YellowDuck

I really don't know the answer, but here is an idea to contribute to the conversation that maybe others can then debunk I would propose that, assuming you are on the most efficient line in both cases (the one that straightens the corner the most), the fastest combination is going to be the one that requires the greatest lean angle. Lean angle = corner speed, so if you are leaning less than you could have, the you entered with less speed than you could have. Yes, entering slower and thereby using less lean allows you to get on the throttle sooner...but the reason you can get on the throttle sooner is because you were going slow in the first place! I can't see how, in a symmetrical corner, carrying less corner speed could ever be advantageous on net. But now I will listen to those who really know...

I upshift clutchless pretty much exclusively, but have *never* managed what I would consider an acceptable clutchless downshift. Either the bike lurches forward on the blip without shifting, or else it shifts but doesn't engage smoothly and lurches in the lower gear. I tried to learn it for a while when I was a street rider but eventually gave up for fear of grenading the gearbox. This thread has given me the motivation to try to learn it again this coming track season. I never realized it was easier in the higher gears, but I can see how that makes sense. It doesn't seem like a terribly important skill though (compared to clutchless upshifting). Especially with a slipper clutch that lets you downshift pretty much whenever it is convenient without fear of skidding the rear, I don't feel like I am losing a lot of time using the clutch on downshifts.

I'd have to go with poor body position. Lots of guys riding crossed up with their knee down. Goofy.

I noticed that every driver who completely saved it and looked professional doing so was driving a BMW. Not sure what that tells you....

Oh, something else interesting in the video that I forgot to mention...the guy with the camera is the local gizmo-freak. He has one of those auto-rev-matching throttle blipper do-dads installed - you can notice it in action if you watch the tach as he gears down. He installed it in *preparation* for his *first* track day.

Ha! You got me. Very astute - yes I am way more comfortable on lefts. Unfortunately the track runs clockwise.... Getting off the seat late huh? I had no idea...will review! Thanks for your observations.

Okay, I'm impressed. And great, instructive post Hotfoot!

Braking and shifting got significantly simpler for me when I got a slipper clutch installed. But still, it is *very* obvious to me that increasing my corner speeds has the most potential for decreased lap times, not deeper braking. I need to brake less, not later!

? You have to look at the times I listed starting at 45:40 for a lap, then 1:10:10 for about half a lap.

Forum seems a bit slow this time of year, so here's something for you to do if you're bored. Here is some video from my last track day. It was taken by another rider in the group, riding an R1. I come on screen at 0:45:40, moving to the front of a group of three bikes. The fellow with the camera slots in behind me by the next corner, and then follows me for the rest of the lap. In another session I am on camera for about 1/2 a lap beginning at 1:10:10 or so. Accepting comments an anything you can see regarding form / technique in these not-so-great videos. I wrote about this trackday in another thread. It was very cold and, as I figured out later, my tires were already shot. This kind of sapped my confidence as I got a lot of creepy slides in the morning sessions. For the rest of the day I stayed 2 - 3 seconds off my normal pace. Still, I think you can get a general idea about body position, lines, etc. Looking at the video, I think I am doing a bit better in the second segment, turning a bit more sharply and not making secondary steering inputs. Even so, in the long slow corner beginning at 1:10:35 I look pretty bad - that corner scares me a little even when I am trusting my tires! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oHPGnl7vpB0

The first one was funny - smooshed bimmer, did both quarter panels! I enjoyed watching some of the later guys save the slide - great driving by some of them. That little green lotus was cool too. Definitely something on the track.

Since I started track-only riding my interest in new bike models has really waned. I still read the magazines and go to the shows, but I can't see myself ever buying a new production bike again. I really like "simple" bikes (air cooled, no ABS, TC etc), which are pretty darn rare these days. Once upon a time, Ducati was selling track-only versions of their DS1000 Supersport. I'd be all over something like that if it still existed, or a track version of Honda's CB1100R concept. http://www.helmethairblog.com/honda-cb1100r-concept-motorcycle-too-expensive-to-put-in-production If I started street riding again it would likely be on a BMW boxer of some description.

Me (short list): 1982 Suzuki GS850G 1987 Suzuki GS1150EF ----------big gap whilst poor graduate student------- 2000 Ducati 750SSie 2006 Ducati Sport 1000 (started as street bike, current track bike) n.b. Not one radiator among them!

Thanks for this great post - it was a nice read for me and useful too. Based on some conversations with others who are experienced with the Pirelli red stripes, I was able to deduce that my tires were likely pretty much cooked by my final track day last fall - that probably was more to blame for the spooky slides that kept me from making further progress. I have put a set of Q2s on for this coming season so we'll see how those are. I was thinking of going to DOTs and warmers but got convinced that that is not necessary at my current pace. Unfortunately I still have not been able to cure my tendency to throw money at the bike - just installed 4-pot brembo calipers and Speigler lines, and the XRAC pads are on their way. I know that none of it is necessary, but I do enjoy tinkering with the bike and it keeps me entertained over the long Canadian winter. I just about had a private coach lined up at the end of last season, so I'll see if I can make that happen this year.

You'll get more informed opinions than mine for sure, but if you are ending up with 10 cm of unused fork travel I would say you probably have the front preload about spot on. I'd be tempted to try reducing rear ride height or rear peload a *tiny* amount to see if it improves things. I definitely would not try using rear brake in this scenario! You said that it happens right at the end of your braking, just before you start to release pressure. I think that is pretty normal, that the rear would be the lightest and therefore the least stable at the end of your braking zone. If it was happening earlier I would suspect excessive engine braking as you gear down, and suggest you delay your downshifts a bit to keep the rpms down. Does the bike have a slipper clutch?

This seems quite confused to me. Last time I checked, the torque was ONLY decided by the RPMs., not your throttle position. How would the maximum (ie peak) torque change with RPM - there is only one point with the peak torque. Torque curves you see from dyno measurements are for WOT. Torque is the rotational force the engine is applying to the drive train, or, if measured at the wheel, that the tire is applying to the pavement in the backward direction. If you are neither accelerating nor decelerating (neutral throttle), that torque is very low, regardless of the engine rpm. The torque is just enough to overcome the forces of aerodynamic and rolling resistance, and that's it. Crack open the throttle and begin to accelerate, and torque has increased greatly. The torque increase happens even before engine rpm has changed. Gear selection has a proportional effect on rear wheel torque. The lower the gear, the higher the torque at the wheel, given the same rpm and throttle position. If you don't like that explanation, think of it this way...even if you are at high rpm, if the throttle is closed there is very little fuel / air reaching the combustion chamber. How does an engine generate torque without fuel? One other way to think about it: acceleration is determined by torque at the rear wheel. Do you always accelerate at the same rate when the engine is at a given rpm, regardless of throttle position?

Noam, I like the way you ride. Looks like a reasonable pace for that road, and you are always in total control (except maybe one tiny wander over the white line on the right). I especially like how you avoid approaching the center line too closely when apexing blind left handers. A lot of people make that mistake and it is only a matter of time until a vehicle comes from the other direction in position to remove your head for you. Great video, beautiful road. Keep things in control like that and count yourself amongst the good guys in the sport.

Actually sounds like a classic high-side. Rear spins up and steps out to the side, rider closes throttle suddenly, rear regains traction and the bike snaps back into line violently, standing up and tossing the rider out of the seat. The error (other than applying too much throttle and causing the rear slide in the first place), is closing the throttle suddenly when the slide is detected.

Maybe I'm missing something, but I think the question doesn't make total sense. The engine output is a function of rpm *and* throttle position. In a certain rpm band you are going to have max torque at wide open throttle (WOT), but the *range* of torque available at that rpm, depending on throttle position, is anything between zero and that WOT max torque. Actually, the range of torque available is between the max and some fairly negative number because with closed throttle your will have negative torque (engine braking) - the max negative torque will be greater at high rpm, unless you have a slipper clutch which limits back torque. I don't think the real danger is cornering in an rpm band where you have max torque. The more dangerous scenario is opening the throttle while cornering in an rpm band where the torque curve rises very sharply. That can become difficult to control, and lots of inline 4 bikes have a part of the torque curve where there is a large and sudden step. Kevin Cameron once wrote an article in Cycle World speculating as to the technical reason why V-twins were dominating superbike racing at the time. His idea was that, since the V-twins of the era generally had declining torque curves at high rpm, when a rider broke the rear loose on cornering and spun up the engine, the torque would naturally decline, making the spin easier to control, whereas on an inline 4 you would get the opposite effect. This was in the era before electronic traction control.

Watching the video, I have to agree that in many corners, there is already plenty of lean angle. There are two obvious things that I would suggest you work on based on the video: 1) Body position. I think you are working more on this already, but just to reinforce that....in the video you are not moving your butt around at all - it just stays in the same place on the seat. You also fail to get your upper body moved over to the inside when setting up for a corner. You are going to need to "hang off" a bit if you want to get your corner speeds up without running out of available lean angle. By getting your body mass (much) more to the inside, you will be able to carry a lot more speed with the same amount of lean. Most riders who are new to the track are surprised when they see photos of themselves at how little they are hanging off. I am sure you feel the same. Commit to the turn with your body by getting your weight well to the inside before you even turn in. 2) Turn in speed. In the video you are turning in very gradually. As you get more track time you should find that you can counter-steer the bike into a turn much more quickly, achieving your final lean angle in a fraction of the time you are currently taking. You'll read about this in the Keith Code books as well....just pointing out that, based on the video, there is lots of room for improvement on this aspect. There are other possible things as well, but it is much harder to deduce much about those from the video. It *looks* like you are quite tense on the bike (but that may not be true - may just look that way because you are keeping your body in one place). Concentrate especially on keeping your arms very relaxed at the bars - let the bike work naturally. I also can't tell much about your throttle control, but I think that aspect has been covered in some detail above. I am *not* an instructor - just a fellow rider trying to learn about track riding, now with two seasons under my belt. The advice above is just based on my own experience and the things that helped me personally. In fact, a while back I started a thread with almost this exact same title, and many of the same questions - scroll a few pages and you will find it ("Drill for Learning to Trust the Tires"). Cheers.

! Holy Hannah. I just can't fathom running bikes on a downtown street course like that. Complete insanity.

Ha ha....he endo'd it, no? Oops. "Yeah, I put in the super aggressive racing pads...but then I forgot they were in there...."

This is interesting and I would like to learn how to do it...but I think I need to borrow someone else's bike!

Why would you want to downshift without the clutch? What advantage do you feel there is in that? The potential for mechanical damage is pretty high.

Bollox. You do not have to lean massively more and you most definitely do not increase the risk of crashing. What's wrong with what he said? If you stay centered on the seat you will have to lean more at any given speed, and you do increase the risk of running out of corner clearance using that riding style. Sure it is an okay way to ride at a normal street pace, but one of the reasons that it is fun is that it requires significantly more lean angle.