racer
-
Posts
1,135 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by racer
-
-
Racer, I'm done. You obviously feel what you recommend is the only "right" way to perform a given technique and don't really want to listen to what others have to say. I stand behind everything I have posted on this thread and am not "backing off" anything that I have posted or implied.
I find your condescending tone insulting and really don't care to continue debating this with you.
I have no idea what you are talking about, Stuman. Oddly enough, I think you sound condescending and snide. Especially your post to acebobby in this thread.
"Whatever you say dude, ..." etc.
In any case, you sound upset. Perhaps a time out would help.
-
Ok thanks for the replies. So no one knows how to desribe the feeling? I'm very, very afraid to lean any more in the rain.. I want to go further... but am afraid of getting to the angle the wheels will just slip away at. Is it noticeable, do the wheels gradually slide out? Does the steering get very light? Does the bike weave about? Does it simply fall down very sharply after getting to that point? These are the real life examples I'd like to know.... If anyone can describe what I'm talking about that would be great! Even when not on the track, in a small car park like on the video i posted... I can not even imagine scraping my pegs... Am just locked at one very shallow angle that i can't seem to get past. If I knew what kind of signs to look out for i'm sure i'd be willing to crank it over more. I also fear that on the road it may get me into much trouble if i can't make myself lean over more to avoid an unexpected obstacle or coming into a radius tightening corner.
All of the above, dude.
Every "feeling" you mentioned is possible. Like Cobie said, it depends on the conditions. Some tracks are quite grippy when wet and some are not. The same conditions exist on the street. Just like learning a track, it is a good idea to learn the roads you regularly ride. Where is the tarmac fresh and grippy, where is it old, worn and slippery? Intersections are the worst as cars and trucks sit and idle at red lights leaking puddles of slip juice onto the road. They can be pretty slippery even when it is dry. So, there isn't any one single answer to your question for wet weather riding. Sometimes you will get lots of clear warning. Sometimes your first clue is the sound of scraping bodywork. That said, you'll need to start trusting your tires, in general, sooner or later. Like you said, if you can't make yourself lean over, you won't be able to turn. Make sure you have fresh rubber and your machine is certified in good working order. Then... just do it.
One note about rain riding: the most dangerous time is when it first starts to rain and the oils and grime in the road float to the surface. In a hard rain, they will be washed away after a short time. In a light rain, they might not go anywhere. So, the most slippery time is just after it begins to rain. And a hard rain is better than a light rain for traction. (Sorta counter-intuitive.) In any case, the best thing you can do is to have fresh rubber with deep grooves for standing water.
A last word of advice: be smooth in rain. Like a car in the snow. Nothing sudden. Gradually increase lean angle to find the limit and mind the rules of throttle control and weight balance. Don't overload front or rear. No hard gas. Be easy on the brakes. Use a little rear brake in the rain. Be mild and be smooth.
And get a copy of Twist of the Wrist if you don't have one. It will save your life.
Good luck,
r
-
Maybe the majority of roadracers do blip when they down shift, but many do not.
I don't know what that means. If you know fifty road racers who don't blip, would you consider that to be "many"? I would not. I would consider it to be "few" as it represents a very small percentage of all road racers.
Soo, how many can you name?
Regardless, I will take that statement as clear indication of you now backing off of your implication that racers not blipping supports your contention that "clutch release, not braking" is how "backing it in" is done on road bikes.
There are schools that teach students to release the clutch slowly instead of blipping.Roadracing schools? Can you name some?
I don't recall Keith or Cobie mentioning that not blipping would cause a false neutral or make you forget what gear your in, but I'm getting kinda old so I forget things sometimes.I know what you mean. I am starting to get a little older myself at 45; but, I do recall Keith and Cobie saying so both at the school and here on the forum. Actually, it is part of Keith's standard rap and one of the most basic tenets of standard downshifting. It is probably even mentioned in TOTW. If I have some free time, I'll do a search for you. In the meantime, Cobie could chime in as he obviously knows what he said and is here more frequently than I am these days. And anyone can always email Keith and ask what he thinks.
r
PS ~ We have several threads devoted to the subject of downshifting here on the forum. One recent thread going in depth where I posted some animated diagrams of transmissions to help demonstrate why it is mechanically a good idea to blip and release. Aside from catching false neutrals and getting lost in the gears, what you suggest (ie. pulling in the clutch and letting the revs fall off) increases the risk of damaging your transmission because the synchromesh can't overcome that kind of difference in revs between road and motor. So, if you are little sloppy with your shift points, ie. if you shift when the revs are down, you are likely to get a very loud surprise.
But don't take my word for it, go ahead everyone, go wind out first gear to red line, pull in the clutch and let the revs fall off, then shift into second gear. Clatter clank bang... OUCH!
If you can even get second gear to engage, it will be a highly painful experience for your transmissions and a good way to chip and break those oh so lovely factory undercut dogs and bend up your shift forks.
Better yet, wind up third gear to red line, pull in the clutch and let the revs fall, then downshift to second gear.
Actually, please don't. I think most everyone here has done it by accident at least once and knows what I am talking about.
The thing is that even with the clutch pulled in, the oil in a wet clutch creates hydraulic stiction between the clutch plates. Not enough for the motor to slow the bike down, or road speed to affect the motor; but, enough to back torque the input shaft of the tranny and reduce the effect of the synchro-mesh to match gear speeds when shifting. To be clear, THIS is how motorcycle transmissions get damaged. Chipped and broken dogs and bent shift forks from trying to force the shifter through the same circumstance.
So, anyone who wants to try the "clutch release to back it in" technique, I would recommend completing all of your downshifts with blipping and only after the last downshift would I hold the clutch in and let the revs fall off to use clutch release to slow the rear wheel. Again... only after I finish all downshifting would I hold the clutch in and let the revs fall.
Anyway, I will stick to using the rear brake. It's cheaper to replace brake pads than clutch plates... or transmissions.
Also, to anyone who wants to experiment more with the rear brake... I cut my rear pads (use a grinding wheel to reduce the surface area of the pad) to reduce braking action and give me a finer, broader range of control, ie. allow me to push harder, hence, have better feel and control to not lock it up. And so do "many" other road racers who use the rear brake.
racer
-
Pretty sure it was Doohan that was the first, then Duhamel here in the US used it I think for a while too.
Yes, it was Doohan and DuHamel followed suit when he broke his leg, too. DuHamel liked it so much he kept the thumb lever after his leg healed. I don't recall if Doohan's leg ever healed enough to effectively use the pedal again.
-
Many racers do not blip when they down shift, they release the clutch slowly instead.
Erm... what? Are you talking about dirt bikes and supermoto perhaps?
The VAST majority of road racers blip. And ALL the riding/racing coaches at EVERY road racing school I have ever attended or worked for, including CSS, teach it as the proper standard technique. Very few road racers I know of are not able to master it or choose to not blip.
In any case, I see what you mean now about pulling in the clutch and letting the rev's drop down low rather than hitting the rev limiter to get the same effect of back torquing the wheel when you release the clutch. Thanks for explaining that.
Of course, as Keith teaches and Cobie has already said and every road racer knows, not blipping and releasing the clutch between each shift is a good way to catch a false neutral and lose track of what gear you are in... or not in.
So, maybe supermoto guys do it differently?
-
Those videos are wicked. I'm sure everyone has seen the Edwards save from earlier this year?
FAAAACK!!!
And Colin puts his hand up to the crowd like, "Yes, I am a God. Thank you, thank you...."
LOL
-
Hi Guy's,
It has been a while since I have posted. It seems that I have missed several philosophical discussions and thankfully no one has said anything about ones mother?
LOL
Your mother wears Army boots.
I have been enjoying my MotoGP 08 game since finishing my last track day a few weeks back at Barber.The question I have is about my riding. I took two motorcycles to Barber, 1000cc and 600cc and had almost identical lap times on both motorcycles. If I am 6 to 8 seconds slower (1:42.00 - 1:43.00) than the fastest riders in the advanced class of which I am in, what can this say about where I can improve. Does it reveal anything?
P.S. I hope that all of you have a great and safe Holiday.
For what it is worth, Troy Bayliss was the only 1000cc superbike rider to lap faster than the supersport 600's at the World Superbike round in Portugal this year.
-
Backing it in is done mostly with the clutch, not the rear brake. You do use the rear brake some, but releasing the clutch slowly (or quickly if you have a slipper) is how you control the rear slide.
Not too many racers use the technique anymore. It was the fad a few years ago, until people figured out that it was slower and they could avoid backing it in with better slipper clutches and anit--engine braking systems.
Guys like Haga and Yates used to back it in all over the place, now you don't even see them doing it. These days most guys don't do it intentionaly if at all, it is typlically just a side effect of braking hard.
Hi Stu,
Is that a newer technique adopted since the widespread introduction of the slipper clutch? I've never backed it in by downshifting too early and controlling the over rev rear wheel lock up with the clutch. That sounds like it would hard on the engine. Constantly locking the rear wheel by bouncing it off the rev limiter like that? Ouch! Not on my bike you don't!
Anyway, all the racers I know, including myself, who "back it in" do so entirely using the rear brake. That's why riders like Mick Doohan and Miguel DuHamel went to the trouble of mounting thumb operated rear brakes to the handlebar when they were no longer able to use the pedal.
Andy Ibbott covers backing it in with the rear brake technique in the California Superbike School - UK TV series. Episode 5 or 6 I think it was. He never mentioned using the clutch to control over rev lock up. I'll have to look more closely next time I'm watching a race on TV.
Cheers,
racer
-
I have no idea what you are talking about. Jay.
Have a good holiday.
-
Yes, Josh's bike was clearly underpowered comparatively. He rode a gallant ride to a hard fought 4th place.
I've seen a lot of racers use the back it in style for intimidation and Josh is no stranger to it.
Erm... soo... should we assume your point is that you think he was backing it in for "intimidation"? Even though it slowed him down?
As a chess player, I've used it to good effect when I've made enough mistakes to know I should loose. There's a 50% chance I can force an error from my opponent.
Josh knew he had a solid 4th; IIRC 5th was too far back, so he had nothing to loose. He now had his sights set on the podium.
Uh... I'm not following you. Was that a yes or a no?
-
Yes, Josh's bike was clearly underpowered comparatively. He rode a gallant ride to a hard fought 4th place.
I've seen a lot of racers use the back it in style for intimidation and Josh is no stranger to it.
Erm... soo... should we assume your point is that you think he was backing it in for "intimidation"? Even though it slowed him down?
-
I now practice progressive brake drills EVERY time I street ride after my tires are warm and my 6 is clear.
Kevin
I do that too!
But the 2 stages of braking are ease it on then ease it off, in between the 2 stages is maximum braking which will differ for different situations, smoothness on the brake lever is key as if you experience a front wheel lock up you do not have to completely release the brake to regain control! Easing the brake out is just as important as easing it on and not grabbing a handfull of lever!
On an interesting note a front wheel lock up can be controled by counter-counter steering if there is such a thing i.e. if you push right hand bar while the front wheel is locked the bike wil go left and vice versa but only while its locked, the rules return to normal as soon as the wheel begins to spin! So say if you brake deep into a right hander and lock the front, by putting a little pressure on the inside bar the bike will try to stand up only untill the wheel begins to spin again.
I have overthought this technique and its messing with my head but I heard a pro racer talking about saving a crash with his knee and using this to his advantage!
I think you got that a little confused. From riding dirt bikes, if the front starts sliding at high speeds a counter-steer will likely put you on your ass. You actually steer the bike.
I have had to do this on pavement when I hit a false neutral going into a turn and the front started sliding. I didn't counter-steer, which would have just pushed the tire right out from under me - I steered the bike to gain traction until I slowed enough to regain traction. Then I could counter-steer again.
It's a feel thing. If you haven't ridden dirt, you will most likely never learn what it is without crashing at high speeds repeatedly. You can't learn it on pavement without a whole lot of pain.
Hi Thor,
Acebobby is saying the same thing you are, ie. with the front wheel locked, the bike does not counter-steer.
racer
-
I just watched Josh Hayes put in a PHENOMENAL ride at the last WSS race in Portugal. He ran in the front group and held 2nd place for the last third of the race, but, was running against guys with obviously much faster bikes. ALL the bikes were running front of the pack SUPERBIKE LAPTIMES. The only rider to go faster than the front 600's was Bayliss on a 1000. And he was the ONLY 1000 to do so. HMMMM...
Anyway... Josh held on battling over third place until the end, but, suddenly started backing it in on the last few laps for some reason. I figured his tires were probably going off so he was trying to relieve some pressure off the front. A couple other racers had lowsided pushing the front near the end. The track is fast, sweeping and flowing, lots of pressure on the front. Anyway, Josh was clearly losing time backing it in. The commentators even noted how the guy who passed him for third on the last lap wasn't doing it and how his in line style was clearly faster and why Josh was losing drive off the corners. Of course, the other guy's bike was clearly faster, but, Josh managed to hold them all off except the Turk until the end. And toasted his tires doing it. AWESOME ride.
Awesome track too. Really awesome track.
-
Sometimes slicks are hand cut to run in the rain when rain tires aren't available. Cut slicks would be disqualified from a DOT only race.
-
Racer, the post wasn't directed at you per se, but you was willing to debate the opposing side with me and for that I thank you and Cobie. It's very often and necessary that the truth is sifted out of vigorous debate until we're left with definitive yes/no answers.
It was HOTFOOT's post #23 that I was referring to that I think helped me to see your and Cobie's explanation a bit better.
And yes, I stand behind what I said about difficulty. Do we give up becuse it's difficult? If that were the case there would be no glory in a championship or working hard to be the best at anything.
LOL
Vigorous refusal to accept the answer does not constitute debate.
-
Did anyone notice in the video how long it took the chase bike to get on the gas after turn-in? Seemed like an eternity.
The difference between a little GP bike and a four stroke pig in action.
Now, who thinks we should do away with two strokes?
But weren't they both on R6's?
Oops... my bad. I clicked on "last post" and missed the Laguna video. It was late and I must have thot I was in the thread about the kid on the little GP bike.
Nevermind.
Why did Hubbard post that in a thread about gas mileage?
-
I don't disagree with the explanation, however as previously stated: difficulty of implementation is not a factor in deciding if an idea is good and the principle is sound. However, someone posted a good reply (sorry if I forget the name, not giving credit isn't intentional) that stated that maintenance throttle worked for him until he got faster, then it became an obstacle to quicker flicks.
Again, I'm not desirous of rehashing it again. I'll let you know if it becomes an obstacle for me when I pickup more corner speed. Or maybe I'll just raise my idle like many, many successful racers do (that's a hint).
I did take your advice and PM'd Mr. Code. If he made an error that needs correction, then he will (perhaps)
Why did you rehash it if you didn't want to rehash it?
In any case, you addressed the post/question to me. I figured I didn't explain it well enough last time. Next time I'll know better and just send you a link to a previous post... lol.
How do you figure difficulty of implementation is not a factor in deciding to use it? Um... what?
And yes, it was ME who answered you in the very first reply that maintenance throttle in the way you described it was good for slow lazy turns but would make a quick flick impossible. Maybe you should re-read the thread and that way you won't need to re-hash things... lol.
-
By lightly dragging the rear brake to slow the rear wheel enough to break traction as you approach the corner. NOT enough to lock it, just enough to slow it down a tad. It was all the rage for awhile back in the mid-1990's but very few road racers still do it.
-
Hate to rehash but see pt #12. That's all I was trying to say
Jay,
I still do not have a copy of Soft Science. If someone out there has a copy, please search it for references to raising the idle and why one would do that. Allegedly it is in there and might have some bearing here. Otherwise...
I (and Cobie) already explained this. AFAIK, you are misinterpreting what Keith is trying to say in point #12. It boils down to the use of the word "at" in the first sentence. I think it would read better if he said "after". Interpreting it as cracking the throttle during the flick goes against everything I have ever heard him say or teach and everything I have learned and experienced in over a decade of racing. Unless Keith drops in and explains it differently, that is what I am going with.
Here is point #12 with added emphasis and clarification to help you understand what I believe Keith is saying:
12. Coordinating the exact roll on to stabilize the bike [after] the brake off/quick flick point. When you drop a bike into a turn quickly there is an optimum opening of the throttle, which maintains good stability through that transition***. The focus on this is to see if you can grab the right amount of throttle right away [after the quick flick/drop in point] to get that instant stability.*** The transition I believe Keith is referring to is the "exact roll on", the transition from being 'off' the throttle to being 'on' the throttle. That is the subject of the whole paragraph: "coordinating the exact roll on". I do not think he is saying that there is an optimum open state of the throttle (ie. maintenance throttle) when you drop a bike into a turn quickly. He is saying that the intial "cracking" of the throttle is very important to maintain stability, ie. not whack it open, not throw all the weight rearward at once. But rather smoothly transferring weight. Everything I have learned says you do not want to be on the gas when you drop a bike quickly into a turn.
That said, I could be completely wrong. However, if Keith is saying you should have the equivalent of 3000 rpm idle craked on when you flick the bike... well... When you raise the idle, what you are doing is opening the butterfly throttle valves more. The amount of movement it takes to get that idle to raise 2000 rpm at idle is TINY. Very small. 2-3 millimeters of rotation. Try to do it with your hand. Stand next to your idling bike and using the throttle, raise the idle to 3000 rpm. Hold it there.
Can you do it? Can you do it whenthebikeisonthefrontwheelwithahandfulofbrakeatsixtymilesperhourrightafteryouf
inishdownshiftingandbeforeyoucountersteer? Because reading that sentence is about what it feels like at race speed. I honestly don't think I am capable of accurately cracking the throttle 2-3 mm and holding it there as I quick flick drop the bike into a corner at speed. And I still think the idle raising is about being able to smoothly transition to on the gas. It's possible that a tiny amount of gas wouldn't affect the engine braking at speed very much, hence the fork will still collapse and not affect the turn in hook. I guess. And doing that might also allow more overall traction due to weight distribution IF the fork still collapses all the way and you still get your hook.
And that is the only thing I can think of. Which is exactly what I said before. So... why don't you send Keith a personal message and ask him?
racer
-
Did anyone notice in the video how long it took the chase bike to get on the gas after turn-in? Seemed like an eternity.
The difference between a little GP bike and a four stroke pig in action.
Now, who thinks we should do away with two strokes?
-
I've never run a race tire down to the cord, but, Daytona 200 racers go through more than two sets of tires, right?
Off Topic: Daytona 200 is won/lost in the pits. IIRC, they have always run slicks in the 200 and for the last few years have allowed special rules just for tire safety concerns at Daytona and is the reason the track was reconfigured.
Oh, aye.
They do run slicks, but, they also have special tires made just for Daytona. That's where the whole dual compound thing started I think. Longer lasting compounds and left side harder for the banking.
-
Ah, I see.
"Race" or "Full Race" are the same thing and refer to the tread compound. So, DOT Race is a full race compound tire made for racing yet on a carcass that is still street legal or DOT approved. Not that you would want to put it on your street bike. You'd never get them hot enough to be really sticky and they would probably last about 200 miles. If that. (That's a guess. I've never run a race tire down to the cord, but, Daytona 200 racers go through more than two sets of tires, right?)
The idea behind this type of tire is/was a tire for production or production based racing that fits the overall Production Racing philosophy, ie. one tire for all conditions. Just like your street bike. Back in the stone age when I was still racing supersport, there was only one compound and one carcass for a DOT Full Race compound available to the paying public (unless you were a factory rider like Miguel DuHamel, in which case you received "special" DOT tires.) Now, of course, we have DOT intermediates and DOT full wets. And multi-compound DOT tires.
The "track day" tires are marketed as an "in between" compound(s) made to heat up and get somewhat sticky similar to a full race compound, however, not quite as sticky as full race and designed to last much longer. And, for the Qualifiers and other multi-compounds, with a harder compound strip in the center that allows them to be ridden on the street without wearing square and down to the cord in less than a week.
r
-
D.O.T = Department of Transportation (approved by)
So, the complete phrase would be DOT approved tires, ie. street legal. You could mount them on your street bike and they would pass state inspection (assuming your state requires inspection). Even if your state does not require an annual safety inspection, I think the law still requires DOT rubber on the road. For instance, a state trooper or highway patrol officer could probably cite you for non-DOT approved tires.
-
Why do you say it's not the right place to do it?
Backing It In...
in Cornering and Techniques
Posted
You are entitled to your opinion and you are the chief. In no way would I attempt to challenge your authority. That said...
Although I have repeatedly requested specific examples of what you are talking about in private, you refuse to respond and continue to offer these vague, generalized, non-specific, unsupported characterizations and strawman ad hominem.
Whatever. When you can behave like an adult and treat me like an adult and discuss the matter like an adult, perhaps we will get somewhere.
As long as you continue to disrespect me privately and publicly I see little chance of being able to make the changes you allude to.
Peace.