faffi

There must be a reason why virtually every top rank rider in the world ride MX etc. in order to keep their form, even during the season. Honing their reflexes and getting used to slides is probably the main reason. Apart from that, it sounds like you need to move to a better place where the grass is green and roads are swerving

Oh, I agree with you that the early systems had their flaws, be that from BMW, Yamaha or Honda. Still, so does the majority of humans. Close to a decade ago, MOTORRAD compared riders of various levels of experience and skill to perform emergency stops on a test track. Not one got close to .8 g during their first stop, most were significantly worse than that. They also did a mountain ride and very few braked harder than .5g at any point, despite riding at a brisk pace, and .7 was the maximum reached. Hence even early ABS would assist most riders when under stress. I remember Cycle magazine did a group test of ABS bikes around 1990. They rode back in the rain. Those riding ABS equipped bikes left the ones in the company without that aid behind, feeling confident that they would not risk a locked front as long as the bike was close to upright regardless of the road conditions. Current ABS systems are miles better, hard even to compare. For instance, a couple of years ago MOTORRAD failed to match the ABS stopping figures on the K1300R when they turned off the system, despite using their best rider and getting many attempts. But even the old ones would more often than not - in real road riding situations - beat their human operators.

Even on a dry road, without the ability to test for traction first, you will not find (m)any rider able to beat even an older ABS system during the first panic stop from speed. Especially under stress, that is in a panic situation. Add varying friction levels and even generation 1 ABS systems have clear benefits, although most experience riders could beat these in a controlled environment. But as you mentioned, conservatism is probably the main reason why ABS hasn't begun to penetrate the market until recently. In Germany, however, I believe there are now more bikes sold with ABS than without - and within 5 years it will probably be very hard to find street bikes without ABS. World class racers will, however, likely still ride and drive without this aid, although it's hard to see why - many current road bike ABS systems are set so that if there is grip, the bike can still flip over forwards with ABS interfering. Honda and several others have opted to prevent the rear from leaving the ground, helping the rider prevent the somersault at the cost of slightly longer stopping distances. BMW seems to be the current leader in the ABS technology war.

It will depend a lot on your natural ability and your level, of course, how long it takes to get back to speed, but I agree that for most people, one track day is probably "wasted" trying to get back to speed after a several month layoff. However, the most important thing is that you will not become all that fast with random riding. Pro riders will ride a LOT, even when they are not at the track. They do motard, MX, trial, dirt track etc. to keep sharp and also to constantly learn new things and push envelopes. So if you really want to become good, you'd need to ride at least a couple of times every week for a couple of hours each time. In addition, you can do mountain bike riding in difficult terrain to get in better shape and to teach yourself bike control at the ragged edge. Yes, it can partly be transferred motorcycles riding around a race track. Basically, the more you work on something, the better you become. It's all down to what you can afford to spend in money and time and how important it is to you to perform.

Double post.

These tyres are infamous for not giving any warning (for mere mortals, at least) before they let go - similar to the BT020 and BT021s. My brother had a rear 020 let go without warning at a track, highsiding him upwards enough to give him a full view of the track (a view he could have done without, according to himself ) and a 016 front letting go at relatively little lean at the road. He have this on video and you can see the bike just falling sideways and lots of scraping noises from metal hitting tarmac, then the tyre just gripped again a split second before he would have crashed, and he could continue on his way. However, discussing tyres is about as useful as discussing what oil to use - different people will have various (strong) opinions. Some are also valid - different bikes and different styles stress tyres differently. Hence a tyre that suits you may not suit another - and the other way around. Personally, I find the Pirelli Demon Stradas to be fantastic. They last noticeably longer than even the BT020 (not to mention the BT016) and are more compliant and have more grip than the 016s. I cannot say if they will slip predictably or not because I haven't managed to slide them since I only ride on the road and I'm not your fastest rider in the world. But I do lean enough that there isn't a hint of chicken strips and the tyres doesn't flinch when I accelerate at my semi-moderate levels of lean. Metzeler ME-Z6 Roadtech is another tyre that apparently are very similar to the Pirellis as well as the new Pirelli Angel ST. Just if you ever feel like trying something else

THat will depend on tyre model, tyre pressure, road surface temperature, asphalt texture and rider style - at least. Sport-touring road tyres will probably deliver full grip on a normal warm and sunny day after 300 yards but will "go off" after a couple of hard laps. Pure race tyres will not grip well until they are in their operating range, hence tyre warmers and vigorous riding needed for them. If you are a gentle rider, you would benefit from using tyres that work well over a wide range of temperatures, as in not race tyres. These will tolerate more load more quickly. Don't know if this gave you any answers

Bar risers, if available, will not only give you more room, the taller handlebars will also improve your leverage in direction changes and also improve braking by allowing you to keep the weight a bit further back. MOTORRAD once tested a ZXR750 in slalom, braking and around a track stock and with (wider) superbike bars sitting about 4 inches taller. Both expert and novice did better in the slalom and braking test with the converted bike, while the expert managed to be a couple of tenths quicker around the track with the clip-ons. The novice were several seconds quicker with the taller, wider bars around the track.

I also think that fronts have more tread available for an extra margin of safety so that you run out of rubber first on the rear wheel, where a slide is slightly easier to deal with.

I'm no expert on these matters, but there are a few things to consider. 1) Tyre profiles differ greatly, as evidenced by your own pair of rubber, which makes it hard to determine how hard you are riding. 2) On just about any tyre, you still have plenty of grip left to lean quite a bit further even when you have just got rid of your chicken strips. 3) Speed is not just related to how far you are leaning over - if you do everything right, you could be cornering faster than another bloke on the same bike that has no chicken strips (on the rear wheel, at least). BTW, I do not believe you can have 2 inches left of virgin rubber on each side of your front tyre unless it has tread all the way to the rim. One inch on each side is possible with the 1/4 in on the rear.

You can hear me As I tried to say; probably not. But unless you are willing to put two identical engines to identical harsh tests with different oils, it is impossible to be sure. But if we consider the fact that air cooled engines running oil temperatures easily 50C hotter than what's typical for modern engines survived endurance races 30-40 years ago when metallurgy was far worse as well, I think it is reasonably safe to assume that it will not matter what you run.

Racing means sitting at high rpm and high loads a lot of the time, and this is bringing oil temperatures up. This again will make it thinner, increasing the risk of oil film shearing. The same will the very high rpm attainable by modern sports engines. Still, the liquid cooling will go a very long way in controlling also oil temperature, so the risk of oil failing when it's fresh, even if it is of the cheap variant, is very slim indeed. I'm curious as to what oils they are using in MotoGP racing this season, now that engines must last for several races. I'm pretty sure they used very, very thin oils before to cut friction as much as possible, because wear wasn't a big issue (overhaul after each race, perhaps 2 or 3 engines used over a weekend). Now, they are likely to use oils that protect better at the cost of a bit extra friction. As to the Shell oils - we have the same oils (at least by name) here, and - just like any other gas station brand type of oil except Mobil 1 - they do not have a good reputation. Generally, they are considered to be overpriced products of very average quality. It's a matter of fact that the big oil companies sell their own oils in bulk to low-priced chains who then sell the very same product for as little as 1/3 the price you have to pay if you want the "right" label.

This shows some of the fun you can have on the road http://www.roadmc.com/ I've ridden most, if not all, of the Norwegian routes they show. Mostly, they maintain what Ienatch refer to as "the pace", which means sporty but not silly, although some of them have a nasty and unacceptable tendency to wander into the wrong lane.

A bit hard to call kids idiots - and once hooked on the bad habit, it's not easy to quit. After all, it is a drug and getting addicted is apparently easy. You will quit the day you get motivated to do so - if you don't die first For your comfort, I think it is better to live "unhealthy" and be happy than live "healthy" and be miserable

Personally, I have never fancied track riding (or driving, for that matter) because I'm bored with repetitive tasks. For me, the best place to ride is a deserted, constantly winding, gnarly road that I have never seen before. But there are others who have different agendas, people who love to get incrementally closer to perfection and enjoy trying something over in a quest for getting it just right. Or perhaps they love the competition. I can see that. Having a fight on the road, especially on fairly slow bikes with limited handling capabilities to keep the speed down, between similarly fast riders can be fun and exciting. On the track, you obviously can - and probably will - have more and better performing vehicles. So it was interesting for me to read Roger Reiman's (then aged 50), Grand National US Champion back in 1964, comments after a long day in the saddle of a FZR1000, GSX-R1100 and ZX-10 together with Nixon and Lawill back in 1989: Two things can be drawn from this: Road riding is fun - and Heaven forbid I have to live in Illinois

My dad got drunk most days of his life and started smoking at the tender age of 4(!) but looked younger than a couple of these blokes when he died aged 70. I guess genes also matter, not just lifestyle. But for the record, yes, at least Nixon was infamous for living very hard.

I typically keep my knees firmly between my hips and heels Seriously, though, I have exceptionally short thighs and comperatively long calfs, which makes my knees sit higher and point higher than for more normally proportioned people. This again makes it that much harder to get a knee down. Me not moving my butt sort of elminates any chance of ever getting a knee to the ground with the tyres still in contact with the road I once saw a front cover on Cycle World magazine portraying John Ulrich riding a GS750, knee down. Since I rode a GS550 at the time, a bike very similar to the 750, I decided to try. So I found a nice corner and had a friend watch how far my knee was off the ground. I had everything decked, inculding the engine/alternator cover while hanging off as best I could. My knee was well over a foot off the ground. Ulrich not only had a better knee/calf ratio, but he could also splay is legs about twice as far as me. So he could do what I couldn't. But that was a quarter of a century ago, and I have never tried to get a knee down since. Instead, I much prefer to use my toesliders as reference for how far I'm leaned over. Interestingly enough, so did Lawwill, Nixon and Reiman when Cycle World invited them to test the latest and greatest sportbikes (FZR1000, GSX-R1100 and ZX-10). BTW, I dug out the article and discovered they were about my current age at the time (50, 48 and 48 respectively vs 46 for me). Being a racer must be hard - they all looked VERY old! I showed the pictures to my wife, who figured they were in their mid-60s

http://www.ehow.com/facts_5820051_differences-motorcycle-oil-car-oil.html http://www.mobil.com/USA-English/MotorOil/Car_Care/AskMobil/Differences_Between_Car_and_Motorcycle_Oil.aspx http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20070530220441AA0UCPi http://www.husqvarnaoutlet.com/the_true_difference_between_motorcycle_oil_and_automotive_oil And if you are really in the mood for reading and study the background of oil: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motor_oil

It would be the exact opposite for me - except that I do not think of SW as fun

Or you could conclude that even 16 years ago, oil quality was more than sufficent to protect your engine and that current oils are likely to be better still What I find amazing is that race engines even survived 100 years ago, using iron pistons in iron cylinders and lubricated with a manually operated oil pump and the oil was little more special than olive oil If we go back 50 years, racing engines typically ran straight oils, often 50 weight. Even long avter multigrade oils were introduced, racing engines used straight oils. Their theory - and for all I know it could correct at first - was that under extreme use, a multi-grade oil would quickly degrade into a thin more or less single grade. Or that it would turn into asphalt when heavily stressed. Interestingly enough, although a 10W50 oil will be as "thin" as a straight 10 weight around 0C* and as "thick" as a straight weight at 100C*, it will flow better below 0C and retain viscosity better above 100C than the straight oils. At least in theory. So a multigrade oil should be able to protect your engine better during cold starts and also better under extreme situations when the oil is very hot. But things are not always as rosy as they may seem at first. A multigrade will - provided we speak of oils of similar basic qualities - be reduced over time and "thin out" so that it will be less and less efficient to protect your engine at high temperatures. This degradation starts to take place the moment you open the oil can and will be accelerated heavily if the oil gets too hot for its design. Also, gearboxes will chew the oil apart, breaking up the polymers that are added to make the oil more elastic and hence withstand higher temps. A 10W50 oil could be a straight 10 weight with added goodies to make it withstand the flow test requirements at 100C. So as the oil degrades, it will get closer and closer to a straight 10 weight. Hence the most important aspect for a good multigrade oil - besides having magificient shear stability (not allowing the oil film to break up and hence allow metal-to-metal contact) is to retain it's viscosity for a long time. It appears that Mobil 1 has always been very good at this, according to a number of tests I've read over the years. In a motorcycle engine, you not only have the oil coping with temperatures, but also shear forces from the gearbox and clutch. For this reason alone, (most) motorcycle engines destroy their oils far more rapidly than engines not sharing their oil with gears. Again, the reason I am not overly concerned with what I put into my engines at my 3-4000 mile intervals and gentle running, is that companies like Honda saw fit to recommend 7,500 mile intervals with 10W40 oils more than 30 years ago. There simply is no realistic chance that my engine's life will be significantly prolonged if I use the very best versus a very ordinary oil. And although it's not a scientific test in any manner whatsoever, I think riding my very old and worn KZ400 for 2 year, mostly short hop (less than 4 miles each way), to and fro work in all sorts of condition from way below freezing to warm days, without any noticeable wear is proof to me that cheap oils will suffice. No, I didn't take the engine apart, but in 5 years and 12,000 miles in total (only used for commuting 2 years) it never even needed a valve adjustment and only once did the cam chain need to be tightened. If I had a costly motorcycle that I used hard, be that for daily short hop commuting or race track (ab)use, I would I have used a high rank 15W40 motorcycle oil. But for my use, which is usually riding 50 miles or more if I go for a ride and 95% of the time in the lower half of the rev range, high cost oils are mostly a waste of money. *I'm not sure these are the correct temperatures, but at least it's cold and hot tests

I'm sure the answer to this question will depend a lot of factors, like road surface, what bike you ride, which tires you use, etc., and I won't try to address that part of the question. But, since I think Cobie is on the road right now and might not be available to respond to this, I'll repeat something I've heard him say lots of times: the danger of adding lean angle and throttle at the same time, is that if/when the rear tire DOES run out of grip, you don't get any warning, and it can toss you suddenly. And it can be a nasty way to fall. You are, after all, adding TWO stresses on the traction at the same time, inreasing lean angle AND throttle simultaneously, easy to shoot right past the "warning" stage and into the airborne stage. On the other hand, if you are standing the bike up as you roll on the throttle, you are putting stress on the rear tire with the throttle, BUT you are also IMPROVING your traction by reducing lean angle, so you wouldn't be approaching the limit as rapidly. You would have a better chance of getting some warning if the tire starts to slide, and if you are already raising the bike more upright, you have a much better chance of recovering from a slide. I'm curious, what was prompting you to add lean at the end of the long corner, versus driving and standing the bike up? Also, how did you know that you were at the edge of the tire? Thank you for stating what I pretty much assumed to be the case. I just feel I am safely within the realms of the grip the few times I do this. I've done it around a couple of corners for many, many years. The reason for the action is that these two corners that spring to mind where I ride this way, is that they both have a change of direction going into them and both the way their shape is initially and the fact that they start out as off-camber corners and gradually gets into positive camber makes it fun to accelerate through, but scary to attack from the onset. Did that make any sense I know that I were on the edge of the tyre because the sidestand was just touching down, which is as far as I ever lean - and I do not have any chicken strips, only a tenth of a mm here and there around the circumference where the tyre isn't absolutely even

Prolly going to take som flak for this, but I need to ask. I wonder when does it become dangerous to add throttle and lean angle at the same time? As I rode through a long corner today, I accelerated from about 50 to 65 mph and at the end I was at the edge of the rear tyre (more lean and grip available aplenty, just that I had reached my maximum which equals with no chicken strips). I was accelerating smoothly and gently and also smoothly adding more lean. My feeling is that I was still a very long way from actually taxing the grip limit of either tyre. Obviously, there is more stress on the rear tyre than there would be if I were just cruising through, but I'm pretty convinced there was quite a bit left. So, how much lean is needed until this becomes a problem? Surely, leaning over from 20 to 30 degrees while accelerating cannot produce any cause for concern unless you have massive power that you put to full use?

Your bearing failure was most likely a result of an assembly error. German magazine MOTORRAD do long term tests, now up to 100,000 km but typically 50k. Back in the 70s and 80s, however, it was mostly 25,000 km. And they had many failures not typical for that particular model. Like a spun big end bearing on a CB900F and a crank bearing worn all the way through to bare aluminium on a CBX550F. Or a total failure of one of the end ball bearings on a GS850G. Or almost destroyed valve guides on a GS1000E. Or a broken piston ring on a Z1000ST. All of these failures were deemed, after scrutiny, to be either a result of material defects or wrong assembly/tolerances from new. Better oils may have prolonged the life a little in these engines, but they were never going to last a long time. Other things, like pitted pinions in the gearboxes, however, could no doubt have survived longer with an oil that could take more pressure before failing and breaking its film. The problem with low friction oils is that they can cause problems for the clutch (slipping) but mostly because the gearbox will break down the molecule chains rapidly, destroying the oil's protective capacity. There is no guarantee that a motorcycle specific oil will be better for protecting your engine than a car specific oil, but that requires an "old-fashioned" oil without slipper modifiers. Hence using oil made for bikes should at least guarantee that you don't end up with a really poor oil since it has to cope with the gearbox' shearing effect.

Where is the ROFLMAO emoticon when you need it 15.)Pennzoil Motocycle Oil Interestingly, that was the only oil that didn't leak past the shabby shift shaft seal on my KZ400. It also provided smoother shifts and oil consumption was lower. It was a M/C specific semi-synt.

Treat your ZX to the very best Even if it doesn't matter to the longevity of the engine, it'll be worth it if it makes you feel good It's for a similar reason people put on coloured drive chains, Ohlins steering dampers and race compound brake pads even if they never lean past 30 degrees or stop harder than .5G. Even I, who see logical as the ideal, have to admit that most of the things I do are pretty darn subjective