to the machine itself.

The Duc guys gave us all a little lecture on the features – changing riding modes on the fly and all that.  It has the keyless fob, so you put it in your pocket and have to remember to give it back when you’re done.  Two instrument panels with lots and plots of info.  It all seems to be complicated and a lot to remember, although of course if it’s your own bike you’ll quickly learn it all and it wouldn’t be a problem.

The seat seems very comfortable, although it tends to lock you in one place, which could be an issue on longer rides.  The handlebar position I found to be perfect and natural.  The footpegs are further forward than I’m used to, but were still in a position where it was not hard to use your legs to lift your butt for big bumps or potholes, etc.  The brake and clutch levers were well positioned and easy to pull.  The turn signals were very pleasant – not something one usually notices, but the buttons were light yet very positive.  The gearshift is a little clonky in stop-and-go lowspeed work, but smooths out nicely once you are moving.  Overall, I give it high marks for ergonomics.

I’m still not wild about its appearance; it isn’t ugly, but it isn’t pretty either.  Fit and finish seem quite good, though.  The feeling of quality is about the same as a Harley or Star; better than the other metric cruisers, not quite as good as a Victory.

It has three riding modes: Urban, Touring, and Sport.  All three affect only the engine; they do not have any effect on the suspension or brakes.  Urban limits the engine to 100hp, and gives a soft throttle response.  Touring allows the full 160hp, but keeps the soft throttle response.  And Sport has full power and a much sharper throttle.  They started us all out in Urban mode.  The bike seemed heavy and kind of ponderous at first, just generally slow to respond to inputs (except the brakes, which are the usual (these days) full gonzo Brembos that you never use more than two fingers on).  Switching to Touring didn’t change much of anything, since we weren’t riding in a place or at a pace where the extra power came into play.  But switching to Sport made a very big difference.  The sharper throttle response seemed to wake the whole bike up, including it feeling lighter and more responsive in the handling.  It likes it much better to corner on the throttle (probably an effect of that fat rear tire); a little acceleration through the curves settles it in nicely, and the Sport mode made that easier to do.  Handling is still a bit more biased toward stability rather than nimbleness compared to a sportbike, but OTOH you’d have to say it’s quick-handling – for a cruiser.

Plenty of torque in any mode; easy to launch, acceleration good from just about any speed in any gear.  Again, Sport mode makes it a lot more responsive.  If I had one of these, I’m pretty sure I’d just leave it in Sport all the time, everywhere.

It’s a little pricey, of course, but compared to its competition in the high-end cruiser market, it’s not outrageous.  It lacks some in practicality – no place to strap luggage, limited passenger accommodations, not great gas mileage, etc.  All of that is pretty par for the course for cruisers, but that’s part of why I’m not a cruiser guy; I want something a bit more useful than that.

If I was in the market for a cruiser –  maybe if I was getting older, not riding daily anymore, and wanted a more relaxed weekend toy – this would be a great choice.  But for me, now, it’s not my bike.

PhilB

[dark_duc]

Great write up Phil!

[SDRider]

I rode the Carbon edition my dealer has as a demo model when my bike was in for some work they screwed up.  I agree with most of what you're saying except that I found on the freeway the rider just sits out there like a sail.  I was being blown all over the place, way worse than on my bike.  It was really noticeable. 

I think it is cartoonish in its looks.  It is fast though.  I took off from a light on a 2 lane divided road with a 55mph speed limit and I was going 100mph before I could blink.  This beast will rip your arms off.  I put about 40 miles on it including some freeway riding and I had it in sport mode the entire time.  I didn't even bother trying urban or touring.  They just handed me the keyfob, gave me a quick briefing on the controls and I was off.

It is easy to turn and the brakes are excellent.

I'd never buy this bike personally but if cruisers are your thing it would be tough to beat the Diavel.

[PhilB]

Yeah, we didn't do any highway on the test loop, so I couldn't evaluate the wind situation.  I like the Monster, and other unfaired bikes, as I prefer to feel the wind.

PhilB

[muskrat]

I found the turn in to be a little difficult at first but once you drop over that tire it does corner very well.  I personally don't think it's a cruiser of any sort but rather a modified sport bike with a more relaxed seating position.....wait, it is.   

[the_Journeyman]

Thanks for the info & writeup!  I know better than to test ride one.  I'll wind up buying one I'm fairly certain.

JM

[pitbull]

  I stopped by the ducati dealership outside of Toronto last week, on the way home from a 5 day trip, to pick up some oil filters.  They had a demo diavel on the floor and I asked the guy if I could sit on it. He says..........sure, but why don't you just take it for a ride.

  I took it out for about 40 minutes and flogged it pretty good. My thoughts on the bike are similar to PhilB's. I was really surprised how easy it was to ride right away in the sense that it felt like I had been riding it for years, within a mile or two. I thought it handled really well and not just for a cruiser, but better than a number of standards, which is kind of what I think of it as. With how light it is and small, it's really hard for me to view it as a power cruiser. In fact after I rode it, I sat on a used v-rod (street rod) they had for sale and couldn't believe how top heavy and heavy in general, the v-rod felt. The Diavel has such a low centre of gravity it felt even lighter than it's weight and in fact much easier to paddle around on and manouver at low speed than my old monster.

  I'm still not in love with the styling of the bike and I would have to have an after market seat if I were ever to buy one. Other than that, it was a fantastic bike to ride and every bit a ducati IMO. I would love to see one set up for touring, I think it could be a great long distance ride.

[Raux]

this is what Ducati should do!

[pitbull]

I think it would actually improve the look of the bike with those bags.

One of the things I don't care for on the diavel is the ass end. I appreciate the idea of trying to create a look where all the bulk and power is out front with a minimalist tail end, but creatively, I think Ducati fell short. I think the bags would give it a little more balance and more importantly, for me, function.

[Howie]

I think it would actually improve the look of the bike with those bags.

One of the things I don't care for on the diavel is the ass end. I appreciate the idea of trying to create a look where all the bulk and power is out front with a minimalist tail end, but creatively, I think Ducati fell short. I think the bags would give it a little more balance and more importantly, for me, function.

That and a little wind protection would go a long way.

[SDRider]

this is what Ducati should do!

They make a bike like that already.  It's called the Multistrada.

[Raux]

yes and no. the seat height of the Diavel along with hard bags and even a small backrest for passengers, add a decent fairing and you have serious competition for baggers/tourers.
the MTS is too tall for many riders and to many, too awkward looking.

[SDRider]

yes and no. the seat height of the Diavel along with hard bags and even a small backrest for passengers, add a decent fairing and you have serious competition for baggers/tourers.
the MTS is too tall for many riders and to many, too awkward looking.

I can see how it might appeal more to the cruiser bagger crowd I guess.  I've ridden both bikes and if I were going to do a lot of 2 up riding and/or heavy touring I'd choose the Multistrada over the Diavel every time. 

My .02.

[pitbull]

That and a little wind protection would go a long way.

agreed

[pitbull]

I can see how it might appeal more to the cruiser bagger crowd I guess.  I've ridden both bikes and if I were going to do a lot of 2 up riding and/or heavy touring I'd choose the Multistrada over the Diavel every time. 

My .02.

at 45 years of age, I would definitely choose the multi as well. However, if I were older and/or, for whatever reason, didn't have the strength or balance I have now, the diavel would be the no brainer choice, due to it's lower centre of balance.