kz 750 vs monster 600?

hey, im thinking about picking up a duc monster 600 ('01). anyone have any comparisons to the kz as far as power, acceleration, etc?

thanks!

HP wise, the Monster has about the same as a 750 twin, but less than a 650 four.

Weighs a little less than the 650 or 750 twin.

Maybe stop better than a stock 650 or 750 twin (not mine though).

Probably handles the twisties better than any KZ. Has to, it's a Ducati

KZ750E would eat it up in a straight line.



02 Monster 620 is better.

Hold out for the Ducati Monster S4Rs Testastretta

mmm, those s4rs are beautiful. i might check one one of these (honda 919):



100 hp / 63 ft/lbs torque (retuned cbr motor)...can be had for around $3500 used.

I've had my '00 750 Monster for about 6 years now and to this day my dad still doesn't understand why I wanted it. (BTW, he's the original owner of a '73 Z1, owns a '78 Kz650C, '94 Zx11D, and a '01 Zg1200 too.) It'll run 13.1's at the strip and then eagerly go attack the curves going home. I don't know about the 600 Monster's power but you'll eat up most, if not all, Kz's in the curves stock vs. stock.

Don't know if this helps but that I'd add my $0.02.

Later, Doug

01 600 Monster has around 53 hp (I looked up the specs and read a road test online).

750 twin has 54 hp, KZ650 has 64 hp, KZ750 four has 74 hp, GPz750 has 85 hp, GPz750 Turbo with K&N filter on the turbo intake, straight pipe, and race mode enabled, has 120+ hp (still pulling hard as it passes 130 mph, but I had to back out of it).




No argument that the Ducati 600 Monster will kick butt in the curves, like I said "It's a Ducati"

The horsepower specs Steell gives for the KZs were measured at the crankshaft. The Monster 600 specs were measured at the rear wheel. Subtract 20-30% from crank h.p. to get rear wheel h.p.

edd wrote:

The horsepower specs Steell gives for the KZs were measured at the crankshaft. The Monster 600 specs were measured at the rear wheel. Subtract 20-30% from crank h.p. to get rear wheel h.p.

To the best of my knowledge, no manufacturer quotes rear wheel hp, they quote either SAE (North America) or DIN (Europe), and both are measured at the crankshaft. Ducati is no exception.

In the past, Motorcyclist magazine posted measured hp specs of all the bikes they had tested on or near the last page of the magazine. All the bikes (including Ducati) had less than publicized hp when measured at the rear wheel.

54.00 HP (39.4 kW)) @ 8000 RPM

LINK


If you have a link to someplace that states that Ducati's published hp specs are rear wheel hp, I'd really like to see it.

DIN is the old way of measuring hp in Europe, apparently they are now using KW (Kilowatts) which I assume is also a DIN standard (it's somebody's standard anyway). It's been awhile since I last lived in Europe, and things change

KW * 1,34 = HP, HP / 1,34 = KW

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kilowatt#Kilowatt

1 Mechanical hp = 745.6999 watts
1 Electrical hp = 746 watts
1 Metric hp = 735.49875 watts
1 Boiler hp = 9809.5 watts

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Horsepower


Someday we'll all be metric

:laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:

DIN horsepower is the power measured according to the German standard DIN 70020 and like the SAE net figure is measured at the flywheel. It is sometimes abbreviated as "PS", which stands for Pferdestärke, German for horsepower. However, DIN "horsepower" is often expressed in metric (Pferdestärke) rather than mechanical horsepower.

Brake horsepower (bhp) is the measure of an engine's horsepower without the loss in power caused by the gearbox, generator, differential, water pump, and other auxiliary components such as alternator, power steering, and AC compressor. Thus the prefix "brake" refers to where the power is measured: at the engine's output shaft, as on an engine dynamometer. The actual horsepower delivered to the driving wheels is less. An engine would have to be retested to obtain a rating in another system. The term "brake" refers to the original use of a band brake to measure torque during the test (which is multiplied by the engine RPM and a scaling constant to give horsepower).

n the United States the term "bhp" fell into disuse after the American Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE) recommended manufacturers use hp (SAE) to indicate the net power of the engine, given that particular car's complete engine installation. It measures engine power at the flywheel, not counting transmission losses (or anything after the flywheel).

Starting in 1971 automakers began to quote power in terms of SAE net horsepower (as defined by standard J1349). This reflected the rated power of the engine in as-installed trim, with all accessories and standard intake and exhaust systems. By 1972, US carmakers quoted power exclusively in SAE net hp. The change was meant to 'deflate' power ratings to assuage the auto insurance industry and environmental and safety lobbies, as well as to obfuscate the power losses caused by emissions-control equipment.

SAE net ratings, while more accurate than gross ratings, still represent the engine's power at the flywheel. Contrary to some reports, it does not measure power at the drive wheels.

Same link.

.