Jaybird180
-
Posts
1,861 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
72
Posts posted by Jaybird180
-
-
I don't know which way is faster but I can say I have turned bikes from knee to knee fast enough that the wheels leave the ground. Driving the front wheel under the bike fast enough to bottom the forks and compress the rear, with both rebounding and the increase in radius from the side of the tire to the center effectively jumping the bike right off the ground. I don't think you can turn it from straight up and down to lean faster than gravity will pull it down, but clearly gravity can defeated coming from leaned to straight up.
Where in the world can this be done? is it a CSS drill? Sounds like fun.
-
I have to disagree with you on the "because of gravity" there is friction point. The friction that we need in any land based vehicle is rolling friction and is an OPPOSING FORCE. It is this opposing force that gives us traction.
Um... okay. What do you think causes friction at the contact patch of a motorcycle driving in a straight line, Jay?
I understand your analogy regarding moment and center of gravity and I think you're onto something with explaining one of the forces involved in countersteering initiating the lean angle.Cool. You are the first person to say you understood my analogy. Thanks.
So, what other force(s) do you think are involved?
Let us keep in mind that gravity is not a force that necessarily is downward.Erm... really? In what other direction does gravity act here on planet Earth?
Once lean has been established it is gravity that keeps us from falling over by application of throttle and is also why the suspension compresses and causes the bike to loose further ground clearance.
With all due respect, Jay, I think you might be mixing gravity up with some other force(s). Here is a link to an excellent online website for Physics and Kinematics (presented in plain English) that I found very helpful.
http://www.glenbrook.k12.il.us/gbssci/Phys/Class/BBoard.html
Gravity strictly by definition is the attractive force between two bodies, which is why I said it's not necessarily "down". We are attracted to the center of that mass, the Earth. But as we know from Newton's first law, there is an opposite force in the opposing direction. That point is not really relevant to this conversation, but I just hope to clear up the muddiness of my other comment. The fact is that gravity's vector can change based on other influences. And since we love specifics, up and down are relative terms because the Earth is the sphere that we ride on.
There is a constant F of G in the vertical, but as you get on the gas, the only Force we're concerned about is the one created by the change of direction in the horizontal, thereby giving us traction to execute the turn (and the road/tire forcing against each other) keeping us from falling onto the ground.
I hope that I only cleared up my earlier comments. I do not want to throw my hat into the ring on the discussion of gyroscopic effect, as I have nothing of worth to contribute to that discussion.
-
I suppose that this isn't really a school question, but I expect an instructor to be best qualified to answer this. I would say that this question is more about the ways in which humans learn new things, and the structure of CSS is the best example.
Suppose you take a rider, the worst rider in the world...say 10 years street experience with alot of bad habits. He was self taught in the 1800's and then decided to get that brand new Liter Bike to teach himself AGAIN to ride and has been practicing those bad habits and ingraining them.
Mr. Rider comes to CSS, and the only thing going for him is time, money and a burning desire to improve.
Given this scenario, he plans to completely retrofit his riding with 13 school sessions. He would like to take levels 1-3 thrice and then do level 4, afterwhich he plans to take another self-inventory.
Should Mr. Rider do Level 1 thrice then progress to each level, repeating the same or go through 1-3 sequentially thrice? Level 4 will be the capstone of his regimen.
My question is an exaggeration, but I suppose I wanted to know which learning strategy would be better.
Thanks.
-
Acebobby,
Since it was a survey type question, I'll chime in. Some years ago, I heard Rossi didn't do much training at all. That I think has changed, but is still pretty recent. There was some data on his heart rate and Biaggi's a while back, and I think Rossi's would go down, where Max's would go up, and pretty high. Bet someone knows that data or can find it out. I'm sure all the top guys are in good shape, a 200+ HP beast, just to hang on and move around on the thing.
For sure technique in the end is more important, one can wear themslves out by poor/unknown technique. Keith is in his 60's, and fast!
Cobie
The heart rate thing was discussed in the DVD of FASTER. It was discussed that during those "puckering" moments Rossi is so cool and calm that his heart rate hardly went up. They just happend to use Biaggi as a comparison. Their rivalry at the time didn't hurt sensationalism either.
In my small experience, I found that each session would wear me out. So much that by the end of the day I was trembling. For me it stopped when I began to realize that I wasn't breathing (LOL). I also got faster and began to relax (or is it the other way around?). I discovered that manhandling the bike (at my skill level) cuts down on me and not my laptimes.
With that said, I agree that fitness can be of benefit to a rider or any person who's doing physical activity...look at ballet dancers, perfect example. They don't look it, but it takes alot of strength to do what they do.
For some odd reason though, most Pro riders are heavily into cycling. I wonder why???
-
I have to disagree with you on the "because of gravity" there is friction point. The friction that we need in any land based vehicle is rolling friction and is an OPPOSING FORCE. It is this opposing force that gives us traction.
I understand your analogy regarding moment and center of gravity and I think you're onto something with explaining one of the forces involved in countersteering initiating the lean angle.
Let us keep in mind that gravity is not a force that necessarily is downward. Once lean has been established it is gravity that keeps us from falling over by application of throttle and is also why the suspension compresses and causes the bike to loose further ground clearance.
Lastly,
Just because you lost us in your explanation doesn't mean that we can't speak the kinematic language.
-
So for now I will still have to rely on what is demonstrable as I find the "scientific" explanation induces drowsiness and I have machinery to operate.
And I thought I was the only one
-
Some people teach and demonstrate hanging off differently than others. I've never seen a pic of mine, but I have a monkey hanging style. I get waaay off the seat (nearly 3/4 butt) and my inside foot is used as a lever to lock my position. I consciously focus on my foot pressure, and LOOKING INTO THE TURN. My head then is far over and faceshield into the breeze. My only task at this point is to add gas.
Like you, I do find that it's easier to have the tendency to turn-in too early, but this is working on a carousel like section of practice area on the street. Darn traffic can sometimes be on my intended line.
-
I am looking forward to doing the 2 day camp in 09'. I was wondering if both level 1 & 2 are covered at the camp.....Thank's
Rick;
The two day camp covers two Levels; one Level per day. If you have never attended before you will do Level's I & II. If you have Level I under your belt, you will do Level's II & III and so on.
Good Luck. Mid-O is a GREAT place to attend your 2-Day Camp.
Kevin
So what are the pros/cons of the two day versus two days of the 1 day (besides price)?
-
OOps. I found them on page 3.
-
Now in my 1st reading of T2 and I thought I was paying attention. I missed something somewhere which got me to this thought: I know that SR1 is throttle on/off and #2 is tensing up. Now Ch16 para 2 is introducing SRs 4-6. Where did I miss #3?
Is there somewhere I can find a list of all of the SR's?
-
My 2 cents worth on pivot steering:
I think Chapter 19 of Twist 2 is probably some of the most profound words KC has ever written. You probably won't get it the first time you read it, or not even the second. You may have to read it 4 or 5 times for it to sink in. Once it sinks in and you figure it out, it is as revolutionary a concept as counter steering is the first time you figure it out.
Case in point: I read Twist 2 many times before I figured out what KC was trying to say (nobody said I was a fast learner). I own a basement full of bikes and just so happened to be on my Goldwing (of all things) one day and thought I would give the "Pivot or Cross Steering" a try. I tried it in a left hand turn. The bike flicked over so fast, so hard, I just about dislocated my left hip when my folding peg hit the pavement with such force and drove my thigh up into my hip. Conscious counter steering combined with conscious Pivot or Cross Steering will turn a bike so fast and so effortlessly it's unbelieveable.
I have learned from Chapter 19 that I don't like to use the term of "weighting the pegs". What you're actually doing is pushing against one peg opposite the handlebar end you're pushing.
A good example for you to think about. Some people say you should weight the inside peg and use a light touch on the handlebars. Do this experiment. Put your bike on a stand, remove the right peg, cross your arms across your chest, and see how much effort it takes to shift your body to the left. It can't be done without a lot of scooting around on the seat which would certainly upset the bike. Now put the peg back on, sit back on the bike with your arms crossed across your chest (i.e. simulating an extremely light touch on the bars). Shift your weight from side to side. See which peg you're pushing against when you move side to side. You push against the right peg to move left, push against the left peg to move right.
Again, my 2 cents. I could be wrong.
Prelude: Forgive my uniformed writing as I'm on my first read of T2, now at Ch 14.
With that said, I think that is the reason the body position should be set prior to approaching the turn. It upsets the bike to do it midcorner or while cornering (which I think I saw Corona Honda rider Jake Holden doing, not sure). But also doing it early in the last part of the straight, leading to the turn is not without penalty too as one has to countersteer to counter the effects of the uneven weight, which under race conditions would contribute to front tire wear.
Personally, I'm waiting for Twist3 to get further into the science of pivot steering as Mr. KC himself expressed desire to update that chapter's content.
In my meager experience when in the turn, fully cranked over and on the gas, it has helped to consciously focus on putting pressure on the inside peg. Getting to the outside peg to stand the bike up has been a no go for me. I have yet to experience slamming a bike over with foot pressure, which would seem to me to give results counter to what KC was trying to prove with his NO BS Bike.
-
I think you may have described the 2-Day Camp structure which is scheduled for Monday and Tuesday. This weekend's Schools are their regular format with three groups: White, Yellow Green and if I remember, they ride in that order.
Kevin
Can we assume then that tracktime is 20 mins and classroom is 40 mins?
-
Thanks for your well written reply Leftlaner. I agree with you about choosing whom to listen (and I'll have to go back to find out what you mean in TOTW2). The technique that I described is purported to be a track technique.
I recall Keith in my DVD (TOTW) saying that 'it doesn't matter what you ride or where you ride, the principles remain the same'. I have found agreement with that by my own experience. I've also found, like you that some things (like knee dragging) don't work well on the street.
-
I've been a magazine reader longer than a rider. I'm especially a fan of the Sport Rider Rider Skills Series. I've realized that not everyone subscribes to Mr. Codes' ideologies about riding and that one may get ideas about riding that don't mix well with the way Keith teaches riding. In particular some authors describe a cornering technique that I would describe as tip in on brakes, get off brakes, coast until apex and then get on the gas at the exit. I noticed it in particular on pp 104 of the September 08 issue.
I'm not debating the merits/ demerits of trail braking (there's a long thread for that). I'm only wondering how many other places where there's riding advice given that doesn't mix well.
-
I wonder why one would want such a thing at a Level 1 school. I understand using the timer as a benchmark for improvement, but shouldn't that come later?
-
hmmmm.......Han Solo: Kid, I've flown from one side of this galaxy to the other, and I've seen a lot of strange stuff, but I've never seen *anything* to make me believe that there's one all-powerful Force controlling everything. 'Cause no mystical energy field controls *my* destiny. It's all a lot of simple tricks and nonsense.
Perhaps I've been using the Han Solo riding plan - just some simple tricks and nonsense.
Maybe you should try riding with the blast shield on your helmet down, erm... a dark tinted shield on your helmet so you can't see anything?
So that's my problem!?
-
Okay, I'm pestering:
2009 ViR
Heck, 2009 anywhere on the East Coast
-
I noticed a couple things.
1- It seems that your knee is in, rather that out.
2- Your toes. Use the balls of your feet rather than the step of your heel.
Before my first time, I had everything right and when I quit focusing on it and working on lines, throttle control, etc I felt something grab my leathers. During the lap I thought about it and realized it was the ground. I then resolved to go faster thru that corner and within 2 laps it happened. Touchdown!
Prior to that, a coach at NESBA had been trying to get me to touchdown. The results of that were bad.
-
UPDATE: Sometime after these questions arose, I tucked the front on the brakes (Damn SR). Once I pulled the forks, I found that one was bent & the lower tree looked crooked too. The front had been making a weird noise from movement and now I know where it's from.
The suspension shop says that one tube is unrecoverable, so I now need a new plan.
This would be the perfect opportunity for me to learn how to disassemble forks. I suppose the best solution is for me to find a set of n-used tubes and transplant them onto my forks along with a n-used lower triple. Then I can also shop around for a bling bling upper triple (Vortex about $140).
I saw the Attack Adjustable Triple trees (very nice). How do I know if this is needed, especially at my riding level (novice)? Or do I just stick with stock triples and disregard GMD computrack's ranting about sweet geometry? (Bike worked very well BTW; turned on a dime and stopped hard enough to pop my eyes out of their sockets without the rear dancing)
-
I know you guys don't know me at all, but if you did, you would know everything that I own that is mechanical, is immaculate. So, that isn't the issue.
I only slept with my bike once and it was the 31 degree day and it was really bad in the room in the morning.
Racer, you have been to a lot of tracks, why would you put your bike in your room when you can drop it at the track the night before?
I am still going to learn a lot at the school and this won't get in the way of learning but I am really so very disappointed in CSS for this. There are various schools to choose from and each person makes their decision on which school based on many factors. CSS is run very well and I like the instructors and format very well, that is but one of the factors in my decision making process. Yes, I would still take the class knowing I can not drop my bike at the track, but I expected a bit more from CSS.
Meat
Waaaa
-
Shane,
I may have to breathe gas vapors all night....along with wife and dog (we leave him in the hotel when at Barber).
Excuse my ignorance, but why does your bike smell? Mine is parked in my living room without issue.
-
I've been riding track here in Phoenix, and am limited to a poorly maintained Firebird International Raceway. It's too hot in the summer so the track closes. I've never heard of a package type deal around here, but I would love it. I'm going to do every trackday offered, and it adds up. If my wife starts, thats even more money. They cost approx. $170-180 for a full day, and although I know a lot of places are more expensive, just a few hours away is Arroyo Seco. $150 for 2 days of open track. One day one way, one the other. And I've heard the owner is amazing. He'll go out of his way to ensure the punters get as enjoyable an experience as possible. If only I had a way to get my bike there without having to depend on anyone. If only.....
I rented a mini-van for my last 2 day. Took the seats out and loaded the bike in the back on the right side. I used the hooks in the floor from the seats to secure the bike with straps. Then I loaded all the gear (coolers, etc) on the left side. It was perfect. We got to the track, unloaded and rolled out the airmatress and slept in the van. Perfect I tell ya. I'm thinking of buying a mini-van just for getting more tracktime.
-
About March 07, I had a set of forks built by Ed of Trackside Engineering in Wisconsin. Ed has since sold the business and the new owners haven’t returned any of my calls, emails or requests for information, so I now turn to you guys for advice.
The forks were built with Racetech 1.0 springs and Racetech Gold Valves part #FMGV S2040nv CTRL# 040297 (from an old email between Ed and myself). I recall talking with Ed about some other kind of pistons, valving, etc. and honestly at the time I was on information overload (in spite of his excellent communication skills). So I’m reasonably sure the RT stuff is on compression side and he used a set of pistons he salvaged from another rider’s setup to use on my rebound side. I have no idea about the brand, weight or oil level used. He also installed new bushings and seals.
During our pre-return shipping conversation, I recall him saying something about stiction but I have no recollection of what he was referring. At the time, I was still struggling with suspension vocabulary (and still do apparently) and so I didn’t retain that portion of the conversation. Possibly he was warning me to be aware of it in the future, that he solved the problem or that the problem still exists.
At a local hangout I ran into Terrence, an all-around great guy, the proprietor of A&J Cycles, a former WERA racer and AMA Tech Inspector. I spoke with him about some of my handling concerns and trying to articulate the inconsistency I was experiencing.
After I invited him over to my bike, he lifted on the front end and when it didn’t return to it’s original geometry he said that I should go inside the forks and find out why it has excess stiction (is this the correct term for this?). Terrence also complained that the 1.0 RT springs may be too stiff for a 233lb dressed weight on my 02 F4i. I haven’t conceded that point yet, as I’ve ridden on this setup with an Ohlins rear (properly sprung by Kyle and verified by Ohlins) since the abovementioned time. I told him that I wasn’t sure of what it feels like, but I believe I may have bottomed the forks a few times on the brakes at Summit Main, so I reasoned that I may have too little spring!?!?
Further in the conversation I communicated that at times the bike seems on rails, goes where I point it, at other times it doesn’t want hold the line on exit and other times it falls mid-corner (Michelin Pilot Power tires). I have always blamed either myself for the inconsistency or blamed a recent change in rear preload from fiddling with the adjuster for 2-up rides.
Now here comes the ending: Since I just had the shock serviced due to a malfunction, AND since I had this suggestion from Terrence about stiction, AND due to the fact that I’m doing some work to the bike anyhow, I want to service the forks; I want to eliminate them as a variable in my riding results, however I don’t know WHAT to do because of too many unknowns and uncertainties.
I haven’t allocated money in this project budget to send the forks out, and besides, whom do I trust to do the work (???), and Terrence is too busy. So I reasoned that changing fork oil can’t be that hard, right? And while I’m doing that, I should be able to visually see if there’s something binding and causing the stiction (which I understand that some of it is normal friction from the bushings and seals).
A confused mind can’t make a decision. Can someone help me get un-FusterClucked?
I talked to the "local" Racetech shop and they say they think there's a twist in the forks causing the springs to bind. Does this make sense?
-
I totally agree with you Racer where applying brake decreases acceleration however regarding the rear traction issue under power...I think the two of you are missing each other. It depends on the location of the rear brake caliper as to where the parasitic force is being directed. If the caliper is directly above the front edge of the contact patch, then it will transfer the force to the rear wheel, thereby increasing traction.
I agree we may be missing each other but now I'm missing you as well.
Let's stop thinking about the bike decelerating and think about constant drive or acceleration while applying the rear brake.
It stands to reason that as the back of the bike comes down (due to chain pull, as I have proved to myself on my own bike), the front must become lighter as the motor is effectively now trying to revolve the rest of the bike around the back wheel. More weight = more traction.
I don't think the position of the caliper has any bearing on this but I will stand corrected
It's one of the reasons why rear brake calipers have been moved over recent years.
Now regarding that chain pull thing: I'd have to reread it, however one thing that often gets overlooked is Newton's 1st law. F1=F2, for every action there's an equal and opposite reaction. Don't overlook opposing forces which often is not what we observe (ex. centripetal vs centrifugal force)
Sorry, but that doesn't sound right to me. I will abstain from asking you for proof as I hope common sense will prevail.
The position of the caliper is only relevant to weight distribution i.e. if it is on the top of the swingarm, then this obviously alters the COG. If it is on top of the swingarm, then it is less likely to pick up debris from the road. If it is on top of the swingarm, then a pushing force is applied to the stay as opposed to a pulling force on the stay should it be under the rear axle. The way the rear caliper is set up on my bike i.e.with the stay an integral part of the swingarm where the caliper holder slots into lugs on the swingarm, wouldn't really matter much if the caliper was above or below the disc.
Are you the same Jaybird from BITOG btw?
No I am not from BITOG
Common Sense is not a Common Virtue
Position of caliper does more than just COG and debris protection. Motorcycles have evolved and placement of componentry is not as arbitrary as "let's put it there because it fits" anymore.
Anywho, I think I'm getting "stupider" by the minute. Peace.
Hello, New To The Forum And Need Some Input After A Trackday Crash
in School Questions/General Discussion
Posted
BAN Him. ....And delete the post