Ducati 996 R

Ducati's are the sweetest bikes ever. Check out these pics:
http://www.ducati.com/images/pg_sbk_26.jpg
^996R

http://www.ducati.com/images/pg_sbk_18.jpg
^996 R Engine (135 HP @ 10,200 RPM & 101 NM @ 8000 RPM)

http://www.ducati.com/images/sbk_996r_tec_ing.gif
^996 R Engine Power Curve

http://www.ducati.com/images/pg_sbk_14.jpg
^996 R 3/4 View

Damn, that is one sweet and damn fast bike. That's the fastest one I could find. Does Ducati make a faster one?

Nope, but Suzuki does. Hayabusa, 1.3 liter engine, 200 mph. and its less expensive than that italian kaka:smoker2:

that bike is sweet!!!

Suzuki actually makes 3 bikes faster: Hayabusa, GSXR1000, and GSXR750

Here is a little teaser for you guy's use as your avatar!

I personally feel that since GSXR750's are faster, handles better, cost less to maintain, cost less to buy, definately would make it a better buy. But if poseur qualities are all that is important to you than you should be happy.

How much does a bike like that cost?

Ducati 996 =$17k, Hayabusa =$10k

cheaper and better :)

Is it true that a Hayabusa can go up to 200mph? If so why does it so cheap? Or is that an expensive price for a bike?

They are limited to 186mph now, but the first production year they were tested to about 191mph.

:cool:

chick's hot, dont like the bike.

The Italian stuff is nice, and the Suzukis are fast as hell, but as far as my likes, the CBR 900 is the best of the bunch. But thats just me.:)

rather have the CBR600, nicer looking imo. BTW, theres CBR 900 and 929, right?

http://www.mcnews.com.au/Wallpaper/MVagusta/Index.htm


that bikes much sexier in my opinion, similiar price range though. Bit expensive.

I like this color

Originally posted by a007apl
I like this color
and this

love the line, soo pure.

Ducati = :chair: = Jap bikes


Piss on Ducs. I am not about to pay some pimple-faced jackass to adjust EVERYTHING on my nasty, rattley, dry-clutched bike every 5000 miles just so I can pose pretty.

I'd sooner own an Exxon Valdez-esqe Triumph before I spent a dime on a Duc.

"a Ducatti, you remove the wheel and the Ferrari's red, you'll end up with a big slug" - Paulo Les Gaz

http://www.mcnews.com.au/Wallpaper/MVagusta/Index.htm


that bikes much sexier in my opinion, similiar price range though. Bit expensive.

Yeah, I actually got a quote from a magazine about the MV Agusta that I always remember "...Rarer than understanding bank managers..." I think you get the idea

:cool:

Let's be honest, I doubt that a Hayabusa will get you her. If you say that a Ducati is ugly, then I don't think that you know style. Performance wise, you do have to have a certain dedication to Ducatis to deal with them.

For everyone who says that Japanese bikes are so much faster then Duc's:
Bikes today are so incredibly indentical that the bike itself has nothing to do with it, it all comes down to the rider anyways. When it comes to maitnence, Japanese bikes win hands down. But as far as performance, an awesome rider on a 500 will tear up someone on a liter bike every day on a twisty track.

When I say performance, I mean that I've heard so many stories of Ducs breaking down that I just don't know anymore. I'm also tired of hearing about them not being as capable as the other sportbikes (In other words, I agree with you 100% YellowMaranello). But I am a big Ducati fan myself to tell you the truth.

That's the fastest one I could find. Does Ducati make a faster one?

There's the 998, 998S, and 998R. There's also the new 999, 999S, and 999R

I never really like ducatis but I'd take an RSV millie R any day.

The new millie r is the absolute shit so is the new R1

I would take a MV Agusta F4S over any other bike on the planet any day. (except for the honda RCV211V)

Favio Arroyo

Field Supervisor

Research Design Specialists

Phone: (714) 527-0606

Phone: 1-800-736-7970



Dear Ducati Owner,



We are Research Design Specialists. For over twenty years we have conducted research projects for major automotive and motorcycle manufacturers. We are currently inviting Ducati owners to participate in a research study via the internet. It will take approximately twenty minutes to complete, and once verified, those that complete the survey will be emailed a $25 dollar gift certificate redeemable at Amazon.com.



This is a legitimate research project. We are very interested in your opinions, and you can be certain that there will be no sales pitch, and your name will not be given to any salespersons or mail order firms.



Primary drivers of the following motorcycles are eligible to participate:



Ducati 996 / 998 / 999 (Model Years 2001 – 2004)



If you would like to participate or have any questions regarding this project or our company, please call our office in Cypress, California at (800) 736-7970 (ex. 30/38)



Sincerely yours,



Favio Arroyo

Field Supervisor

You guys that think a GSXR750 is a better bike than a 996 are just high. They don't handle as well, and aren't built to the same quality level. Are they faster in a straight line, possibly, but that doesn't make it a better bike. How many GSXRs are competitive in WSB? A BUSa doesn't stand a chance on a racetrack next to a 996-998 with equal riders aboard. Apples and oranges as far as bike design goes. Japanese liter bikes offer higher performance at a lower price in most cases, but it doesn't make them "better" bikes. Better value, yes. The 996 didn't get voted motorcycle of the century just because it's pretty. But there hasn't been a Jap bike yet that looks half as good IMO.

So you lapped around the track with a 996 and a 04 GSXR750, and came out feeling that 996 has superior handling?

I think I'll contest that Ducatis are built with better quality than Japanese bikes. Is that why everything rattles and falls apart before it leaves the driveway, and spends more time in garage/dealership than on the road? lol.

996 was voted to be prettiest bike of the century? So does that make it better for posing or riding? Looks are subjective really, I don't think everyone will agree that 996 is THE best looking bike out there, but many will agree that 999 is the fugliest Ducati out there, with the exception of Multistrada.

I've ridden both, it's just my opinion. You should re-read my post regarding mc of the century...You get a lot of what you pay for; Ohlins susp., lighter running gear, etc....It's a superior motorcycle in many ways. Unlike the American brands that sell for big bucks and you get nothing for it but a name.

I understand that, but ohlin forks and shocks could be fitted to Japanese bikes as well. But Ducatis are known to have pieces fall off just from vibration, it's a trait. If Japanese bikes had the same problem, they wouldn't be this popular in the west. Ducati in many ways is just a status bike that reflects the size of one's pocket, Italian/European exotic which requires ridiculous attention. Many riders get it simply because it's non-Japanese, something to do with Western heritage and v-twin sound. In terms of handling, Japanese bikes are just as capable, it's the riders in the end. And the carbon fiber pieces are only meant to adds to its appeal.

Ohlins forks and shock would run $5k. Throw in some lightweight wheels and you're dangerously close to Duc pricing territory for a liter bike.

A couple months ago, Motorcyclist threw some money at an RC51 to upgrade the suspension and performance. They admitted that even a highly modified RC was no match for a 998 when it came down to riding 8/10s and above. But of course, most of them would buy the RC because it's falls within more of our budgets and performs better than most of us can handle. All I'm saying is that if you can afford it, you get something for your money. And although Jap bikes are incredibly capable and reliable, they are not Ducatis. And as someone mentioned, the 999 doesn't hold a candle to the 996-998s in the looks dept.

I don't think maintenance costs really factor in to what's a better weapon. My ZRX requires valve adjustments every 7500 miles. Other bikes wait till over 20k. Does that make the other bikes "better" than my ZRX? No, there's plenty of other things that make them better bikes! LOL

i love the ducati's 996-998, and i used to ride a gixer daily and rode a duke once (albeit in a carpark at the bike shop)

i'd take the duke any day. especially the R

can't really compare the 998 with a liter jap bike. the dukes are compared to the 750 class in racing. and definately can't compare a 998 with a 04 gixer

BUT bang for buck the jap bikes win out everyday but the dukes are an awesome machine. for me it would come down to riding them back to back on the track and the street. chances are my skill level would suit the more forgiving nature of the jap bikes :banghead:

true, the hayabusa is faster but much harder to come across, i dont think ive actually seen one in person

Let's be honest, I doubt that a Hayabusa will get you her. If you say that a Ducati is ugly, then I don't think that you know style. Performance wise, you do have to have a certain dedication to Ducatis to deal with them.

Thanks bro, I own a 996, I never regret buying it, even the price was high. Until now, my friend rides a 2005 CBR 1000 RR, but 996 has its own style, and people always admire Ducati, it just doesn't compare to Japanese bike. But that's my oppionion though.

Damn this is an old thread. I just skimmed it, but I'm surprised I didn't see anyone bring up the fact that Ducati won 10 out of the 14 WSB championships with the 916-998 series bikes. That decade was undeniably dominated by Ducati, and that bike was way ahead of its time.

The truly amazing thing about that bike, and what earns it the reputation it has, is the fact that it was designed in 1994 and remained virtually unchanged for SEASONS at a time. It received only power increases and a bit of polishing over an entire decade of racing. That is absolutely unheard of. The Japanese companies were just that far behind. In fact, that bike was SO dominant, that as a result of the whining of Ducati's competitors, Ducati was required to conform to a higher standard of rules in an attempt to slow the domination of the company. The highlight of those being a major minimum weight requirement increase. Fast forward to today, and I still see a slew of 916/996/998 race bikes turning respectable lap times, and that's a bike that's over a decade old. If that isn't domination, I don't know what is. I love the jap bikes, and I respect the level of performance they are at today for sure, but there is no denying the history of that particular motorcycle.

And I have a feeling my R6 will be in a junk yard somewhere long before it reaches the 50k trouble-free miles my Ducati had on it when I sold it...

And why the hell would anyone compare a Hayabusa to any real sport bike? It's fast in a straight line, but not much more so than a literbike, and it handles like a pregnant cow.

I do like ducati!

Only reason why Japanese bikes were behind those years simply because they lacked power on corner the exit, and weighed like hippos. Remember, they also restricted Japanese bikes to compete with equal displacements as the Ducs, they were limited to 749 CCs to make it "FAIR" for 900ccs twins. And now tables have turned again, Ducati lacks the power to keep up with the literbikes. And they've given up completely competing against middleweights.

Major bread and butter for Japanese manufacturers are 600 ccs, not quite the same for Ducati's 748/749, price tag and performance just doesn't cut it for the average squid. And perhaps insufficient fund for R&D hinders them to develop and release a new bike every two years, but at this rate, it would be a miracle for Ducati to win championships again. Sure they achieve single victories, but even with best riders, Ducati has tough time making it to 3rd at overall average with best riders on board. Hence why they're further developing V4 engine to replace its twin powerplants on WSBK and AMA racing grids.

I like sport v-twin engines, the power delivery, ease of use, but I would never consider racing on one at the current level of competition.

For me to go out and buy a 996-998/999 now would simply be because of its uncontested looks and visceral sound and feel. Not because it's the best bang for the buck for performance riding.

true, the hayabusa is faster but much harder to come across, i dont think ive actually seen one in person

I worked with a guy who had a Hyabusa, he said as soon as he could he would get the new 999R. I myself have a Ducati monster S2R dark that I got a year ago... though I don’t get to ride it much here in Dallas (bad drivers).

Only reason why Japanese bikes were behind those years simply because they lacked power on corner the exit, and weighed like hippos.

In otherwords, the Japanese bikes didn't have the power or handling to match the 916. Stop, go, turn; those are the 3 most basic elements of road racing. That's like losing a foot race and saying "he only beat me because he runs faster".

...but even with best riders...

In what form of racing does Ducati have even close to the top riders? Because it certainly isn't SBK or MotoGP. '06 is looking much better on both fronts for Ducati, though, with Gibernau and Bayliss riding Duc's.

I believe Ducati is making a motorcycle as good as any as it stands right now. Sport Rider did a track test a few months back of all of the current crop of literbikes, and the 999 was the fastest time of the weekend over all of the Japanese machines. Magazines are certainly not the end all be all of comparisons, but it says something about the capability of the bike in the right hands. I think Ducati's race program is no different. It's a matter of who's on board.

As far as what the 916 generation is/was, there is no way around the fact that it dominated a decade of racing, and with few changes needed along the way. It was far ahead of its time, and I'd go so far as to say that level of domination will never be matched by a single model of any manufacturer ever again.

Capirossi, Laconi, E Bostrom, Xaus, I certainly would think they're talented riders, and Bostrom just switched mount. They're not your typical 5th grid rookies, they have years of experience behind them. And can I have link or scan of that comparisons, I would very much like to read it and see how much of it was measured in terms of track capability or emotional connection (as many Ducatista associate themselves with the badge).

I definitely agree it's the rider, but seeing how Ducati is being ranked far below in overall average even with talented riders on board, it does say something about the bike's capabilities. What, they can't afford a good rider? Certainly not that. Suzuki and Honda were at top on WSBK racing, and no point in getting into what happend in Moto GP, even if we took Rossi out of it. Racing is simple, whoever wins, must be doing something right, Ducati wasn't it. With all their 916-998 heritage of Superbike racing, they're just not cutting it. One could say the same about Kawasaki or Suzuki racing in Moto GP.

Another thing great about modern Japanese bikes, they're nimble on the street. You couldn't say the same about 916 compared to 900RR. Or 998 VS R1 or 748 VS any 600s. The weight just killed it for ease of use. Canyon carving on Ducs meant, enter the corner slower and power out.

i'll take a 1000rr any day especially the black 06 and still have money to take all of u guys out to eat. rc211v :naughty: hey a man can dream right?

Capirossi, Laconi, E Bostrom, Xaus, I certainly would think they're talented riders, and Bostrom just switched mount. They're not your typical 5th grid rookies, they have years of experience behind them.

Xaus is as fast a rider as anyone out there when he's upright, but he's a habitual crasher. You can't win championships when your bike is burried in the sand trap. Capirossi is a good rider, as all of those guys are, but he is not on the level of the top MotoGP riders. This is evident by the fact that when Gibernau climbed aboard the Ducati for testing for '06, he immediately turned lap times over 1 second faster than anyone else in the field, including Rossi. Having good riders doesn't get the job done at the current level of competition, having guys like Rossi on board is what makes the difference.

And can I have link or scan of that comparisons, I would very much like to read it and see how much of it was measured in terms of track capability or emotional connection (as many Ducatista associate themselves with the badge).

I'll see if I still have the magazine, and if I don't I'll find out which issue it was for you. It was simple a list of the lap times for each machine for the weekend. No emotion, no feel, no bias, just numbers.

Another thing great about modern Japanese bikes, they're nimble on the street. You couldn't say the same about 916 compared to 900RR. Or 998 VS R1 or 748 VS any 600s. The weight just killed it for ease of use. Canyon carving on Ducs meant, enter the corner slower and power out.

Are you speaking from experience here, or simply from hearsay? After having first hand experience with several Ducati sportbikes, a 916 being one of them, I can tell you that the cornering characteristics are truly outstanding. The main difference between the Trellis frame design and that of the japanese bikes is that Ducati has given up some ease of turn in for massive stability and feedback. This can obviously be adjusted for application, but the nature of the frame design and the setup the bike comes with stock lends itself to those traits. Ducati gets a lot of praise for unmatched stability, and the feedback given by that design is greater than any I have ever experienced. Feedback is so clear and concise it might as well be writing it down on paper for you. This makes riding the bike to its mechanical limit a much easier and more predictable proposition, and for a literbike, it is still an easy bike to flick around, at least in my experiences. There is a reason the trellis frame is still being used on bikes in '06, afterall...

basically I am just echoing what racers said about the bike in it's day, and the fact that it was such a great total package was the key to it's success.

You can't simply just blame Ducati's inability to win just on the riders. Look at Suzuki, they've tried for years, but they simply couldn't keep up with Honda and Yamaha going back to the days of 500s. I think Hopkins could've been just as good as Hayden if Suzuki got their acts together. Rossi is a different story, he takes it as a challenge to be a fast rider rather than concentrate of business aspect of racing, plus he's had good manufacturers supporting him with a strong pedigree of racing and racing affiliates. I really wanted him too keep on GP racing, but with different brands, perhaps struggling Ducati or Suzuki, instead of retiring on 07.

No, I never rode a Ducati 916, and thus cannot comment on it's handling traits, and only can insinuate what other have claimed, just as you expressed your view. But after having owned three bikes of my own, all radically different than one another, and have ridden the older Honda CR125, and Nighthawk 250 (v-twin model?), I can definitely say with confidence that weight of a bike makes a world of difference.

We can all debate how much the stability is there on different chasis, but lighter weight makes the bike that much more nimble and flickable. In my book, that helps tremendously when running wide and too hot for the curve, a stable bike won't necessarily react quickly without conscious effort, while it's much easier to change mid corner lines and enter the turn faster.

My old SV could run circles around the F4, despite Honda providing better front end weight and stability. And I bet you could run circles around your old Duc with the R6. Suspension has a lot to do with these sort of factors, but it can't replace the added advantage of reduced weight. Consider this, F4 in its day offered arrays of suspension adjusting capabilities, and when SV came about, same year, but cheap and crappy suspension, yet for the average rider, SV is much easier to throw into corner for its light weight and smaller tire profiles. While F4 may soak up bumps better at high speed, but that's because it has better suspension than SV. IMO, chasis on modern bikes are too good for the average rider.

Ducati chasis is stable, but it also came with Ohlins and Marchesini trick stuff for the high end model, homologated version of their race bikes. Fit similar suspension into Japanese bikes, and you get an equally capable bike. It's one of the reason why Japanese bikes advanced this far, their suspension have greatly improved, while still managed to be inexpensive for the average buyer.

You can't simply just blame Ducati's inability to win just on the riders. Look at Suzuki, they've tried for years, but they simply couldn't keep up with Honda and Yamaha going back to the days of 500s. I think Hopkins could've been just as good as Hayden if Suzuki got their acts together. Rossi is a different story, he takes it as a challenge to be a fast rider rather than concentrate of business aspect of racing, plus he's had good manufacturers supporting him with a strong pedigree of racing and racing affiliates. I really wanted him too keep on GP racing, but with different brands, perhaps struggling Ducati or Suzuki, instead of retiring on 07.

How else do you explain Gibernau climbing aboard the Desmosedici and out lapping everyone in '06 testing on the same machine that Capirossi struggled on all season, if not for rider inadequacy? The number of riders capable of winning a MotoGP championship is incredibly small. If one of those contenders isn't aboard your machine, it doesn't matter how good of a package you put together.

No, I never rode a Ducati 916, and thus cannot comment on it's handling traits, and only can insinuate what other have claimed, just as you expressed your view. But after having owned three bikes of my own, all radically different than one another, and have ridden the older Honda CR125, and Nighthawk 250 (v-twin model?), I can definitely say with confidence that weight of a bike makes a world of difference.

Don't fall into the trap of bench racing with spec sheets. It's never accurate.

I'm not even going to bother looking up the weight of the 916 for two reasons. 1) I have ridden the bike and I know exactly how it handles in various riding scenarios. 2) The bike won 10 WSBK championships. Whether or not Kawasaki's bike was 15 lbs lighter or not makes absolutely no difference. It obviously wasn't as capable as the 916 was, which is hardly even a debatable topic. That bike was head and shoulders above the rest of the field, or it wouldn't have done what it did. That has been clearly expressed by everyone who had the privilege of racing one, or even riding the street version compared to the Japanese street bikes of the time. Do I need to remind you of when Chili lost his factory ride, pulled out his PRIVATEER Ducati 996 and proceeded to outrun every factory bike on the grid?

We can all debate how much the stability is there on different chassis, but lighter weight makes the bike that much more nimble and flickable. In my book, that helps tremendously when running wide and too hot for the curve, a stable bike won't necessarily react quickly without conscious effort, while it's much easier to change mid corner lines and enter the turn faster.

My old SV could run circles around the F4, despite Honda providing better front end weight and stability. And I bet you could run circles around your old Duc with the R6. Suspension has a lot to do with these sort of factors, but it can't replace the added advantage of reduced weight. Consider this, F4 in its day offered arrays of suspension adjusting capabilities, and when SV came about, same year, but cheap and crappy suspension, yet for the average rider, SV is much easier to throw into corner for its light weight and smaller tire profiles. While F4 may soak up bumps better at high speed, but that's because it has better suspension than SV. IMO, chasis on modern bikes are too good for the average rider.

Ducati chasis is stable, but it also came with Ohlins and Marchesini trick stuff for the high end model, homologated version of their race bikes. Fit similar suspension into Japanese bikes, and you get an equally capable bike. It's one of the reason why Japanese bikes advanced this far, their suspension have greatly improved, while still managed to be inexpensive for the average buyer.

Just making suspension changes and reciprocating mass reduction is not going to make up for inferior chassis dynamics. If it did, the japanese bikes wouldn't have been so far behind in that era. Again, it's the total package that makes a bike a winner.

i read awhile back ago an article about duc's and it's use of engine type was actually outdated and this was from a ducati page. can't recall exactly, but i think they explained that the only reason why they still implement a v-twin is because of tradition and heritage. however, they did found ways to extract more power though. personally, although i think ducati makes awesome bikes, i think ethnicity plays an issue, just because it's italian, people tend to think it's far superior, elite, and exotic then the japs, which i disagree. just my 2 cents

i have a 749 and i love it, nothing has fallen off yet and i think the sound of the dry clutch is sexxy as hell.