15 replies to this topic

[Eirik]

The replies I have received in my Uh-Oh topic made me think. This in itself is about as rare as moon-landings, so I do hope you appreciate the significance Again, I know I use too many words, but although it must be tiresome to the point of being ignored by most - or all - readers, it do help me writing things down.

Apart from the CB1100F, which was totally unruffled by anything I or the road could throw at it but also increadibly heavy to steer, the bike that gave me the most confidence was my 1979 Kawasaki Z400G. This was the cast wheel version of the standard twin. Of the claimed 36 horses, I expect around 27 remained based upon actual performance. Which was enough to play Mike Hailwood in a sensible manner over gnarly backroads, but a bit short when trying to pass an 18-wheeler up an incline while facing a gale. A lot short, actually, to the point that you probably wouldn't try it

After upgrading the chassis with 40 mm longer (1.5 in.) KONI shock absorbers with adjustable rebound damping and 25 mm higher oil level in the front forks as well as drilling out the compression damper holes to 6 mm and use 25 weight fork oil instead of the stock 10W, all the better to increase compliance and control, both the chassis and the suspension handled quite admireably for such an old steed. The suspension was fairly supple, yet controlled, cornering clearance matched the grip of the narrow tyres (3.00 front and 3.50 rear) and steering was incredibly light and direct. And the whole thing was also stable and would track wherever it was pointed without further inputs. I could literally corner at the bike's limit (with my hopeless style) and still everything felt like slow motion, giving me time to look around and taking in the scenery while leaned way over.

It didn't just feel rapid around the bends, it actually was. Along with the CB1100 and a VT500 Ascot that was raised even further than the Z400, this was the bike that allowed me to corner the fastest around the sort of low-speed bends I prefer (sub-60 mph). And also, like the the two Hondas, there weren't scary moments because even going fast (for me) things felt calm and relaxed. I was utterly confident in them bikes.

Today, things are different. I have never been overly confident in my current bike. I do not know exactly what's wrong, but I suspect that the rear suspension and overall geometry is involved. The Daytona 900 is a very, very heavy and slow steering motorcycle. Just getting it off the sidestand took some serious effort. I have never ridden a stock Thunderbird, so I do not know how it is, but it was much easier to get off the stand. My bike runs the wheels, brakes and front end from the Daytona fitted to the frame and rear suspension from the Thunderbird. I also run the Thunderbird triple clamps. The rear sits significantly lower than on the Daytona, making the bike sit lower overall. As a result, the bike is downright twitchy and getting it off the sidestand takes virtually no effort.

So instead of letting the bike do the work, I find myself guiding it all the time. I also have to be on the outlook for bumps on the road because it acts a bit like cruisers if bumps are encountered mid-corner; it tends to be pushed upright and head straight. In many ways, it's one of the lesser handling bikes - especially for confidence - that I have ridden. I do hope that fitting the suspension from the Daytona will rectify much of these issues.



In conclusion (do I even have the ability to conclude, you may wonder) I have realised today just how important confidence is when it comes to riding well - and also how much more fun it is to ride a bike that always does what you expect.

[the razor]

Eirik, on 13 October 2010 - 08:23 AM, said:

The replies I have received in my Uh-Oh topic made me think. This in itself is about as rare as moon-landings, so I do hope you appreciate the significance Again, I know I use too many words, but although it must be tiresome to the point of being ignored by most - or all - readers, it do help me writing things down.

Apart from the CB1100F, which was totally unruffled by anything I or the road could throw at it but also increadibly heavy to steer, the bike that gave me the most confidence was my 1979 Kawasaki Z400G. This was the cast wheel version of the standard twin. Of the claimed 36 horses, I expect around 27 remained based upon actual performance. Which was enough to play Mike Hailwood in a sensible manner over gnarly backroads, but a bit short when trying to pass an 18-wheeler up an incline while facing a gale. A lot short, actually, to the point that you probably wouldn't try it

After upgrading the chassis with 40 mm longer (1.5 in.) KONI shock absorbers with adjustable rebound damping and 25 mm higher oil level in the front forks as well as drilling out the compression damper holes to 6 mm and use 25 weight fork oil instead of the stock 10W, all the better to increase compliance and control, both the chassis and the suspension handled quite admireably for such an old steed. The suspension was fairly supple, yet controlled, cornering clearance matched the grip of the narrow tyres (3.00 front and 3.50 rear) and steering was incredibly light and direct. And the whole thing was also stable and would track wherever it was pointed without further inputs. I could literally corner at the bike's limit (with my hopeless style) and still everything felt like slow motion, giving me time to look around and taking in the scenery while leaned way over.

It didn't just feel rapid around the bends, it actually was. Along with the CB1100 and a VT500 Ascot that was raised even further than the Z400, this was the bike that allowed me to corner the fastest around the sort of low-speed bends I prefer (sub-60 mph). And also, like the the two Hondas, there weren't scary moments because even going fast (for me) things felt calm and relaxed. I was utterly confident in them bikes.

Today, things are different. I have never been overly confident in my current bike. I do not know exactly what's wrong, but I suspect that the rear suspension and overall geometry is involved. The Daytona 900 is a very, very heavy and slow steering motorcycle. Just getting it off the sidestand took some serious effort. I have never ridden a stock Thunderbird, so I do not know how it is, but it was much easier to get off the stand. My bike runs the wheels, brakes and front end from the Daytona fitted to the frame and rear suspension from the Thunderbird. I also run the Thunderbird triple clamps. The rear sits significantly lower than on the Daytona, making the bike sit lower overall. As a result, the bike is downright twitchy and getting it off the sidestand takes virtually no effort.

So instead of letting the bike do the work, I find myself guiding it all the time. I also have to be on the outlook for bumps on the road because it acts a bit like cruisers if bumps are encountered mid-corner; it tends to be pushed upright and head straight. In many ways, it's one of the lesser handling bikes - especially for confidence - that I have ridden. I do hope that fitting the suspension from the Daytona will rectify much of these issues.



In conclusion (do I even have the ability to conclude, you may wonder) I have realised today just how important confidence is when it comes to riding well - and also how much more fun it is to ride a bike that always does what you expect.

  Hi Eirik.
I am glad you feel confident. But do not get too over-confident my friend.. One thing I have notice since my confidence increased (after taken level I) is that my survival response (SR) has vanished to a point that it is almost non-existing. I have been able to control my nerves in a couple situations that I have been impressed the way I did it. Just applying the techniques I learned.  I am learning  more every day I ride about my bike, the way it handles on the turns, I can tell when it is and it is not in sinc and I can correct it right away. How to control the throttle accordingly to the turns, etc. But back in my mind I always keep the big if. In that way I am always in my toes in case the unexpect occurs. Having said that. Congrats again. I can tell that you are concentrating on how your bike handles which is a big part of riding. By knowing this you now how to react to a differrent turns and situations and how the bike is going to react. Top it in off with the Keith Code techniques of cornering you are going to be amazed of how smooth your are going to be. As you can see I did not say fast I said smooth.
Smooth is fast my friend.

My regards and keep it going.
Be safe
The razor.

[Eirik]

Over-confident is not ideal, I agree. But I tend to measure how well I ride by my (lack of) near-misses and/or mistakes. As such, bikes that gave me confidence not only allowed me to ride faster and better, but also safer. Well, most of them. Both the CB1100 and also the Sprint 900 gave me confidence to ride very fast, but it was too fast in that I was pushing hard at very high speeds, when things can go wrong in a hurry.

This is were slower bikes come in. Bikes that behaved totally predictable for me (apart from the two mentioned above) were the GS550E, the CB250N, the XS500, the VT500FT and the Z400G. The GSX600F was also pretty decent. I've also had some horrible bikes that could turn around and bite in an instant. The CX500, the Z1300, the GS650L (despite chassis upgrades) and the two cruisers (Vulcan and Intruder) are good examples of bikes that could quickly get out of control for me when pushed.

But I think overall, for the sort of riding I do most (sub 60 mph), nothing I have ridden can beat the Z400. Perhaps the most important feature was its ability to change directions instantly and predictably. Whereas the Intruder would require a written request a couple of hours in advance in order to change direction, the 400 would be there almost before I could think it. And without being twitchy. Great little bike.

I have read TWOT2 a couple of times, and each time I understand more. But joining this forum have helped me further along the road of understanding. I do not - and probably will not - adapt everything into my riding, but at least I begin understand what and why

[Crash106]

Hello Eirik,

Funny you should mention confidence and being on the right motorcycle. My wife and I have been testing big touring bikes. I always thought the BMW R1200RT would be my ideal. Testing it. Hated it. Because my muscles don't work well, I had ZERO confidence I could ride the bike for a hour without my arms literally failing and leaving my paralyzed on the side of the road. This well founded fear was so strong that I didn't enjoy the test ride AT All. We went out on the giant K1200LT--huge, dinosaur of a bike, but I could lean it, stop it and have much more fun on it because I had confidence it wasn't going to embarrass me and leave me stuck on the side of the road.

I've known riders who were scared to death on a big touring bike. They felt uncomfortable with the weight and didn't think they could get the bike turned. I've always loved 'em. I hate jittery, uncomfortable little bikes (like my old GN400 Suzuki). They scare me. I'm afraid I'll sneeze and ride into a tree!  

Beyond the bike, and maybe you've felt this too, I find that the more relaxed I am, the more feedback I get from the tires and the more confident I feel. Maybe that's what you felt on your 400 Kawi. Anyone else notice this feedback/confidence loop?

[Eirik]

I think that if you are confident, you are also relaxed. And if you are confident and relaxed, you have freed up brain capacity otherwise tied up with horror and fear. This can be used to sense what the bike is doing.

I also believe that bikes that communicate well also makes it easier to be confident and relaxed. Hen and the egg, sort of thing.

The way we ride, our style, will also affect what kind of bike that suits us. It's not like one bike fits all. One example is my former Ascot 500. For me, it was working well because I accepted it couldn't be forced to turn quickly. I adapted and we worked well together. When I raised the rear but left the front end stock, however, I lost all confidence in it because it demanded to be cornered under throttle at a time when I only felt comfortable cornering on a trainling throttle or on the brakes. Once I raised the front to restore geometry, we worked fine again. It's the only bike I have leaned far enough to get scruff marks on the very edge of the tyre sidewalls. But my brother, who grabs his bikes at the scruff of their necks and violently force them to change direction never gelled with the Honda. Its frame was flexing and the whole bike protested, making him very uneasy - and I can understand why.

Here I am, rambling again

Crash, I'd be interested to hear more about them touring rigs you are trying out, what you like and what you dislike.

[Crash106]

Hello Eirik,

You asked about my impressions of the big touring bikes. I haven't ridden them all, but here is my snapshot of the one's I have ridden.

BMW R1200RS. Pros: Feels very small and light with great handling and good control over bumps. Cons: Seat nothing special. Big twin doesn't provide good feedback off idle, but motor fairly strong. My wife wasn't real impressed with seat or trunk. Seating position is too sporty/forward for me (others will disagree). I would probably like the R1200GS with the tall dirt bike bars, but my wife wouldn't be caught dead on a giant dirt bike.

BMW K1200LT. Pros: Feels big and likes to lean. Comfortable seat front and back. Good accessories. Great deal right now because the K1600LT is coming out. Cons: Top heavy and feels a bit underpowered. No floorboards in back.

Honda GoldWing 1800. Pros. Feels "just right," the way a touring bike should feel. Granted, it was heavy but also easy to ride in parking lots. The weight disappeared as soon as you got going (unlike the LT). No problems leaning over. Handles well and quickly. Great big, comfortable seats front and back. Lots of luggage space. Motor feels plenty strong but not scary fast. Cons: Everybody else owns one. Bit dull.

H-D Electra Glide. Pros. Good size. Good front seat and okay back seat and back rest. Again, the big twin engine feels vague letting the clutch out (maybe it's just me). Handles fine at slow speeds and in the parking lot. Handles okay at speed, but I didn't push it very hard. Cons. More expensive than any of the others for no more features. Vibrates like crazy. Noisy. H-D has been building bikes for 100 years, so why can't I find neutral? Would never buy an Electra Glide when I could get a Goldwing or FJR for the same money or less.

Yamaha FJR1300AE. Pros. I LOOOOVE the automatic shifting! Pick a gear and control the throttle. No clutch and no fuss. Tons of power but very controllable. I spun up the rear tire a bit turning left at a stop light and just kept the throttle steady and counter steered into the turn with no worries. Handles great. Effortless cornering. Very good riding position. I felt very confident and connected to this bike. Cons: Trunk is an extra cost option. My wife wasn't sure the back seat would be comfortable on a long trip. My wife didn't go on my test ride--big mistake!

Kawasaki Concours 14. Back seat really cramped with my supermodel wife smooshed up against me. We both said no.

Buell XB1200XT. Rear foot pegs so close to the saddle bags my wife literally couldn't even get on the bike. Dealer was shocked. That bike (heck, Buell's in general) could easily have been so much more! No dice.

My Picks? I would be very happy with the FJR1200AE. I loved the power, the automatic shifting and the riding position. If it was just me, I would at least test ride the big BMW dirt bike, but we're looking for a two-fer touring bike so that's out. I felt very comfortable on the Wing. It has a delightful effortless quality that instills lots of rider confidence (the theme of this thread). It is NOT slow or clumsy to steer and holds the road very well. The GW seat really is the best and that's important to me. The misses wants the Goldwing--without a doubt. If WE are going to spend $25 grand on a bike, we BOTH need to be happy.

I hope that helps.

[Eirik]

Interesting! Thanks for sharing   Funny you should find the K underpowered - tests suggests it's really strong.

[Cobie Fair]

Nice comparo of the bikes.  I just about never ride touring bikes, we don't get tons at the schools, and pretty rarely ride 2 up any more.  Stuman (coach) has a Kawi Concourse that he really likes, but doesn't ride it 2 up.  My daughter is a more likely canditate.

Crash out of curiosity, what is your wife's height and approximate weight?  Just curious about the fit and how tall/big she might be.

CF

[Crash106]

For those asking about bike fit on the touring rigs, I'm 5'10" 205 pounds. My wife really does look like a retired super model at 5'9". You couldn't get me to tell you her weight for a new S1000RR!   If it was just me, I'd also be very tempted by the Concours as well--I love the fully adjustable windshield, the power and all the other nice features and electronic aids. They are a great value!

[Fajita Dave]

Eirik especially after reading Twist of the Wrist II have you ever considered that the issues with some bikes you've ridden to be nothing more than the way you were riding it? There are ways you can ride that will prevent the suspension from working as well as it was designed to work. If your preventing the suspension/geometry of the bike from working to its full potential than it might not ride very well. I have ridden a lot of motorcycles (mostly off-road) and I have never ridden one that felt like it might turn around and bite me at any moment unless I was the one causing the issue. For example like tense arms causing a tank slapper or the many ways to make the front tire wash out and low-side.

I have ridden motorcycles that I didn't like and some that are very confidence inspiring but I don't think any should ever feel unstable unless something is wrong with either the bike or the rider. Maybe I just misunderstood what you said about some of the bikes you didn't feel comfortable on like the CX500?

[Eirik]

It could of course be the way I ride the various bikes. For instance, if you have to use a lot of force in order to get the bike to change directions, you will not be as relaxed. Well, at least I won't. But the GS550 and CB1100 were both heavy steerers, yet perfectly predictable. The CX500 also required lots of effort to turn, but was a serious wobbler.

Two things with these older bikes can seriously affect handling and stability; (lack of) suspension quality and sloppy production tolerances. Take the CB750/900/1100 family made between 1979 and 1983, for instance. Some of them were so twisted when they left the factory that you would have believed they'd been involved in a crash. The worst of these bikes would wobble even in a straight line from as little as 90 mph / 140 kph. Others were perfectly aligned and stable as trains on rails regardless of what you threw at them.  

The same issues affected the suspension bits. Shock absorbers filled with fish oil that went dead after only a few miles and front suspension typically hampered by a lack of rebound and an abundance of compression damping as well as spindly fork legs - the original CBX had 35mm fork legs, for instance!

Not sure I can conclude on this, but although my way of riding a motorcycle clearly will impact the way they handle, I believe my motorcycles have varied more than my own actions. But of course, if one is immediately comfortable on a motorcycle one is definitely going to ride that better than one that makes you nervous!

[Eirik]

Did about 200 miles on my "new" 1986 Yamaha XT600 Tenere this weekend after doing a full service and some very minor mods over winter. First, when changing fork oil, I noticed the fork springs aren't stock, but something stiffer and more progressive. Since the fork felt harsh for my use - street riding - I removed the 1/2 inch spacers and dropped oil level about an inch. Furthermore, I replaced the stock 10W fork oil with fully synthetic 2.5W oil, all in the quest for compliance.

The rear suspension was also hard, but a mate told me that I should increase preload in order to get a softer ride. That reminded me of similar stories I've read in motorcycle magazines. The clue is that the suspension works through a progressive linkage, and by increasing preload the suspension will operate in the softer range of the progressive curve more of the time.

I'm happy to report that the susension is now much better balanced and far more compliant, yet there is enough damping to prevent any sort of wobble or weave. Going through bumps that would have my Triumph throw me into the air followed by a mild impression of a tankslapper wouldn't even have the XT shrug its shoulders.

Another benefit was that the front now sits lower and the rear much higher, causing the bike to be perfectly balanced. Whether I accelerate or decelerate or keep a steady pace while cornering, the bike simply retain its line like on rails. It's absolutely neutral in the way it behaves. After struggling with the Triumph all through last season, it was great to again ride a bike I can have confidence in. It's not perfect; the fork twists badly when the front brake is applied, so I hope I never have to do that mid-corner as it will make the bike steer. And the front end dives dramatically under brakes, so braking going into corners is not very nice, either. What the bike does, is demand smoothness. Roll off the throttle to set throttle speed, retain speed under light throttle until the exit is visible and power out. Smooth, swift and effective - and very un-dramatic. Nice

[Eirik]

I now have two bikes I've ridden over the past two days; a 1993 Honda CB400SF four and a 1983 Honda VT500FT Ascot twin. The two are very different, bit regarding engine performance and chassis performance.

The 400 have brand new Dunlop Supermoto D253 tyres in the sizes 120/70 and 150/70, both 10mm wider than stock. They're made in 2008, which is why I got them at half price. I feel a bit tentative since they're not yet scrubbed in and because the roads have lots of dust and also patches of sand on it. It's been cold also, around 10 C. In addition, the bikes is very nimble and doesn't steer neutrally; the front wheel sometimes want to flop in and need pressure on the inside handlebar. But since the bike reacts so quickly and easly, it is easy to overcompensate. I must work on being smoother yet. The rear tyre have chicken strips about 3/4 of an inch wide, the front looks like only the middle have touched asphalt - massive strips of virgin rubber. Even so, by toes have touched down due to the bike being so low.

The 500 is a totally different animal. It rides on Metzeler tyres with less than 1000 miles on them; ME330 front and ME77 rear. They are many years old, however, at least from 2005 if not older. But they are 100/90 front and 120/90 rear diagonals, tyres easier for me to "read". Also, the Ascot has acres more cornering clearance; there are zero chicken strips on the rear and maybe 2-3 mm up front, yet my toes doesn't touch even if I deliberately point them down. This is a result of me raising the bike with much longer and stiffer Koni shock absorbers meant for the V65 Magna plus stiffer Progressive springs with additonal preload and extra oil.

The biggest benefit, for me, with the Ascot is it's lazy but light and totally neutral handling. It's easier to ride on gravel than the XT600 Dual-Purpose machine and I always know what it's going to do. The riding position between the two is similar, as is the weight. But the older 500 have a lot more rake and trail as well as taller, narrower wheels and as a result feels very different. In a good way for me, but horrible for a person used to modern sportbikes; they would definitely prefer the more modern 400.

Finally, to my point, that again this show how important confidence is. Since I feel utterly at home on the 500, I ride it much more relaxed and hence quicker yet safer.

[ktk_ace]

Eirik, on 24 March 2012 - 10:30 PM, said:

I now have two bikes I've ridden over the past two days; a 1993 Honda CB400SF four and a 1983 Honda VT500FT Ascot twin. The two are very different, bit regarding engine performance and chassis performance.

The 400 have brand new Dunlop Supermoto D253 tyres in the sizes 120/70 and 150/70, both 10mm wider than stock. They're made in 2008, which is why I got them at half price. I feel a bit tentative since they're not yet scrubbed in and because the roads have lots of dust and also patches of sand on it. It's been cold also, around 10 C. In addition, the bikes is very nimble and doesn't steer neutrally; the front wheel sometimes want to flop in and need pressure on the inside handlebar. But since the bike reacts so quickly and easly, it is easy to overcompensate. I must work on being smoother yet. The rear tyre have chicken strips about 3/4 of an inch wide, the front looks like only the middle have touched asphalt - massive strips of virgin rubber. Even so, by toes have touched down due to the bike being so low.

IMHO the suspension might need servicing, either the springs are shot or the oil is too thin (or both) for the forks and/or rear shocks.

[Eirik]

ktk_ace, on 30 March 2012 - 02:31 AM, said:

IMHO the suspension might need servicing, either the springs are shot or the oil is too thin (or both) for the forks and/or rear shocks.

Service is too mild an expression - replacement is in order. Only it's an old POS not worth it, so it won't get it

[mugget]

Wow - thread resurrection!

But yes, very important topic. I've often thought about confidence and it's role in motorcycling. I came to the conclusion that if there was a pro racer, but they were very nervous and not at all confident for some reason - racing against a novice who was overflowing with confidence, I would put my money on the novice.

I have often wondered if confidence is actually one of the most important attitudes/attributes when it comes to motorcycling. Thinking back on my own experience, it's amazing how blind confidence has brought me through difficult situations. I think if you're confident, your thoughts won't even go to SR's. And as long as you don't lock up and target fixate etc. most times the bike will sort itself out and it'll all be fine. Of course that needs to be real confidence, since you don't really "think" about SR's, they're more of an involuntary/sub-conscious reaction as the name suggests. Which is why having a crash and knocking your confidence can bring about a whole lot of unpleasant and uncomfortable feelings when you get back on a bike...

I will do anything possible to avoid losing confidence. If I crash, I will start to track down the problem as soon as possible. Once I know the problem I can make a mental note and make sure it doesn't happen again. Then I know that I can stop it from happening again, confidence restored. At least that is the theory. It's not always so easy in practice...