I had a 996s and now have a 998 with moderate tuning (cams, pipes, headwork). I also ride a 996 BIP and a 999 BIP occasionally.
The base 998/999 motor feels a little revvier and faster but personally I think the 996 motor may be a bit more "soul full" on the road. However, with the 998 motor you have no need to worry about flaking rockers.
998 has Ohlins on the back as standard - worth having.
If I had to start again I would buy whichever one was better condition/specced, 996 or 998 and be equally happy.

 

I own a 916, 999 and RC51 SP2. I would wait to find a 998 or get a 999.

 

I would wait for the 998 too, the engine is much better. Alltough, it is pretty much the same but not nearly as sad in the reliability department as the woeful Desmoquatro it replaces.

 

i would wait for the 998 too, the engine is much better. Alltough, it is pretty much the same but not nearly as sad in the reliability department as the woeful desmoquatro it replaces.

+1

 

Thank you for the replays so far. Ray, 999's are easier to find and cheaper, I just can't over the styling.

 

998... purely for the Testastretta.

 

If you plan on doing your own valves, definitely 998.

t_bare

 

i would take a 998 over a 996. only problem is finding one for a good price. every one want 9-10k for them where as i see 996's for 5k all the time.

 

998.

It is a better platform for more power.

It's a better engine.

Is it a more reliable engine?

 

Stock to stock form, both are great bikes and you can't really feel the extra power of the 998 compared with the 996. But I would go with the 998 for I find it more easy to add on performance parts to make is faster and meaner.

 

The 996 side fairings look better. The 998 is too plain. The scoops and vents on the 996 look great.

 

The 998 has much less cylinder head and valve trouble than Desmoquatro. For that reason alone, i would pay significantly more for it. Change fairings for it if you want scoops and hoops, and the power is snappier and it runs much better than an 996. Theres no denying that Desmoquatros are old and fragile nowadays. Steer clear of them if you have the choice.

 

OK, I'd choose the 998 too if I was looking and had the choice, but the DQ isn't a fragile and on the edge of death as you make it sound. There are some DQ engines pushing big mileage (for a bike) out there with no problems. Remember, these engines live in ST and Monsters too. Largely reliable and good power for the street has been my experience.

 

Just my opinion, have a 996 with almost 90 thousand kilometers on it, on its fourth engine and its a problem after another. Some are problems you only find while searching the engine, but problems and design faults altogether. You could ignore them and keep driving it but it will bite back... Mainly most of them are cylinder head related, rockers, springs, valve stems, cams, valve locks, rocker pins, rocker pin covers... etc etc.... I too know many people that have high mileage Desmoquatros, and all that i have stripped down for a service have had lots of worn out components without the owner ever noticing. Maybe its just me, but i hate driving a bike that can grenade from the most absurd places and parts. Only reason im willing to keep going with it is because have a spare engine for it and the fact that its worthless in here as an exhange bike, not a single shop will take it as a part exhange. Something to consider when making a choice too... But 998 and the bikes after that are taken as part exhange.

 

I hear ya, but if it's showing wear and not giving a problem, it is pretty much acting like it's supposed to... Right? No need to replace or rebuild if it is in spec. If doing so gives YOU piece of mind, go for it, but it is not the norm or even remotely required. Any bike can bomb out and leave you stranded, even if you replace every single item you feel is showing wear.

My ST4s has about 50K miles (80K Kilometers) with the original engine which has never been opened up beyond the normal service. It shows slight wear on the inner rocker plates where the pins can rub. The half rings show wear where the closing shim seats. It could be argued the rocker pins even have signs of usage. The opening rockers and some closer have wear marks (grey patch) and some of them have since the very first valve check at 6000 miles, which I did. These things all have wear limits. No need to replace them if they are not exceeding the limits, unless you just want to. The fact that you know several people with high mileage DQ engines that have shown wear at tear down, but the owner never knew it, says it all...

Even the 998 is a 21 year old bike at this point. Updated engine, yes, but still a 21 year old design. At this point discussing which is better, the 916, 996 or 998 is pretty academic. They are all dated and severely under-powered by today's standards. If you're looking for one, I hope you are doing so with the same mentality as anyone who is looking for a classic bike. For the bike, not the spec sheet.

 

Even the 998 is a 21 year old bike at this point. Updated engine, yes, but still a 21 year old design. At this point discussing which is better, the 916, 996 or 998 is pretty academic. They are all dated and severely under-powered by today's standards. If you're looking for one, I hope you are doing so with the same mentality as anyone who is looking for a classic bike. For the bike, not the spec sheet.

The Spec sheet is important to me (or real world power) to a degree. I don't want to buy a bike where I feel as if I am going backwards (from my previous modified RC51 SP2). On the flip side, I don't need much more power than I had in the RC51. Im more interested in riding dynamics, styling and retaining or slightly exceeding what I was used to on that bike.

A good friend of mine owns a 2014 Panigale 1199R which i rode for a bit. And while it is an awesome machine in every respect, the power on that bike is just not usable on the street in Race mode. It is insanely quick and will get me into trouble one way or another. More to the point, I prefer the older bikes as I feel they offer a more rewarding experience as they are not as easy to ride given that they lack traction control and all the other electronic nannies.

 

If you're coming at it from a RC51 point of view and not a new bike point of view, I agree. Thing is, the chassis are the same 916 - 998. Shocks, forks, wheels are easy upgrades and there are models of each that have basic or top of the line suspension and wheels from the factory. Also the used market makes upgrading a basic model suspension and wheels an easy and relativity inexpensive proposition. At this point no one can say one is better than the other in the chassis department because they are all dated and if you find one that is still original, the suspension will be in need of servicing anyway.

Engine character? Again you have to ride them. I feel my 916 is revvier than the 996 engine in my ST4s. It's more fun to ride fast, but the ST has more torque and easy to be lazy on. No idea how a 998 feels.

I remember the RC51 being direct competition to the 996 and later the 998. Back on the old Speedzilla forum, it was often fun to read the Ducati / Honda wars. You'll just have to take a few test rides and decide for yourself. No matter how you slice it, these are older bikes that weren't necessarily the fastest things out there even when new, but neither was the RC51 compared to the I4s of the time.

 

My Desmoquattro experience mirrors Dan's. @58K miles my '95 916 has not required anything but regular service excepting a set of rocker arms. I wouldn't choose a 996 over a 998 to gain reliability. I would choose the 998 to get equivalent power to the RC51.

The 998 and RC51 engines are similar in character. They are equally rev happy (the Testastretta is more rev happy than the Desmoquattro in my experience) and both produce good torque. The RC51 is more civilized, the 998 is rawer. Similarly set up and tuned they produce similar power although the 998 benefits more for being set up (cams degreed, injectors flow matched) and tuned correctly. An improperly setup and tuned 998 is not very impressive.

What I think the 998 has over the RC51 is better handling, but if you put a Dan Kyle link, Ohlins shock and get the forks revalved the RC51 ends up being very close to a properly set up 998.

 

Not counting S, R, or special models...
2002 998 would first choice. Newest, fastest, and has testaretta engine which is a definite improvement over desmoquattro.

2000-01 996 would be next. Five spoke wheels.

1999 996 would would be last of the group, if only because of the three-spokers.

Have to be careful to understand year-by-year changes. Take this rough 996 near me.
Ducati Used Cars Pickup Trucks For Sale Kansas City Quick Stop Motors

It says 2000, but has three-spoke wheels painted in a non-standard color. Makes you wonder why. No one would have sold the five-spokers and replaced with three-spoke. Unless they crashed the bike and just patched it up enough to sell and had to get whatever wheel they could find.

 

Maybe i should clarify, i use my bike everyday, touring, trackdays, nailing it on Europe trips on the Autobahn. Constant high revs are poison to it! But if you are a weekend rider that doesnt care about high speed touring and trackdays, the engines might last a bit longer. What i mean about poor quality is that it cant be kept on high revs and high speeds like any japanese bike can. It will go bang. And i hate that.

 

If you are looking for a decent spec sheet, and still raw power, why not a 1098 or 1198?

 

I loved the riding dynamics of the 748 I owned. Loved the power of the RC. When I bought the 748 I wanted a 996/8, but was not ready for one in regards to rider skill. When I bought the RC I wanted to a 996/8 but my cousin gave me a deal I could not refuse on the RC. So now I'm back to square 1. And based on the comments, a 998 is the bike I would enjoy most between the two. This is a bike I plan to keep for a long time. My next bike won't be a replacement but rather an addition.

I always wanted a 996/998, and I think I will regret springing for a 1098/1198 (as it would mark the 3rd time I did not get the bike I really wanted) and end up picking up a 998 in the future anyway. Some of this is also sentimental value, growing up watching wsbk and all the title's Ducati won with the 916-996-998 series bikes, I always wanted one.

I actually hated the RC and Edwards lol for beating Ducati 2 out of 3 years. Battle at imola always burned. ending up with the RC was ironic. Great bike none the less.