Just info that may be useful for someone. I had this 696 for a year as my every day bike and whilst I really like it, over time, I found the suspension less than satisfactory. I'm really not fussy and usually I'm happy to put up with whatever is given to me but this bike really isn't good enough. The front is hard and bouncy and the rear really jars my back over some of the harsher bumps. I also found it didn't willingly turn in but has to be really made to turn. For me to feel any of this it has to be bad. As ever, I have short arms and deep pockets so I wanted to improve it without throwing lots of money at it. For the front I decided to get a set of Showa forks from a 848 on eBay for £180. They have linear springs instead of progressive and are adjustable in bump, rebound and preload. The stock forks are bottom of the barrel with no adjustment and damping only in one fork leg. The outer fork tubes of the 848 are 53mm top and bottom triple so they don't easily go into a 696 which has 50mm top and 54 bottom but the stanchions are the same at 43mm and the fork bottoms are a near match. Also travel is the same at 120mm. So I decided I'd use the Monster outer tubes and the rest from the 848. To make that fit I had to shorten the damper rod, bump adjuster metering rod and spring preload spacer by 33mm. That's the difference in overall fork length. Then I had to modify the fork top end caps which are too large in diameter. Turn them down and cut a new thread to suit the 696 outer tubes. I also decided to go with 5 weight oil as I'm looking for a more comfortable ride. That worked out really well and static sag at the front at the middle of the spring preload adjustment is the same as with the OEM forks at 9mm. The 848 axle is different but the 696 axle can be made to fit with a split bush on the right and a top hat bush on the left. I then discovered that brake disc offset is different by 5mm so I had to make some suitable spacers to go under the discs. I set preload, compression and rebound at the middle of the adjustment and went for a ride. I felt a good immediate improvement,. especially over some larger bumps. Sometimes it's hard to know if it's a real improvement or just perceived because one wants it to be better but in this case there's no doubt it's better. Now for the rear. To aid turn in I wanted to raise the ride height some. As you may or may not know, that's not a feature on a 696. However, the top damper clevis as enough thread sticking through the frame that I could put a 3.5mm washer under it which raises the ride height by 10mm. The washer goes on the stud where I have circled the picture. Quick and dirty but it helps enormously with turn in. I could perhaps do with even more but that will require a new clevis. I may well make one to experiment. I was also unhappy with the progressive spring at the back. Over some larger bumps it feels like the closely wound, soft part of the spring goes coilbound and the stiff part is so stiff it really bucks you out the saddle. So I decided a normal linear spring is what's needed. Ktech do them at £100. Öhlins @£120. Did I mention I have short arms? Too much money for my liking. It's just a spring. After some time on Google I found these guys. They have 2.25inch diameter springs in all sorts of lengths and rates. 7 inch length was the closest and I decided on a 500lbs/Inch spring which equated to 89N/mm. I had no way of knowing for sure what a good rate would be as measuring progressive springs is rather difficult but I have a 90N/mm on my 916 and I felt that Ducati designers, like all designers will always go with what they know if they can get away with it. At 28 pound delivered even I can make a mistake and not get too upset about it. Well, what do you know. I set the new spring up with the same amount of preload than the old one and static sag is identical to before at 10mm. Now I have a bike that just rides nicely and can cope with a pothole or a bump in the road as one would expect. It also turns in much better but I think I'd like to raise the rear another 5mm. Can't lower the front as the forks would hit the handle bars. I did change the front tyre for a 120/60 to a 120/70 some time ago so the forks are already 12mm further through the triple trees. A couple more pictures for you to enjoy.
For the rear clevis, you can use the part from the 1100 and/or the 796 iirc to raise the rear ride height. Did that years back on my 696 and it made the turn in much better,
