Nightflight
New member
A fairly comprehensive review and test with a conclusive result.
MT07 vs MT09 review on bikerglory
- Thread starter Nightflight
- Start date
goloso_b
New member
A great read. I haven't tested the MT-09, but their ideas about the MT-07 and the Street Triple match my experience with these two bikes.
After testing both of them, I got the MT-07 because it was more fun at low speeds.
After testing both of them, I got the MT-07 because it was more fun at low speeds.
amavro
New member
After 3 months of ownership I rode mt-09 inside town and on b mode .loved the sound of it but it was harder to drive in traffic due to the wider size (vs 745mm ) and couldn't feel something more in terms of acceleration at least till 80kph ..
Of course after 80kph the acceleration was staggering and I was flying ...
Both are fun bikes but on my case I think for commuting my-07 suits better .
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Of course after 80kph the acceleration was staggering and I was flying ...
Both are fun bikes but on my case I think for commuting my-07 suits better .
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
amavro
New member
What was the reason John69 ? ,seating position ? , brakes ?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
mt07 vs mt09
hi amavro, main reason suspension on the mt 09 in my opinion is like a pogo stick the bike never feels planted i know its budget suspension but its poor,where's the mt 07 feels way better and has a much better balance it goes where you point it, iam no expert on road bikes i've rode motocross most of my life but thats my opinion
Nuggets
Member
I tested the mt-09 whilst my 07 was getting first service, I agree with John69 the MT-09 felt less planted, I also noticed it wanted to turn in really quick and sometimes I found myself having to compensate because it was steering in quicker than I would expect, and the big bug bear of most who ride one ......the fuelling is crap, although there is a ECU mod now, there is a guy in Australia who has come up with a further solution which involves plugging a box inline with the lambda to change the closed circuit fuelling behaviour which contributes to all that horrible jerkiness, my personal opinion is the mt-07 is a belter and more than enough fun.
DeadHead
Member
I just borrowed an MT-09 for the day while the 07 for in for some warranty work. I covered 120/130 miles all county roads and I had a blast!
Would I buy one..YES
Is it better than the MT-07..YES...
Is it more fun than an MT-07..NO...both bikes are brilliant with max fun from either
It is more comfortable than the MT-07..NO..right hand went numb, has this supermoto kind of seating position - I did love it.
Is the seat better..YES...more grip, thicker and softer.
Are the brakes better..YES, much better..they are Awesome.
Is the suspension better..Hell YES....much better over the bumps. Did feel a little flighty when pushing hard.
Fuel consumption..NO but not by much..I got 53mpg(UK) on a bike that was just days on and only 50miles on the clock.
A good commuter bike..YES but no better than the MT-07..it has wide bars but it makes no difference to filtering.
Better Handling..YES, I personally felt this was the biggest leap for me, i could throw the bike into corners much easier than the 07.
Power..YES..bit obvious really....she pulls much harder than the little sister, particularly when you hit higher revs.
Fuelling..MT-09 has 3 modes.. gives you a soft throttle response ideal for wet weather riding[STD] is your everyday mode that the bike reverts to when you switch it off [A] gives you a Sensitive throttle , this was fab on more spirited riding with no play in the throttle. [A] mode has it's place and is fun just not for everyday riding as I found when I tried to navigate a gravel infested country road which required more delicate throttling, it just wasn't possible in [A] mode. Not better or worse than the 07 just different with options.
If I only had room for one bike or the money for one bike the MT-09 would be it...
After riding the 09 all day the 07 felt positively small in comparison.
Would I buy one..YES
Is it better than the MT-07..YES...
Is it more fun than an MT-07..NO...both bikes are brilliant with max fun from either
It is more comfortable than the MT-07..NO..right hand went numb, has this supermoto kind of seating position - I did love it.
Is the seat better..YES...more grip, thicker and softer.
Are the brakes better..YES, much better..they are Awesome.
Is the suspension better..Hell YES....much better over the bumps. Did feel a little flighty when pushing hard.
Fuel consumption..NO but not by much..I got 53mpg(UK) on a bike that was just days on and only 50miles on the clock.
A good commuter bike..YES but no better than the MT-07..it has wide bars but it makes no difference to filtering.
Better Handling..YES, I personally felt this was the biggest leap for me, i could throw the bike into corners much easier than the 07.
Power..YES..bit obvious really....she pulls much harder than the little sister, particularly when you hit higher revs.
Fuelling..MT-09 has 3 modes.. gives you a soft throttle response ideal for wet weather riding[STD] is your everyday mode that the bike reverts to when you switch it off [A] gives you a Sensitive throttle , this was fab on more spirited riding with no play in the throttle. [A] mode has it's place and is fun just not for everyday riding as I found when I tried to navigate a gravel infested country road which required more delicate throttling, it just wasn't possible in [A] mode. Not better or worse than the 07 just different with options.
If I only had room for one bike or the money for one bike the MT-09 would be it...
After riding the 09 all day the 07 felt positively small in comparison.
amavro
New member
Excellent review .
Mt-07 is 745 mm wide vs 815 of mt-09 but the mt-07 mirrors are almost 815 ..so this proves your point about filtering .
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Mt-07 is 745 mm wide vs 815 of mt-09 but the mt-07 mirrors are almost 815 ..so this proves your point about filtering .
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
shadowmonkey
New member
Having read that review, I was intrigued by the 160 profile of the rear tyre instead of 180. Would this actually be better and would you have to change the wheel?
D
Deleted member 20
Guest
Yes a 160/60 ZR 17 rear like I have on the TDM900 and had on the XJ6 would have been better fit for the MT07.
But the MT07 rim is to wide at 5½", the TDM900 rim is 5". Both have 3½" front rims and 120/70 tires
But the MT07 rim is to wide at 5½", the TDM900 rim is 5". Both have 3½" front rims and 120/70 tires
As I keep saying. This bike needs a 160/60 on the rear. More correct matching of weight and power. Unfortunately Yamaha insists on putting oversize rear rims on it bikes. All round ( pun) extra weight for NOTHING except style. Even the Yzfr125 has a 3.5" rim and a 130/70 rear tyre ( 11HP and 110kg only needs a 100/70) which makes it almost uncompetitive in the Commuterlite class as the rear tyre is TWICE the weight of the cbr125). Japanese Manga styling. Big fat low profile rear tyre and ridiculous unaerodynamic styling.
A 170/60 will fit the MT and so will a 160/60 but it si a little more complicated than that. Without changing rims the wider rim will allow the bead of the tyre to expand outwards. The exact amount is a fraction of the increase of the rim width depending on the profile of the tyre. A one inch rim width increase will make a 160/60 almost a 168/58 off the top of my head. A 170/60 will become a 170/63 very roughly. The will weight less though and the former a lot less. Their rolling radius will also decease so if you have ABS , depending on the software difference calculation method , it may produce an ABS error. In time if I can find a 4.5" rim , the MT will get one.
By the way, the Australian on only has 50hp. Really only needs a 140 or a 150, so could be even lighter.
IF they bring out an adventure version of the MT07 like everyone seems to do at the moment, if we are very lucky it MAY have a smaller rear rim that could fit....hope, hope, hope...
A 170/60 will fit the MT and so will a 160/60 but it si a little more complicated than that. Without changing rims the wider rim will allow the bead of the tyre to expand outwards. The exact amount is a fraction of the increase of the rim width depending on the profile of the tyre. A one inch rim width increase will make a 160/60 almost a 168/58 off the top of my head. A 170/60 will become a 170/63 very roughly. The will weight less though and the former a lot less. Their rolling radius will also decease so if you have ABS , depending on the software difference calculation method , it may produce an ABS error. In time if I can find a 4.5" rim , the MT will get one.
By the way, the Australian on only has 50hp. Really only needs a 140 or a 150, so could be even lighter.
IF they bring out an adventure version of the MT07 like everyone seems to do at the moment, if we are very lucky it MAY have a smaller rear rim that could fit....hope, hope, hope...
It's funny... Almost every other bike I've ridden (while the internet existed), people usually complain that the rear wheel won't fit the larger tire they would like (mainly for cosmetic reasons). I agree with most of the posts here that the wider tire is not necessarily better, but just wanted to interject that the manufacturers are in a no-win situation, and I think Yamaha has made a reasonable trade-off. Maybe it's a little wider than would be "track optimum". but it still handles quite well for hooligan shenanigans!
That's because most people think wider equals better grip and handling. That is NOT the case with a motorcycle that leans. The right size profile for weight, power, torque, engine pulse at the rear wheel, and riding style are what is important. On a car wider is basically better on a motorcycle right is better. That plus wider means heavier on the part of a motorcycle that needs it the least. PLUS wider the more expensive. Why would you want to pay for more tyre than you need . Ok pose value maybe , but then you would be better off with a cruiser.
Wider on this bike would be track less optimium. On the Euro models I am guessing without having had it on a track, a 170/60 or 160/60 would be WAY better. On the 50hp Aussie models a 150/70, or even a 140/70, would almost certainly be better. Better profile leaned over and weigh a lot less. How wide do you think a motogp tyre is? And they have 200hp.