Better than mine too But once you experience the thrill and ease of a 1200 overtake.....any other bike is so slow it is dangerous I totally agree with Monsterped the 's' suspension is really different - Much more composed on bumpy corners under power and more able to cope with a pillion (4hr comfortable according to my wife)
I would say that the upgraded Ohlins is more important than the displacement. Rex On Edit I was at first shopping to save a little (Non S) and then do an upgrade later. I am very glad I went with the S right off.
I can say this now that my bike has sold, the basic M1200 is more bike than 99% of riders can handle on the road, yes the R and S are better specced but the suspension on the basic M1200 is extremely good, IMO there is simply no point in spending the extra money to get Ohlins and another 10 or so bhp, bear in mind that the full extra bhp is way up the Rev range, if you’re at 9k revs on a regular basis on the road you need your head examined, IIRC the M1200 is 118 Nm torque and the S is 124Nm , hardly any difference, so do not discount the M1200 anyone thinking of getting an Monster 1200, they are extremely capable , save yourself a few grand and don’t fall for Ducati marketing, real world you will be no faster!.
Well I am certainly not using the extra 10hp. But I am not 200lbs or under, and I ride as aggressive as my skills allow (Learning) and I do use more of the suspension than the engine. BUT The base 1200 does at least have adjustable suspension right? The 821 does not up front. It will really matter there. Rex
Yes the suspension is adjustable, more basic than the Ohlins of course but more importantly it works really well, bhp has always been a big selling point, however if you monitor how many revs you actually use on a regular basis and then check what bhp your bike makes at those revs most people get a surprise, Torque is what you “feel“ when accelerating, most people change up to the next gear way before they are anywhere near the higher rev range/max bhp, basically “riding the torque” I’m talking road riding here of course, some people buy bikes because “it’s 200bhp mate”, then never ever use the bike at anywhere near 200bhp!, it’s more to do with bragging rights as far as I can tell
Its when you make your overtakes when i tend to use full power ,you get two or three cars to pass at once so i get past them as fast as possible ,so i would say on every ride i get to use all 160bhp on a few occasions ,it might be only for a few seconds ,but its still used .But each to there own ,they are all very capable and great bikes.
Yes we all ride differently, personally I’ve never needed to go to 10,000 revs to overtake but it’d be boring if we all rode the same
I may have reached 10k I think redline is 11k I have never seen the red lights... but then again I am never looking down. I agree that it probably helps with passing more. but the 821 does have plenty. I mean if I am in 5th or 6th gear I am not really riding, just covering miles. Unless going for a true speed run. 5-6k is where I like to be when waiting to pass. In the mountains I am generally between 6-8 with bursts to 9 in a low gear because I am not going 90 in the twisties. Rex
@Mattt Are you still looking for a red 1100 monster ? I have just seen this on Autotrader. Looks to be a great buy at that price. The mileage wouldnt worry me on that engine as I have had 3 air cooled 2 valves well past 40k and all running beautifully. If I didnt already have my S2R1000 I`d be after this . www.autotrader.co.uk/bike-details/202008232846181?advertising-location=at_bikes&include-delivery-opti
Hiya Thank you for the heads up ,I would prefer a lower mileage one I think . My 916 is up for sale on eBay so can't purchase anything until,it's sold as I have no where to store it under cover or even on the drive until then
I've had an S4, a M900, a 796 and an S4R. The (air cooled) M900 felt a bit wheezy and crude tbh but had a basic non-nonsense charm. The S4R is a bit of an animal as it has the 996 superbike engine. It's by far the most all round enjoyable bike I've ever owned - you can commute happily on it one day then hold your own in the fast group on a track day the next. The S4RS is all that and more (998 Testeretta engine, which confusingly some late model S4R bikes were also fitted with), plus it is sprinkled with the magic Ohlins fairy dust front and rear, along with radial brakes. The S4 is similar to the S4R but has a 916 motor instead of 996 (100bhp v. 120bhp), a basic double-sided swingarm and twin "wheelbarrow" exhausts so it looks a bit crude and cheap compared to the S4R which has a single-sider and stacked exhausts (which I don't personally like, but they do make the S4R and S4RS look different to the rest of the range) The M796 was a little gem of a bike as I think the 796/1100 are the best looking bikes of the Monster series and they are light. I think they're a little let down by only being fitted with old school air-cooled engines, though some purists will say that a Monster should only ever be air cooled. I only sold my 796 because @dukesox made me an offer I couldn't refuse to buy his S4R. If I hadn't bought the S4R then I would have probably only sold the M796 to buy an M1100s. I'm not keen on the 821/1200 range - the looks don't do a lot for me and for me they have too much tech for what should be a raw and basic motorbike, so they seem a little clinical.
I have only owned M900 (sadly a 1997 ) and M1200s. The M900 was one of those bikes that punched above its weight because it was comfortable, good handiing and you could use every horsepower anytime you wanted unlike revvy 3s and 4s or peaky two strokes (the 1200 keeps that spirit of giving everything at one twist of the throttle !) Unfortunately early M900s suffer from carb icing, fuel pump failure, poorly ground camshafts, start failures and snapping head studs - the later Injected M900s are better in most ways. IMHO the S4 is probably the best proper Monster end of story I never like the 2010 range as the single side swing arm is an engineering abortion for the sake of style i mourned the loss of the 851 frame i thought that the retarded headlight was ugly and the air vents in the tank tacky.. The 2014 range has the same stupid single side angle iron, way too much electronics and an even uglier headlight but a prettier tank and a Vincent style frame ... the engine the 1200 is just an engine with the necessary other bits dangling off. So i score them 1st S4, 2nd Injected M900 and 3rd M1200s YMMV
I had a S4 and got through two S4r's. The big problem with them (IMO) is fuel consumption and range. whilst enormous fun (the S4r would wheelie off the throttle quite easily) and all track day capable, on the road I was always looking for the next petrol station. Once, when I had a 40 mile commute, it was fill up every other day!
Good real world info ,thank you Strange as I've been looking at aesthetics and not really thought about fuel consumption, I would do a short commute, bit of weekend fun and very occasional tour to France
My old M900 (96 vintage) did 50 mpg, it's just a small tank so about 130 miles before filling up to be comfortable. Did some touring on it - Scotland, Ireland, Netherlands & Germany and never has a problem with the range
That’s true actually. When I first had it, the fuel light came on so often I thought the sender was faulty
The only real problem I had was in Germany on an Autobahn. Mate comes past and suddenly dives into a refuge. "Problem?" "I've just run out of petrol!" "What? We only filled up a few miles ago!" urns out that he didn't! He was on a BMW and was trying to make the point that he could fill up at EVERY OTHER stop because his BMW was so much better! So, me and another lad had to go off buy petrol and a plastic petrol can for him. Then go back and all fill up again. No more p1ss taking about my frequent fuel stops! That was a 800 parallel twin job that only had about a 14 litre tank!
