|
n8r posted:You know what dampers are for right? Have you had issues with headshake? They're for protecting your bike, right?
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2014 00:56
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 5, 2024 18:41 |
|
|
I can't believe people are actually being serious in considering those military marching boots as decent protection in a crash. Have fun with amputated feet, or at best with pins in literally all of your tarsal bones.
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2014 01:03
|
|
|
clutchpuck posted:They're for protecting your bike, right? Nah man, they are for increasing your odds of riding out of a bailed 90mph wheelie when you start to wobble while still on the back tire.
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2014 01:58
|
|
|
Incursus posted:I can't believe people are actually being serious in considering those military marching boots as decent protection in a crash. Have fun with amputated feet, or at best with pins in literally all of your tarsal bones. I can't believe you think crashing in anything but $1000 dedicated racing boots will result in amputated feet. Look at what Moto cops wear...
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2014 02:59
|
|
|
Brain buckets, short sleeved button-up shirts, and polyester pants?
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2014 03:08
|
|
|
Coydog posted:Do those run a little wide, too? Or narrow like a lot of shoes. I have wide feet, and even my dianese were a bit cramped (had to really loosen the laces down there). If you go a half size up, for me at least they are perfect. I have issues where usually the ankle area fits fine but the toe box feels like I'm attempting foot binding. In these there's a lace up system underneath the cinches so I can tighten around my ankle as needed and the toebox area is just about perfect.
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2014 03:22
|
|
|
I don't think anyone is implying that you are literally going to loose your feet if you go down in something other than a dedicated riding boot. But to write off any statistical advantage you have wearing something built for riding is a bit naive. You will have a greater chance of walking normally after a crash by wearing something like an SMX more so than you would a work/combat boot. You'll have a greater chance wearing a work boot than a running shoe, as a shoe will offer more protection than a sandal. The point I'd like to make is the chances grow by leaps and bounds if you choose a riding boot (even a cheaper model) over anything less. More-so with the ankle and fibula than anything. Find a pair of discounted SMX-5's or similar. I've owned a pair for years, they've held up well, and are comfortable enough that I can walk around all day in them if I have to. They aren't very expensive (roughly 1.5 or 2 times the price of a decent work boot), and will last you a lot longer and offer better protection, especially if you go down in them.
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2014 03:34
|
|
|
Crayvex posted:I can't believe you think crashing in anything but $1000 dedicated racing boots will result in amputated feet. Look at what Moto cops wear... Gotta wear something comfy while standing next to your bike behind a road sign/bend in the road for 30-60 minutes at a time.
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2014 03:45
|
|
|
There was a study of motorcycle gear published a while back that showed no difference in protectiveness from one boot to the next (ie., a hiking boot reduced injuries at the same rate as a motorcycle-specific boot). The only thing that was reliably shown was that anything above the ankle is better than anything below the ankle.
Sagebrush fucked around with this message at 04:04 on Aug 29, 2014 |
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2014 03:58
|
|
|
Any recommendations for an upgraded headlight bulb? Leaning towards the PIAA Xtreme White based off reviews.
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2014 04:02
|
|
|
Depending upon the bike you might be better off adding a relay into the headlamp wiring. I went from getting a solid 12.3V at my bulb to the full 13.6V at idle when I added a relay. The light output went from lovely to pretty drat decent even with a stock, million year old H4. I'd check power at the battery at idle and then across the terminals of the bulb (while it's plugged in and on causing a load) and see how much of a difference there is. Anything more than a half a volt or so and I'd wire in a relay. Light output decreases significantly as the operating voltage drops.
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2014 04:14
|
|
|
n8r posted:You know what dampers are for right? Have you had issues with headshake? You know, safety and poo poo! Everyone has one! Looks super track cred bro. MonkeyNutZ posted:Brain buckets, short sleeved button-up shirts, and polyester pants? Over here it's BMW branded ATGATT provided by BMW.
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2014 04:37
|
|
|
Sagebrush posted:There was a study of motorcycle gear published a while back that showed no difference in protectiveness from one boot to the next (ie., a hiking boot reduced injuries at the same rate as a motorcycle-specific boot). The only thing that was reliably shown was that anything above the ankle is better than anything below the ankle. This seems super specious. And I'm not just busting your balls, I basically refuse to believe it's factual.
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2014 05:00
|
|
|
Sagebrush posted:There was a study of motorcycle gear published a while back that showed no difference in protectiveness from one boot to the next (ie., a hiking boot reduced injuries at the same rate as a motorcycle-specific boot). The only thing that was reliably shown was that anything above the ankle is better than anything below the ankle. Eh, you figure that motorcycle boots protect against a specific subset of broken bone injuries, and only within certain bounds, and the chances of that overlapping with someone who wears real boots and has an accident in that range, and that the median speed of a crash is 27mph, so not that fast. But I like my ankles and loving them up sucks cause of all the small bones so I'll wear full boots. For reference, it took a 95mph straight through the windshield track crash (head over heels, right foot driven straight into the track as I flipped) to destroy the inners to my boots - shattered the plastic boot heel, destroyed the ankle mechanism, but was walking and had no broken bones/residual injuries, so totally worth it. Z3n fucked around with this message at 05:06 on Aug 29, 2014 |
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2014 05:01
|
|
|
Inimitable posted:Just got myself a Triumph Street Triple R 2014. You really don't need either. Get a pair of frame sliders for $50 and call it good.
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2014 05:03
|
|
|
ShaneB posted:This seems super specious. And I'm not just busting your balls, I basically refuse to believe it's factual. Someone posted the actual study here when it was new. Maybe six months ago? I can't be arsed to look for it. The data came from actual crashes, and they weren't explicitly saying "any boot is as good as any other boot", but rather "our data does not show a statistically significant difference in injury rates between one class of boot and another." Racing boots are, logically, almost certainly safer than hiking boots, but there isn't enough of a difference in actual accident reports to say. Then again, who knows -- consider that in the SHARP rating system you frequently find extremely expensive full-face helmets that perform more poorly than a cheap HJC full-face. There's no body testing boots the same way, so who knows if what a given manufacturer says about their protective features is accurate? One thing the study did show beyond any shadow of a doubt, though, is that any footwear that goes above the ankle significantly reduces injuries compared to footwear that doesn't, i.e. shoes suck. Probably this has to do with boots actually staying on your feet in a crash.
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2014 05:22
|
|
|
Surely the crucible of WWII would have yielded the necessary advances to keep our boys protected while getting messages to field generals all over the globe. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K3t0yom2TV4 Maybe not. What say you, Old Blighty? Right, leather reinforced pants, nice touch.  OK, surely in the six decades that took us from prop jobs to space travel, military motorcycle boot technology has evolved enough to protect an armed marine about to be dropped in a war zone:  OK, Air Force special ops, come on, blank check, black budget, whaddya got?  What the gently caress, ok AUSTRALIA, peace time exercises, street bikes, pavement, do us proud:  ...
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2014 05:32
|
|
|
Statistics refer to a population, not an individual. Set yourself up for the best outcome as an individual but with a mind to the statistics.
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2014 05:43
|
|
|
nsaP posted:Statistics refer to a population, not an individual. Set yourself up for the best outcome as an individual but with a mind to the statistics. Yup, this sums it up.
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2014 05:52
|
|
|
Gonna blow a few peoples minds and mention that the point of racing boots is NOT to reduce the chance of injuries compared to, say, gum boots or other heavy boots, but to offer the same level of protection while being lightweight and more flexible. If anything dedicated racing boots actually (very slightly) increase the chance of amputation compared to a pair of decent ankle boots. They do reduce the amount of broken ankles slightly but the cost for that is that in doing that they increase the chance of the dreaded spiral tib and fib fracture (because the ankle is effectively a crumple zone to protect the rest of the leg from those sort of twisting motions), which can be a leg-loser if you get unlucky - it's what almost killed Mick Doohan at Assen (and he only got to keep his right leg because the Dorna medical rep basically kidnapped him from the hospital he was in).
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2014 06:32
|
|
|
Sagebrush posted:There was a study of motorcycle gear published a while back that showed no difference in protectiveness from one boot to the next (ie., a hiking boot reduced injuries at the same rate as a motorcycle-specific boot). The only thing that was reliably shown was that anything above the ankle is better than anything below the ankle. I'd like to point out that just because something is sold or even designed as a motorcycle boot doesn't automatically mean it offers more protection than a regular heavy boot either. There are plenty of lovely "motorcycle specific" boots on the market. I have a pair of these - http://www.altberg.co.uk/product/veldthog-country-high/  They are designed for guys who work on country estates and moorlands. They have thicker leather, stiffer soles and as much if not more ankle padding than 95% of the boots at my local gear shop. It's loving criminal some of the gear that gets sold as "protection" and that will have undoubtedly skewed the study.
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2014 11:23
|
|
|
n8r posted:You know what dampers are for right? Have you had issues with headshake? Dampers are designed to prevent undesirable movements, eg. tank-slapping. I have a Hyperpro on my other bike now. Although I have no issues with wobbles, I don't mind getting one as a precaution.
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2014 11:47
|
|
|
ReelBigLizard posted:I'd like to point out that just because something is sold or even designed as a motorcycle boot doesn't automatically mean it offers more protection than a regular heavy boot either. There are plenty of lovely "motorcycle specific" boots on the market. They look pretty beefy and nice. How are they for shift lever wear on top?
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2014 12:14
|
|
|
KozmoNaut posted:They look pretty beefy and nice. How are they for shift lever wear on top? No real mechanical wear from the shift lever in the last three years wearing them daily; the SMC has a rubber covered shifter though. I use kevlar laces thanks to the routing and poor heat shielding on the bike having melted the ends of the original ones, with the added benefit of improved strength and abrasion resistance. Despite the heavy construction they are are extremely comfortable, supple in the right places with excellent support and a slightly wide fit that suits my feet. I have hiked all day in them on our rough coast paths. I've had a 0mph drop while wearing these where the bike actually pinned my ankle with the foot rest, my ankle was fine. If I had the money I would have a pair of these and a pair of their proper motorcycle boots and never worry for the safety of my feet.
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2014 17:18
|
|
|
All of this boot talk is making me want to upgrade from my SMX 1s to something with a tall boot. The SMXs are comfy as hell so I just might go for the SMX 6s...
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2014 22:10
|
|
|
I'm attempting to work on a scooter with a friend and it's refusing to pull fuel. With a squirt of starter fluid it dies immediately after it uses that fluid to turn over. At this point, I'm afraid we mixed the connections up on the carb. These pics are after switching everything around multiple times. There's a drainage hose on the bottom of the carb, but there's another open black hose (pictured) that we can't figure out where it goes, if anywhere...    Anybody know where we're screwing this up?
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2014 01:46
|
|
|
Barnsy posted:All of this boot talk is making me want to upgrade from my SMX 1s to something with a tall boot. The SMXs are comfy as hell so I just might go for the SMX 6s... I don't really know how great these are in the grand scheme of things, but they're more comfortable (by far) than my $150 pair of redwings that I wear for work. http://www.revzilla.com/motorcycle/dainese-tr-course-out-boots?utm_source=product&kwd=&gclid=CNC2u530ucACFShp7AodhH4Aig I've gone grocery shopping in them way too many times.
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2014 03:10
|
|
|
Bixington posted:carb issues The hose that goes to nowhere is a vent tube, it's there to let air in our out as the fuel level changes. Is fuel finding its way from the tank to the float bowl? See if you can find a guide our manual of some sort online, that usually does the trick.
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2014 10:47
|
|
|
Unfortunately it's a Chinese scooter (Big Chief Motorsports) so information is pretty much nonexistent. No fuel is hitting the carb at all even though all hoses are clear and fuel will pull from the larger tube connected to the petcock. It's a vacuum petcock, so where we have the vent tube needs to be switched with a hose connected to the petcock in these pictures. There's a sturdy black hose and spongy grey hose (this one has a circular device, possibly a fuel filter in the middle), going to the petcock. Would the sturdy one go at the intake manifold for a vacuum petcock most logically?
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2014 17:15
|
|
|
My neighbor parked his motorcycle in front of my storage closet. I need to get stuff out of it for a weekend trip and also daily for other stuff. There appears to be some sort of wheel lock preventing it from rolling around. He is not home and I do not have his phone number. How do I move his bike? I was planning to lift his rear tire onto one of my jacks as I suspect the rear tire is the one locking up and rolling it out of the way. Is there something simpler that I do not know about? It's a Suzuki GSXR if that helps.
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2014 17:40
|
|
|
You probably need to put it into neutral.
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2014 17:41
|
|
|
Z3n posted:You probably need to put it into neutral. How do I do that? Edit: nevermind. I googled it and managed to move the motorcycle. Thanks for the help! nollij fucked around with this message at 17:55 on Aug 30, 2014 |
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2014 17:42
|
|
|
You can also pull in the lever on the left bar and push. It's going to take a bit more force to roll around as the clutch, even when the bike is off, will resist rolling a bit. Or you can try and click the lever on the left footpeg up a bit to get it into neutral. If it still doesn't roll after you lift it, you went too far, push it back down, and then try again.
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2014 17:57
|
|
|
On the "handlebars", the left lever is for the clutch. Just squeeze that in and grip hard, and move the bike however you need to. Don't release it until the bike is fully stopped and on its stand. That is the easiest way, if you don't know how to use a sequential gearbox and don't know what gear it was left in.
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2014 17:58
|
|
|
Bixington posted:Unfortunately it's a Chinese scooter (Big Chief Motorsports) so information is pretty much nonexistent. No fuel is hitting the carb at all even though all hoses are clear and fuel will pull from the larger tube connected to the petcock. Yes, the small circular device is a vacuum pulsation damper. From the pictures it looks like you have the vacuum line for the petcock fitted to the wrong fitting on the carb. Why don't you try sticking the petcock on prime, if it has that position? If it doesn't, block off the vacuum fittings on the carb and just manually apply vacuum to the petcock just to see if the engine runs at all. Oh I see what you mean. You really should bust out MS paint in situations like this so you aren't sitting there trying to describe something in a picture you can just draw on with the magic of technology. If I had to guess, you have the hose the right way around, but the small circular thing may be a one way valve of sorts. Take the hose off and try sucking on either end in turn, you might find it only works in one direction. Slavvy fucked around with this message at 20:56 on Aug 30, 2014 |
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2014 20:53
|
|
|
Bixington posted:Big Chief Motorsports Mods, namechange please nollij posted:My neighbor parked his motorcycle in front of my storage closet. I need to get stuff out of it for a weekend trip and also daily for other stuff. There appears to be some sort of wheel lock preventing it from rolling around. He is not home and I do not have his phone number. You figured this out, but in the future if you need to move a bike, generally if you can find a burly buddy the two of you can just (gently) pick them up and move them. Lift with your knees. Also if you think you'll be moving it even remotely regularly in the future, you should talk to the owner. I'm assuming he can't just put it somewhere else, or he's a dick, which will complicate matters. But most bikers want to know who's laying hands on their bike when they're not around, and non-dicks will do what they can to make you moving it as little hassle as possible.
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2014 21:09
|
|
|
Slavvy posted:vacuum pulsation damper Was operating on the assumption that it was a fuel filter of sorts, that makes so much more sense! Taking another shot at it tomorrow now that I can put the hoses where they go properly.
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2014 21:19
|
|
|
Would an 83 KZ 750 be a terrible idea for a first bike to someone whos entire experience riding has been on a scooter once around the block ten years ago? I ask because I just acquired one as a debt owed. Or should I just sell the bastard. Mind you it does need a little TLC to get it running again as its been sitting for two years in a shed. i dont hang with to many riders so everybody I know thinks its a death wish. BTW Im 6'1 and 150 wet.
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2014 22:44
|
|
|
Preoptopus posted:Would an 83 KZ 750 be a terrible idea for a first bike to someone whos entire experience riding has been on a scooter once around the block ten years ago? I ask because I just acquired one as a debt owed. Or should I just sell the bastard. Mind you it does need a little TLC to get it running again as its been sitting for two years in a shed. i dont hang with to many riders so everybody I know thinks its a death wish. BTW Im 6'1 and 150 wet. You have two basic problems with an old beater as a first bike: 1) They will be a lot of work, especially initially. Parts can be difficult to find (dependent on year/make/model/how many built/hipster popularity etc). Every time you take something apart to fix one thing you'll find three more things that need addressing. This may be OK if what you're really looking for is a technician project, but it means you'll get a lot less initial riding time than you think. 2) Because you don't have a lot of experience, your butt-dyno is not calibrated to tell you when something's wrong. I.e. geez your brakes are bad, but you think that's just how moto brakes are, geez your tires are squared, etc. This can lead both to reduced safety from riding a bike that really needs servicing, and learning bad habits to compensate that won't translate to a better machine. I'm going to guess that a 31+ year bike given out as debt payment is probably not in pristine condition and may end up costing you more than you'd think (time and money) to get up to full zoot. I'd also not be surprised if there were title and registration headaches involved. There are people here who have been through a similar process of reviving an old bike as a first ride and when you read their posts they're heavily laden with Stockholm Syndrome. If I were you I'd see what I could get passing it on.
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2014 23:05
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 5, 2024 18:41 |
|
|
I got given an old bike, and after wrestling with it for 6-8 months I'm selling it. It's just not reliable and unsafe. Sell it for blue book value if you can, sink that money into a down payment for a decent bike. Or a horse.
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2014 23:12
|
|
