|
You can definitely brake while leaned over, surprisingly hard as well. As Z3n said, just gotta figure out how much it'll effect you and your bike.
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2013 02:00
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 16, 2024 00:05 |
|
|
Z3n posted:Eh, just go out to a giant parking lot or something and try it. Get the bike to maintain a lean angle at around 30-40mph, drag a little brake, and see what happens. Try it while hanging off, while sitting on the bike, while looking through the corner, not looking through the corner, etc. Changes in bike geometry, suspension setup, rake, trail, tire profile and pressure, etc, all have different contributing factors to this, and for me, the goal is always to have a bike that handles very neutrally. There's no substitute for going out there and figuring out how you react on your bike though. Most of the time, I want my bikes, track and street, to be neutral enough to set a given lean angle and hold it naturally. Adding throttle should increase the arc of my turn due to higher speed, and adding brake should decrease it due to scrubbing speed, but I try and get my bikes to the point where each input has no affect on the other inputs I could give, so I can combine inputs like trail braking and adding lean angle, and have a consistent set of results. Really? No wall of text going into the physics of it? I was just curious because you're the first person I've heard say that using the front when leaned over doesn't stand the bike up.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2013 03:24
|
|
|
A well setup bike will let you turn in harder given sufficient traction as getting on the front brake shortens the wheel base of the bike & loads the front end which can assist with grip before it all gets to be too much and you lose it all. Do it all the time on the track, trail a little harder to turn in a bit sharper at apex. On the street, in the rain, on 'just some bike', I'll brake when leaned over only if necessary to avoid a collision if I can otherwise avoid needing to, just to keep a nice safety bubble of available traction at all times.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2013 04:27
|
|
|
nsaP posted:Really? No wall of text going into the physics of it? I was just curious because you're the first person I've heard say that using the front when leaned over doesn't stand the bike up. Do enough research and you discover that motorcycles are still pretty much black magic as far as the significant forces of physics that go into play. We still don't really understand how bicycles work, let alone motorcycles.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2013 04:30
|
|
|
Z3n posted:Do enough research and you discover that motorcycles are still pretty much black magic as far as the significant forces of physics that go into play. We still don't really understand how bicycles work, let alone motorcycles. We can accurately place car-sized rovers on Mars and you think we can't understand bike physics? That's a bit hard to swallow.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2013 10:44
|
|
|
I remember a quote from Faster or Fastest, one of those documentaries about the MotoGP bikes and one of the technicians explained it as aeroplane physics but on the ground. As he put it; "At this level the bikes are basically flying on the ground. We have to take into account lots of the same considerations as aeronautical technicians"
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2013 11:43
|
|
|
nsaP posted:Really? No wall of text going into the physics of it? I was just curious because you're the first person I've heard say that using the front when leaned over doesn't stand the bike up. This is a really good post by Nick Ienatsch on the subject of using the front brake in a corner; http://www.advrider.com/forums/showthread.php?t=805304 The short of it is basically of course you can use the front brake in a corner as long as you apply it smoothly. People tend to grab at it in a panic situation which either breaks traction low siding them or bottoms out the suspension on the front end standing the bike up. Note you can do this in the wet too, I live in the desolate wasteland of North England and practice this regularly. Like most things on a bike finesse is important.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2013 11:46
|
|
|
EightBit posted:We can accurately place car-sized rovers on Mars and you think we can't understand bike physics? That's a bit hard to swallow. We've got computer simulations devoted to understanding the smallest effects revolving around aerospace travel, things as detailed as modeling the air off the lip of a plane's wing at supersonic speeds and how that causes a bunch of micro turbulence and sonic booms. There are decades of work around spaceflight by many, many brilliant minds with incredible amounts of funding with a single, repeatable, consistent goal that is unchanging - get spaceship from point a to point b. Motorcycles, on the other hand, as a constant moving target. Not only do advances in tires, engines, frame design, suspension, etc, allow for a faster bike to be made, everything is also particular to the rider. You can make the "right bike" for one rider, and it can be completely wrong for another. For an extreme example of that, see Casey Stoner's success on the Ducati. As every motorcycle is interpreted by a rider, rather than having a clearly defined, singular goal like getting from A to B, the value of understanding the system from a purely physical standpoint is far less valuable than getting the rider around the track as quickly as possible. Motorcycles are as much more about the human / machine interface, and primary development is easier to simply test in real life then devote a bunch of resources to modeling something. You only get one shot at sending a rover to mars, so it's better to model obsessively, get there slower, and get there right. Motorcycles, it's better to just throw a bunch of riders at a bike and sort out the preferences of each one, as "right" is not clearly definable. As a result of this, no, we don't model motorcycle physics. We don't really understand how they work because it's mostly irrelevant. A technician can set up the bike technically correct, but the rider can hate everything about it, and it is wrong as a result. We've got some general guidelines...most people like geometry values in these lines, most geometry works like this, but if you read books on experimental frame and suspension design, you discover that no one really knows why it works. Most motorcycle design is cargo cult by nature as sport bikes are specified to perform under riders who ride them in a way that no one else in the world is capable of. And on top of that, there will be significant disagreement between those riders on the right way to set all of the suspension, tuning, etc. And that's why we can put a rover on mars but we don't bother to model motorcycle design, performance, and handling. Z3n fucked around with this message at 18:02 on Dec 22, 2013 |
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2013 17:56
|
|
|
OK I'll bite. "Cargo cult"?
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2013 20:03
|
|
|
Me thinks you may be suffering from a case of logical fallacy. Human Factors in aviation (and Aerospace Engineering) is a multi billion dollar investment by hundreds of aircraft manufactures and governments to progress human space earth/space travel and safety. There are government agencies investing more money then you can comprehend to sort this stuff out. Motorcycles are a hobby 1 or 2 people you know do for fun, and 1/100th of those take the bikes to the extreme where such precision is needed. If motorcycling had anywhere near the effects of Aviation, we would have everything MC related down to the exact same science.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2013 20:15
|
|
|
Rev. Dr. Moses P. Lester posted:OK I'll bite. "Cargo cult"? Its an interesting phrase I've only ever heard on SA before You guys raise a good point though - we need zeroG moon bieks. Someone played golf on the moon, why not a little cratermoto? Paging Red Bull/KTM to the Marketing Phone.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2013 20:22
|
|
|
EightBit posted:We can accurately place car-sized rovers on Mars and you think we can't understand bike physics? That's a bit hard to swallow. No there are legitimately some unsolved questions about motorcycle/bicycle physics. This article touches on it a little bit, but one big thing is we don't really know the reason why bikes stay upright when they're moving. We literally don't know what physical properties of a bike cause it to behave that way. Science isn't a RTS tech tree. We can do crazy advanced poo poo while still having weird unanswered questions floating around.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2013 20:23
|
|
|
Look guys I think the point is that z3n is a space cowboy on the edge of a frontier unknown to man, he's out there pushing the limits, trail braking into the abyss. Finding out where the edge of the razor is, turning to face the darkness and revving his 690 into it's vast gaze. This isn't for some sissy boys in lab coats, you gotta live this to learn it bro. Unless you're a rider you can't comprehend what it means.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2013 20:27
|
|
|
Modern Day Hercules posted:No there are legitimately some unsolved questions about motorcycle/bicycle physics. This article touches on it a little bit, but one big thing is we don't really know the reason why bikes stay upright when they're moving. We literally don't know what physical properties of a bike cause it to behave that way. Science isn't a RTS tech tree. We can do crazy advanced poo poo while still having weird unanswered questions floating around. To test the relative contributions of these factors, the authors eventually built their own computer model of a bicycle and started playing around with various features. It turned out that they could eliminate both the gyroscopic and the negative trail factors, and the bike would still be stable as long as it was moving faster than 2.3 meters (7.5 feet) per second. Just saying.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2013 20:34
|
|
|
HNasty posted:Look guys I think the point is that z3n is a space cowboy on the edge of a frontier unknown to man, he's out there pushing the limits, trail braking into the abyss. Finding out where the edge of the razor is, turning to face the darkness and revving his 690 into it's vast gaze. This isn't for some sissy boys in lab coats, you gotta live this to learn it bro. Unless you're a rider you can't comprehend what it means. It's like you've seen the innermost me. Come ride with me, space cowboy. xaarman posted:Me thinks you may be suffering from a case of logical fallacy. Human Factors in aviation (and Aerospace Engineering) is a multi billion dollar investment by hundreds of aircraft manufactures and governments to progress human space earth/space travel and safety. There are government agencies investing more money then you can comprehend to sort this stuff out. quote:There are decades of work around spaceflight by many, many brilliant minds with incredible amounts of funding with a single, repeatable, consistent goal that is unchanging  I guess I should have explicitly spelled out that obviously governments aren't investing in motorcycles like they do in spaceflight but I sort of figured that'd be obvious. Rev. Dr. Moses P. Lester posted:OK I'll bite. "Cargo cult"? Basically because all bikes are at the point where development takes place in a very limited window - we have pretty established ranges of values for steering geometry what will make motorcycle "handle" according to most riders. The notable exception being the BMW stuff, but even they went with standard forks for the S1000RR. Z3n fucked around with this message at 20:57 on Dec 22, 2013 |
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2013 20:50
|
|
|
The Mars Rovers are actually pretty unsophisticated, relatively speaking. They're running on hardware that would be an embarrassment to a modern smartphone and get there using launch systems whose last big innovation was in the 80s (well technically lithobraking is a new concept but it's still using 1970s technology). More importantly there are still a shitload of things we don't know even in those multitrillion dollar aerospace areas - even pretty fundamental things about how lift actually works are still up for grabs. (For an even freakier derail and example - we thought we had antenna design pretty much nailed down, it's one area where the underlying science is pretty well known and very solidly understood - except genetic algorithms went ahead and designed this thing:  and we have literally no idea why or how it works, only that it is vastly more efficient than anything we've managed to design as a species. There's a reason why science and technology and engineering are separate fields...)
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2013 22:39
|
|
|
Do you have an article for that antenna? Cool as gently caress.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2013 22:45
|
|
|
BlackMK4 posted:Do you have an article for that antenna? Cool as gently caress. Just wiki, but: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolved_antenna
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2013 23:06
|
|
|
Did that iteratively evolved FPGA thing turn out to be legit?
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2013 23:08
|
|
|
This is all pretty interesting, but the instinct not to slam the front brake while leaning is pretty deeply ingrained. It was a snap decision and it paid off at the time. Without the grassy verge at the side? Probably not. I'm sure no amount of braking could have slowed me quickly enough on the wet road, but I'll give it a try when I'm next feeling brave in a parking lot.
|
|
#
?
Dec 23, 2013 00:35
|
|
|
No, what the hell is a "cargo cult"?
|
|
#
?
Dec 23, 2013 01:14
|
|
|
Rev. Dr. Moses P. Lester posted:No, what the hell is a "cargo cult"? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cargo_cult#Metaphorical_uses_of_the_term
|
|
#
?
Dec 23, 2013 01:24
|
|
|
goddamnedtwisto posted:The Mars Rovers are actually pretty unsophisticated, relatively speaking. They're running on hardware that would be an embarrassment to a modern smartphone and get there using launch systems whose last big innovation was in the 80s (well technically lithobraking is a new concept but it's still using 1970s technology). No, we have plenty of knowledge on why poo poo like that works, it's just that our design methods are a bit lacking. We programmed a computer to try a bunch of poo poo and this is what stuck, so obviously our understanding of physics allowed us to make the program.
|
|
#
?
Dec 23, 2013 03:34
|
|
|
EightBit posted:No, we have plenty of knowledge on why poo poo like that works, it's just that our design methods are a bit lacking. We programmed a computer to try a bunch of poo poo and this is what stuck, so obviously our understanding of physics allowed us to make the program. I really have no idea what I'm talking about but going by what you said succeeding by trial and error doesn't necessarily mean you understand why what you did works, just that it does.
|
|
#
?
Dec 23, 2013 03:38
|
|
|
Covert Ops Wizard posted:I really have no idea what I'm talking about but going by what you said succeeding by trial and error doesn't necessarily mean you understand why what you did works, just that it does. The computer had to evaluate it via simulating the properties of the antenna, therefore we know how it works, just that designing it with traditional methods wouldn't achieve the same result. It's not some mysterious unexplained thing.
|
|
#
?
Dec 23, 2013 04:13
|
|
|
Automotive Insanity > Cycle Asylum › https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OvmvxAcT_Yc Content: riding home from my girlfriend's place just now on a nice curvy two-lane road I've ridden tons of times before. I came into a blind corner a little hot, flinched at a car in the opposite lane, straightened out and almost went wide into the opposite curb as it S-curved the other direction. Thankfully I repeated "DONTTARGETFIXATEDONTTARGETFIXATE LOOKTHROUGHTHECURVELOOKTHROUGHTHECURVE" in my head and made it through. Felt like an idiot. The Royal Nonesuch fucked around with this message at 04:38 on Dec 23, 2013 |
|
#
?
Dec 23, 2013 04:34
|
|
|
Just because John Q ReadsRideApart doesn't grok the sublime mechanics of a motorcycle turning at speed doesn't mean Honda hasn't meticulously modelled it for the next point release of PedrOSX
|
|
#
?
Dec 23, 2013 08:44
|
|
|
Forgive me father for I too am a heretic and have braked mid corner without standing the bike up (Sniff glue, worship supermoto).EightBit posted:The computer had to evaluate it via simulating the properties of the antenna, therefore we know how it works, just that designing it with traditional methods wouldn't achieve the same result. This is true, it's a bad example. EightBit posted:We can accurately place car-sized rovers on Mars and you think we can't understand bike physics? That's a bit hard to swallow. But so is this. There have been more failed Mars missions than successful ones. We often use phenomena without fully understanding how they work. Aerodynamics is a fantastic example, Orville and Wilbur Wright didn't understand aerodynamics, but it didn't stop them making a plane. Even now we still don't understand turbulence fully, and it is a key function of spaceflight from the aerodynamics to the engine design. Similarly we have recently found out that our understanding of bicycle (and thus motorcycle) stability is flawed, and that the traditional explanations of negative trail and gyroscopic forces don't fully cover it after some guys managed to build a working model bicycle that had neither. In on-topic news, I had to borrow MY GIRLFRIEND's vespa this week. It's the first time I've ridden a scooter and it was frankly terrifying. It didn't help that we are experiencing gale force winds and torrential rain right now. I thought metal drain covers in the road were scary on proper bikes, but the little babby wheels on the scooter made even crossing one perfectly straight and upright a puckering experience. Several times at only modest lean angles I felt the little tyres squirming and I had no confidence in the brakes. It's odd, scooters are seen as toys and commuters here; Kids often get them before getting their first 'real' motorcycle or car. Frankly if I had a child I would prefer they started on a small displacement "proper" motorcycle like an RS50 or one of the 50cc babby motards before a scooter. They would have a safer bike and learn clutch control so they would be better prepared for learning how to drive a car. Scooters - Not even once.
|
|
#
?
Dec 23, 2013 14:11
|
|
|
Ah, so I did a fun stupid thing on the Harley a few days back. I hit the rear brake while in a turn since my city has some silly roads that go from a tight turn right into a light. Normally, no problem, but apparently I put too much on the rear and it started locking up and slipping (the road being wet likely did not help). I immediately pulled the clutch in and lined up the bike as best I could and released the rear brake in a controlled fashion. It jerked me forward a bit but I just reacted naturally and slowed to a stop at the red. Scared the crap out of me.
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2013 05:48
|
|
|
ArbitraryTA posted:Ah, so I did a fun stupid thing on the Harley a few days back. I hit the rear brake while in a turn since my city has some silly roads that go from a tight turn right into a light. Normally, no problem, but apparently I put too much on the rear and it started locking up and slipping (the road being wet likely did not help). I immediately pulled the clutch in and lined up the bike as best I could and released the rear brake in a controlled fashion. It jerked me forward a bit but I just reacted naturally and slowed to a stop at the red. Glad you're good, but whenever I hear someone describing a near miss on a Harley, I just picture a stereotypical long-bearded, bandana-wearing, leather vest-having older guy wiping the sweat off his brow and proudly proclaiming "Whew, it was a close call! I almost didn't get to lay'erdown in time." I think I'm bike racist, guys. 
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2014 00:54
|
|
|
ArbitraryTA posted:Ah, so I did a fun stupid thing on the Harley a few days back. I hit the rear brake while in a turn since my city has some silly roads that go from a tight turn right into a light. Normally, no problem, but apparently I put too much on the rear and it started locking up and slipping (the road being wet likely did not help). I immediately pulled the clutch in and lined up the bike as best I could and released the rear brake in a controlled fashion. It jerked me forward a bit but I just reacted naturally and slowed to a stop at the red. My Vstar had a touchy rear brake, too. By the end of my 2 years of ownership, I starting having fun controlling the locked-rear slide.
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2014 18:28
|
|
|
clutchpuck posted:My Vstar had a touchy rear brake, too. By the end of my 2 years of ownership, I starting having fun controlling the locked-rear slide. My mechanic was very confused when I complained that my rear brake wasn't easy enough to lock, I really had to stand on it. That's part of the fun of a rear brake!
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2014 23:10
|
|
|
I simply cannot lock the rear brake on the Ulysses or the DT when they're in gear. I accept it, and I'm used to it. Then I got on my friend's KTM 300EXC and tapped the lever ever so lightly to control my descent down a little hill, locked up the rear unexpectedly, and landed me and the bike in a nice little bramble. Do'h!
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2014 23:19
|
|
|
Drifter posted:Glad you're good, but whenever I hear someone describing a near miss on a Harley, I just picture a stereotypical long-bearded, bandana-wearing, leather vest-having older guy wiping the sweat off his brow and proudly proclaiming "Whew, it was a close call! I almost didn't get to lay'erdown in time." No no that's pretty accurate. I drive a Sportster because I adore old school standard bikes, but every time I am around other Harley riders it's almost always one day a month old dudes with bandanas and an attitude.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2014 19:26
|
|
|
60 degrees F today, so I went for a cruise. When I left, I was cautious around the grit on the road from the recent ice. But, on the way home I forgot about it and almost ate it. The combination of a new brake lever (with a different setting then my previous) and sand on the road led to an almost highside at a stop light. I let out the brake once it lost traction and kind of super-manned out—putting my foot down and saving it. Glad I hat on motorcycle boots—they don't have the support of like, track oriented boots but they held up well. There was a teenager in the opposite lane after I turned who gave me a deer-in-the-headlights look. I'm sure I looked like around 3:00 minutes in this video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LU-ynRoqDEs Watch the hole thing, the music is out at the end.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2014 06:01
|
|
|
thylacine posted:60 degrees F today, so I went for a cruise. When I left, I was cautious around the grit on the road from the recent ice. But, on the way home I forgot about it and almost ate it. The combination of a new brake lever (with a different setting then my previous) and sand on the road led to an almost highside at a stop light. I hope you saluted the kid and then popped a wheelie out of there.  I practice my Power Ranger's karate chop thumbs' up moves for specifically the moments something like that happens.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2014 17:14
|
|
|
A new tire and a bit of paper did me in today. I was standing/sitting on the GS pushing it off the center stand (after having installed a new rear tire) when my foot slipped on that goddamn paper causing me to go balls first into the tank. The bike didn't fall over or even wiggle or anything, I just ran into the tank like a boss. My last two bike related injuries have happened when it wasn't running. I believe I am lucky or a klutz.
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2014 04:16
|
|
|
Bugdrvr posted:I believe I am lucky or a klutz. A similar thing happened to me today. I pulled up to a light, and then found myself teetering over. Maybe my foot slipped on road salt a little bit? I don't know. All's I do know is that my thigh is all that prevented 500 lbs of 'Murrican Sportbike from hitting the road.
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2014 04:42
|
|
|
I once dropped my bike (in front of about a hundred other bikers) when i got my tow caught in my tail sack and my standing foot slid out from under me. Thanks Aprilia and your spring-loaded kickstands! Also on Saturday, turning left in heavy traffic, I hit a loving massive bit of broken tarmac that I didn't see quickly enough (too close to the car in front) just as I was tipping in - it was interesting to see how different bits of my body had different ideas about what to do about this, my left hand went "poo poo something's wrong, pull in the clutch!", my right hand went "Quick get on the power to settle the bike!", my right foot, bored with nothing to do, stabbed at and missed the back brake, and my left leg decided it could be a hero and tried to catch the bike (which would have probably snapped my knee like a twig if it had actually managed to find the ground with anything like enough force to make a difference), and my testicles bravely decided to cushion the blow for the rest of my body. As it was the bike just ignored the loving idiot on it's back, jumped a bit, then carried on as if nothing had happened.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2014 08:40
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 16, 2024 00:05 |
|
|
Left a bit earlier than normal this morning and in my half-asleep state completely failed to notice that the road was sparkling. Holy-poo poo I'd forgotten what hitting ice felt like, how I didn't immediately hit the deck will remain a mystery to man and God for ever more! To join in with embarrassing drop chat; I tried doing a u-turn on road with a pretty steep grade, got half way round lost my balance and toppled over incredibly slowly.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2014 14:20
|
|