MT09 first ride with MCN


Yeah, it does look like a great bike. I might even be tempted by it if I were in the market for a new bike :slight_smile:

Couldn’t open the link, but looked at official vid - obviously just being marketed to the boys stylistically, but no matter. Am sure someone will explain why I’m wrong, but I’d rather have Street Triple R.

Aren’t all bikes?

I make you right Ally

Yamaha trying to claw back some of its lost market to Triumph

What’s the attraction of three cylinders? - I know Triumph have made it their trademark and Yamaha want some of Triumph’s market share by building a similar bike - but surely you only need to come up with something that handles the same, has a similar physical profile, power delivery etc - surely you don’t need to go the extra mile and come up with an engine with 3 cylinders?

If the Triumph target bike was a v-twin - then it would seem less strange to see Yamaha come up with a v-twin powered competitor - but building a three cylinder just because Triumph’s have them? Why not stick with an existing Yamaha IL4?

I’ve never had a triple - so I’m guessing there must be something special (like with a v-twin) about the three cylinder engine and the way it makes power etc that meant Yamaha just had to come up with their own triple engine competitor.

As for the MT-09 - obviously a lovely bike that no one in their right mind would turn their nose up at - but the styling is a bit bland.

from what I’ve heard, the 3 is the benefits from a Vtwin and IL4 together.

looks better than the str3

Three is between two and four :smiley:

Seriously though, once you’ve ridden 1, 2, 3 and 4 cylinder bikes that’ll make sense.

well lumpy with great torque but don’t even think about trying to rev the nuts off thema bit smother and slightly more revy, still bags of torque, especially if it’s a V
even smoother and more revy, still plenty of torqueeven smoother and seriously more revy, (well my R6 is anyway), with superb power at higher revs though
Also weight as well as cost of servicing can, in many cases,
be roughly proportional to the number of cylinders.

The arguments for the MT09 (which is obviously competing with
the street triple) has to be it’s nearly £1000 cheaper!
It is also slightly more powerful.

For the Triumph… it’s British :cool:

Most importantly both bikes are about the same sensible weight.

I’d have to take both for a good test ride before I could say which is best.

And Yamaha have made triples before, the XS750 and 850 are two I can remember.

Triples have the low down torque lacking in some IL4’s. Everyone should try one as they are awesome to ride.

Good to see MCN finally doing a decent review video. Also interesting to note their gripes with the bike were a slight lack of front end feel and a slightly snatchy ride-by-wire throttle at low speed.

From my experience with Yamaha’s I would like to think that the front end issue might be dialled out by a bit of suspension tweaking and the low speed snatchy throttle by dropping a front cog on the gearing.

The bike looks much better than in the official (very dark) promo. Looking forward to seeing one in the flesh…I may well be tempted at that price. :slight_smile:

Yes - I see what you guys are getting at regarding the performance characteristics of a triple - I can get my head round the differences between singles, twins and IL4s and why they exist - I just haven’t really got my head round what makes a triple so distinctive.

I rode a speed triple once - but not for long and far enough to really appreciate the triple thing.

I really like the look of it, well all except that rear end, that just looks wrong to me.

A very simplist way a looking at cyclinders is more cyclinders = more power.

However it is more complicated, involving primary and secondary balance, and loads of other factors. More cyclinders allows you scale the power more effectivity, less vibration, engine is less stressed.

I’ve watch this later, It’ll be interesting so see where else this engine gets used.

i like the look of it, i reckon a year or two to iron out the rough bits and it will be a winner:)

I think the Triumph thing is only part of the reason this is a 900 triple. I seem to remember reading somewhere that this is a modular engine, so by lopping off cylinders they can have a 300cc ish single or 600 twin, with lower manufacturing costs as there’s more components shared. The smaller sizes are clearly useable in scooters and small bikes, but would also give them a 1,200 cc four for use in an eventual FJR replacement. In the same way, the ER-6 motor is a modular version of the ZX-12R and subsequent big Kawasakis.

I like the idea of this alot bar the absurdly small fuel tank. I commute 50 miles a day and I don’t want to be going to the petrol station every second day, I need more range!

Did they say what the fuel efficiency is, that was apparently one the design goals to make it as frugal as possible.

does anyone else think the air intakes on the side of the tank make it look like a Vmax?


Triples rock, but if the throttle is snatchy its not going to be much fun around town (unless you like the smell of clutch)

Not sure about the vague front end… in the video it tips forward and back like a supermoto in the corners. A lot of travel (137mm according to the specs) and too soft.

I think it would take an R version to get me consider trading in the street triple.

Whatever you think of its looks … at least its an interesting new like, a brand new 800 engine that should be a peach (unlike the Honda 700 - ie half a jazz engine) and you get a lot for your money.

All credit to Yamaha :smooooth: