MT10 test ride

wessie

Registered user
Joined
Jan 8, 2002
Messages
13,059
Reaction score
398
Location
Welshpool
Tracer in for a service so I just spent an hour on a Yamaha MT10. Like almost every other inline 4 I have ridden, it's not my thing. I missed the torque of the triple engine at the first junction.

The R1 derived, crossplane engine makes a lovely burble when you open the throttle at 5000 rpm but after that the wind noise drowns out the engine until you are near the top of the rev range. I didn't use earplugs but any long term owner will want them.

Riding position is not too bad. My knees were happy. Arms less so as you are canted forward more so than the Tracer. Compared to what I'm used to, I felt perched on top of the bike. Bars are not so wide as I am used to so felt narrow to begin with, but I soon got used to the level of steering needed for each turn. Due to the wet conditions I wasn't pushing it hard in corners.

Riding at 50-70 across a twisty B road was fine as far as wind/noise. Accelerating up to over a ton happens very quickly as you would expect. If you ride at this speed often then I would suggest using a fly screen to deflect the air over your head - at an indicated 100mph my helmet visor was trying to make friends with my nose so I didn't go much faster.

Suspension was set on the firm side (no idea if this is the default). This was too firm for the bumpy roads I deliberately selected to be quite representative of my main riding. One bump made me leap out of the saddle to the point where I inadvertently opened the throttle. Not something to be recommended on a 160bhp bike.

The seat is an odd shape. It feels hard when you sit on it and it feels even harder after 40 minutes and by the end of my hour, I just wanted to get off the bike.

Fuelling is very good. At low revs the bike is a pussycat. My perception is the bike is not going anywhere but that is because my brain is calibrated for big twins & triples and I expect the initial take off to be a bit jerky and maybe needing some clutch slippage. People who go the other way complain big twins & triples are lumpy or jerky.

I tried all of the power modes but defaulted back to the middle one. I didn't alter the TCS from the default as the roads were quite damp in places and pissing with rain elsewhere. The air in your face is an advantage in the rain as it keeps your visor clear.

I went around the Gloucester North bypass and the bike is a pussycat in traffic. You might get fed up with the leant forward riding position if you do lots of urban miles.

Mirrors are straight off the Tracer so work for me but others may fill them with elbows. There's an annoying white LED on the dash - seems to be like the Eco thing on the Tracer which encourages you to change up - it's not linked to revs. I would want to turn it off or fit some tape over it.

So, the funny crank hasn't changed my mind about inline fours. They just don't float my boat. The seat is a major disappointment and will cause many threads on forums and create business for Bagster etc.

I won't be going back to test the bike in better weather.
 
I will be test riding one of these next week. I find the triple MT09 just a buzzy as a four TBH. Everyone I know that has ridden the MT10 says the seat is hard and the first change they would make is fitting the comfort seat option or going for a corbin etc.

I think the crossplane engine sounds great, even without a fruity pipe.
 
Tracer in for a service so I just spent an hour on a Yamaha MT10. Like almost every other inline 4 I have ridden, it's not my thing. I missed the torque of the triple engine at the first junction.

The R1 derived, crossplane engine makes a lovely burble when you open the throttle at 5000 rpm but after that the wind noise drowns out the engine until you are near the top of the rev range. I didn't use earplugs but any long term owner will want them.

Riding position is not too bad. My knees were happy. Arms less so as you are canted forward more so than the Tracer. Compared to what I'm used to, I felt perched on top of the bike. Bars are not so wide as I am used to so felt narrow to begin with, but I soon got used to the level of steering needed for each turn. Due to the wet conditions I wasn't pushing it hard in corners.

Riding at 50-70 across a twisty B road was fine as far as wind/noise. Accelerating up to over a ton happens very quickly as you would expect. If you ride at this speed often then I would suggest using a fly screen to deflect the air over your head - at an indicated 100mph my helmet visor was trying to make friends with my nose so I didn't go much faster.

Suspension was set on the firm side (no idea if this is the default). This was too firm for the bumpy roads I deliberately selected to be quite representative of my main riding. One bump made me leap out of the saddle to the point where I inadvertently opened the throttle. Not something to be recommended on a 160bhp bike.

The seat is an odd shape. It feels hard when you sit on it and it feels even harder after 40 minutes and by the end of my hour, I just wanted to get off the bike.

Fuelling is very good. At low revs the bike is a pussycat. My perception is the bike is not going anywhere but that is because my brain is calibrated for big twins & triples and I expect the initial take off to be a bit jerky and maybe needing some clutch slippage. People who go the other way complain big twins & triples are lumpy or jerky.

I tried all of the power modes but defaulted back to the middle one. I didn't alter the TCS from the default as the roads were quite damp in places and pissing with rain elsewhere. The air in your face is an advantage in the rain as it keeps your visor clear.

I went around the Gloucester North bypass and the bike is a pussycat in traffic. You might get fed up with the leant forward riding position if you do lots of urban miles.

Mirrors are straight off the Tracer so work for me but others may fill them with elbows. There's an annoying white LED on the dash - seems to be like the Eco thing on the Tracer which encourages you to change up - it's not linked to revs. I would want to turn it off or fit some tape over it.

So, the funny crank hasn't changed my mind about inline fours. They just don't float my boat. The seat is a major disappointment and will cause many threads on forums and create business for Bagster etc.

I won't be going back to test the bike in better weather.

I will be test riding one of these next week. I find the triple MT09 just a buzzy as a four TBH. Everyone I know that has ridden the MT10 says the seat is hard and the first change they would make is fitting the comfort seat option or going for a corbin etc.

I think the crossplane engine sounds great, even without a fruity pipe.

Well I've just tried the MT-10 last Saturday and immediately went back and ordered one.Good job I did as my dealer only had one unsold and an hour later a ditherer phoned up to say he wanted it !! I hear they are now sold out until at least September.

It's obviously horses for courses as I tried the Tracer when they came out and didn't think much of it at all.

But the MT-10 was stunning.

Wessie,I'm struggling to find how you 'missed the torque of the triple at the first junction ' ??

The MT-10 has so much more pull than the Tracer.The R1 never had manic mid-range but the MT-10 has been retuned for such and the torque is superb.I see official torque stats quote the MT-10 has having 111 Nm at 9000rpm and the Tracer only has 87.5 at 8500rpm !

The MT-10 also has 45 more bhp and an identical wet weight of 210kgs !

I agree with you about the screen and the seat but I've ordered the optional comfort seat and screen which should solve that.

I think Yamaha have been quite clever.They've kept the base price down (£9999 in UK) yet have accessories that will turn it into a Tracer 1000 very easily and relatively cost-effectively.

 
I do love the look of the XSR900 but I've never ridden one, yet, and I'd probably want a bigger tank.
I nearly said I'd never ridden a triple but I have - when Jack Gow, from Dundee, had an open day on a Wednesday afternoon when I was still a student and I took a Trident round Knockhill and the clutch cable broke on my at 90mph heading for a bend. Now that was interesting!!!!
The XSR900 is a bit newer in the power and technology stakes!
 
I do love the look of the XSR900 but I've never ridden one, yet, and I'd probably want a bigger tank.
I nearly said I'd never ridden a triple but I have - when Jack Gow, from Dundee, had an open day on a Wednesday afternoon when I was still a student and I took a Trident round Knockhill and the clutch cable broke on my at 90mph heading for a bend. Now that was interesting!!!!
The XSR900 is a bit newer in the power and technology stakes!

But what does this have to do with the MT-10 ?


Sent from my iPad using Twattybollox
 
Nothing, really but it's also a big engined Yamaha!
Close enough link or too tangential?
 
Nothing, really but it's also a big engined Yamaha!
Close enough link or too tangential?

I'll let you off !! The XSR900 does look quite good,especially in the Kenny R speedblock limited edition paint.But I think it's more of a Sunday blaster.
The nice thing with the MT-10 is that it's also one for sunny Sunday's,but with screen,panniers and better seat,it'll tour quite well.

It can be returned to standard very quickly if you don't want to leave the screen and pannier rails on all the time.

Shame they didn't also offer it in Kenny R colours !!


Sent from my iPad using Twattybollox
 
Apparently all the XSR900's in the yellow are now in the country, though you could still swap the side panels, just wouldn't have gold fork legs.
 
I'll let you off !! The XSR900 does look quite good,especially in the Kenny R speedblock limited edition paint.But I think it's more of a Sunday blaster.
The nice thing with the MT-10 is that it's also one for sunny Sunday's,but with screen,panniers and better seat,it'll tour quite well.

It can be returned to standard very quickly if you don't want to leave the screen and pannier rails on all the time.

Shame they didn't also offer it in Kenny R colours !!


Sent from my iPad using Twattybollox

I'm sure the MT10 is a great bike but the XSR900, in King Kenny speedblock colour scheme, is different by paint and it's also a triple. I don't have a triple. I have singles and twins; chain, belt and shaft drives; left and right foot kickstarts; old and new. I like different and that's partly why the triple appeals. Of course I could just be losing it and talking pish! :thumb
 
I rode the XSR on Saturday and prefer my (now sold) old 63 plate MT-09. Seems to have lost some of its punch / attitude, perhaps the throttle maps are different now.

Rode the MT-10 and absolutely loved it. The gearing is so much better for the road than on the S1000R and the engine is fantastic. It wheelies off the throttle in the first 3 gears and you can have fun going through the gears, whereas i found the Sthou didn't really want to get out of 2nd on twisty stuff due to speed. The S1000R feels better made, more quality and a better / more comfortable ride. I felt the suspension was much better on the BMW too. That said, Ive got a bike to sell, but i definitely want the MT-10 over the S1000R now. It has bags of character and that engine will sound insane with the appropriate exhaust. Im being hounded by yamaha who have the grey / flouro one coming early July but haven't got my ducks in a row yet.

 
I had three ducks once, very briefly until a fox ate them! I couldn't them them to go in a row either!
That's ducks for you.
 
I had three ducks once, very briefly until a fox ate them! I couldn't them them to go in a row either!
That's ducks for you.

The English contingent have Edvard Munch and Bendy Toy, a surrealist and a practitioner of the non sequitur. As usual, Scotland goes one better and you manage to roll both roles into one.....:thumb
 
Perhaps torque was the wrong word to use.

The torque is undoubtedly there (but peak torque comparisons are not really relevant to the point I was making) but after talking this through with a racer friend, it's the nature of the low speed power delivery of the triple that I prefer.
 
Parts bin special: Look at all those matte plastic panels covering up ugly bits the lack of fairing has exposed. Do those headlights actually do any good at night or do bikers not go out at night anymore...?

Tracer or XSR every time....IF I were changing.

:beerjug:
 
Well I've just tried the MT-10 last Saturday and immediately went back and ordered one.Good job I did as my dealer only had one unsold and an hour later a ditherer phoned up to say he wanted it !! I hear they are now sold out until at least September.

It's obviously horses for courses as I tried the Tracer when they came out and didn't think much of it at all.

But the MT-10 was stunning.

Wessie,I'm struggling to find how you 'missed the torque of the triple at the first junction ' ??

The MT-10 has so much more pull than the Tracer.The R1 never had manic mid-range but the MT-10 has been retuned for such and the torque is superb.I see official torque stats quote the MT-10 has having 111 Nm at 9000rpm and the Tracer only has 87.5 at 8500rpm !

The MT-10 also has 45 more bhp and an identical wet weight of 210kgs !

I agree with you about the screen and the seat but I've ordered the optional comfort seat and screen which should solve that.

I think Yamaha have been quite clever.They've kept the base price down (£9999 in UK) yet have accessories that will turn it into a Tracer 1000 very easily and relatively cost-effectively.


I think he means low down torque . The great thing about the tracer is its so light
 
Parts bin special: Look at all those matte plastic panels covering up ugly bits the lack of fairing has exposed. Do those headlights actually do any good at night or do bikers not go out at night anymore...?

Tracer or XSR every time....IF I were changing.

:beerjug:

The headlights are LED. Those matte panels on the MT-10 are part of that colours scheme i think. The grey one is different (looks better to me)
 

Attachments

  • 2016-Yamaha-MT-10-09.jpg
    2016-Yamaha-MT-10-09.jpg
    43.4 KB · Views: 559


Back
Top Bottom