1199 To 899 Swingarm Conversion

25366 Views 36 Replies 18 Participants Last post by JerseyPanigale, 15 d ago

Ttown899

Discussion Starter · Mar 30, 2014

Ok so I've read that it can be done but has anybody seen it done or know of a how to write-up of everything involved? I would love for my 899 to have the single sided swing arm.

I'm just wondering if all the electronics are plug and play. It would be really cool if it was as simple as removing the 899 swing arm and bolting up the 1199.

Let me hear what you guys think and if anybody is working on this now it would be great to see a detailed write-up with pics.

21 - 37 of 37 Posts

ducatichiel

· #21 · Aug 29, 2014

Ah, I'll chech google next time first

And I am still in the process of deciding which bike to buy. But I tend to go for the 899 so it might become a winter project for the future.
Curious to see who is going to do this!

jarelj

· #22 · Aug 29, 2014

MustangWolf said:
Google usually helps with these kinds of questions

1199 wheelbase = 56.6"
899 wheelbase = 56.1"

Supposedly the reason for the "longer" wheelbase of the 1199 is to reduce wheelies with aggressive throttling.

That's the overall wheelbase difference, which is not just the swingam length but also affected by the steeper rake angle on the 899. The actual swingarm from pivot center to axle center in stock configuration is roughly 5mm shorter just measuring it by hand.

MustangWolf

· #23 · Aug 29, 2014

Ahhh! That explains the quicker turn in on the 899. didn't realize that. That justifies the 899 for the roads I ride.

jarelj said:
That's the overall wheelbase difference, which is not just the swingam length but also affected by the steeper rake angle on the 899. The actual swingarm from pivot center to axle center in stock configuration is roughly 5mm shorter just measuring it by hand.

jarelj

· #24 · Aug 29, 2014

MustangWolf said:
Ahhh! That explains the quicker turn in on the 899. didn't realize that. That justifies the 899 for the roads I ride.

Yes it's 24 degree rake on the 899 and 24.5 degree on the 1199's.

ducatichiel

· #25 · Aug 29, 2014

So is it kind of safe to say that the handling will not be compromised by much doing this conversion?

Howard

· #26 · Aug 30, 2014

swingarm

You really don't want to do the exchange because the single-sided swingarm isn't as rigid and its heavier.

chouse34

· #27 · Aug 30, 2014

My thought process was similar until I remembered the SL has a SSSA so it cant be THAT bad hahaha

might be a bit of an "apples to grapes" comparison though

jarelj

· #28 · Aug 30, 2014

ducatichiel said:
So is it kind of safe to say that the handling will not be compromised by much doing this conversion?

I don't think there would be too big of a difference in handling just due to the swingarm, the big difference would be going from a 180/60 rear tire up to a 200/55 rear tire on the 1199 swingarm.

Bunglebubs

· #29 · Aug 30, 2014

It has been done, I saw some photos of one a couple of months ago, but don't recall any comments on how it handled after the conversion.

Sash

· #30 · Sep 6, 2014

Says its heavier here...
7 things you didn't know about Ducati's 899 Panigale - Features - Visordown

Ben888

· #31 · Dec 24, 2018

I’ve just done this conversion as well as taking some measurements. The SSA is indeed LIGHTER by just under 1kg than the DSA. It is 4mm longer measured with both swingarms in their mid point of chain adjustment, in real life of course there is lots of overlap in length depending on your chain adjustments and sprocket size. Fitted with new chain and sprockets it is 3mm SHORTER with the SSA.
The feel in handling with the 200/55 tyre (which has an identical circumference as the 180/60) is very minimal. In fact with the new tyre, the steering was a little quicker than my worn and squared off old 180 tyre.. this is despite being a bit wider. If you have the talent to ride the bike to it’s absolute limit then maybe you could notice, but for fast road and track days I doubt you could tell.
Abs and traction control all work as expected. The whole job is about 1/2 a day with the right tools and torque settings.
If anyone has any questions please shoot me a pm or reply..

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

See less See more

Ben888

· #32 · Dec 24, 2018

Before..

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

See less See more

sinjin

· #33 · Dec 26, 2018

Yours is the first account, out of more than several, that reportedly found the DSS heavier than the SSA. Someone on another forum that I belong to and in a group on Facebook posted mutually exclusive photographs of the scales weighing each of the swing arms demonstrating that the SSA was indeed heavier... as you have already indicated, it is longer and in addition, has to be reinforced to provide support and reduce the amount it flexes. It makes no sense that it is lighter. The weight savings is found to be from the forged wheels.

Ben888

· #34 · Dec 28, 2018

Hi Sinjin

The double swing arm on its own is a bit lighter, but it’s not comparing apples to apples. The double arm does not carry the sprocket or its carrier, it’s all on the rear wheel, unlike the single sided arm. The wheel for the double arm carries substantially more material to fasten the brake disk and sprocket carrier. So if just the double swingarm with the wheel removed is weighed then it will of course be lighter than the single arm carrying those components on it. However, the complete assembly with wheel fitted is slightly heavier than the single sided assembly. This is with the cast 1199 wheel that I’m running. The forged must be quite a bit lighter still. There’s another upgrade on the cards when I can justify the cost! That was my experience, unfortunately I don’t have any photos weighing the complete assemblies to show, but that was what I found.. for what it’s worth...

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Ben888

· #35 · Dec 28, 2018

I forgot to mention that I am running the Renthal light weight sprocket and quick change carrier, so that’s probably saving a little weight on the single sided over a standard setup...

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Ttown899

Discussion Starter · #36 · Jan 13, 2019

Ben888 said:
I’ve just done this conversion as well as taking some measurements. The SSA is indeed LIGHTER by just under 1kg than the DSA. It is 4mm longer measured with both swingarms in their mid point of chain adjustment, in real life of course there is lots of overlap in length depending on your chain adjustments and sprocket size. Fitted with new chain and sprockets it is 3mm SHORTER with the SSA.
The feel in handling with the 200/55 tyre (which has an identical circumference as the 180/60) is very minimal. In fact with the new tyre, the steering was a little quicker than my worn and squared off old 180 tyre.. this is despite being a bit wider. If you have the talent to ride the bike to it’s absolute limit then maybe you could notice, but for fast road and track days I doubt you could tell.
Abs and traction control all work as expected. The whole job is about 1/2 a day with the right tools and torque settings.
If anyone has any questions please shoot me a pm or reply..

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Wow! Its been almost five years since I started this topic and almost a year and a half since I logged into the forum.

Great work! Looks awesome!

JerseyPanigale

· #37 · 15 d ago

Just wondering if the V2 swingarm is a straight swap with the 899 swingarm, I cannot message ben888 directly as not met the minimum requirements yet for private messages ?

21 - 37 of 37 Posts