Hey Everyone! May's Bike of the Month challenge is now open for entries!

996SPS (1999) Yes or No

11999 Views 64 Replies 18 Participants Last post by j0oftheworld, Nov 30, 2012

chantank

Discussion Starter · Oct 23, 2012

3

Hi everyone,

I have an opportunity to purchase a 1999 Ducati 996SPS with 5,000Km on the bike with a lot accessories (Slipper Clutch, New Radial Mount Forks & 4 Pot Gold series Brembo, Dymag Carbon wheels, Evolution Front Faring, & list goes on and on...etc) as can partially be seen on the pictures.

As bikes prices varies by country to country, my best analogy is that the seller is asking the price equivalent to a used 2006 Ducati Paul Smart.

1.) What do you guys think re the deal (Pice about right, too high, too low)

2.) I want to have 1 bike of the Tamburini design...not sure this is a good choice or I should hold off for a 998S, or 998R?

3.) Any particular concern over this 996SPS, anything to watch out?, etc...

Please excuse my ignorance & any perceived silly question this may seem to be...I'm totally torn & cant decide whether to proceed or not & would like your inputs as a sounding board.

Best,
Kris

See less See more

21 - 40 of 65 Posts

ProphetPVD

· #21 · Oct 23, 2012

nine16 said:
That Evolution is just hideous. Of all the bikes to revamp the cosmetics for. Why choose arguably the best looking bike of all time? It's like a karaoke singer trying to cover Freddie Mercury.

Plus 1...

Dominique

· #22 · Oct 23, 2012

ProphetPVD said:
Plus 1...

The carbon dream carbon kit "Evoluzione" for 998 looks good ... except the front fairing which is "special" !

DUC1198S

· #23 · Oct 23, 2012

That bike is nice. I think the seat is ugly and you would have to change the front fairing. If the price is right and you really like it I would go for it. In my opinion though, if I had to own just 1 Tamburini style bike I would hold off and look for a 998R. Either way you'll be getting a sweet bike. Good luck with your purchase.

KiwiEd

· #24 · Oct 24, 2012

I say go for it ... the purists out there have my respect for insisting on OEM for what is largely just a resale value purpose, but for pure seat of the pants joy there's probably more fun in having an SPS with 'improvements', be they asthetic or mechanical ... and in the end if you like what the thing looks like fairing/colour scheme wise, what difference does it make when you are fanging through the twisties.

The SPS character comes from it's cams, tranny and primary gearing.

I'm actually rebuilding my old 996SPS from the ground up right now .... except it's not an sps, it was a 916SP. The engine got changed to SPS specs in 97-99. And, shock horror, I've p/coated the frame silver ... and the engine will be better than a stock sps ... I hope ( it might rev too quick and lose the lazy torque they have, hope not)

I'm still going to call it my SPS though.

chantank

Discussion Starter · #25 · Oct 24, 2012

Again all.....thanks so much for your inputs! Such a great community to get more ideas to ensure an informed decision is made.
I made a 2 step offer to seller

1.) Price without stock items (92% of agreed price)
2.) Price with stock items (8%)

Will pay # 1 first, if & when he can find the stock items. I will pay him the remaining 8%

Should I get it & no stock parts comes with this, will certainly look for the correct fairing.

Will update as once.

vanduc996

· #26 · Oct 24, 2012

KiwiEd said:
I say go for it ... the purists out there have my respect for insisting on OEM for what is largely just a resale value purpose, but for pure seat of the pants joy there's probably more fun in having an SPS with 'improvements', be they asthetic or mechanical ... and in the end if you like what the thing looks like fairing/colour scheme wise, what difference does it make when you are fanging through the twisties.

The SPS character comes from it's cams, tranny and primary gearing.

I'm actually rebuilding my old 996SPS from the ground up right now .... except it's not an sps, it was a 916SP. The engine got changed to SPS specs in 97-99. And, shock horror, I've p/coated the frame silver ... and the engine will be better than a stock sps ... I hope ( it might rev too quick and lose the lazy torque they have, hope not)

I'm still going to call it my SPS though.

Could you expand a bit on what you mean when you say part of the SPS character comes from it's tranny and primary gearing? I'm wondering from the perspective vis a vis standard 996 tranny and gearing

Dominique

· #27 · Oct 24, 2012

In Europe, the SPS engine come with Titanium internal parts, specific cams, gearing rate. The SPS engine is different that the standart 996.

vanduc996 said:
Could you expand a bit on what you mean when you say part of the SPS character comes from it's tranny and primary gearing? I'm wondering from the perspective vis a vis standard 996 tranny and gearing

vanduc996

· #28 · Oct 24, 2012

Dominique said:
In Europe, the SPS engine come with Titanium internal parts, specific cams, gearing rate. The SPS engine is different that the standart 996.

Yes, I realize the SPS is quite different, but I'm curious specifically about the tranny and final gear ratios that KiwiEd spoke about, how those two aspects influence the SPS experience vis a vis a standard 996

nine16

· #29 · Oct 24, 2012

Ed, I'm with you. It's funny--on September 14th, in a thread about 996R's holding their value, I wrote the following:

nine16 said:
I chose to keep the 996R over the SPS's. There's no other bike I'd rather have, but I'll tell you first hand: If you were to cover up the speedometers and just ride them back to back, or if there were no dynographs to tell you otherwise, you would swear from the sound and the "feel" that the SPS was faster. It just has a more raucous quality. It's animalistic.

Dominique

· #30 · Oct 24, 2012

I have sold my 916SPS and I have only my 998R : the last and the ultime Tambourini series "chef d'oeuvre" ...

KiwiEd

· #31 · Oct 25, 2012

vanduc996 said:
Yes, I realize the SPS is quite different, but I'm curious specifically about the tranny and final gear ratios that KiwiEd spoke about, how those two aspects influence the SPS experience vis a vis a standard 996

OK, I may be getting this wrong because tbh I don't even know what the later 996 Bipostas were running tranny and gear wise, nor any changes that were made to the later SPS.

Without quoting numbers, which anyone can do by checking comparison data, the 996SPS runs a different ratio primary gearing (NOT final gearing as you have mentioned above) which was actually the same as the 996 Corse engines. The tranny is a close ratio box same as the 748 (which has different primary gearing) and certaintly completely different than the 916's.

I'm assuming here that you know what and where the primary gears are.

So to answer your question, the 'character' that I alluded to, comes from the way the cams deliver the power and the way the gear ratio's work to deliver that power to ground. It was unique to the SPS and worked extremely well with the difference between a 996 Biposta and a 996 SPS being like night and day.

My opinion anyway.

KiwiEd

· #32 · Oct 25, 2012

nine16 said:
Ed, I'm with you. It's funny--on September 14th, in a thread about 996R's holding their value, I wrote the following:

Yep, know what you mean Adam.
In fact, like you speaking first hand, my race experiences on first my "SPS" engined bike, then on a 1997/8 spec Corse (ex FBF) and then on a 2001 996RS I built ....... the lap times were not that different.
I should clarify that I was just an average club racer with a very modest budget so getting 10/10ths out of the engines was never even remotely on the radar ..... and in reality that meant that it was easier to get max power out of the SPS by tuning it to deliver it's peak power at 10K and thus utilizing all it could give you. On the other hand, to get the max out of the corse engines revving to 12-13K + was needed ... and that's something I refused to do since I was paying for them, so therefore it follows I wasn't utilizing all they could offer.

So, from that perspective, racing the SPS was more satisfying.
In addition, the corse's with their race trannies, are absolute pigs to get of the line (without burning up a clutch every race) where as the sps was brilliant of the line.

Again, all just my opinion.

See less See more

vanduc996

· #33 · Oct 25, 2012

KiwiEd said:
OK, I may be getting this wrong because tbh I don't even know what the later 996 Bipostas were running tranny and gear wise, nor any changes that were made to the later SPS.

Without quoting numbers, which anyone can do by checking comparison data, the 996SPS runs a different ratio primary gearing (NOT final gearing as you have mentioned above) which was actually the same as the 996 Corse engines. The tranny is a close ratio box same as the 748 (which has different primary gearing) and certaintly completely different than the 916's.

I'm assuming here that you know what and where the primary gears are.

So to answer your question, the 'character' that I alluded to, comes from the way the cams deliver the power and the way the gear ratio's work to deliver that power to ground. It was unique to the SPS and worked extremely well with the difference between a 996 Biposta and a 996 SPS being like night and day.

My opinion anyway.

Hmmm, interesting. I'm asking because I'm planning on adding SPS cams to my 996 motor, and wondering how much of their effect I'd miss out on by using standard 996 primary gearing and transmission...?

TomTom

· #34 · Oct 25, 2012

With all the respect of KE, its the same primary but a close ratio box, 6th on a CR box is same as 5th on a normal.
Why the SPS feels the way it does, I dont know, but Nines description is spot on, 996R feels flat(-ish) while SPS is beasty yet controllable.

vanduc996

· #35 · Oct 25, 2012

Is slotting in a 748 tranny in my 996 along with the SPS cams a recommended step for more of that SPS feel or character?
I realize this is veering a bit from the original post, but people were talking SPS character, I was planning on posting a thread about CR boxes....

chantank

Discussion Starter · #36 · Oct 25, 2012

2

996SPS on its way to Ducati Service

Hope I made the right call...it's now on way to get a full service

Thanks again for all your support!

See less See more

PeterS

· #37 · Oct 25, 2012

KiwiEd said:
Yep, know what you mean Adam.
In fact, like you speaking first hand, my race experiences on first my "SPS" engined bike, then on a 1997/8 spec Corse (ex FBF) and then on a 2001 996RS I built ....... the lap times were not that different.
I should clarify that I was just an average club racer with a very modest budget so getting 10/10ths out of the engines was never even remotely on the radar ..... and in reality that meant that it was easier to get max power out of the SPS by tuning it to deliver it's peak power at 10K and thus utilizing all it could give you. On the other hand, to get the max out of the corse engines revving to 12-13K + was needed ... and that's something I refused to do since I was paying for them, so therefore it follows I wasn't utilizing all they could offer.

So, from that perspective, racing the SPS was more satisfying.
In addition, the corse's with their race trannies, are absolute pigs to get of the line (without burning up a clutch every race) where as the sps was brilliant of the line.

Again, all just my opinion.

Similar experience with similar bikes

Still have my 916SPS & 998R & much prefer the animal character of the SPS over the R.
The SPS is by far my preferred bike.
R is just so "smooth" (but still more animal than those current 1098/1198 etc "things")
Cheers.

nine16

· #38 · Oct 25, 2012

vanduc996 said:
Is slotting in a 748 tranny in my 996 along with the SPS cams a recommended step for more of that SPS feel or character?
I realize this is veering a bit from the original post, but people were talking SPS character, I was planning on posting a thread about CR boxes....

When I drop the SPS cams in my track bike I'll be able to make a comparison, but there probably won't be any riding until Spring. Close ratio box may be nice, but an SPS powerband is anything but peaky. I don't think wider ratios are going to hurt or change things that much as long as the final drive ratio is adjusted accordingly. Numbers are irrelevant, but look at the shape of this curve, noting the torque above 70 between 6500 and 9000 RPM:

See less See more

TomTom

· #39 · Oct 25, 2012 (Edited)

When you put the cams in its of utmost importance to have them timed. There is another thread about adjustable wheels, woodrufs are as hot as a thick TV nowdays...

SPS' are typically good timing wise for stock spec(119/107), but 109/109 is the best Ive found, huge difference in response and midrange between the two (I did a lot of playing around with various timing on mine), 114 to 109 in second gear is like 'No wheelie' versus 'I rather wheelie', imagine 119 then...lemon

The SPS feeling is found in each gear separately so its not the gearbox that does it, imo.
Sound and delivery is my bet.

ducv2

· #40 · Oct 25, 2012

I know the figures arent really comparable but you might be interested in this. Think the cam timing is as mentioned by Tom Tom, another dyno showed a couple of HP more.

See less See more

21 - 40 of 65 Posts

This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.