Yamaha XJ6 2009 vs. Yamaha MT-07 2016
Yamaha XJ6 2009
Yamaha MT-07 2016
Overview - Yamaha XJ6 2009 vs Yamaha MT-07 2016
The Yamaha XJ6 2009 and the Yamaha MT-07 2016 are both naked bikes with similar technical specifications. However, there are some notable differences between the two models.
In terms of engine power, the Yamaha XJ6 2009 has a slightly higher output with 78 HP compared to the Yamaha MT-07 2016's 75 HP. The XJ6 also has a higher torque of 59.7 Nm compared to the MT-07's 68 Nm. However, the MT-07 has a larger displacement of 689 ccm compared to the XJ6's 600 ccm. Both bikes have liquid cooling and a steel frame.
Yamaha XJ6 2009
Both bikes feature a telescopic fork front suspension and double disk front brakes. They also have the same front and rear tire diameter of 17 inches. However, there are differences in other dimensions and weights. The Yamaha XJ6 2009 has a longer wheelbase of 1440 mm compared to the MT-07's 1400 mm. The seat height of the XJ6 is also lower at 785 mm compared to the MT-07's 805 mm. Additionally, the XJ6 has a larger fuel tank capacity of 17.3 liters compared to the MT-07's 14 liters.
In terms of strengths, the Yamaha XJ6 2009 is praised for its rider-friendly performance characteristics, optimal clutch, playful and lighter handling, comfortable seating position, and high-quality build. It also has an individual and aggressive look that appeals to younger riders.
On the other hand, the Yamaha MT-07 2016 is commended for its very agile engine, very easy handling, low weight, powerful brakes, comfortable seating position, and extensive and easy-to-read display. It also has an aggressively angular look and a throaty sound that adds to its appeal.
Yamaha MT-07 2016
However, both bikes have their weaknesses as well. The Yamaha XJ6 2009 is criticized for its design components not being too demanding and its torque development. On the other hand, the Yamaha MT-07 2016 has a chassis that is considered a little soft, footrests that can drag easily, and some cheap plastic parts. The telescopic fork on the MT-07 is also described as boring.
In conclusion, the Yamaha XJ6 2009 and the Yamaha MT-07 2016 are both solid naked bikes with their own strengths and weaknesses. The XJ6 offers a more powerful engine and a larger fuel tank capacity, while the MT-07 boasts a larger displacement and a more agile engine. Ultimately, the choice between the two would depend on the rider's preferences and priorities.
Technical Specifications Yamaha XJ6 2009 compared to Yamaha MT-07 2016
Pros and Cons in comparison
Pros and Cons in comparison
Yamaha XJ6 2009
Despite the common basis, the XJ appears much younger and more aggressive. A mid-cass motorbike that by no means makes you feel mid-range. Except for the swingarm, the motorbike appears quite high-quality and cool. The bike is a little easier to handle than the Diversion.
Yamaha MT-07 2016
The MT-07 is an incredible fun machine that is extremely sporty to ride. The brakes pack a punch, the handling is superb and the engine is currently by far the most agile powerplant in this class - and even above.
Price Comparison Avarage Market Price Yamaha XJ6 vs Yamaha MT-07
There are a few key differences between a Yamaha XJ6 2009 and a Yamaha MT-07 2016. In terms of price, the actual average price of a Yamaha MT-07 2016 is about 45% higher. A Yamaha XJ6 2009 experiences a loss of 210 GBP in one year and 20 GBP in two years of ownership. This is offset by a loss of 390 GBP and 720 GBP for a Yamaha MT-07 2016. Compared to Yamaha MT-07 2016 there are less Yamaha XJ6 2009 bikes available on the 1000PS.de Marketplace, specifically 6 compared to 24. It takes less time to sell a Yamaha XJ6 with 31 days compared to 51 days for a Yamaha MT-07. Since model year 2009 1000PS.de editors have written 4 reviews for the Yamaha XJ6 and 69 reviews for the Yamaha MT-07 since model year 2013. The first review for the Yamaha XJ6 was published on 13/11/2008 and now has more than 21,900 views. This compares to more than 12,600 views for the first review on Yamaha MT-07 published on 04/11/2013.
