air cooled vs liquid cooled? ducati monster... | GTAMotorcycle.com

air cooled vs liquid cooled? ducati monster...

motoride777

Well-known member
hi there, so i really like the monster 1100 evo (air cooled), and monster 1200 (liquid cooled). is it correct to assume that the air cooled monster is more reliable because it has less parts than the monster 1200? less parts = less things that can potentially go wrong right?

and, i'm guessing that the 1100 evo will run hotter than the 1200??? but even if it gets stuck in grid lock traffic, the motor won't get so hot it breaks down, right?
 
Last edited:
While I'm not up to speed on the particulars of those two specific engines ...

There is good reason behind almost all bike engines going to liquid cooling nowadays (and the auto industry switched decades ago). Even BMW flat-twins and Harley V-twins are heading in that direction. (H-D has a new engine that is partial air and liquid cooling - it has cooling channels in the cylinder heads and a subtle radiator tucked away in the bodywork)

It's true that the air cooled engine is simpler in the "stone-ax complexity" department. If you are going on a trip through undeveloped areas with no spare parts availability and no availability of professional mechanics, there is something to be said for an engine that has fewer parts and which theoretically can be fixed using only hand tools.

But for the rest of us ... Liquid cooling allows internal tolerances to be tightened up. It means the oil temperatures and cylinder head temperatures can be controlled to a tighter range so that it won't be as tough on the oil and the mechanical parts. The tighter tolerances mean less leakage past the piston rings which mean less oil contamination and that means longer oil change intervals. The tighter piston to cylinder clearances mean less mechanical noise - and less piston and cylinder wear. Controlling cylinder head temperature and evening-out the hot spots means less tendency for detonation, so the liquid cooled engine can run higher compression and make more power.

The liquid cooled engine is a more modern beast ... but that air-cooled engine was a development of a basic engine design that Ducati built for a couple of decades. They know the bike is going to get stuck in traffic.

Both bikes will get the job done. The 1200 will make more power. If you plan to keep the bike for a long time, go with the liquid cooled engine. Besides the liquid cooling, it's also a more modern engine design; the liquid cooling wasn't the only change that was made. 'Course, it's gonna cost more. Your choice ...
 
Brain P; all that you say is true. However, I will only counter by saying that I've owned my share of modern liquid-cooled beasts, and "stone axe reliable" air-cooled beasts. In my experience, the air-cooled motorcycles were always the least amount of trouble. They also don't puke fluid in the hot summer while idling at a red light. I'm not saying that there's anything wrong with liquid cooling, but for me, it's an unnecessary level of complexity that I simply don't need. The two hottest running motors that I've ever experienced were my SV1000S and my K1200RS... I guess those animals needed liquid cooling!
 
Oil cooled has a certain nostalgia about it. When I bought my bike, I was looking specifically for an 88-89 GSX-R 750 short stroke. I ride up in farm town a lot and it's fine and dandy for that. but heavy city traffic has me starting and stopping the motor quite a bit. It's for good measure. You can really feel the heat building up. An electric fan can always be retrofitted. But this is late 90's technology. Then again, there's a reason why my oiler takes 4.3 litres.
 
The air cooled Duc has a small advantage over other AC V twins as the engine is configured more like an L , so the back cylinder gets more air flow. Canting the engine forward puts the back cylinder up into the air and even sitting still it doesn't get the blow past of a steaming head directly in front. That said the LC engine is more modern in many respects and I'd lean that way. I have owned both and still have an AC Duc in the shed, I'd own another but if LC was an option I'd go with it.
 
You are trying to compare apples and avocados here.
The 1100 Evo is an air cooled 2 valve 100 hp old school sweet heart with a slightly more aggressive seating position and hooligan like characteristics. Yes, it will run hot in traffic but the engines are designed to take it.
The new 1200 is a liquid cooled 4 valve 135+ hp, twin plug, ride by wire child of the electronica techno wizardry new world order complete with TFT colour display and three ride modes. Ducati claims it runs cooler then other models but when you're in stuck in traffic hot is hot for any rider.

The Evo will cost less to purchase as well as to maintain. Oil changes every 12000 km's and valve services at 24000 km's.
The new 1200 will cost more to purchase but pushes those services to 15000 and 30000 respectively. However, four valves do cost more as you've noted for they are far more complex engines.

If you're looking to purchase you should be less concerned about the heat and more about which of these two great bikes would better serve your riding style, ability and bank account.
 

Back
Top Bottom