Ducati Monster Motorcycle Forum banner

1 - 16 of 16 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
72 Posts
Discussion Starter #1 (Edited)
Hi there, I've been riding my friends 2001 m600 for about a straight week and love it. I'm on the market for my own used Duc and have a decision to make about these two bikes (a 2004 M620 and a 2001 M750) . I bequeath thee oh smart Ducati owners on which one you would get:

Keep in mind the following:
- Price is a slight factor but in the long term money is money and I rather be driving a better bike
- I drive about 60 miles a day / 1200 miles a month and this bike would be my main mode of transportation
- Resell value is a slight factor in a few years and so in maintenance

2004 Ducati Monster M620 $3000 (originally asking $3300)
miles: 6,500
mods: remus exhaust
notes: large tinted screen
damages: Bike has been down once - typical ducati dent on left side from handle bar "otherwise 9.5/10" (unverified)
ridden yet?: Nope. Can tomorrow.
specs: http://www.bikez.com/motorcycles/ducati_monster_620_ie_2004.php

2001 Ducati Monster 750 $4200 (originally asking $4700)
miles: 11,000
mods: remus exhaust, aftermarket bar-mirrors, new front and back tire, new starter, other stuff
notes: clear short screen
damages?: Barely a scratch on it.
ridden yet?: Yes and it's smooth as butter. Stayed in 1st gear almost the entire time while riding through the City (only shifted up to test gears)
specs: http://www.bikez.com/motorcycles/ducati_monster_750_2001.php

If you compare specs on the above website you'll see a few notable differences:

2004 m620:
Engine displacement: 618
Fuel System: Injection
Gearbox: 6-speed
Wet Weight: 177.0 kg / 390.2 pounds
Fuel capacity: 3.96 gallons
2001 m750:
Engine displacement: 748
Fuel System: Carburetor
Gearbox: 5-speed
Wet Weight: 1778.0 kg / 392.4 pounds
Fuel capacity: 4.26 gallons

I haven't seen the m620 yet but I don't know whether I'm wasting my time and should just go ahead and get the m750. I've ridden the m620 and it runs really smoothly and has barely a scratch on it.

- What bike would you choose?
- The newer m620 uses fuel injection are carburetors on their way out? I realize with injection one doesn't need to use a choke but besides that is it really a big deal?
- The 620 also has 6 gears - the 750 5 - I don't think it's that meaningful but if it is, let me know

Thanks you all for your advice in advance!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
28 Posts
In short: I'd go for the newer bike. Fuel injection is very reliable, fewer miles, less age and the biggest thing is the lower cost. $1K buys a lot of aftermarket parts or fixes a lot of parts after you drop it. Plus at that price the resale should hold up better on the newer bike.

Why does the 750 have a new starter motor? Sounds like lots of things have been replaced on it, I'd worry that it has more wrong with it.

Is the 600 coming up on a big maintenance event? That might add $800 to the cost, so that might sway me more toward the 750 if the 750 is all caught up on maintenance.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
72 Posts
Discussion Starter #4
Thanks for the feedback Smilingbear,

Yeah I agree about the resale value of the fuel injected m620. At that price I could always resell it for the same amount a year from now.

The m750 has a new starter because the guy said he bought brand new front and back tires for it and then left it in his garage for 2 years without riding it. On the plus side he said when he took it in to the shop they not only replaced the starter but did a full checkup on it. The guy seems like a wall street type who only rides during the weekends and the bike really reflects that by how clean it is.

Good call on seeing when the last time the m620 had a checkup. I read that monsters (or all bikes?) usually need a full checkup at 6k and 12k miles. I'll ask if that's been done.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
72 Posts
Discussion Starter #5
MonsterHooligan: why'd you get rid of the M620?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
72 Posts
Discussion Starter #7
Yeah I know what you mean. As I said above riding in the city with the 750 I didn't even need to switch it out of first - the 2001 m600 I'm riding now definitely needs to go up to second even between stop lights. I guess I'll give this 620 a ride tomorrow and see if the engine is good enough (and that it has a clean title).

Here are pics of the 2001 m750 to show you what we're dealing with:
http://readystate4.com/m750_front.jpg
http://readystate4.com/m750_side.jpg
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
232 Posts
As long as you can check out & ride the 620 to make sure all feels straight, I would definitely go for the 620. Will have better resale, lower maintanance costs etc.
And this is from someone who loves his '97m750.

Also the 2001 is just plain overpriced.

Plus, with the money you save you could easily find a clean second hand tank.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
72 Posts
Discussion Starter #10
Thanks for the tips guys. I'm checking out the m620 tomorrow and will let you know how it goes.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
72 Posts
Discussion Starter #14

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
26 Posts
Let me offer a slightly different perspective. The 620 is cheap and if you trust the seller, it's probably a good deal. But neither bike sounds perfect. One has been down, and one has been sitting unridden. Not sure where you are, but here in Northern California the local Craigslist has about 15 Monsters for sale. Lots of choice. BTW, I have a 1999 M900, carb'ed, owned since new with almost 30K miles and it's been 100% reliable, so I wouldn't worry about a slight mileage difference. get a bike which has never been down and has been well maintained. If you don't see any low-end rideability difference between the carb'ed and fuel-injected Monsters, I wouldn't say that fuel injection is an advantage. Mine runs pretty lumpy at low rpm, FI might be better, but the carbs are reliable.

-dman
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
279 Posts
IMO the carburated 750 is a better choice and is easier to fix, if you like to get your hands dirty.
 
1 - 16 of 16 Posts
Top