1987 Yamaha SR 500 vs 2009 Yamaha YZF-R6

Full specifications comparison • 2 motorcycles

Comparing 2 motorcycles
1987 Yamaha SR 500 1987 Yamaha SR 500

Naked bike

Engine
Four stroke, single cylinder, SOHC, 2 valves per cylinder.
Power
31.5 hp / 23.5 kW @ 6500 rpm
Top Speed
95 mph / 152.8 km/h
Weight
173 kg / 381.4 lbs
2009 Yamaha YZF-R6 2009 Yamaha YZF-R6

Naked bike

Engine
In-line four
Power
N/A
Top Speed
N/A
Weight
414.0 pounds
Full Specifications
General
Year1984 - 87-
Colours-Vivid Orange/Raven, Team Yamaha Blue/White, Raven
Make ModelYamaha SR 500-
Dimensions
Seat Height810 mm / 32 in851 mm / 33.5 in.
Wheelbase1405 mm / 55.3 in1,379 mm / 54.3 in.
Height1155 mm / 45.5 in1,100 mm / 43.3 in.
Length-2,040 mm / 80.3 in.
Width845 mm / 33.3 in701 mm / 27.6 in.
Weights & Capacities
Oil Capacity (l)-3.40 litres
Oil Capacity (Quarts)-0.22 quarts
Dry Weight158 kg / 348 lbs-
Fuel Capacity12 Litres / 3.1 US gal17.41 litres / 4.60 gallons
Oil Capacity2.4 Litres-
Wet Weight173 kg / 381.4 lbs187.8 kg / 414.0 lbs
Performance
Top Speed95 mph / 152.8 km/h-
Max Power31.5 hp / 23.5 kW @ 6500 rpm-
Max Torque36.3 Nm / 26.8 lb-ft @ 5500 rpm-
Standing Start ¼ Mile15.3 sec-
Engine
Fuel Control-DOHC
Bore x Stroke (in,)-2.6 x 1.7 inches
Bore x Stroke (mm)-67.0 x 42.5 mm
Displacement (cc)-599.00 cc
Displacement (ci)-36.55 cubic inches
Stroke-4
Engine Type-In-line four
Displacement499 cc / 30.4 cu-in-
Engine DetailFour stroke, single cylinder, SOHC, 2 valves per cylinder.-
Fuel System-Injection. Fuel Injection with YCC-T and YCC-I
Bore x Stroke87 х 84 mm-
Compression Ratio9.0:113.1:1
Cooling SystemAir cooled-
Fuel Consumption63 mpg-
Fuel Induction34mm Mikuni VM34SS carburetor-
IgnitionCDITCI: Transistor Controlled Ignition
StarterKickElectric
Drivetrain
Final DriveChainChain
Gearbox-6-speed
Transmission / Drive5 Speed-
Chassis
Frame TypeHalf-duplex cradle-
Suspension - Front35mm telescopic forks41mm inverted fork
Suspension - RearDual shock, 5-way adjustable spring preload.Single shock
Rake27.5°24.0°
Trail117 mm / 4.6 in97 mm / 3.8 in.
Wheel Travel - Front150 mm / 5.9 in102 mm / 4.0 in.
Wheel Travel - Rear105 mm / 4.1 in102 mm / 4.0 in.
Wheels & Brakes
Brakes - Rear Diameter (in.)-8.7 inches
Brakes - Front Diameter (in.)-12.2 inches
Brakes - Front Diameter (mm)-310 mm
Brakes - Rear Diameter (mm)-220 mm
Brakes - FrontSingle 200mm discDouble disc
Brakes - Rear150mm drumSingle disc
Tyres - Front3.50 S18120/70-ZR17
Tyres - Rear4.00 S18180/55-ZR17

Verdict

Too close to call

The 1987 Yamaha SR 500 and the 2009 Yamaha YZF-R6 are evenly matched across the key measurable criteria. Your decision comes down to personal preference, riding style, and which brand's dealer network best suits your location.

Key Differences

1987 Yamaha SR 500 - Advantages

  • Lower seat height: 810 mm vs 851 mm - accessible to a wider range of rider heights.
  • More front wheel travel: 150 mm vs 102 mm - greater compliance over rough surfaces.

2009 Yamaha YZF-R6 - Advantages

  • Fuel injection: Precise fuelling, better cold-start reliability, and lower maintenance requirements.
  • Dual front discs: Greater stopping power and better heat management under hard braking.

1987 Yamaha SR 500 vs 2009 Yamaha YZF-R6 - FAQs

What are the engine differences between the 1987 Yamaha SR 500 and 2009 Yamaha YZF-R6?
The 1987 Yamaha SR 500 uses Four stroke, single cylinder, SOHC, 2 valves per cylinder., while the 2009 Yamaha YZF-R6 is powered by In-line four.
Which bike is better for shorter riders, the 1987 Yamaha SR 500 or the 2009 Yamaha YZF-R6?
The 1987 Yamaha SR 500 has the lower seat at 810 mm, making it more accessible. The 2009 Yamaha YZF-R6 sits higher at 851 mm. A seat height below 800 mm suits most riders; above 820 mm shorter riders may need to tiptoe.
Which should I buy, the 1987 Yamaha SR 500 or the 2009 Yamaha YZF-R6?
Both are strong choices. The 1987 Yamaha SR 500 has the edge in lower seat height and higher front wheel travel, while the 2009 Yamaha YZF-R6 stands out for fuel injection and dual front discs. Visit dealers, arrange test rides, and factor in local parts and service costs - these often matter as much as the spec sheet.