Continued challenges for new riders
There is so much more learning to do beyond the very, very basic MSF course. I started riding in January and learned a lot from reading books, magazine articles, internet forums, Total Control Level 1 riding class by Lee Parks, and by being out on almost every weekend riding different routes in the hills. What's cool about riding a motorcycles is new challenges keep coming up, and there are a lot of techniques to learn. First it was up hill start, then u-turn in traffic, riding on the freeway, gusty wind, twisty roads, steep downhill turns, sand/gravel, steeply crowned/narrow/broken/wet pavement, night rides on twisty/hilly roads, etc. They really keep things interesting. I've ridden about 8,700 miles so far, and I still get a little nervous before I go on a long ride on some challenging roads/conditions.
Oh, I haven't practiced enough in a parking lot, haven't ridden in the rain, haven't taken track school or done track days, can't keep up (not even close) with the faster riders when the roads get difficult, etc. There's so much more...
What are the challenges that you had to overcome, and what are the new ones you'd like to take on?
You've ridden 8,700 miles and
You've ridden 8,700 miles and not been rained on? I need to move to where ever you are :)
Riding in the rain isn't so bad if you have gear that stops you from getting wet and cold. Visibility is my biggest problem with it. You very quickly miss having wipers to clear the water away. Wiping it away with your hands tends to smear it and make things worse (though there is something called the finger squeegee I have yet to try).
In the beginning my biggest challenge was not chickening out half way through a corner and hitting the brakes. Having the confidence to roll on the throttle and lean when I already think I'm going too fast was hard. Then later having the maturity to slow down and work on proper technique instead of barreling into corners so as not to look like a slow poke.
I sucked at the box in the BRC so I spent months working on that. Made sure to practice at least once a week. Literally took me months to get perfect at it but got there in the end and it felt good :)
My biggest challenge by far is overcoming the fear I developed after a low side. I still struggle with that today on damp roads. Are the roads really as slippy as I think they are, are my tires shot that explain my lack of grip, or is it all in my head? (I think the answer is A but it is something I struggle with).
Lee Parks Total Control is on my must do list but I will probably take an offroad course before that. Someday soon I hope.
Finger squeegee...
Who ever invented that thing... I hope they're living a life of earned luxury for the rest of their life. Yeah, it's THAT good. I keep one in my tank bag. I try not to ride in the rain, but there are times when it starts raining during a ride. I've made it 6K miles in the last year and only been rained on maybe 5 times.
I still have a HUGE pucker factor on wet pavement. But at least I can see.
When you feel like a hero
When you feel like a hero someday, give these a try:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bWaq0zOaAVU
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mp-ZRiVslbM
RIDE MORE
EAT LESS
wow
That's impressive, to say the least.
I wonder how many hours those guys have logged to get that far, because I doubt I've ever met someone face to face who could do that stuff clean.
I'm in San Jose and it only
I'm in San Jose and it only rains in the winter here. When I first started riding last winter, riding in the rain was out of the question due to my newness and safety concerns, and it had only rained a few days so far this year. Lately I'm beginning think it would be fun to do some rain rides. I still have this mental block of not wanting to get my gear and bike wet, partly because I'm lazy with maintenance and just don't like the idea of having to clean up, dry up and lube the bike after wet rides. Neverthelss, I think it'll be hard to resist the urge to ride when the rain does come.
Seeing in the rain is one thing, but I'm much more concerned about being seen by drivers when its raining. I imagine a motorcycle is practically invisible to most drivers on a rainy night.
I've got about 9,700 miles logged
and been through torrential downpours. Have the right duds ready and slow down a little. In the summer it's almost fun... :)
My next big challenge is
My next big challenge is going to be getting back on the bike after 5+ months of winter. They don't have the schedule posted for the ERC, but it is high on my to-do list.
I'll skip rehashing my trials and tribulations from the first few weeks that I owned the bike, but unfortunately, as late in the season as I bought it, I didn't really move beyond them (at least as far as I would like).
You did more than you think.
You did more than you think. Next season . .just start easy, from the beginning, but with the wisdom of experience. Next season will be a good one.
2006 Harley Davidson Dyna Wide Glide
Sales, Peterson's North Miami Store
The city scares me
You guys know I'm a fan of the track, and I personally have spent TONS of time in parking lots. My problem is that I tend to psyche myself out when I'm no longer in controlled environments. Tight u-turns that are cake in a parking lot suddenly make my heart pound when there are cars to hit if I get it wrong. Corners that most other riders will take at 35-40mph I take at 25 in 1st because I'm worried about gravel or sand or oil. I wouldn't really have a problem with calling this prudence, but the truth is that I sometimes go into "scared" mode in situations where a better street rider would just be careful. Know what I mean? It's not that I outwardly do the wrong thing, but rather that I loose mental clarity and leave everything to my muscle memory and reflexes.
Anyway, I've gotten a lot better about this since I first started riding. When I first started I'd puss out and put my foot down in a u-turn, despite the fact that I had plenty of room to finish it out. Now I might get worried a bit, but I'll force myself to crank my head harder and muscle it out. Ultimately though, developing better mental discipline and control is my next big step, both on the street and the track.
Prudence
Prudence?
Maybe its just old fashion wisdom. The more there is surrounding you that bites, the more you have to work not to be bitten.
Rule one, day one. Slow in, throttle out. (-;
2006 Harley Davidson Dyna Wide Glide
Sales, Peterson's North Miami Store
Always ride within your limits
I don't see a problem with any of what you're saying, so long as you're not *paralysed* with fear. Many of us have been where you are now.
Maybe you should start commuting to work by motorcycle; one day a week at first. That's one way to get lots of miles in traffic and experience will help you overcome your mental blocks.
Beware of falling into the trap of thinking (as I did initially) that faster, risk-taking riders (on the street) are necessarily better riders. Sure, there are some great and fast street riders out there, but most of the fast street riders I see out there every day are squids who are just too stupid to realize the danger they are putting themselves (and others) in.
One of the best motorcycling "skills" you can learn is to ride your own ride and not feel pressured into riding beyond your limits or competing with anyone on the road, or keeping up with other riders when it's scaring you, or allowing yourself to get pissed-off with that dick-head car driver who wants to race you, etc. etc. etc.
Ride your own ride. No-one else cares if you're fast or not...
My local BMW riding club has
My local BMW riding club has a parking lot gethering in the beginning of the riding season every year. All it takes is a decent size lot with some safety cones. Object is not speed, but smooth.. clutch control and balance is key.. fun to watch old timer BMW riders scraping pegs and side luggage in a parking lot.
There is even a slow race, riders go head to head against each other on a grassy field bowl shape circuit with elevation change, rear tire may slip on the uphill section if you give it too much throttle; too little throttle you have to put your foot down and DQ. Fun event to master your bike...
RIDE MORE
EAT LESS
Having never lived in a
Having never lived in a place with true 4-seasons, i.e., severe winters, the notion of putting the bike away at the end of a “riding season” is alien to me. Stop riding for 5 months and loosing some of the hard learned skills from lack of practice? What a bummer deal! But I guess people find other things to do, like ice skating, snowmobiling, ice fishing? Again, those are all foreign concepts to me. ;-)
I don't do any of that stuff,
I don't do any of that stuff, though generally people who ride in the summer are all over snow machines in winter. The only winter sport I partake in is snowshoeing which was a foreign concept to me when I first moved up here. :)
In the winter, I do alot of reading. Hough's books are on my list for this year, but I'm going to wait until Feb for those...
Actually, this is what I do
Actually, this is what I do sometimes in the winter:
RIDE MORE
EAT LESS
Bad...
...ass
You're using studs right?
I mean, those aren't just normal dirt tires are they?
eternal, Lots of guys say
eternal,
Lots of guys say once they’ve experienced track riding, going fast on streets looses its appeals. But I always thought track experience makes one a more confident street rider, so I find your account of being comfortable on the track but being psyched out on the streets (due to traffic/gravel/sand/oil) interesting. Can you help by explaining more on the “why”? What’s your background like, such as how long you’ve been driving/riding, do you live in the city or a small town, do you have off-road riding experience, etc.?
It takes some blind faith on the streets to think you’d always have adequate traction, especially after reading the occasional crazy stuff like people dumping oil on off ramps and curves deliberately to “get” motorcycle riders, and the more innocent spills that cause bikes to crash. Riding a mountain bike for years made me fairly comfortable with a little bit of sliding on loose terrain, although I’ve been told that’s nothing like dirt bike riding where you slide big time. Somehow traffic never bothered me, even when I was on a bicycle, and when driving in congested foreign cities in Asia and Europe where traffic are said to be much worse than here in the States. The exception is a local highway (hwy 17 in Santa Cruz) which goes thru the hills with tight curves and all the cars never slow down (many go 60-70 mph or more, in a 45 mph zone) and are always nearly out of control. That highway scares me a little even in a car.
I’ve experienced the staring at the guard-rail and road-side gravel wobbles. I’ve tried hard to discipline myself to look where I want to go, and now I trust myself about 95% in this regard. I don’t trust myself 100% when the road gets very twisty and the turns come up in quick successions, so I slow down to add safety margin whenever I need to. On a hilly road where I’ve only been on twice, there is a sign that says “extremely slippery”. Now, “slippery when wet” I’ve seen often, but “extremely” slippery? Like ice (actually it’s not)? Both times when I rode past that sign, my upper body tensed up so much I had to slow to almost a stop to make a curve that could probably be taken at 25mph safely. That sign really psyched me out.
Don't get me wrong
Track riding DID make me a much more confident street rider. I feel like I have reflexes and subtle control over input that I would not have had otherwise. This makes me very confident on, say, a sunny day on a nice windy well-maintained road, the super-slab, cruisin' around town. But I live in Seattle. We haven't had a day without rain in what feels like weeks. The roads were utterly destroyed by our last winter (idiots using chains on snow-free pavement for a week). And it's fall. There are leaves, especially wet leaves, everywhere.
And again, I'm not sitting in traffic quaking in my boots. It's more that if I have ANY reason to doubt full traction (wet road, cool tires, debris on road surface), I turn into the world's biggest whimp. Like I've said, I've done track days in the rain, but at the track falling is an option. That's not to say you WANT to fall, but you have to avoid focusing on NOT falling or you'll waste valuable attention that is better spent on other things. Moreover, a lowside because of failed grip in the rain is no big. Just $$$. Yeah, hurts the wallet, but you don't get run over by a pickup or slide into a sharp and heavy object. The problem is that on the street the consequences are severe, so I'm not willing to risk my reflexes recovering from a slide, so instead I go 3mph :) Not literally of course, but like I said, I'll take a corner that can be reasonably safely taken in the given conditions at 30mph at 20mph, just because I have no confidence in my traction.
As far as my background, I used to race road bikes (i.e. bicycles) and did a lot of mountain biking as well, and on those I'm definitely comfortable slipping and sliding. The main difference, and part of the reason I'd really like to have a go at MX or Supermoto, is that with the added weight of my sportbikes I no longer have the confidence to test my luck. Also those pretty body plastics are bloody spendy! Again, this is something I'm looking to fix with a light, low-power bike that I don't care about falling off of ^_^
"It's more that if I have ANY
"It's more that if I have ANY reason to doubt full traction (wet road, cool tires, debris on road surface), I turn into the world's biggest whimp."
This is why I stopped riding for the season after the first snow, even though it didn't stick. When I was out walking, I could see where the ice was hiding in low spots, cracks, etc in the pavement. I just didn't trust that I wouldn't loose it on something that I didn't recognize as a hazard.
In the end, we all have to find our own level for risk tolerance. Yes, that level changes (both up and down) over time and through experience. But as we all know, you have to ride within your own comfort zone. Ride your own ride... :)
light, low-power bike
"quote from eternal"
Also those pretty body plastics are bloody spendy! Again, this is something I'm looking to fix with a light, low-power bike that I don't care about falling off of ^_^
"end quote"
That is so true! That's why I love my beat up '01 naked GS500 so much! Of the three bikes I have, the GS500 requires the least amount of "active brain power" to ride. It feels like an extension of my body, like when I'm on a mountain bike. As a result, I worry the least when I'm on the GS, and I tend to ride much better. Whenever there's a route or riding condition that I'm not sure about, the GS is always my first choice.
When I first started riding I have this notion that I NEEDED to man up and not hold up traffic in corners, so I always felt pressured to carry more speed into the corners. Until one day I talked to a co-worker who's a long time cruiser rider; he said he had no problem slowing down to whatever speed he felt prudent, and not allowing impatient drivers behind him forcing him into something he felt unsafe. That made me realize that I needed to ride at my own pace, rather than being forced into an unsafe pace.
Agreed
My Ninja was nice in that regard, and in many ways I feel the same way about it that you seem to feel for your GS. The difference is that I still didn't want to crash it. I could have de-faired it, but that felt like sacrilege. To own a Ninja after Kawasaki had finally grown a pair and redesigned it to look all sleek and then strip off the sleek? Nah.
I'm goin' motard :)
SM is the bomb
RIDE MORE
EAT LESS
(No subject)
RIDE MORE
EAT LESS
Motards
Motards are so badass!
This thread...
... has been an interesting read. I now have about 1200miles experience since Oct, and it has been fun, humbling, exciting, frustrating....
My biggest challenge has been trusting the bike to take me through the corners. Initially, every time out, I would have 1 or 2 turns where I would panic, and almost not make the turn. Honestly, I nearly quit riding, but by using countersteering properly, and envisioning a successful turn, I have gotten much better, to the point where I actually enjoy the sweepers.
One thing that helped me was going on a couple of charity rides where I knew that mine and other's lives were on the line if I didn't execute in the turn. I imagine that if other riders around me could have read my mind, they would have given me LOTS of room!!!!
My "resolutions" for this year:
1) find someone of similar interest & skill level to ride with
2) wear out the sides of the tires a little
3) luggage solution to my little ninja, so I can do some short trips
Goal #2 ++
Wear on the edges of the tire? Good goal! Just make sure you're not trying to get rid of your chicken strips by pushing the bike down under you.
...you know, or using 40-grit "chicken-strip remover" ;)
getting rid of chicken strips
getting rid of chicken strips is overrated. you can be plenty fast and still have chicken strips on the tires. check out the tires of your club racers next time. if you're goal is to get rid of chicken strips, sanding 'em down is the safest way to get rid of them.
---
AFM #998
If there's anything more important than my ego
around, I want it caught and shot now...
Agreed!
Common sense tells you that chicken strips might be a bit more about machismo than skill, but one of the best pieces of advice on of the track-day instructors gave me was that, if anything, you WANT to have chicken strips...and go as fast as everybody else. The real mark of a good rider is that they can go the same speed as another guy (or faster) and lean LESS in the same turns.
I spend a 1/2 hour in one of
I spend a 1/2 hour in one of these near my house every few month..
RIDE MORE
EAT LESS
Freeway cloverleaves
I was thinking about using the freeway cloverleaves to do some practice, but the problem is you only get to turn right on those.
Actually that's a benefit
Actually that's a benefit since most people suck at rights more than lefts. ;-)
---
AFM #998
If there's anything more important than my ego
around, I want it caught and shot now...
I never understood that.
I never understood that. Rights come far easier to me, partially because on the street (in countries where you drive on the right, anyway) running wide in a right means you MIGHT wreck, running wide in a left means you WILL wreck. Other than that, you'd think I'd be built for left handers... left handed, left eye dominant. But nope, outside of the track I run rights way more aggressively than lefts unless I just know the turn absolutely by heart.
-XRayHound
I can see through GLASS!!!!
Running wide on right better than left?
"running wide in a right means you MIGHT wreck, running wide in a left means you WILL wreck."
I used to think like that (that I could always drift to the opposite lane when running wide on a right turn), until I read and realized that running wide on right and cross the centerline can get you KILLED from a head on collision. That seems worse than running off the road from going wide on a left.
What am I saying? Either one is BAD!
+1
Turning into my neighborhood is basically a blind right turn. I worked hard to get to where I could make it each time without going wide because I never know until I'm committed to a turning line whether there is oncoming traffic.
The funny thing was that once I was proficient at making the turn, I applied the same techniques to driving my cage and I don't have nearly as many problems with it anymore in car or on bike. :)
Line selection through a blind right turn
On a blind right turn, especially when the road is narrower, consider hugging the right shoulder throughout the turn, because oncoming cars have a tendency to get "lazy" with the turn and cut into your lane, so you'd want to stay as far right as possible throughout the turn. I know - this is not the "racing line" nor the "performance riding line". I read about this strategy in a motorcycle forum and, of course, there were different opinions. First I argued against it - there's more likely to be debris on the right shoulder, there is less sight distance when you hug the right shoulder, blah blah blah. Then, when I went into the hills on a twisty and narrow road with many blind corners (at speed down to 10-15 mph or so), I found myself hugging the right shoulders in those blind turns to avoid unexpected oncoming cars. Call this the "blind corner survival line".
That's exactly my point,
That's exactly my point, there's a chance there's a car in the opposite lane but there's a chance there's not... the ditch will always be there. It's a mental block for me, not a justification for crossing the center line. While I take Nick Ienatsch's advice to consider each trip over the yellow line a failure, I know there's more pavement on the other side of it, and, to quote Morpheus, it "frees my mind"!
To state it another way that just occurred to me, the oncoming lane offers a margin of error... admittedly, a margin of error than can be taken away at any given instant. Think of it as binary code. The oncoming lane is a series of ones, with every car, and a given space (the amount you need to maneuver clear) ahead of it as zeroes. The edge of the road is an unbroken line of zeroes.
Then there's the inconsiderate cagers who cross the double yellow and put the zeroes in your lane...
-XRayHound
I can see through GLASS!!!!
Most cars are not "wide" on
Most cars are not "wide" on turns, they are shallow. If you are wide and on the line on a blind corner, not only is there a risk of a car showing up in that blind area, the LIKELIHOOD that HE will be crossing the line and in your lane is extreme.
Rule is, what ever distance you can SEE, you should be able to STOP in that distance and in that field of vision. If you are in those speeds, you wont be crossing lines, and in fact will be able to "maneuver" some if necessary.
Our track boys can pipe in . . .how MANY times did you have to hit each turn BEFORE you had the perfect line? On the street on blind turns speed should NOT be in the conversation. That is relying on 'luck" and luck has a way of running out.
2006 Harley Davidson Dyna Wide Glide
Sales, Peterson's North Miami Store
A lot :)
I can't really think about good lines through a corner until I feel like I "know" the corner. By that I mean that, given some clay, I could form an exact copy of the corner, its contours and elevation changes, etc. from memory...you know, if I was good with clay, which I'm not ;) Then I can start to think about "where would I go if there was no traffic." After that I start thinking about "where would I go in the rain," or "where would I go if I had a slow-poke in front of me," etc. On the track, this also includes "how would I pass somebody on the brakes before tip-in," "how would I sneak around the outside of somebody here," "how tight can I get around the apex without losing too much speed to pass on the inside," etc. You're right though: with blind corners, the name of the game for me has always been "slow and with a conservative line."
I still don't really have a "perfect" line...just a bunch of different lines that I know will work in different situations. I mean, granted, I'll usually try to use the same line when I don't have traffic ahead of me and conditions are good, but my lines will change depending on road conditions, people around me, etc, both on and off the track.
As far as Gary was saying about hugging the right side of your line going around a blind turn, I think this could be smart provided you apply one additional condition (which he implied as well), and that's dramatically reduced speed. The one way in which Gary's advice differs from conventional advice is that, while it keeps you farther from the center-line at corner entry, it puts you at a severe risk of falling prey to a decreasing-radius corner. What I hear conventionally (motorcycle magazines, safety articles, etc.) is that you should pull an ultra-late apex, almost to the point that you don't swoop in for your apex until you can see corner exit just to make sure you don't get taken by surprise. I think, as far as keeping both wheels down, this might be safer. Keeping the wheels down doesn't help much when you get cleaned out by a car wandering across the center-line, though, so maybe Gary has a point.
Of course, if it's a blind corner that you know well, then Gary's absolutely right, and the only concern is staying out of the way of stray cars.
the majority of people have a
the majority of people have a hard time with right turns are RIGHT handed.... so it makes sense that if you are left handed- you would have a harder time with left turns and an easier time with rights.
The why mechanics behind that- not sure but it makes sense knowing that most people suck at rights and are right thanded... that you would be better at rights being left handed.
And whoever said that stuff about binary 1 and 0 regarding riding into the other land or off the road a little bit- I don't like binary never have never will- but that was a suprisingly good definition of that. =) totally cool. thanks!
Dancing, playing with my pony and playing with my lady.
Work hard, play hard
Life is sweet... very sweet.
Tips and techniques from Mr. James Davis
When I started riding, I found it easy to control and turn (counter-steering) the bike once it’s above walking speed. But for a while I felt very iffy about the slow-down-to-walking-speed-then-u-turn transition. Some times the u-turn worked out fine and felt natural, but some times it was all wrong - the bike wouldn’t turn the way I expected. Once day I went on a 70 miles ride, got home ok, but messed up a 3 mph u-turn in front of my house, hit the curb and dropped the bike. I was so mad at myself, but I didn’t know why I messed up. Now, when you ride a motorcycle, there is nothing worse than the “didn’t know why,” because you can get serious injured or killed by “didn’t know why”. Sometimes I wanted to make a u-turn in traffic, but I dared not do it, so I went around the block instead. For a few weeks it felt like having a dark cloud hanging over my head whenever I was riding. Finally I found this article (tip #233) by Mr. James Davis on his website:
http://www.msgroup.org/Tip.aspx?Num=233&Set=
That was like a light got turned on in my head – it got all clear in an instant. I got on my bike and knew exactly what to do. (Still needed practice but that’s different.) Tip #233 gave me the single biggest break through in my early riding days. In fact, as a beginner, I learned so much from reading Mr. Davis’ safety tips. Some of them can be long and technical, but to me it was well worth the effort.
http://www.msgroup.org/articles.aspx
Now that I think of it, I want to re-read all those tips.
Thanks for that link. I had
Thanks for that link. I had found it a WHILE back but forgot to bookmark it. Guess I will have to go through it again myself!
****Life's journey is not to arrive at the grave safely in a well preserved body, but, rather to skid in sideways, totally worn out, shouting "Holy Shit....What a ride!!!"****
Good advice, but one point of contention
" A change of direction results in a lean, a lean does not result in a change of direction."
This is false on both counts, but unnecessary to his (otherwise correct) argument. I personally think understanding why this is wrong is really important to your understanding, scientific or otherwise, of how your bike steers. As with any argument, you can disprove it by contradiction: finding any single case where it fails.
Try the following, either on your motorcycle or (preferably) on a bicycle.
1) At VERY slow speed (slow walking speed), turn the handlebars but do not lean the bike. You will find that you CAN (don't have to) steer the bike directly (not counter-steering) while keep the bike completely vertical. The reason both direct steering and verticality hold is that you are steering your bike like a car or trike. Both tires have a (mostly) flat surface is in contact with the ground, and the only way to change direction is by changing the orientation of the front tire's contact patch.
2) At speed greater than 10 mph, try to lean the entire you+bike package without changing direction. You can't! The reason is simple. If a bike is leaned, it HAS to turn. The explanation is really simple: bike tires (both motorcycle and bicycle) are rounded. The circumference of the middle of the tire is larger than the circumference of the edge of the tire.
That means that if you roll the tire one revolution on its side, the inside of the tire will travel less distance on the ground than the outside of the tire. The only way for that to work is if the tire rolls in an arc. Voila! Turn.
Direction change and lean
"2) At speed greater than 10 mph, try to lean the entire you+bike package without changing direction. You can't! "
Yes, you can. Three examples:
1. Leaning against a steady side wind while going straight.
2. Going straight on a side-way slope - in effect you're leaning against the ground, rather than being perpendicular to it.
3. Set up body position (hanging off) while counter-steering to go straight prior to executing a turn. The bike would be leaned while going straight.
You're using the "rolling a cone" example that David Hough used in Proficient Motorcycling; it is technically correct but on a tire where the contact patch width is what, not even an inch wide, the inner and outer diameter difference at the contact patch would account for a very small amount of turning effect relative to steering angle. The coning effect has more to do with needing to add throttle to maintain speed in a lean. The above is not a real argument against the correctness of the statement you cited.
Back to the statement you felt was incorrect: "The fact is that counter-steering, or direct steering, results in a change of direction, not lean. A change of direction results in a lean, a lean does not result in a change of direction." Note that it's a cause-and-effect statement, i.e., what happens first, and what follows. Does direction change happen before or after the bike leans?
The statement is actually correct in physics, i.e., direct changes first, then bike lean follows as a result of direction change, but the semantics is tricky and you need to think it thru. The whole thing has to do with equilibrium of force. This is the sequence as I see it:
1. Steering (turning the handle bar) causes tire contact patch direction change, and the friction (i.e., traction) between the tire and pavement causes a change of direction of travel. (Imagine no friction/traction between the tire and pavement, such as when you're skidding on ice - no amount of leaning will result in a change of direction. Right here it should be clear that direction change is from steering, not from leaning.)
2. The change of direction of travel results in centripetal force wanting to pull the bike/rider to the OUTSIDE of the turn -> As a result the rider/bike has to lean toward the INSIDE of the turn to counter, or balance out, the outward centripetal force. The point is if there's no direction change first, then there'd be no centripetal force, and you wouldn't be leaning the bike to counter the centripetal force.
Hope this makes sense.
Oversimplification indeed
First off, I think we agree...for the most part. Second, I think I definitely over-simplified things. You're absolutely right that there is a complex equilibrium of forces that must be maintained, and it's certainly not as simple as I made it out to be.
I think you're still missing my point which is simply that change of direction can be brought about without lean, and that a leaned bike will change direction. That point is a direct contradiction of the line I cited. If I, for instance, go to a big empty parking lot and get myself into a nice 25 mph circle, I can, with a sticky throttle, take my hands off the bars and keep going around in that nice tight line. No steering input whatsoever and the bike keeps going in a perfect circle. Whatever combination of forces is at play, the bike goes in a circle if it's leaned over substantially.
As far as your examples of ways to lean a bike without turning, I think it's fairly straightforward to say, as you suggest, that opposing a certain amount of turning force with another force, either a strange normal from an inclined surface, wind, or displacement in body weight of the rider, may yield cancellation. If you chain a moving car to a barge also in parallel motion in an adjacent canal and try to turn the car away, nothing will happen. But that's not conclusive proof that the action of turning away is not responsible for turning impetus. All you've done is show that some additional force can be introduced to cancel out or counteract whatever cornering force would normally be causing a change in direction. Also, I'm not sure what roles tire profiles and deformation behavior play in the examples you gave, but I wouldn't be surprised if it had something to do with it, especially in the case of pre-corner setup.
Again, I didn't mean to get into a physics boxing match (one I'm horrifically unqualified for), only to point out common-sense error cases in the cited statement.
Over my head
OK, eternal, I stayed up until almost 2 am to write the semi-nonsense I wrote (the physics/mechanics were not fully correct; I think I messed up by discounting the tire's "coning" effect in a turn you mentioned, and I didn't/couldn't explain the steering geometry involved). I really shouldn't have written what I did, because half truth like that (on the physics/mechanics part) only serves to confuse people. If anybody is really interested in the physics of this, read the following from James Davis on what's happening during counter-steering (which talks about the tire "coning" thing):
http://www.msgroup.org/Tip.aspx?Num=048&Set=
A lot of this stuff is counter-intuitive and can make one's head spin. When I first read them, I spent days thinking about it, finally put it all together and felt it make sense, but now, months later, I half-way forgot why again. Understands the physics satisfies the intellectual curiosity, but by and large it's not necessary to ride the motorcycle.
Anyway, let's not gunk up this thread with too much physics discussions. I'd like to get back on topic - share your experience on learning to ride. Thanks.
Definitely
Wise move. Sorry for the derailing!
Uphill start
I had an “interesting” experience with uphill start.
I bought my GS500 before I knew how to operate a motorcycle. The seller rode it to my garage and parked it there. The evening after I finished my MSF class (no M1 yet, and no riding gear other than the helmet, gloves and hiking boots), I started my GS for the first time and went for a ride around my neighborhood streets in the dark. After a while I decided to go up this small hill not far from my house. The hill was perhaps 400 feet high, with a county communications facility (bunch of antennas) on the top and a good view. The road going up was fairly steep; on a mountain bike I had to be in the lowest gear and strain to ride up that hill. I thought that first gear would be spinning the engine too high, so I decided to charge up the hill in second. That worked well until the first turn, which happened to be the steepest section and the sharpest turn (more than 90 degrees), so I had to slow down and down shift. I stalled the bike right there. Not panicking yet, I held the bike with both brakes, started the engine, let out the clutch and stalled it again. Tried it again, more gas, letting out the clutch quicker, stalled again. I started to worry. Tried it 3 or 4 more times, still couldn’t get it going. The headlight was getting dimmer, the battery was getting weaker, and I really began to worry. Being in the steepest section, I dared not let go of the brakes, and couldn’t put the kickstand down and get off, so I was stuck there in the dark, with a weakening battery, fearful of dropping the bike on my very first ride. I didn’t know what to do, so I stayed like that for a few minutes, and then finally decided to try duckwalk backwards down the hill while dragging on the front brake. That worked, and good thing I could flatfoot on this bike comfortably. When I finally reached a driveway on the right side of the road, I back into the driveway carefully, started the engine, turned left and rode downhill.
I thought about this problem for a few days. I even mentioned this to a friend who’s been riding for 20+ years. It must have been so instinctive and natural for him because he had no clue what my problem was with uphill start. A few days later it came to me – I was stalling because I was letting out the clutch too quickly; my logic (false) of letting out the clutch quickly was to get the power to the wheel and get moving quickly so I wouldn’t slide backward down the hill. The magic words were "the friction zone". The correct technique was to stay in the friction zone, throttle up and get the bike moving slowly without bogging and stalling the engine, before letting out the clutch all the way. Once I realized that, and with a little practice on my slightly inclined driveway, uphill start was no problem.
Sounds simple if you knew this ahead of time, and I knew how to do this in a stick-shift car. But being out riding for the very first time, I was just overwhelmed on that hill and couldn’t think this through. If you just read about a situation ahead of time, then you’re better equipped to deal with it when you actually encounter it.
I’m curious how others learned to do uphill starts. Did someone explain or show it to you, did you “just know” on your own, or did you have to figure it out the hard way like I did?
Having an automatic I've not
Having an automatic I've not had to worry about hill starts (yet), but I have driven stick for over 15 years. I also learned how to drive in the UK where (shock) we have an actual test and hill starts is one of the things you are tested on. Roll back an inch and it's an automatic fail. The principles are the same so here is how to do it in a car.
I'll assume you have come to a stop facing uphill with your foot on the brake and the clutch pressed in.
1. Pull on the hand brake (what you call the e-brake here)
2. Foot off the brake making sure the hand brake is supporting the weight of the car
3. Give it some gas and ease off the clutch into the 'friction zone'. We actually referred to it as the 'biting point' which I prefer. There is one point where the engine starts to bite and you can support the weight of the car with just enough gas and just enough clutch so that you are neither rolling back or forward.
4. At this point you can then ease on the gas, ease of the clutch and release the hand brake and away you go.
Replace hand brake above with rear brake on a bike and everything else should work the same (I imagine!).
Inclined to say...
Inclines are CAKE!
Here's the dealio!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H5X1FjCxMvc
My first rain ride
As of last week I've ridden 9,700 miles, and finally went on a 60 mile ride in the rain on Saturday morning. It included some sections of expressway (50-60 mph), 2-lane country roads (40-50 mph), and a narrow and twisty road (15-30 mph). Locked up the rear twice:
The first time was when going about 50 mph on the expressway, got close to the intersection and the light turned yellow, hesitated for a moment on whether to keep going or to stop, then decided to stop at the last moment. Had to brake fairly hard, but in the wet I used less front brake and more rear brake, and fish-tailed into the intersection by about 6 ft. Kind of expected that, and I could have used a bit more front brake and a bit less rear.
The second time was when coming close to stopping to make a left. The rear locked up, skidded a few feet and did a slight jerk when traction was regained. That lock-up surprised me a little; felt like maybe there was some sand on the ground at the intersection.
In the straight sections I pretty much rode as fast as in the dry, but in the tighter corners I went maybe 5 mph slower, followed the slow-in-fast-out principle, and leaned my body to keep the bike as upright as possible. I kept the speed in check and avoided braking in the corners.
It was fun; wish it had rained harder, but I'll get my chances, and needed to upgrade my rain gear. Temperature was mid-50s, much warmer than the clear but cold (low 40s) weather we had a few days before. The helmet visor didn't fog up too much and the visibility was not bad. I realized that although my Rev-it Turbine overpants are "water-proof", it's the inner liner that's water-proof; the outer shell is not and got soaked, along with the content in the pockets. Also, my leather gloves got pretty wet; not good. I just bought a two-piece rain suit, and I'm looking for a pair of water-proof glove covers.
Sounds like you had fun. It's
Sounds like you had fun. It's always rewarding when you push your envelope that little bit further.
Interesting that you have Rev'IT pants. I was seriously considering getting myself a full Rev'It outfiit, probably the Cayenne Pro or maybe the soon to be released Sand. Went off it completely when I realized the outer layer is not waterproof. Currently my Teknic jacket is completely waterproof but I was looking to upgrade the protection level. Probably going to just stick with that as it rains a lot here in the winter so being waterproof on the outer layer is important to me. So much so I've now decided to get a matching pair of Teknic pants as my current Tourmaster ones absorb water like you described. I guess the climate and rainfall patterns where you live makes a difference in what gear works best for you.
I should add that the summer rainfall here is on a par with the south west i.e. not very much at all. It's just that we get 3/4 of our annual rain in 1/4 of the year. So I need different winter and a summer outfits.
Yeah, in doubt, bang on the front brake (not the rear)
Especially in low-traction situations, you gotta be super careful with that rear brake. The consequences for locking it can be a lot greater as well, especially if you fishtail significantly out of line.
You can really clamp down on the front, much more so than you might think. Moreover, it's super easy to get out of a front lock (as they say in MSF): just release. This is probably THE best thing you can do to get over queasiness with that front brake. Just go to a parking lot and overapply the front. Just slam it on. Do what you're not supposed to do. You'll instantly feel the front tire start to lock, the handlebars will probably go wiggly on ya, and by instinct, you'll just let off the front brake...and voila! Problem solved. Getting comfortable locking your front, releasing, and quickly reapplying is a great way to gain confidence in your braking skills and to avoid serious trouble on the road.
This raises an interesting
This raises an interesting question. Some time ago I think Elwood posted something saying in the wet you are supposed to use more rear brake than front. Something like 80/20 rear/front. I'm sure he got this from somewhere (Ride Like A Pro?) but it struck me as odd and I meant to go read up on it. Of course I never did. Personally I don't change the proportions between front/back but I do try to give myself more time and avoid heavy braking, especially on painted lines, metal etc.
What's your take on this?
Never, ever, ever . . 80
Never, ever, ever . . 80 front, 20 rear . . . . and thats a cruiser.
2006 Harley Davidson Dyna Wide Glide
Sales, Peterson's North Miami Store
Yup!
I'm with Elwood on this. I think what you may be thinking of is Munch and Elwood's advice to, for instance, Owlie, that in a slow-speed low-traction situation (e.g. getting out of a gravel driveway), friction zone + rear brake is the way to go. That is DEFINITELY true. As far as stopping power goes, weight will naturally redistribute to the front under braking and so, in addition to being rainy or slick or dusty or gravely or whatever, the rear tire will also have less weight on it, making for a an easy lock if you're not careful.
Rev'It waterproof level; rain suit
I think the outer-shell of the "Turbine" overpants I have is mesh construction for the warmer weather. Its' a very tight weave, but still mesh, thus soaks up water in the rain. Other models, such as Cayenne Pro and Sand, in Rev'It's lineup just MAY have fully waterproof outer-shell construction. Double-check before you write them off. I got Rev'It pants because they have hip pads/armor, which aren't provided by many other brands.
My rational of getting a cheap rain suit ($40 for jacket and pants) to wear over my regular gear is so that my more expensive gear don't get dirty/muddy from the spray kicked up by cars. It'll also add a bit of extra warmth. I don't quite get why waterproof gear is that important since you can just wear a cheap rain suit over the regular gear, unless you're touring and really don't want to pack the extra rain suit. I guess I'll find out if it's really a lot of hassle to carry and wear the extra rain suit.
"I don't quite get why
"I don't quite get why waterproof gear is that important since you can just wear a cheap rain suit over the regular gear"
Not sure where you are located but places like the SE US. Pop up Thunderstorms can and will catch you in the most un practical places. Hauling at highway speeds with traffic is not a cool time to try and dip off to don the pull over rain gear. If you try to beat it out to get to a bridge... chances are your going to get wet before hand anyways and kill the need for the $40 rain suit. I have Frogg Toggs that go in my Saddle bags for when it is just to damn hot to go for full on water proof priced gear, but to be honest those are for the days where the rain chances are over 70% otherwise I just enjoy the cool down of the rain (oh yea cruiser w/windshield = no feeling like I am getting pelted by kids throwing rocks). Another reason also is depending on what your plans are, cargo space is a premium on bikes...yours more so then mine. If you plan on doing some quick errand shopping you will need just that much more space.
****Life's journey is not to arrive at the grave safely in a well preserved body, but, rather to skid in sideways, totally worn out, shouting "Holy Shit....What a ride!!!"****
I have a good set of rain
I have a good set of rain gear . . when I did my 300 mile ride across the sate in thunderstorms a few weeks back it was great. Keeps you warm and dry IF you can get it on. But as you say Munch, sometimes by the time you can make a safe stop, it doesn't really mater anymore anyway. (-;
2006 Harley Davidson Dyna Wide Glide
Sales, Peterson's North Miami Store
All RevIt gear relies on the
All RevIt gear relies on the inner layer to be waterproof, as do most brands. They claim making the outer level waterproof would reduce the breathability of the jacket. I'm sure that's true but adding the rain layer presumably has the same affect. So now I have a jacket that cannot breath and gets soggy. What they are trying to do is make it an all season jacket. In the warmer drier months you remove the inner layer and your jacket is still comfortable. The point I was trying to make about the climate is that I have very wet winters and very dry summers. Makes no sense for me to have a jacket that tries to do both but necessarily has to compromise on each.
I actually have the RevIt Turbine jacket as my summer jacket and I like it a lot, which is why I was looking for their winter jacket. I could add the rain suit like you suggest but it comes down to practicality. I already have up to 3 layers on (an external back protector, my jacket and then a reflective bib). Adding a rain suit to this would just be a huge pain. If it was to be a once in a blue moon thing then I could live with that. But here, it's probably more 50/50. I've lost count the number of times I've left the house and it is dry, ride a couple of miles and it is pouring. I either put the rain suit on all the time or face having to stop and put it on MANY times. Makes more sense for me for the rain suit to be part of the jacket.
Rain gear
Munch and eon, thanks for the explanation on the unpredictability of weather and the importance of waterproof gear in your climate zones. Makes sense now to this rain-riding newbie - me. I’m in San Jose, CA, where the weather is super predictable, especially with weather.com’s hour-by-hour forecast and radar map. I can see the rain coming a week ahead, and on a given day we either have rain or we don’t, almost no surprises. I’ve forgotten the thunderstorms that came at a moment’s notice I experienced in my youth, growing up in Taiwan, over 30 years ago.
Eon, good info on the conflicting outer-shell’s breathability vs. waterproof requirements. I did not realize that you had already done the research on Rev’It, and I did not realize that most textile outer-shell are not waterproof. Have you considered Aerostitch, and would their products work for you? Every manufacturer tries to offer a 4-seasons jacket because that seems to be what people want, but I’ve since realized that there’s no such a thing, even for the temperate California climate. Any given jacket is good for 3-seasons, at best, in my opinion. We’re better off having two jackets, one geared toward the warmer months and another toward the colder ones. Or you need an electric heated liner, which is yet another thing to buy and deal with (power consumption).
I have not seriously looked
I have not seriously looked at Aerostitch but I did come across a set of pants online that looked good until I noticed they were only 500 Denier. Equivalent Teknic pants are half the price and 600 Denier. Unless there are subtleties to the whole protection level I am not aware of then I'm not sure why the huge price difference for a seemingly inferior product. When you have a name you can add $$$ on but Teknic has a reputation for good gear at a good price, and I've been happy with my jacket.
If a jacket is advertised with a rain liner then I am assuming the outer shell is not waterproof. The brands that do not have a rain liner that I came across were Teknic, FirstGear and Aerostitch. Probably should look at Aerostitch in more detail.
front/rear braking bias in the wet
While traction on “clean” wet pavement is surprisingly good (up to 80% of dry from what I read) to most people and the front brake remains to be the dominate stopper on “clean” wet pavement, that traction disappears on slick materials such painted surfaces, metal surfaces, mud, wet leaves, etc. When you lock up the front on those slippery surfaces, the bike tends to go down in an instant, faster than most people could react. With the rear, you’d fishtail but still have steering control. The unpredictability of traction is why most people advocate biasing the braking force toward the rear when riding in the wet, and slowing down in general to reduce the need for heavy braking. And you certainly want to be extra smooth, less abrupt, to avoid locking up either brake.
Eternal is right that threshold braking practices would be invaluable for everyone. I’m guilty for not doing more of that.
By concentrating on the back
By concentrating on the back brake you are giving up most of your stopping power in order to keep steering control but are almost guaranteeing a back end slide. I would prefer to stop quicker in a straight line. If I feel the need to swerve I can let go the brakes. If I don't grab the front then I should be able to avoid a front lock up. I need to practice that more too but I would be careful about deliberately causing a front lock up. I locked mine up during my ERC and it scared the bejeebus out of me. Did not go down but it was a scary moment.
A friend of mine watched Ride Like A Pro and came away enthusing over using the back brake. I have not watched it yet but the message he took from it seemed to contradict everything else I had learned. I really need to go back to Proficient Motorcycling and see what he says about braking in the wet.
Back brake has its uses
...but stopping is not one of them. Don't get me wrong: a small application of the rear brake helps slow down a bit faster and stabilize the bike in day-to-day braking. Like I said though (and this is not my arrogance speaking, but the words of many authors and coaches ^_^), especially on a sportier bike like mine, under hard braking there is virtually no grip in the rear and it's cake to lock.
I understand fear of an insta-down with a locked front on a slippery surface, and maybe if you're on a painted line or crossing a patch of ice that is something to worry about, but believe me, it took me plenty of lock-ups in rain and shine to learn where the threshold of traction was, and I've never been down as a result. I find it much less scary than locking the rear. It's one of the few cases in motorcycle riding when your natural instincts are EXACTLY what you need to do (you know, UNLIKE where you look, counter-steering, controlling a spinning rear, staying relaxed when the bike becomes unsettled, etc.). You'll react before you know it, releasing the lever and restoring grip to the front before you can think about what's going on.
I'm not saying that you should go out and lock the front all the time. I'm just saying that, if you learn where that point is in a controlled environment, you won't be crippled by your fear to use the front brake when you need it most.
</soapbox>
Really have to be careful
Really have to be careful with this topic folks. There is a lot of varying situations that will call for a different reaction...that's where saddle time and practice helps.
Some things that will change the correct answer:
Cruiser or Sport
Dry high traction surface
Wet slippery limited traction
Gravel or loose traction
Direction of intended travel (or trying not to)
Speed of travel
Traffic congestion
Reaction time and acting on it
So many varying degrees of changes that can be made there is no ONE umbrella answer. For instance if you are on a semi slick road with plenty straight travel distance and need to hammer the brakes ( lets say Deer) more back brake might be more prudent. Sure the rear will skid and can fish tail but if you get enough practice at it (like those of us in rural areas) you know how to keep it from going wide, and to stay on it until stopping. Though this would also be a good point of argument for the ABS crowd. Jamming the front brakes are a good answer here also though most instincts will be to naturally lock up all the oh shit muscles and a slight turn and loss of traction in the front will bring you down quickly. Practice the hard stops as mentioned above and you can minimize that risk. However we are addressing beginners, not gray beards.
Change any of those variables and the right answer or "close enough for government work" answers can apply.
****Life's journey is not to arrive at the grave safely in a well preserved body, but, rather to skid in sideways, totally worn out, shouting "Holy Shit....What a ride!!!"****
Well, I don't think any of us
Well, I don't think any of us are pretending to be experts. Any complete beginner reading this should at least understand it is a discussion of differing opinions and take everything said with a healthy dose of skepticism.
If you reduce the variables to wet slippery road in a straight line where you need to stop as quickly as possible with a potential need to swerve, what is your best braking strategy?
I understand that cruisers are less prone to rear lock ups than sport bikes, but is the fundamental principle that most of your stopping power comes from the front different? I have never seen that so I will assume it is still true.
So I am struggling to understand your deer example. By not using the front brake you are increasing your stopping distance. By locking the rear (assuming you do) you have just increased your stopping distance even more. And once you lock it you pretty much have to keep it locked or else risk doing a Buzz Lightyear impression. The only benefit is you can still steer but I am doubtful if you could steer around said deer with a fishtailing locked rear (man, that was poetry :)
I honestly believe Gary would have stopped before the red light if he had used more front brake.
Too fast and surprised by the light turning yellow
"I honestly believe Gary would have stopped before the red light if he had used more front brake."
I agree with that. I even said that I could have used more front brake (if I really needed to), but there's more to it. In that specific stop, it was in the beginning of the ride, I was going a little too fast (going about 50 mph with a 40 mph speed limit), got surprised by the light turning yellow, became indecisive whether to go or stop, so I eneded up needing to brake more heavily than I normally do, wet or dry. I knew the painted area (arrows, cross-walk, etc.) was coming up in the intersection, didn't want to risk a slide out with heavy front braking on the painted surfaces, so I started with both brakes but reduced the front braking pressure as I got close to the intersection, knowing if I overshot the cross-walk it wouldn't be by that much, given that there was no pedestrian, I had a clear view of the wide open intersection and cars on the cross-street have not started moving yet. So I overshot the intersection by about 6 feet, used that extra distance to buy some braking margin, but still in a (kind of) controlled manner. I'm not disputing that this wasn't a rider error, started with going too fast.
By the way, about 2 hours later toward the end of the ride, almost the same situation occured again (I was still going too fast ;-) and I just continued thru the intersection.
To me, the whole business of riding the street safely is not about having the ultimate skills or squeezing the last ounce of physical performance out of the equiment. I work on improving my skills continuously to increase my safety margin, but safety is more about judgment, knowing what I can get away with, and knowing where I got to slow the hell down and not take any chances even if I had the skills to.
braking in the wet
eon and eternal, are you advocating no front/rear braking bias adjustment when riding in the dry vs. wet? That controdicts all the professional opinions I read in various books and websites about wet riding. Tracking riding is about exploring the limits, where as street riding is about maximizing the margin of safety. On the MP3 w/ 2 front wheels that eon has, I'd imagine the margin of safety of front lock-up in the wet is higher than a normal motorcycle w/ just 1 front wheel.
At the risk of over simplification but to illustrate there is a different between dry and wet braking:
- On "clean" wet pavement, going straight, normal street riding, not much adjustment is needed compared to dry. The front brake can and will provide most of the stopping power.
- On "special" surfaces (painted lines, rail road crossing, man hole cover, mud, wet leaves, etc.) that may have decent traction when dry, but have very low traction when wet, avoid touching the brakes in the wet, and certainly not the front brake.
- Wet traction is a continuous variable between the above two extremes, so you need to adjust your front/rear braking bias according to the condition, speed, deceleration needed, your experience, etc. Since you can't tell with 100% certainty where you are in that traction continuum, the strategy from expert advice is to be more conservative - a) slow down, so you don't need that much braking force in the first place; b) since you're going slower, you can afford to give up some front braking power and rely more on rear braking power, in exchange for the lower chance of locking up the front.
Off-road (low traction) riders heavily "bias" their braking toward the rear to reduce the risk of front lock up. The point is not to say that you don't use the front brake in the wet, but that the front/rear bias should to be adjusted based on the traction available to you.
No I don't advocate that
Using the front vs. rear is all a question of where the traction is. What I'm claiming is that there is more traction in your front wheel than you think during MOST wet riding. Moreover, both you and I have tiny weenie crappy rear brakes. If I were to stop using only the rear brake, it would take me about 4-5x as long. So even in the wet, I still clamp hard on the front when I'm straight-up-and-down. Yes, I use the rear brake too, but on my bikes, the rear is too weak to do much. I'd be dead without the front.
You're right, however: there are special conditions in which the risk of losing traction in one wheel is greater and so more caution should be used. You cite off-road riding as an extreme (but good) example of this, and while it may be too different to be applicable to the road, it is a good example of how super-low traction conditions are a safer place for rear slides and much more punishing to front skids. It's simply a question of when you choose to alter your braking bias. For me, it's almost never. I'll be careful using the front on a manhole cover, a sewer grate, some slick-looking paint, wet leaves, etc. but if I know that might be in my future (i.e. if I'm riding blind turns and can't see ahead, or if I know the road hazards ahead, etc.), I will have already reduced my speed to compensate for my not being able to stop worth sh%&. If you're going 50mph, you better be able to use the front brake, because the rear isn't going to stop you before hell freezes over.
You're right: riding on the street is about maximizing your margin of safety. Which is why I'm a big pussy on the street (as we've discussed earlier in this thread). I don't advocate knowing how to get 99% braking potential from your brakes because I need that on a regular basis. On the contrary, maximizing your margin of safety starts with, as you said, judgement, the use of which controls the speed you are traveling such that you will be less likely to put yourself at risk. If you were not going so fast, and you were not taken by surprise by a light turning yellow, and you had practiced braking more under a wider variety of conditions and instinctively balanced your braking approach without having to think, you would not have failed to brake before the intersection.
These are all things that come with practice, both of judgement and motorcycle skills. I'm no master of this stuff, and I've only been riding for a few years, so I'm not going to pretend I have this down at all. But I will say this: you know riding is more dangerous than driving by far, and in the end, it is not just judgement that will save your ass, but judgement combined with reflex, optimal, and instantaneous reactions that will protect you from the unexpected things that come up in riding. No, it's not about being able to brake from 120mph-0mph as fast as possible and regularly exercising that ability on the street. It's about having the skills to get your bike to obey you, but using judgement to avoid having to use them until something inevitably crops up to try to kill you. And it will happen.
I didn't say not to use the
I didn't say not to use the fronts at all.... just not to jamm on it... this will assist in shortening the distance.. and yes you can steer with the front loosed up to a degree. Pull that front brake too hard and you have 2 options both is up to big man upstairs. Cruisers really aren't all that less likely to lock up but you do have other way to counter that, one is there is decent weight back there and 2 something I was taught by a gray beard was to slide a bit back on the seat (when reason sticks in your mind) to get more weight back there...
Only reason I can talk on this specifically..... I had to encounter this last week......dang rut season.
****Life's journey is not to arrive at the grave safely in a well preserved body, but, rather to skid in sideways, totally worn out, shouting "Holy Shit....What a ride!!!"****
Well I've got the good book
Well I've got the good book in front of me and on page 119 Mr Hough tells us "in the rain, you have less total traction available for braking, but you can share the braking almost equally between front and back". I think the theory is since you are not braking as hard (due to less traction) there is less weight transfer to the front therefore you have a more 50/50 split than in the dry.
You also goes onto claim in More PM that "It might surprise you that many cruisers and touring bikes out-stop the sportbikes". He argues that race bikes are not designed for quick stops but for cornering quickly. I guess the short wheel base helps cornering but causes the rear to lift under heavy braking. This loss of traction means you cannot use all the power of the front brake available to you (or you would flip over).
And lastly he tells us studies like the Hurt report have shown riders in accidents made critical errors when braking. The primary sin being using too much rear brake and not enough front (this last bit is not talking about wet conditions, just in general).
Well that was a worthwhile refresher.
I'll toss in on the brakes
I'll toss in on the brakes just as a result of riding with some Sporty vets one day. I was talking about upgrading the brakes, yda yda and one of them asked why. Long story short, he told me to squeeze harder. He was dead on. If I just kept squeezing, it just kept grabbing . . I was using a fraction of that bikes ability at the time. His little, simple statement changed the way i ride.
Like a gun, squeeze, don't jerk. On the Sporty I could almost lift that big heavy ass off the ground and never worry the front was going to skid in the least. Just progressively "squeeze" the brake and you feel what its doing. In every circumstance, in panic stops from speed, your front brake is the majority by FAR of your stopping power. It's not a question of "should" you rely on the front the most, you in fact should. It is a question of control . . smooth is fast, smooth is safe, smooth is a fast stop. Control.
My Dyna is real ass heavy . . . I get good stopping power from the back, but the front is still 80% or MORE of it when it has to be a FAST stop. For any new rider, my advise is use both 100% of the time at speed, train the habit, then a year or two down the road if you want to fine tune . .more power to you. But in a real world life or death panic stop, you should have front and rear on the edge of traction for 100% stopping power. It is in using both brakes every time you learn to "know" where the edge of traction is in ant given environment. It is in the "progressive", "controlled" application you sort out how much stopping power lands on what wheel and where . .you "feel" it.
I still fish tail my ass end now and again when I land my boot down to hard in a traffic disaster . . but I have never lost the front . . don't under estimate its value and the amount of control it has to offer. In environments full of gravel or sand or slat . . .well "panic" should not apply to a "predictable environment". Don't over ride the road.
And keep in mind, front skids and you can let go, let it roll and get back on it. Ass skids and you are now at risk of being flicked of off the bike if you let it roll again . .far more skill in recovering the rear skid . . .
2006 Harley Davidson Dyna Wide Glide
Sales, Peterson's North Miami Store
So true
Again, Elwood with the wise words. Most people have no idea how hard they can squeeze the front brake, and therefore have no idea how much stopping power the front actually carries. On my DR-Z the brakes are crap compared to my GSX-R, and combined with the softy front suspension, it took me a full day of playing in a parking lot to realize that, despite the nose diving and when I squeeze the brakes a little, I could really just rail on more and more front brake until I was stopping in about half the time.
As far as what Mr. Hough says about sportbikes being slower to stop, I think he may be referring to anecdotal evidence seen on the road, because a GOOD sportbike rider SHOULD be able to outbreak just about anything in the dry or on clean wet pavement (let's forget paint and debris for the moment) EDIT: for people reading this after the fact, the previous sentence is straight-up WRONG. See the following discussion. This is because sportbikes cheat. They have far more powerful front brakes, and they have more traction due to stickier tires. And no, their short wheelbase does not mean they can't brake hard. It only means that the rider has to be much more careful about where they put their bodyweight under heavy braking.
If you watch racing you will find that racers will very rarely ever lift a rear wheel, and when they do its considered to be a mistake. Just like wheeling on acceleration, doing a stoppie on the brakes is a waste of your braking power. The fact is that you have to TRY to do a stoppie once you put your bodyweight in the right place. Most street sportbikers don't; they put the weight of their torso on the bars, putting much more weight into the front, compressing the front forks, and allowing the rear to come up. Racers, on the other hand, keep their weight off the bars entirely, so under heavy braking their weight is still firmly on the seat and on the pegs. I've never accidentally stoppied my GSX-R, but in the parking lot that day, I lifted a rear wheel three times on my DR-Z (on accident...I'm no stunter) trying to find maximum braking power just due to the dive of the front forks and change in weight distribution.
braking performance of sportbike vs. cruisers
"As far as what Mr. Hough says about sportbikes being slower to stop, I think he may be referring to anecdotal evidence seen on the road, because a GOOD sportbike rider SHOULD be able to outbreak just about anything in the dry or on clean wet pavement (let's forget paint and debris for the moment)."
eternal, have you read Total Control by Lee Parks?
In Chapter 11 on Braking, Lee Parks states in item 6):
“Modern sport and race bikes are all limited by their wheelbase or center of gravity. Improving items like the calipers, pads, and tires will not affect the bike’s minimum distance potential.”
“In fact, if cruisers had stickier tires, they would crush sportbikes on the brakes. Right now, the best cruisers stop just as well, and more consistently, than sportbikes.” (Cruisers tend to have less sticky, longer lasting tires by choice for long distance cruising.)
Motorcycle Consumer News did a 60-0 braking comparison test on various types of bikes, including sportbikes. Most of the top-10 performers were cruisers. I think the test was done in 2006. Most of bikes listed in the test seemed to be older models, but the test results illustrated the same idea stated in books from Lee Parks and David Hough, etc.
No doubt
Sorry. I over-spoke earlier as a result of non-representative experiences I've had. I spoke so assertively earlier because I've seen sportbikes go up against more relaxed tourers and cruisers at the track, and I've even seen the lead instructor for my local track's performance riding school race around the track on his Harley just to show what can be done with any bike. In these situations, anecdotally, the sportbike "wins" on the brakes. I don't know why, and it was silly of me to accuse Hough of "anectodal evidence" when that's all I have to work with.
But now I have a question with respect to this quote:
"Improving items like the calipers, pads, and tires will not affect the bike’s minimum distance potential."
Why then do MotoGP teams spend oodles of money on carbon rotors and fancy brake pads? If braking potential was already limited by inherent characteristics of frame geometry (something they'd know with all their research and data acquisition), why spend thousands of dollars per bike to make it brake harder? It makes sense to me that cruisers, especially with stickier tires, would be able to brake harder...but this doesn't make sense to me.
Fancy sportbike brakes are for "extended and heavy" use
The high-dollar braking systems (like those carbon ceramic brakes and huge brake discs on exotic and race cars/bikes) buy you the ability for "extended and heavy" braking, such as under racing conditoins, when the repeated and heavy braking would cause a lesser braking system to overheat and "fade". It's not about increasing the stopping power (shorter stopping distance), but about better efficiency (less lever pressure), better modulation, and the ability to handle extended high temp operation through out a race.
In other words, a cruiser may be able to brake just as hard as a sportbike for normal street riding where the brakes get a chance to cool down between applications, but put it in a racing situation with repeated hard braking, in a couple of laps its brakes may overheat and fade to the point of being useless. The flip side of that is most sportbikes with race-ready hardware are totally overkill for normal street use.
MMMmm interesting...
Good call on the brake fade issue. I'd totally forgotten about that, which is sad, because my brake system modification was largely to combat that issue. Brake feel and ease of use (i.e. less force required on lever) is a no-brainer. Thanks!
I should point out David
I should point out David Hough was basing his statement on feedback from the MCN test riders. I think his book was cobbled together from his articles published in MCN so he probably heard firsthand from those guys. And while there is no guarantee they are expert riders, the fact they ride bikes for a living would mean they have more skills than most of us. And the ability to jump on differing bikes back to back and to a direct comparison is invaluable.
Frame geometry
Hough is talking about frame geometry. Just as an extended swing arms allows more energy to be usefully applied to driving the rear wheel, the extended fork rake found on most cruisers theoretically allows more force to be applied to stopping the front wheel (if all other factors are equal). I don't think he was making a comparison between what top riders might be capable of. A little research of tested stopping distances often highlights that a number of cruisers, including ones with otherwise subpar discs and calipers, turn up some really decent stops, often matching some sport bikes with "better" suspension and brakes.
I'm not smart enough to understand all the physics involved, but I have picked up a few pearls of wisdom -- including: If you're continually unintentionally locking up your rear brake, you're either pushing too hard or too suddenly on that right foot pedal thingy. And on a sport or standard, the harder you're stopping, the easier it is to lock the rear.
And like Elwood mentions, you can recover from a rear end skid. IMO, it's best to stay on the lock up while shifting your weight to bring the wheels into alignment (so you are skidding straight behind the front tire), then you can release the rear brake and you're back in control. Learning how to end a skid can be very useful as it puts you back in full control.I've done this before on the freeway when trying to skid to a stop would have sent me into the back of a line of stopped cars. Once the skid was over, I was able to change course and slip around the stopped cars, giving me the extra 20 feet I needed to safely stop (plus, it probably looked fairly cool to folks watching who didn't know I was simultenously crapping my pants!).
.... yeah I'm a nerd I'll admit soooooo.....
"Hough is talking about frame geometry. Just as an extended swing arms allows more energy to be usefully applied to driving the rear wheel, the extended fork rake found on most cruisers theoretically allows more force to be applied to stopping the front wheel (if all other factors are equal). I don't think he was making a comparison between what top riders might be capable of. A little research of tested stopping distances often highlights that a number of cruisers, including ones with otherwise subpar discs and calipers, turn up some really decent stops, often matching some sport bikes with "better" suspension and brakes."
As a new rider I know only what I read and much less from experiance. On the other hand several years of yeomans work in dynamics/physics (but not geometry specifically) ;) was screaming at me and you totally nailed it.
All else being equal- brakes/riders/conditions a touring/cruiser will be able to maximize MORE of its front brake than its sportbike competitor with a shorter wheel base simply because when you apply a force like that and it shifts the weight you get a lever that lifts up to the air- if there is a vertical force in the negative direction (i.e. saddle bags) its going to only help that coefficient of friction that is present on that contact patch. If the only weight a sport bike has is joblow 160 bls on a 425 lb bike and the weight is shifting forward and me joblow alreaady leaned forward you have much less of a negative force trying to keep that coefficient of friction engaged and its WAAAAAY more likely to pop up.
Basically its an algebra + dynamic forces equallity problem and you get a greater than less than situation The road pushes back on the bike equally- and that contact patch which we are all familar with- needs to have a certain amount of force on it- as soon as the numbers go this direction gravity + you plus bike and things < force pushing UP from the road/coefficient of friction your wheel goes up but if you keep the g + all your shit > ground your bike stays down. The shorter the bike the more weight goes forward the less downward force you have to help keep the little packman symbol in your favor.
If that made ANY sense at all- great... if not I'll just go play nerd in my corner with my calculator now.
by the way I totally love reading all of these threads- soooo helpful and intersting! esp for locations and how people handle different things!
Dancing, playing with my pony and playing with my lady.
Work hard, play hard
Life is sweet... very sweet.
Neat!
Thanks for that...'twas rad. Not sure I got it 100%, but fun read all the same :)
ha ha
well I'm sure there are way better ways to describe it or simplier ways and a diagram WOULD have helped and not being 10something at night but its an interesting subject that my education really has helped me understand more of in ways I would have been handicapped as far as understanding is concerned. so i get kind of excited that the fact the "when are we every going to use this" factor came into play. yeah I know. :D
Dancing, playing with my pony and playing with my lady.
Work hard, play hard
Life is sweet... very sweet.
"When are we ever going to use this" factor?
Well if you want to feel better, at one point in my life I was a music major! Not to say I haven't used that education around the house on a daily basis, but the opportunities for professional application of 90% of the curriculum are...shall we say, hard to come by...
ha ha ha yeah I suspect thats
ha ha ha yeah I suspect thats pretty limited for around the house applications. Thats pretty much how i narrowed my major to begin with- whats most practical and what can I actually do. I'm constantly suprised at how much I do actually use in random locations (the bike stuff coming into play big at this point is pretty fun)
Dancing, playing with my pony and playing with my lady.
Work hard, play hard
Life is sweet... very sweet.
Couple of suggestions for you...
I've heard it said, and it makes sense...you can have 20,000 miles of riding experience, or you can have one mile of riding experience 20,000 times. I think it's great that you're reaching out and saying, "hey, I need more tools in my tool box to feel comfortable!" I think that's a great attitude.
Here are couple of suggestions;
> Don't worry about going fast, worry about technique...be fanatical about technique, and understand how to take a proper line. First comes technique, and then comes speed.
> Be very careful with group riding. I can't emphasize this enough. In my opinion, group riding is one of the most dangerous things a person can do on a motorcycle. There are a BUNCH of reasons for this, not the least of which is you are bound to have people that will ride over their experience level and crash, possibly taking you with them! The other challenge is trying to "wick it up" just a bit to try to stay with another faster rider. This causes crashes every weekend. The person you're following may be faster, but may or may not have ANY technique at all. Try to avoid too much group riding. I do!
> I encourage new riders to keep a journal about what they learn with every ride. You should learn something each and every time you go out and writing it down is a good way to steepen your learning curve.
> On riding in the rain; smooth inputs are key. Even smoother than in dry conditions. SSSSSqqqqqquuuuuueeeeezzzzz your front brakes and very smmmmooooooottttthhhhly apply your rear brakes. You still have to press to initiate a turn. I see a lot of riders try to keep the bike upright when turning in the rain. Won't work. Don't find yourself in a situation where you were concerned there wasn't enough grip to turn and wind up having to quickly apply the brakes which causes you to crash, especially when there was plenty of traction available to turn!
> On braking....a lot of interesting discussion on brakes in the last several posts. There are many, many variables that go into total stopping distance, not the least of which are contact patch size, vehicle weight, chassis geometry and the ability of the brakes to shed heat.
SOME big touring bikes CAN stop faster, primarily due to contact patch and stearing geometry. But again, we're talking about stopping in a straight line, and not using a proper trail braking technique where big bikes are down right squireley!
Allen Dye
MSF Rider Coach
Track Day Instructor
Ironbutt Rally Finisher '03-'05
There we go
"But again, we're talking about stopping in a straight line, and not using a proper trail braking technique where big bikes are down right squirrely!"
THAT's it. That's why I see sportbikes rock the brakes at the track. Their suspension, build geometry, etc. allow them to carry trail braking safely up to corner apex, giving the appearance of later braking than some other, less-steeply-raked bikes...good call.
<"But again, we're talking
<"But again, we're talking about stopping in a straight line, and not using a proper trail braking technique where big bikes are down right squirrely!"
THAT's it. That's why I see sportbikes rock the brakes at the track. Their suspension, build geometry, etc. allow them to carry trail braking safely up to corner apex, giving the appearance of later braking than some other, less-steeply-raked bikes...good call.>
yeah you start changing the environment in which braking conditions change then yes each bike will brake differently. And sport bikes will invariably perform better on the track for braking and well all else- they are built for that. The comments I made were/are made under the premis that all circumstances being equal for braking purposes only.
Dancing, playing with my pony and playing with my lady.
Work hard, play hard
Life is sweet... very sweet.
Sorry, one more thing on brakes...
Brakes on modern bikes of any style are simply incredible. When properly applied, the brakes are far more capable than you could ever imagine. One of the challenges with the rapidly expolding technology in motorcyles and especially in sportbikes, is that 90%+ of the riders couldn't squeeze 70%+ of the potential out of a sportbike when they first hit the market in the 80's. Skills have improved generally, but no where near the pace of technology. I see 20 year old sportbikes SPANKING modern sportbikes every weekend at the track in the hands of capable riders. It's a hoot!
Allen Dye
MSF Rider Coach
Track Day Instructor
Ironbutt Rally Finisher '03-'05
I would add it's important to
I would add it's important to go out and practice. After having this conversation I went out and practiced braking in the wet. Found out that it is very easy to lock up using just the back brake. Still easy but not so much when using just the front. Using both together I had to really work at locking up. Gave me confidence to squeeze harder knowing where the limit was. Also had fun timing the braking to end up in a puddle with leaves. Instant lockup! Also leaning over on wet leaves was a scary moment. Nice to practice these things though in safe environment (an empty MSF practice range).
ps. is it just me or is this thread getting too long for Firefox? Had to go back to IE to read the past few comments.