Post IMS 1098 Opinions?

1708 Views 24 Replies 13 Participants Last post by YO!JOE!!!, Dec 22, 2006

Rick T.

Discussion Starter · Dec 18, 2006

2

I like the 1098 - and based on the reactions I witnessed around me, so did everyone else.

The most immediately tangible difference (aside from looks) is weight. The 10-9-8 is LIGHT... SUPER light... 600 supersport light. Only time will tell how/if the weight-saving impacts durability/reliability.

The 1098 standard is THE bang-for-the-buck deal of the decade. The "S" is nice, but the base model is just the ticket for the insatiable modification cravings of the Ducatista (I can do a LOT with that extra $5K!).

Ducati's goal to link it's future directly to it's past is evident in its retro line as well as the new Superbike - it is undeniably the direct decendant of the venerable 916. The overall New Superbike package (price, performance, looks) will result in phenomenal sales numbers ($$$$$ woohoo!!!) come February 2007. Visions of deposits dancing in their heads, the dealers will be scrambling to meet the tsunami of demand.

Will I have a 1098 in my garage? Maybe - but I won't be first (or even 1000th) in line for one in '07. I'll let all the madness settle and the quirks (yes, there will be those niggling things!) work themselves out this first year. Then maybe in '08, I may be motivated to grab that "black" one Ducati waited to release.

For now, my 748R and 900 Monster is all the Ducati I need. Then again, if I had the $22,950 for my addiction... [thumbsup]

See less See more

1 - 20 of 25 Posts

Tigre

· #2 · Dec 18, 2006

It was shockingly light and nimble-feeling. Granted, it had no fuel in the tank... which helps... but the weight they shaved should make a big difference.

Sadly, I'm going to hold off a few years before I try to step up to the big boy for racing. I want to wait until traction control is available (which I anticipate within 3 years).

Dan071

· #3 · Dec 18, 2006

Rick T. said:
The most immediately tangible difference (aside from looks) is weight. The 10-9-8 is LIGHT... SUPER light... 600 supersport light. Only time will tell how/if the weight-saving impacts durability/reliability.

That's the first thing i noticed also, almost kept going over the other way when standing it up. Of course id imagine it was bone dry, no fluids at all. But it looks good and i like it. Will propbably grow on me in the next few years like the current body style has. over all [thumbsup]

need to fihure a way to put my 749 on a diet....

joemorse

· #4 · Dec 18, 2006

...and think of all the used 999s that'll soon be available for track duty ;D

MonsterHooligan

· #5 · Dec 18, 2006

1. its beautiful

2. i'm too short

johnc

· #6 · Dec 18, 2006

Tigre said:
I want to wait until traction control is available (which I anticipate within 3 years).

traction control is available now baby ... it's called your right wrist, you know ... the one that twists the throttle [cheeky]

G

· #7 · Dec 18, 2006

MonsterHooligan said:
1. its beautiful

2. i'm too short

I thought it wasn't that tall for a SBK. It's still a tall bike when compared to monsters and such (and by such I mean everything except dirt Bikes [cheeky] )

It is a [borat] niiiiiiice bike!!
I totally do not need one nor should I have one(don't really do track days or race), but I want one...bad >

Tigre

· #8 · Dec 19, 2006

Isn't that the same version of traction control that led me to highside on a 98hp bike??

BTW: Reminder -- I want that box from your wheels -- please let me know when you get your new set from TAW.

johnc said:
traction control is available now baby ... it's called your right wrist, you know ... the one that twists the throttle [cheeky]

Mostrobelle

· #9 · Dec 19, 2006

MonsterHooligan said:
1. its beautiful

2. i'm too short

How tall is it? I'm 5'-4.5" but I have a 30" inseam. Could I fit it? Not that I'll get one until it's 10 years old and someone else has put 50K miles on it... [cheeky]

G

· #10 · Dec 19, 2006

my jeans are most of my other pants are a 32 inseam and I fit on it. My feet were both flat and I had a small bend at the knee too.

The bars a bit of a reach though, in fact they are a big reach and I'm 6 feet tall. I think you would have more of an issue with the bars than the seat height. But then again you don't have to worry about crushing the twig and berries either

so you could sit more "forward" on the seat.

S2RGRL

· #11 · Dec 19, 2006

The 1098 is one sweet bike. I was quite amazed by its lightness, it seemed effortless trying to stand it upright. The reach didn't seem as aggressive as the older superbikes that I've straddled. I give it a definite two [thumbsup] [thumbsup]

Tigre

· #12 · Dec 19, 2006

The ergonomics are very similary to the 749's I've been on.

Mostrobelle

· #13 · Dec 19, 2006

pt33 said:
my jeans are most of my other pants are a 32 inseam and I fit on it. My feet were both flat and I had a small bend at the knee too.

The bars a bit of a reach though, in fact they are a big reach and I'm 6 feet tall. I think you would have more of an issue with the bars than the seat height. But then again you don't have to worry about crushing the twig and berries either so you could sit more "forward" on the seat.

Interesting...I wonder how much waxing of the tank I'd have to do to fit on it? Not that I have to worry about that too much. There are benefits to having a 12 y.o. boy's physique. [cheeky] Is there any adjustability to them?

Tigre

· #14 · Dec 19, 2006

Prolly the dsme adjustments as the xx9 series.

Speeddog

· #15 · Dec 19, 2006

Tigre said:
Prolly the dsme adjustments as the xx9 series.

Seat position and rearset position adjustability is gone...

Rick T.

Discussion Starter · #16 · Dec 19, 2006

Speeddog said:
Seat position and rearset position adjustability is gone...

Fixed-position rearsets - no problem (aftermarket rearsets!)

Fore & aft non-adjustability - bummer...

derby

· #17 · Dec 19, 2006

Rick T. said:
Fore & aft non-adjustability - bummer...

not really a loss, IMO. your main obstacle in how close you can get to the hand controls is the tank, and that's not moving. in the twisties, you're gonna be up on the tank (or hanging off the side) anyway.

Rick T.

Discussion Starter · #18 · Dec 19, 2006

derby said:
not really a loss, IMO. your main obstacle in how close you can get to the hand controls is the tank, and that's not moving. in the twisties, you're gonna be up on the tank (or hanging off the side) anyway.

The 999/749S had fore & aft seat/tank adjustability. I'm 5'10 and rode my buddy's 749S. He's 6'2 and his position is adjusted to him - believe me - it matters.

spidey

· #19 · Dec 19, 2006

Opinions? I like it a lot, 'specially in red, but I don't wuite love it yet. The fact that every manufacturer followed the 916 styling makes any "return to 916-based styling" look a bit unoriginal. I liked the red a lot more than the tricolor. Still, it sounds like a big step up from the 749/999 series, and it is definitely better looking in person than in pics.

I spent a lot of time poking around the tricked out S model with all the tasty add-ons. I hadn't before seen that feature where you can adjust the brake lever travel with knob by the clutch. That'd be really cool to deal with brake fade later in a race.

Tigre

· #20 · Dec 19, 2006

Spidey said:
I spent a lot of time poking around the tricked out S model with all the tasty add-ons. I hadn't before seen that feature where you can adjust the brake lever travel with knob by the clutch. That'd be really cool to deal with brake fade later in a race.

The monster (s series, at least) comes with that type of adjustability on the levers. It's a dial and not easy to do with one hand, but it *could* be done.

1 - 20 of 25 Posts

This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.