Ducati to resurrect its Scrambler in 2015

The Italian manufacturer announced plans to launch a new Scrambler in 2015, over 40 years after the last model in the range left the factory.

Ducati-is-teasing-the-arrival-of-a-mysterious-new-Scrambler-in-2015-Photo-AFP
Ducati-is-teasing-the-arrival-of-a-mysterious-new-Scrambler-in-2015-Photo-AFP

The Italian manufacturer announced plans to launch a new Scrambler in 2015, over 40 years after the last model in the range left the factory. Ducati is expected to premiere this new, vintage-inspired motorcycle at Intermot next October.

Before revealing details on the characteristics of the new Scrambler, the Italian manufacturer has created a dedicated website. For the time being, Scramblerducati.com features only a short video on the project, ending with the outline of a new retro-style bike with wide handlebars.

Trending Cars

Find more Cars

So far, only a handful of Ducati insiders have laid eyes on the first prototype of the revived Scrambler. The new model could make its debut at Intermot, which takes place October 1-5 in Cologne.

Vintage-inspired designs have become a trend in the motorcycle industry in recent years, as exemplified by models such as the BMW R nineT and the Moto Guzzi V7.

Originally, Scrambler was the name given to a line of motorcycles with engines from 250cc to 450cc produced by Ducati from 1962 to 1974, primarily for the North American market.

Get insights into Upcoming Cars In India, Electric Vehicles, Upcoming Bikes in India and cutting-edge technology transforming the automotive landscape.

First Published Date: 11 Jun 2014, 17:43 pm IST
NEXT ARTICLE BEGINS

Check Latest Offers

Please provide your details to get Personalized Offers

Choose city
+91 | Choose city
Choose city
Select a dealer

Want to get the best price for your existing car?

Powered by: Spinny Logo
By clicking "View Offers" you Agree to our Terms and Privacy Policy
Dear Name

Please verify your mobile number.

+91 | Choose city
Couldn't verify the OTP.
It's either expired or it's incorrect.