Jump to content

faffi

Members
  • Content count

    1,821
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    13

Everything posted by faffi

  1. https://riders.drivemag.com/news/suzuki-f50-super-stepthru-racer-test-uber-underbone
  2. In 1984, Kevin Cameron wrote an article in Cycle magazine about active suspension, how Lotus was testing real world models. Cameron considered it the future. Not the least because the systems we use today are quite inferior, even the suspension used in MotoGP. Simply put they cannot follow the road and they come with a harshness as well as harmonics detriment to handling, grip and stability. He also expected the active suspension to lower the bike under acceleration and braking and raising it for cornering clearance and bigger bumps. Not only for racing, but for everyday riding. Cameron also expected to see power steering and stabilizing systems that allowed radical steering geometries far beyond what a human can control by him/her self. Like fighter airplanes that would shake apart in seconds if left alone to be controlled by a human with no computer assistance. He also wrote about putting multiple 'puters in the bikes to make sure that if one went down, there would still be several working - the bad one would simply be shut off together with an error message, but without disturbing performance. Furthermore, he expected the fork to be replaced by better systems (which only BMW have tried on a large scale) and traction control more sophisticated than even the best we see today. Not everything happens as quickly as we (some) anticipate.
  3. I am looking for a new helmet, but it has proven very difficult to find one that fits perfectly. This is what I have learned, both recently and over decades: SHOEI - pure pain. They are too narrow at the sides of the top of my head. I cannot even keep on on for 5 seconds, not even one that's too large. ARAI - acceptable, but tend to hurt around the temples if tight enough. Loud. NOLAN - not exactly luxurious. Loud. But OK to wear. Tend to sit low over the brows. AGV - Comfy enough, but will drop over the brow when correctly sized otherwise. Not great for wearing glasses, which I must wear. SHARK - Great for glasses, comfy if I use one size too large, but like Shoei - to a much, much lesser degree - hurt on the sides of the top of my head when the correct size is used. SCHUBERT - feels too narrow on top and too wide at the bottom. Not comfy for me, but not painful, either. HJC - interior feels hard, and like Schubert a bit wide at the bottom and narrow on top, but less pronounced. CABERG - impossible to wear glasses, interior feels a little hard and seems like it will be loud because there is too much room around the ears and the helmet is a little wide at the bottom. Most helmets are too tight around my cheeks, and tend to bite myself. Literally. Sizes listed also vary a lot. I need a Small Shark helmet, a Medium CABERG and a MediumLarge AGV, for instance. But that is irrelevant as long as I can try it on for size. Based upon this information, can you recommend a brand of helmet I should try to search out? A helmet that is, I presume, for a rather round scull seen from the top, not egg shaped.
  4. My grandfather saved his life because he didn't wear a seat belt - his very old Mercedes (1957) was reduced to almost nothing, but there was still a bit of space down at the passenger foot-well. That's also where he ended up. But although no belt may be the better option in 10 or even 20% of the incidents, that leaves 80 or 90% where they turn out to be a benefit. So I wear mine, but I am not good at removing my thick winter clothes or pull the belt really tight - both important to get the most out of the security from the belt. Just an inch of slack on the lap strap can cause massive internal injuries, I'm led to believe.
  5. If this is authentic

    Center stand, most likely. Used to sit along the swingarm.
  6. - then we may have to re-evaluate the widespread notion that the modern riding style began with Kenny Roberts Sr. https://silodrome.com/john-surtees-vincent-knee-down/
  7. I've owned Römer, Bieffe, Tommy, Nolan, AGV and Arai. At least. Not too worried about brand. Used to be most interested in price and not having pain, but it's only recently I've learned how snug a helmet should be - and that it can still be comfy if of the correct shape. Despite all that, I have crashed hard with helmets too big (virtually all of them have been too large, especially lacking support at the forehead) and they have still done their job. Two helmets have cracked, but I'm still here. And several helmets have saved my face from being scraped off. It is hard to understand people who ride sans helmets, nor would I consider an open face helmet or a flip-up helmet. However, people have different opinions and preferences - though I think this was well said by somebody unknown:
  8. Just learned that Arai and a few others make helmets for all kinds of head shapes - I just need to find a shop with a bigger selection, apparently.
  9. Things have changed
  10. Development

    To those who have ridden a lot of bikes over the years - if you took the best sport motorcycles from yesteryear and put them up against the current bikes of the same size but less sporty, fitted them with the same tires (where possible) and sent them around a race track, which would win? I'm asking because people have told me for quite some time that modern bikes, even budget bikes, are so much better than the stuff just a decade old. In my experience, my FZ07 has suspension no better than what many bikes could offer in the 80s, so I do not buy this. However, I could very well be wrong. So what if you teamed up something like these pairs, do you reckon the latest would beat the oldest every time? Or would it be the older sport bikes taking the honour? 1992 CBR900RR vs 2017 CB1000R 1993 GSX-R750 vs 2017 GSX750S 1994 ZX-9R vs 2018 Z900 1994 FZR600 vs 2017 FZ6R 1994 916 vs 2017 Multistrada 950
  11. Development

    Thank you very much for your effort on helping out, much appreciated. It sure does help to explain what have happened during a quarter century of development, but I feel pretty sure the tyres have a lot to do with the improved lap times, perhaps as much as half the time gained. Also, what I am still really curious to learn is when sportbikes become too old to keep up with the current standards, if both are fitted with the same tyres.
  12. Development

    Perhaps I should suggest such a test be made by the German magazine MOTORRAD; they often compare new and old, but usually "like to like", as an old Gixxer to a new etc. But to me, it would be interesting to learn how a 1987 or 1992 Ninja 600 stacks up against a 2017 Z650, for instance.
  13. Development

    Not the same, but at least it compare handling. Weather conditions will also matter here, which does not appear. Data from MOTORRAD magazine.
  14. Development

    Thank you for the link, it does tell about performance development in a straight line for the past two decades. It also show how big tolerances there still are - just compare particularly roll on times for for instance the GSX-R600 from one test to the other. What unfortunately cannot be read from these numbers is how fast they will go around a given circuit.
  15. I have not heard it said like that before - this is how I've heard it stated repeatedly: It is easier to teach a fast rider to stop crashing, than a slow and safe rider to go fast.
  16. Development

    That would be nice
  17. Development

    Thanks, but not really. If you compare an old superbike to a new model, the older will be slower. It may be better at some details, but overall the modern bike will reign supreme. That's why I wonder how and old superbike would stack up against a current standard or sports tourer. Is the suspension better or worse on a 1992 CBR900RR than what you find on the CB1100RS of today, for instance? Or the new Z900. What about brakes? Handling? I'm curious because I personally believe 25 year old superbikes, as they were new, can still beat many current "normal" bikes when it comes to suspension and handling, and match them when it comes to the brakes. But I cannot be sure.
  18. We got some winter here and I took my Virago-come-scrambler out for a spin. Hard work! I have been riding a lot on winter roads on bicycles when growing up, as well as 3 winters on motorcycles before, but this - at about 530 lb - is by far the heaviest two-wheeled vehicle I have taken onto snow and ice. The tyres didn't impress, either, and combined with my limited skills when it comes to playing made things less than elegant. But at least I got to spin up some figure eights for the first time in my life, although they also proved the expected lack of talent. Still, I had fun, but during my commutes I stay away from playing since the front tucks every time the rear starts to spin up - I'd rather stay upright than topple over trying to look cool
  19. CORNERING VS. RPM INCREASE

    That is impossible to answer. If the large wheel meant 7000 rpm, the smaller wheel would give 8600 rpm. If the engine had a torque dip at 7k, it may be able to go faster with the smaller wheel at the same throttle opening. Same if the load his high, like climbing a steep hill, you would likely benefit from the extra rpm and resulting extra power to give a small increase in speed. Another thing to consider is mapping; 50% throttle will not give the same amount of fuel at high rpm as at lower rpm, meaning mapping could be better or worse if you increase rpm for any given speed. However, for most engines the extra energy required to rev higher due to more internal friction, you would not go as fast with the smaller tyre - if you have an instant fuel consumption read-out on your bike (or car) you can see how much more energy is required to go a certain speed in a lower vs a higher gear.
  20. CORNERING VS. RPM INCREASE

    Other than the slip between tyre and road, the engine is mechanically linked to the tarmac. By that it means that for any given speed, rpm is constant for a particular gear, regardless of throttle position. Let's say you need 5000 rpm to go 60 mph in 4th gear. Regardless of where the throttle is, be that full off or full on or anywhere in between, you will have exactly 5000 rpm at 60 mph in a straight line. Unless the tyre is spinning or the clutch is slipping. Now, if you lean over, the circumference of the tyre is reduced. This has a similar effect to lowering the gearing. But while lower gearing mean that the engine must turn more revolutions in order to get the wheel turned a certain amount of times, now the wheel must turn faster to maintain the speed, bringing the engine along with it. This could probably be explained much simpler, but as long as you remember that when the engine turns over X times it always makes the tyre turn Y times in gear Z. A smaller wheel must turn faster than a larger diameter wheel for any given speed, and so the engine must turn X+n to compensate.
  21. 31 year old TV spot about CSS at Laguna

    The original Ninja 600 sans fairing - thanks for sharing.
  22. Drag Racing- Why do they do this?

    They do it to lower the CoG, which again makes it less likely for the bike to wheelie.
  23. Limitations of CSS techniques?

    Thank you for calling my bike nice, although we both know it is rather ugly Your Nighthawk, however, is in a stunning condition A friend has one, and while I like the way it looks (not unlike the VT500FT Ascot I once owned), it doesn't do anything for me while riding. Seat is big and inviting, but so soft my bum quickly gets on fire. And the engine is rather lackluster in performance, and also manage to feel even tamer and slower than it is. Suspension lack damping, but is very good at flattening out frost heaves and as such worked very well for me. Albeit basic, the brakes also work remarkably well. When Cycle World tested one in 1991, they actually stopped the Nighthawk in a shorter distance than the period race reps.
  24. Limitations of CSS techniques?

    I took a beginner course in gravel riding earlier this fall. After some slow slalom stuff standing up we did maximum braking in some really deep and loose gravel. We learned to pull clutch, shut throttle, apply rear brake and lock wheel, apply and modulate front brake. In that order, but in quick succession. Having ridden quite a bit on snow and ice, I had little trouble with the test. Next was riding over a small mountain on gravel littered with stones and potholes. That also went well. After an hour with basic practice I joined the fast group, which wasn't all that fast. Got a tip from a guide at a coffee stop to stand up, keep most of the weight on the outside peg and push with the outside knee against the tank, let the front end wander and steer with the throttle. Something clicked and I went from being almost afraid of loose gravel to searching for it, enjoying having both wheels sliding about. My bike of choice was my Virago scrambler project in the making. In the ten years they have run the event, this was the first Virago they had seen. It was a superb conversation starter. I'm going back next year
×