MOTOKIYAS.

Motorcycles › Compare

Kawasaki Ninja ZX-10R vs Yamaha MT-09

ESTIMATED SIMULATION

Run the comparison →

The Kawasaki Ninja ZX-10R (2026) and the Yamaha MT-09 (2025) are compared with the same Moto Kıyas physics model under identical conditions: flat dry asphalt, no wind, a 75 kg rider and no passenger. The Kawasaki Ninja ZX-10R is a sport bike with 998 cc, 193.1 hp and 209 kg; the Yamaha MT-09 is a naked bike with 890 cc, 117.3 hp and 193 kg. Power-to-weight with the rider: 680.0 hp/ton versus 437.8 hp/ton. On this measure the Kawasaki Ninja ZX-10R is 55% ahead.

In the simulation the Kawasaki Ninja ZX-10R covers 0-100 km/h (speedometer) in 3.16 s and the Yamaha MT-09 in 3.11 s; the Yamaha MT-09 is quicker by 0.05 s. In the 100-0 km/h brake test, braking distance without the 0.3 s reaction time is 36.4 m for the Kawasaki Ninja ZX-10R (with ABS) and 48.0 m for the Yamaha MT-09 (ABS unknown, class assumption: no ABS). The Kawasaki Ninja ZX-10R stops 11.6 m shorter. Calculated top speed: 286 km/h (manufacturer claim) versus 199 km/h (manufacturer claim).

All values are an estimated simulation, not road-test measurements. Technical data comes from the sources listed below; the model uses model-specific parameters calibrated against published road tests for both. Open the interactive app (currently in Turkish) to watch the run side by side and change the load.

Estimated simulationKawasaki Ninja ZX-10RYamaha MT-09
Classsport bikenaked bike
Engine998 cc890 cc
Power193.1 hp117.3 hp
Wet weight209 kg193 kg
Power-to-weight (75 kg rider)680.0 hp/ton437.8 hp/ton
0-100 km/h (speedometer)3.16 s3.11 s
100-0 km/h braking distance36.4 m48.0 m
Top speed (calc.)286 km/h199 km/h

Data sources and calibration

Specifications: the sources below (manufacturer pages, plus road-test or spec sites where the manufacturer gives no figure). Acceleration, braking and top speed: Moto Kıyas physics simulation (power/torque curve, gearing, drag, traction and wheelie limits, ABS assumption), calibrated against published road tests where available. Estimated, not measured.

More comparisons