If you could get any monster, which would you get?

I’m also planning to go ride a new one, they keep advertising test rides so I signed up.

Good answer. The new versions are much improved but the older Ducatis cost about a dollar a mile to run (not including fuel)

You’re doing something wrong.

I believe Ducati was doing something wrong. They seem to have improved design

I had a 2002 Monster 900S. It was a lot of fun. Never had any issues with it either. My 1990s carbureted Ducati bikes.....not so great in the reliability dept.

105,000 miles and counting. Put new pistons, valves, and guides in it at about 85,000. No other major work of any kind. 1993 900 SS with ST2 cams, ported heads, JE pistons, 41mm flat slides, Termi "spaghetti" exhaust. Absolutely dead reliable motorcycle.

http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1751298353.jpg

If I buy a used Ducati, what should I get?...

...AAA

https://orangecounty.craigslist.org/mcy/d/aliso-viejo-hayabusa-for-sale/7862247743.html

I'm just here to help.

and I just found this one too....

https://orangecounty.craigslist.org/mcy/d/irvine-for-sale-ducati-1198s-very-low/7855221951.html

I did see this one too, but I'm sure you'd find a Honda way too boring to ride since you'd never have to work on it...

https://orangecounty.craigslist.org/mcy/d/costa-mesa-1998-honda-cbr1100xx/7855232019.html

Well because you asked, a S4RS. I have bid on a couple of them but did not win. A S4R would likely be my second choice, likely a better road bike.

Honda RC51! All the fun of a v-twin superbike, none of the hassle.

I saw a gorgeous BMW 1000S RR last night. They are now on the potential list. 204 HP and supposedly comfy for a sport bike.

I think if I get a monster it will be a new one or a 1200 based on what has been posted here and what I’ve read.

Gotta wonder what on earth is going on with today's liter bikes. The horsepower wars have gotten ridiculous. 204 hp on a road going motorcycle is absurd. No one can use that. No one.

Over the years I've become friends with one of the guys who was involved in spec'ing out and building my Super Sport for the original owner. He did this while working at the Ducati shop that sold it, then wound up owning Ducati of Seattle, and now owns Seattle Used Bike. He knows his way around Ducatis. Many owners of brand new bikes, just off their factory warranties, bring them to him in preference over the dealers. He is that good, well liked, and respected.

He confided in me a couple of years ago that of all of the new Panigale fours and twins he services, he has yet to see one arrive at his shop with the ride mode setting turned to anything more aggressive than "rain mode". Even there, they still provide something like 130-140 hp, which is apparently "enough" for everyone whose bikes he services.

The application of power on performance motorcycles is limited by three things - short wheelbase, high center of gravity, and traction (under acceleration). Under full power, all these bikes will do is either lift the front wheel or roast the rear tire. We choose which by where we place our weight. What is delineated by power output is the speed at which we still have to make this choice - the lower the horsepower, the lower the speed at which the bike will no longer force us to make this choice.

On my Super Sport, that speed is somewhere at or above typical freeway speeds. Granted, I can just whack it open at 70 mph in a higher gear with no worries, but if I'm "serious" about it and downshift into its powerband, it will lift the front wheel, limiting how fast I can actually accelerate.

So, where does 204 horsepower leave us? At lower, "real world" street riding speeds, like on the twisty back roads with 35-50 mph limits (with our speed adjusted accordingly... ;) ) that 204 horsepower will gain the rider absolutely zilch in performance over my meager 95 horsepower. It just can't make use of it until speeds are up in the Isle of Mann range. So what good is it?

My buddy's customers have, I believe, answered that question.

Pretty well all of the new bikes have wheelie control…

For some reason.

Yup. But they still limit acceleration.

There was a time when skilled riders did that themselves. Nowadays, in the interest of "winning" the horsepower wars, manufacturers have so vastly exceeded rider skills that they feel compelled to do that for them. The end result is "204 horsepower" bikes castrated down to 130 horsepower through their computer controlled "ride modes" so people can actually ride them. But, well, they can still brag that their bike makes 204 horsepower. Even though they are terrified to ride it on anything above "rain mode".

So, yeah, do yourself a favor and buy a bike that doesn't have to rely on all of that. It will be much less technologically complicated, much easier to maintain, much cheaper, and all of that. And you will be giving up nothing as far as real world performance that you can actually use.

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/Yw5ATA1DNLM?si=fGz_3ejSAI0UphGW" title="YouTube video player" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture; web-share" referrerpolicy="strict-origin-when-cross-origin" allowfullscreen></iframe>

I was considering a S1000rr prior to picking up the RC8R, that is quite the machine. From what I remember look for 2016 and newer, I can not remember what the changes were. The one thing that worried me was there are a fair amount of engine failures, possibly a rider problem. As Jeff said that much HP can rarely be used, but lots of fun for the occasional roll on. RC8R at 175HP and 400lbs is more than enough for me, and there is no computer to tame it down.

The only thing I can add is what a great morning it was to ride to work. Such a good way to start a day.

That was beautiful! Thanks for posting Jeff!