cellige

Thanks for the replies ! I am curious as to the nuts and bolts of what your saying T-McKeen 1. This is interesting. Because gravity combined with centripetal force will always act directly down the lean, wouldn't that mean the forks would be getting side pressure on any kind of rider lean? Imagine a 600 pound person leaning off so much that the bike didn't need to lean and imagine the side pressure on the forks. Without rider lean it seems from the perspective of the bike the force is always straight down its lean, as if you were riding vertical with a seriously cambered road under you and getting pushed on from the top, in which case the suspension would react normally? However I can also imagine a theoretical bike that could achieve an 80 degree lean angle, then a non rounded absolutely vertical bump in the road the suspension couldn't move with.. the two scenarios seem to conflict a bit. 2. Doesn't the contact patch elongate and actually have a bit more surface area cornering than straight up? Taken to the extreme, where the wheel lying on the ground and just slightly lifted on one side, has a lot of rubber down. So why is it the "Fat Part" when standing up? Just the tire profile on big liter bikes we are talking maybe? As to the other benefits you mentioned, does it actually reduce tire wear or just wear more evenly but same overall amount of wear? Also why more traction? Thanks !

So hanging off the bike moves the center of gravity a bit giving us a little more clearance before we start scraping parts. My question is, what other advantages does this give? Things I suspect are affected by hanging off: 1. suspension compliance due to the forces down the bike to the track being a little out of line 2. contact patch shape 3. steering head angle slightly less 1. would seem to be a disadvantage? 2. does its shape add more or less cornering g's? Perhaps it doesn't matter since friction is a component of the coefficient and the normal force? 3. reduces the slip angle so seems a positive but i'm sure this is a seriously slight amount.. When talking street riding where we always have more clearance (if your not an idiot) perhaps hanging off/leaning the upper body helps in no way? Or perhaps the sudden need to go to max lean angle would be a help having that max be a little more. Thoughts?

I understand that it is taught to crack on the throttle as soon as the lean is complete, however don't you have to be with a slight roll on to achieve 40/60 weight distribution to get to max lean?

There seem to be three reasons people have said that seem plausible for all the trail braking in Isle of Man TT. 1. Long straights. Whoever mentioned using trail braking when coming off a straight to keep the higher speed for longer, I have a question for you. Since the quick flick allows you to turn in later, assuming your 100% on the brakes in both techniques, you would start braking later in the quick flick. Wouldn't that mean you keep the higher speed for longer with the quick flick? 2. The feel at the limit of traction from trail braking. 3. Different hardware. Perhaps for the superbikes, but certainly not the superstock and in the videos they look to ride them pretty much the same way. Most thoughts in this thread are that the quick flick makes total sense, so specifically for the Isle of Man races I am still confused, perhaps its just number 2, but what a let down if that's the case Could a quick flick master come shatter the TT lap records?

Ah, do the rules say they don't have brakes?

So how is the dirt of a flat track any different than any reduced traction surface? You don't see riders sliding like that in rain so why does that technique work on dirt and not asphalt?

Nope The largest radius of curvature would be a straight line. smallest would be whatever your bike does at full fork lock. Thats how I was using the terms anyways, your free to use them as you wish !

Interesting comments, but my question still stands With a quick flick the radius of the turn will always be larger than a slow flick. Without the presence of other riders I don't see how machinery, track type or anything would change that?

So I would like to bring this back up I know there are lots of threads on trail braking but it always delves back into it being necessary for racers to make sure people don't pass or to pass themselves. What keith code has shown in his videos and books to me makes a lot of sense, that with a quick flick you create the better line and therefor get to less of a lean and back on throttle sooner. But does that reflect in lap times? Watching some of the Isle of Man races, these guys set lap records while heavily trail braking. Could it be faster if they flicked quicker? Can they not flick any quicker than they are because of their high speed?

So expressed independently of specific bikes, what is the optimal amount of front load for the tire while one is quick flicking?

Someone in here mention that it is basically impossible in good conditions to flick the bike too quick, as long as they are not on the brakes. My question is, does engine braking count as on the brakes, or do they mean just not on the throttle at all? Is cracked open ok? Some bikes engine brake more than others, I imagine the heavy engine braking on some could be an issue for a seriously fast flick?

Thread has been interesting ! Inspired, I have been doing drills out in the nearest open space I can find (would loooove to get out to the school) putting all this together and have noticed a few things. - Some kind of intelligent linked brakes like the honda system that work well and operated solely with the right foot would be fantastic to free the right hand from braking, anyone every go such a custom route? - Not so hard to avoid excess brake input when i use my middle, ring and pinky to brake leaving my index and thumb for throttle, as well as giving me the leverage at the end of the lever for hard braking. Also doesn't run the risk of pinching the fingers in a panic brake. When i had the brake lever adjusted to work with my index and middle finger, it was way out there to avoid pinching my other fingers, and then the blip was more difficult.. - Even with repetitive multi day practice, still very very hard to blip and clutch in/out very quickly to keep up with very hard braking and NOT have the suspension bob. This isn't so hard to do when not braking because it can be done slower and very smooth, but I just can't get it when braking at max due to the speed needed and then lack of accuracy. Funny enough though, there is bob under the hardest braking, and the lightest braking, but the least on just mild hard braking, since mild hard braking gives me that pressure difference in brake force to lever force that lwarner was saying as well as a little time to get it done, at least I think that's why. - I ride a vstrom daily and have noticed that on street tires at least, i can not get the back wheel off the ground on braking, it will lock up first. I assume this is due to it being a heavy, long wheel base bike that is not a total sport bike. I have access to an R6 that I will test out though. Things brings the question back up though that if the wheels will slide first, that doesn't remove the engine from the equation and it would seem then that I could stop quicker with the clutch pulled in. Just what I have noticed and I am sure I still have some misconceptions, and definitely am not satisfied with less than smooth braking, but will keep at it !

Thanks for the detailed response ! Couple of follow up questions: My bike doesnt seem to be totally smooth when I crack the throttle on even the smallest amount, is that common? Is it not common to have corners where you need to brake as hard as possible? - I was under the impression that once you brake harder than engine braking alone provides you are then slowing the engine with the brakes which would increase braking distance. - Seems like getting the blip and clutch out per gear would be tuff under maximum braking. If you mess a blip up and blip to high it pushes through the front brakes and/or causes a rear slide, is that not a huge concern in practice since your not leaned over? Needless to say I am not proficient blipping and/or clutchless downshifting. But for those that are, is the clutchless downshifting totally smooth as one can achieve with the clutch? Is it possible some bikes just won't clutchless shift smoothly? Thanks !! Wish I was out in California to get to the school !

I posted this over at advrider but this might be a better place to ask From what I can tell the recommended technique (mainly without a slipper clutch) is to downshift while braking, releasing the clutch for each gear, finishing your braking/downshifting before you lean the bike, lean the bike and then immediately after done leaning, roll on the throttle. I would like to know why there is an advantage doing that method instead of: braking, downshifting through each gear with the clutch held in, leaning the bike and immediately after leaning getting the clutch in the friction zone/rolling on the throttle/getting clutch all the way out. Note, in both methods I am talking about getting on the throttle at the same spot on the track, in option 1 the clutch is already out and you crack on the throttle and in option two you get the clutch in the friction spot and crack on throttle. So whats the deal?