^ Exactly this. I spend most of my time lowish down in the rev range and torque is much more important to me than peak power. V-twin delivery is so much nicer from this perspective. Immediacy, snappy acceleration etc. The XR I have ridden felt much less immediate to me, unless you were revving it a lot higher, which just doesn't feel comfortable to me from a mechanical sympathy and noise perspective. I'm absolutely delighted by my standard DVT - what a bike!
Good point. Twins and fours feel so different they are hardly competitors. It would be like saying, I like animals but can't decide whether to get a dog or a horse. Or I like music but can't choose whether to buy a piano or a trumpet. Surely you just know?
I think Ducati need to seriously and quickly look at some off these quality control issues, otherwise they are going to lose sales and tarnish what is otherwise a great bike!!
It depends where your priorities lie, I guess. I currently ride a Tuono V4. It's a cracking bike and really quick but there's no comprise for long distance riding. I want something that can be just as quick, have a more comfortable ride and be able to carry luggage. The engine is important in giving me performance across the range and I guess that's where the twin versus four comes in to play - but it's not the be all and end-all for me. And I do think the current DVT has blurred the lines a little there. The multi ticks the boxes for me, but I don't want it letting me down and leaving me stranded. I can put up with silly minor issues, but I'd rather comprise on the engine if more major issues are the reality of what I could be up against. The fact Ducati haven't sorted the extended warranty is nagging at me too. Any updates on that?
Agree the finish between some of the parts (particularly the seat not looking in-line) needs improving. That is one are I'm disappointed with. I do feel there is a slight flat spot when the bike is pushed hard from lower revs in higher gears. Like you're sat waiting for a bigger oomph! Oil - no problem for me. 3,500k to date and not a single drop required! I'm more than happy with the bike I bought and along side an XR there is no comparison in terms of style. The small negatives are overwhelmed by the positives - it's a great piece of kit! Looks as good with or without the luggage; not something you could attribute to the XR in my humble. A bit less power? er so what indeed?
To be honest, I don't think you'd go wrong with either of them. It's not what anyone else thinks, it's what works for you. The S1000XR has won all of the journo reviews (incl. fast bikes mag today) but that's because they're comparing topend power and Sportsbike agility. I thinking there's a bit more to it than choosing the one you can thrape the bollocks off the most.
I can see that both V-Twin and IL4 could be candidates if you are coming from a V4. Otherwise I still don't really get it.
I really don't understand this, to read this thread it sounds like the DVT is just unreliable and badly built......mine is 5 months old and has never missed a beat in 4500kms, not a drop of oil used, starts on the button its been the perfect bike, it would be nice to see as much effort being put into praising the bike......if you dont like the DVT go and buy something else and then realise it's not that bad, infact its bloody good....!!!
As one of the many fence sitters who haven't decided on either,we are currently in Misano for the GP before moving onto the Bol and it's the first time in 15 years I've used anything with less than a 25l tank and what a pain in the backside it is(k1200)and while I could make a good case for either XR or Multi neither has what I would say is a decent range,particularly when being used hard on an autoroute.
I also had a k12R and 175 range was about max, I'd recon the XR will drink fuel because @ any touring speeds it's revving it's bo11ox off.
When I got my 2010 multi, I thought I'd be getting more to a tank than I am. 150 miles if I take some of it easy. I think a touring bike should be breaking 200 without too much difficulty. I'm not saying they should tame the beast, more a case of finding more tank space.
The bike we use for long distance stuff normally is a much converted 955 Tiger with a 17 inch front wheel,Dymags/Ohlins/Beringers and a 25l tank but for the shear hell of it come down to Misano on the K Sport and apart from errr cramped legs the 19l tank is a hassle,and hence my reservation about either an XR or Multi.
Ah - another triple, so I can see why v-twin vs IL4 would be less of a concern. I can see your point about being cramped though. I think a GS would be more akin to the Tiger than either a Multi or an XR.
Hmmm I don't understand, I've just come back from a tour of Europe and Croatia with the wife on the back, we've been getting around 160 miles then the light comes on and there's 2 bars left on the gauge. This is with FULL to the brim panniers, top box and tank bag + 2 slightly over sized persons, and we weren't hanging around most of the time. I was even using 6th gear and I can honestly say that's the first time I've ridden in 6th for more than a few miles. it's typical though my bike becomes more economical just as fuel prices drop.
I don't understand either. On a recent trip down to Switzerland on my 2013 twin spark with 18,000 miles on the clock I got a true (measured at the pump) 50+ mpg. That gives 200 miles with two litres remaining in the tank. (20 litre tank = 4 and a half gallons) I only use the pessimistic fuel gauge as a guide and use the actual fuel consumption read-out - I checked it and it is one mpg optimistic. By resetting trip one at fill-up I know I am good for over 200 miles provided I average 50mpg or more and I always do when touring and sticking with speed limits (ish). Only on the French motorways against a strong head-wind did I drop to about 46mpg. I rarely cruise at more than 4000 rpm (except on motorways) as I find it unnecessary and less relaxing. I would suggest ignoring the low fuel light and using consumption plus known 20 litre tank capacity to judge range instead. I do find the twin spark some 10% more economical than my previous 2011 single spark.
