S3 versus Ducati Monster s2r1000

[haggis95]

Can anyone tell me how the Ducati Monster s2r1000 and the Speed Triple compare?

Has anyhone ridden both?

What about reliability etc?

I'm not selling my RS, but I want a second bike for shorter blasts, in-town riding, twisties, attitude(!) and a different riding experience. (The RS isn't really an attitude bike, but I love her! and she does suprise a lot of sports riders :-D )

[Calitriple]

A Dago bike over a Triumph? Been mixin' the bleach and amonia again, haven't you?

[R100Pilot]

I want a second bike for shorter blasts, in-town riding, twisties, attitude(!) and a different riding experience.

I was looking for exactly the same things (well, minus the attitude - attitude attracts law enforcement). My Triumph dealer is also a Ducati dealer and had three S2s on the floor, as well as the rest of the Ducati line. I bought the Triple.

The Duc's good points: great engine sound, VERY compact, well finished (love the instruments on the Ducs too), air-cooled.

Beyond that, there's not much to recommend it unless you've got a jones for that trendy brand name.

The Duc handles well, but feels smallish, has nowhere near the power of the Triple, and maintenance costs are absurd.

Then you ride 'em. Handling is excellent on both. Call that a draw. But... Turning on the throttle on the Duc: "Hmm... decent power, I could live with this." Turning on the throttle on the Triple: "WOW!"

To even approach the Speed Triple in terms of performance, you'd have to get the S4R - and pay a couple grand extra, and you'd still end up with just another Monster.

[ This message was edited by: R100Pilot on 2006-07-21 05:12 ]

[BlackOakTree]

I went through the same battle on which to buy. After riding both, it was clear that the Triumph is a clear victor. I found the same kind of things that everyone else says. The Ducati feels smaller. Consequently, it felt more flickable when riding around town, but after about 30 minutes it felt too small. Prior to my purchase I didn't know anything about the brake issues people talk about. I did notice that the Ducati's levers felt tight, but I was blown away by how quickly the Triumph stops. The Ducati felt smoother all around when grabbing the throttle, but the Triumph, that thing made me want to reach for the seat belt. Yeah, raw power! Sound, the Ducati has the Triumph beat on day one, but throw a set of pipes on the Triumph, or just wait about 1,000 miles with the stock cans. There is a distinct throaty sound that can only come from the Triple motor. It sounds like nothing else out there (except for another Triumph triple). Handling through the canyons or the short trips where riding is a little more aggressive, the Triple eats up the road. Handling on this bike is superior to anything that I've ever ridden before, except my buddy's R1.

You could talk about image and maintenance costs and that stuff doesn't mean much to me. The Speed Triple is an all around great bike that was purpose built for having fun. When you ride it, you'll know what we all mean. Ride it first, then ride the Duc, then ride the triple again, then write the check.

As far as the instruments, the Ducati looked dated to me. I love the digital dash on the Triple.

[mjoolnar]

I have test ridden both. The S3 blows the Ducati away. The Ducati was way under powered. The S3 is just a more exciting bike to ride; power, handling, looks, and did I mention power are all much better on the S3. I'll give the Ducati better brakes, but that is it. At the same price, there should be no question, the Speed Triple all the way.

[amberale]

Ok, my monster was 10 years old and had carbs not FI.

It also had Marzochi [ok I spelt it wrong, it's late] front forks with the same set up as the S3. It also had a 944 HC kit and Dyno reading of 93 hp! It weighed less, sounded better while moving, and looked divine

Do I miss it?***** NO!!

I was split between a monster or a triple in 96 and eventually went for the Duc when a mate bought a Triple. Hey, then I could ride them both.

Eventually, I got sick and tired of the grabby, snatchy, noisy clutch and the evolution of bigger power.

Then the saints at Triumph finally got their sht together and coated the frame black and put a real big motor in the beast.
I couldn't resist.

In my experience [no track days yet] the brakes are different but at least as good.

The service costs are less, but you will chew through more tyres on the S3 due to that lovely HP.

Go with what you feel fits, but in performance stakes, they don't compare.

AA

Hi
I can't tell you about the S2R but I swapped my S4R for the Triumph so I know the difference and I dont think the S2R (1000) is a great deal different.
I love the whole Monster thing and had an early M900 then a BMW R1100S. When riding the BMW I really missed the Ducati and tried to sum it up by likening the BMW to driving a current BMW car like a 330i, It is fun but after awhile becomes just transport. Where as the Monster is like driving a Caterham (UK basic sports car) Its a raw viseral experience. When you get off a monster you feel exhausted. Any way I bought the S4R to get some of that 'rawness' back. I had the blue one with the white stripe which is one of the finest looking bikes ever. It had a few carbon bits and a vented clutch cover. When you start it up the mechanical clatter is quite unnerving as it sound like it is trying to lunch it's self.

The riding position mkes you feel like you are sitting in the bike as the tank rises up and splays your legs. The seat hight is low and the bars are more of a stretch than the Triumph. The hydraulic clutch is really heavy and does get painfull after half an hour in town. The motor is powerfull and reasonably smooth but below 40mph progress is lumpy and jerky. The gear change is positive and clunky when hot. You need to be patient with the gear box as when you short shift up too early the engine will protest and things get really lumpy, so top gear is really useless below 70-80mph.

The sound of a Ducati accellerating hard is really wonderfull and the Monster is ideal for fast back roads with smooth flowing corners. Gear selection as you approach slow corners is critical as the engine won't cope with too high a gear. You can pull 100mph plus very easily but as the speed climbs it runs out of puff and to get to the supposed 145 top wack you will need nerves of steel and a very long road.

The Brembo brakes are great. Two fingers is all you need and they will pull the bike up in a very short distance but are not grabby at slow speeds. On long trips the fingers in my right hand went numb after an hour although I was not aware of exsesive vibration. The finish was much better than my old Monster but there are hundreds of tiny crevices when dirt collects and the gold colour on the bolts very quickly rubs off but on the whole it stands up quite well.

My bikes are pampered and are allways on a charger when not in use and I replace the oil and plugs every 1000 miles. The anual belt change is expensive and if the bike is under warrenty is essential. If buying a used one I would bother doing it anually if the milage is kept low. However.....

The Speed Triple has a much more refined engine and once I had test ridden one I knew it was the perfect blend of the torquey lowdown pull of a twin with the smooth power of a multi without the need to keep the revs very high. The Triumph feels like a more modern motorcycle and I know Ducatis are very beautiful objects but the lumpy power feels old fashioned for a 21st century bike. I sure as a racer you might love the huge pull of the 999 but the big engines dont really suit the Monster/streetbike category. They only work well at high speed and you don't buy a Monster to ride around at three figure speeds as the fairing doesn't work that well.

When you jump off the Monster and onto a S3 it feels like your sat on a high bar stool and peering down on the bike but the S3 is much eaier to ride at all speeds and sure the brakes aren't as good and some of the fit and finish isn't as good but It does feel robust and shound withstand the elements pretty well. On reflection I realised I bought the Duke for looks but didn't look forward to riding it. Owning a Ducati is like owning a classic bike, They require investment of time and love and need someone who likes all the quirks and traits of the ride. But if you want to have a bike that you just swing your leg over and enjoy the ride the S3 is the better bet.

Both bikes have that magic feeling when you open the garage door. Wow! is that mine?!!but I feel that the Ducati engine needs to be more refined before I buy another. Also the Monster shape is looking a bit familiar theese days the S3 has great road presence. Drivers really notice those bug eyes.

[R100Pilot]

Now THIS is dated.



Being older than most rocks, I am kinda fond of old-school dials, and the white face Duc clocks give me wood (though I'll admit, for a compu-gizmo, the Triumph is entertaining - especially the shift lights).

But you can tell where we're goin' here, man - just get the Triple.

[jdub3]

s3 all the way. monster will cost you more in maintenance and require more of it. parts can be harder to come by when you need them (i'm talking mechanical not ones that make it prettier). the monster look is dated as they haven't revamped it in quite a while. the s3 is a much more rare bike on the road. seat height is definitely higher on the s3 but comfortable even for me 5'7". the monster sits more aggressive and i'm sure would cause me great pain on longer rides. the s3 is a better bang for the buck.

that's all my input as others who have more experience with that actual ride have offered great comparisons.

the past few people who have asked similar questions ended up with the s3 the last updates i read from them indicated they knew they made the right choice. get an s3 and you will be happy.

[premier]

Umm. I have no doubt that everybody here is totally unbiased, but still... ;-) I think it's only fair that you ask the same question on a ducati forum.