How The Entering Speed For Each Turn Is Found?

[daesimps]

I agree and always when questioned reply that you'll not lose the front from steering too quickly (save the usual oil, ice etc). However, knowing that it won't happen and believing it when you push that bar quick and it feels weird is quite different. As I mentioned above, on my old bike I'd steer as quick as you like and was always completely confident in the bike's (and my) ability.

 

I'm not sure whether it's the different front end, suspension, geometry, seating position or whatever else, but the current bike just makes it feel like you're much further over than you are. There also doesn't appear to be much feedback - rather like your playing on a computer game and moving a joystick with no real idea of what's happening in real life.

 

I believe if I can get this sorted along with regaining my confidence in my own ability and plenty of practice I'll have it licked. I'm hoping to create some sort of positive feedback loop and the better I get the more I'll believe and therefore I'll get even better.

 

 

Thanks for the tips,

Dae.

[faffi]

Out of interest, how long does the effect of quick turning last? By that I mean it's said you need less lean for any given corner speed the quicker you turn in. But for how long do you need less lean? What if the corner is long and lasts 10 seconds, will you save lean all the way through?

 

Sorry for the high-jack.

[johnnyrod]

The idea of quick-turn oges with a single steering input which inherently means you have one lean angle and it takes very little time to get down there and back up. The slow-turn way means you spend a lot (most?) of the bend incereasing then decreasing lean angle. So if you ride fast and use quick turning (single action/single lean angle) then you don't lean the bike over as far as you would have mid-corner. At the start and end though you might be leaned more than in lazy steering. It's the same with braking, if you brake a little harder from the start then you stop in the same place with less brake pressure than if you brake too gently then have to build up more pressure later on just to get pulled up.

 

Back to the OP: 1. I am still struggling with getting my speed perception right in track so still enter bends too slow. You do get the ride each bend many times though so you can finely tune your speed.

 

2. Road riding and unfamiliar bends: unless you like hospital food then really you have to sit in the fact that you're not going to be riding at 100%. Equally you can't necessarily apply the 2-step because you need at least one RP, and unless it's a familiar road you'll have none at all. No RPs means we have to take a different approach hence the wider entry for better visibility, and using the vanishing point (in slow out fast, for this reason). You don't need these on a track because you know (learn) where then bend goes and you don't need to see round it, there aren't any cowpats, cars etc. around it.

 

In Level 1, as far as I can remember, RPs are looked at and you experiment by moving your RP deeper into the turn as you increase the turn-in rate once you've got quick turns. In Level 2 this is followed up (RPs) but really we all ride different lines so you haveto choose your own RPs, and also move them as your pace changes or you find better lines. They're an itertive thign though so RPs on an unfamiliar road will be near-impossible on the first ride through.

[Lnewqban]

..........Back to the OP: 1. I am still struggling with getting my speed perception right in track so still enter bends too slow. You do get the ride each bend many times though so you can finely tune your speed.

 

2. Road riding and unfamiliar bends: unless you like hospital food then really you have to sit in the fact that you're not going to be riding at 100%. Equally you can't necessarily apply the 2-step because you need at least one RP, and unless it's a familiar road you'll have none at all. No RPs means we have to take a different approach hence the wider entry for better visibility, and using the vanishing point (in slow out fast, for this reason). You don't need these on a track because you know (learn) where then bend goes and you don't need to see round it, there aren't any cowpats, cars etc. around it.

 

In Level 1, as far as I can remember, RPs are looked at and you experiment by moving your RP deeper into the turn as you increase the turn-in rate once you've got quick turns. In Level 2 this is followed up (RPs) but really we all ride different lines so you haveto choose your own RPs, and also move them as your pace changes or you find better lines. They're an itertive thign though so RPs on an unfamiliar road will be near-impossible on the first ride through.

 

Thanks Johnny, very good response!

[mugget]

I would say that using the two-step on unfamiliar roads is definitely possible, and it should be the preferred way to ride. Every corner has a turn point. Right? It's a fact. So then if you don't choose the turn point, how will you know where to turn? When will you turn? Usually when your SR's force you to turn! I don't know about you guys & gals, but letting SR's control any aspect of my riding is an unsettling prospect! Riding an unfamiliar road may alter a turn point, but the person who has consciously selected a turn point knows where he is and the person who doesn't is lost to some degree. (Reference for this info is TOTW II, Chap. 18.)

 

It may seem like a really strange thing to try and select a correct turn point on a completely new road, but I suppose this comes down a lot to experience. Being aware of the different lines that are possible using different steering rates and earlier/later turn points gives you a better idea of what will work for a turn. That's not to say that you'd be able to get a new turn immediately correct, a small steering correction may be needed, or you may realise that you need to slow or quicken your steering rate - but those type of corrections are bound to happen. To me, the point is that it's better to consciously choose your turn point, even if it is slightly wrong and does require that you make some small corrections. Because the only other option is to let your SR's determine the turn point, and you can bet that point will definitely be wrong.

 

So back to the two step - if we agree that it's better to consciously choose your turn point and that ideally we want to do that on every turn (unfamiliar or not), then it's possible to use the two step. Choose your turn point as early as possible, look to where you want to go in the corner, turn when you reach your turn point. Job done. I suppose those actions may be completed much closer together in a new turn, but it seems to me like the single biggest advantage of the two step is overcoming the SR to turn as soon as you look.

 

Now this has all got me thinking about how easy or difficult it would be to practice the two step on an unfamiliar road... I have got to ride some new roads and test this out...

[khp]

From what you've said before, it sounds like you are already using quick turn but it bears mentioning for the sake of others who are reading this, since, to quote the book again "Your quick turn abilities determine your corner entry speed. Period."

Absolutely worth repeating. Turn 1 at Thunderbolt comes after a long straight section. I immediately know that I could have entered the corner at a higher speed because I wind up apexing a little earlier than I had planned due to a quick turn that was actually quicker than necessary for my speed, if that makes sense.

I must have missed this point in TOTW-2 for more than a decade, so allow me to dense for a moment longer: why is it true that your quick turn sets your corner entry speed? - couldn't there be situations where your max entry speed is set by the radius, camber, bumbs, elevation changes, or something else than the quick turn ability?

 

 

Out of interest, how long does the effect of quick turning last? By that I mean it's said you need less lean for any given corner speed the quicker you turn in. But for how long do you need less lean? What if the corner is long and lasts 10 seconds, will you save lean all the way through?

Excellent question, Eirik! After I convinced myself that the quick turn actually reduces the required lean angle, I never thought about how much impact it actually had, but your question got me thinking a little bit more about it.

 

Let's set the scene: (same) single-apex turn, same speed at the start of the turn-in, same turn point*, and same apex. With the quicker turn-in, you finish the leaning action quicker and you have therefore covered less distance (both straight forward and to the side) than you would with the slow turn-in**. Thus, your distance from the max-lean-point to the apex is larger than with the slower turn-in action. This means that the radius of your turn is therefore effectively larger than with the slower turning action - and you therefore need less lean.

 

So when do we starting bringing the bike back up ("unleaning", if you will) again? Definitely not before the apex, and some times after, I guess.

 

There are some turns that are so large and fast that you're stuck in the lean and on the gas fore quite a while (several seconds), and here the slower turn-in action might not affect the actual lean angle, if you simply move the Turn Point back up so your max-lean-point is the same, because the lean angle is set by the speed and radius.

 

*) Actually, if you're a slow leaner, you would realistically initiate your turn earlier than the fast leaner. So in reality the "half-lean point" might be a better point to consider, but I don't think that it affects the argument.

 

**) OK, so this is not mathematically correct. If you're REALLY slow turner, you end up increasing the distance to the apex, but that's not helping you, your angle to the apex will be even smaller. Mathematically, we need to think in the vectors (something like the angle between the vector for the bikes' direction at the turn point (ie before the turning action) and the vector at the max-lean-point (= after the turning action is completed). I think. Too many years since I learned about classical movement mechanics of rigid bodies, and I never paid much attention to it even then )

 

 

Kai

[ktk_ace]

I would say that using the two-step on unfamiliar roads is definitely possible, and it should be the preferred way to ride. Every corner has a turn point. Right? It's a fact. So then if you don't choose the turn point, how will you know where to turn? When will you turn? Usually when your SR's force you to turn! I don't know about you guys & gals, but letting SR's control any aspect of my riding is an unsettling prospect! Riding an unfamiliar road may alter a turn point, but the person who has consciously selected a turn point knows where he is and the person who doesn't is lost to some degree. (Reference for this info is TOTW II, Chap. 18.)

 

It may seem like a really strange thing to try and select a correct turn point on a completely new road, but I suppose this comes down a lot to experience. Being aware of the different lines that are possible using different steering rates and earlier/later turn points gives you a better idea of what will work for a turn. That's not to say that you'd be able to get a new turn immediately correct, a small steering correction may be needed, or you may realise that you need to slow or quicken your steering rate - but those type of corrections are bound to happen. To me, the point is that it's better to consciously choose your turn point, even if it is slightly wrong and does require that you make some small corrections. Because the only other option is to let your SR's determine the turn point, and you can bet that point will definitely be wrong.

 

So back to the two step - if we agree that it's better to consciously choose your turn point and that ideally we want to do that on every turn (unfamiliar or not), then it's possible to use the two step. Choose your turn point as early as possible, look to where you want to go in the corner, turn when you reach your turn point. Job done. I suppose those actions may be completed much closer together in a new turn, but it seems to me like the single biggest advantage of the two step is overcoming the SR to turn as soon as you look.

 

Now this has all got me thinking about how easy or difficult it would be to practice the two step on an unfamiliar road... I have got to ride some new roads and test this out...

 

about the two step...

 

 

 

 

 

on unfamiliar roads (eg no sampling before hand) , I usually go slow for 1 to 2 "laps" to sample the turns.

 

The 2 step is usually reserved after enough sampling (eg RP, TP, sense of speed etc)

 

 

I develop this SOP hoping there is a more optimized solution for public roads... anyone has an even better plan??

 

 

[Lnewqban]

I develop this SOP hoping there is a more optimized solution for public roads... anyone has an even better plan??

Study the road via Google Earth before leaving

[khp]

I develop this SOP hoping there is a more optimized solution for public roads... anyone has an even better plan??

Study the road via Google Earth before leaving

Videos on youtube (sorta-worked for me before going to the Nordschliefe of Nürburgring in 2002. I got about 2/3rds in before I couldn't remember which way the blind turns went).

[faffi]

 

on unfamiliar roads (eg no sampling before hand) , I usually go slow for 1 to 2 "laps" to sample the turns.

 

The 2 step is usually reserved after enough sampling (eg RP, TP, sense of speed etc)

 

Up until last season I used another method; go as hard as I could, expect corners to be more open then they appear and try to throw sparks around each corner (on old standard bikes from the 70s and early 80s, could not do it on race reps). Then, on my second go, I would be more tentative; was this where the corner closed and I almost ran off the road? Was this corner with the huge dip in the road? Etc.

 

I remember back in 1996, riding my Yamaha XS500 on an unfamiliar mountain road. Beside the road a sign said tunnel and another said sharp bend. OK, a tunnel with a 90 degree corner, I thought, and stormed into the little tunnel. Only it was a 180 degree tight hairpin! Had to brake hard and keep a little bit of brake on all the way to the exit, sparks flying from stands and mufflers and pegs. A few corners later the same signs popped up, but there was no way in hell there could be two such crazy tunnels. I was wrong. Repeat drama from first episode. Yes, I'm a slow and reluctant learner

[faffi]

From what you've said before, it sounds like you are already using quick turn but it bears mentioning for the sake of others who are reading this, since, to quote the book again "Your quick turn abilities determine your corner entry speed. Period."

Absolutely worth repeating. Turn 1 at Thunderbolt comes after a long straight section. I immediately know that I could have entered the corner at a higher speed because I wind up apexing a little earlier than I had planned due to a quick turn that was actually quicker than necessary for my speed, if that makes sense.

I must have missed this point in TOTW-2 for more than a decade, so allow me to dense for a moment longer: why is it true that your quick turn sets your corner entry speed? - couldn't there be situations where your max entry speed is set by the radius, camber, bumbs, elevation changes, or something else than the quick turn ability?

 

 

Out of interest, how long does the effect of quick turning last? By that I mean it's said you need less lean for any given corner speed the quicker you turn in. But for how long do you need less lean? What if the corner is long and lasts 10 seconds, will you save lean all the way through?

Excellent question, Eirik! After I convinced myself that the quick turn actually reduces the required lean angle, I never thought about how much impact it actually had, but your question got me thinking a little bit more about it.

 

Let's set the scene: (same) single-apex turn, same speed at the start of the turn-in, same turn point*, and same apex. With the quicker turn-in, you finish the leaning action quicker and you have therefore covered less distance (both straight forward and to the side) than you would with the slow turn-in**. Thus, your distance from the max-lean-point to the apex is larger than with the slower turn-in action. This means that the radius of your turn is therefore effectively larger than with the slower turning action - and you therefore need less lean.

 

So when do we starting bringing the bike back up ("unleaning", if you will) again? Definitely not before the apex, and some times after, I guess.

 

There are some turns that are so large and fast that you're stuck in the lean and on the gas fore quite a while (several seconds), and here the slower turn-in action might not affect the actual lean angle, if you simply move the Turn Point back up so your max-lean-point is the same, because the lean angle is set by the speed and radius.

 

*) Actually, if you're a slow leaner, you would realistically initiate your turn earlier than the fast leaner. So in reality the "half-lean point" might be a better point to consider, but I don't think that it affects the argument.

 

**) OK, so this is not mathematically correct. If you're REALLY slow turner, you end up increasing the distance to the apex, but that's not helping you, your angle to the apex will be even smaller. Mathematically, we need to think in the vectors (something like the angle between the vector for the bikes' direction at the turn point (ie before the turning action) and the vector at the max-lean-point (= after the turning action is completed). I think. Too many years since I learned about classical movement mechanics of rigid bodies, and I never paid much attention to it even then )

 

 

Kai

 

Thanks, Kai. I think

[mugget]

So when do we starting bringing the bike back up ("unleaning", if you will) again? Definitely not before the apex, and some times after, I guess.

 

This is one of those variables that will change for each corner/turn point/steering rate/entry speed combination. But saying that it's absolutely not possible to stand the bike up and start opening the throttle before the apex isn't really true. Relating your throttle opening point to a certain distance before or after the apex seems to be counterproductive to me. Isn't the really important thing whether or not you will be able to keep your line on the exit and not run wide or exit too slowly? So then the decision of when to open the throttle can be thought of in this way: open the throttle as soon as your know that you will hit your apex and achieve your line through the remainder of the turn. It's interesting to note that in Level 1, one of the main points that stuck out to me aside from opening the throttle as early as possible, was that this would ideally be before the apex.

 

If you look at some of the diagrams in Twist II you can see this really clearly. Using a late turn point combined with a quick steer it's possible to achieve more or less a straight line from your turn point, to apex, to exit. Which makes it much easier to complete your turning, get back on the throttle, then you pass your apex and you're really having fun. Contrast that with a early turn point and slow steering, in that case it will probably take at least until the apex to complete the steering, which will stop you from opening the throttle as early.

 

Two-Step and Reference Points

It's also interesting that so much of the discussion here around Two-Step involves some mention of Reference Points. But as everyone is quick to point out - you wouldn't have a turn point on an unfamiliar road. Pop quiz: turn up TOTW II Chapter 23 (The Two-Step) and note how many times RP's are mentioned.

 

By using the two step and looking ahead into the turn you will be able to find out how quickly to turn and how far to lean it over, simply because you know where you're going. If you don't use the two step, you'll end up looking into the turn while you're turning, and that's too late. The more I read up on the two step, then more it sense it makes that two step is exactly what is needed when riding unfamiliar roads.

[khp]

So when do we starting bringing the bike back up ("unleaning", if you will) again? Definitely not before the apex, and some times after, I guess.

This is one of those variables that will change for each corner/turn point/steering rate/entry speed combination. But saying that it's absolutely not possible to stand the bike up and start opening the throttle before the apex isn't really true.

My reason for saying "not before the apex" is that IF you need to stand the bike up before the apex, you did not need to lean the bike as much in the first place.

Could you come with a more specific example of where this is not correct?

 

After the apex, the point where you start to stand the bike up definitely dependant on the specifics of the turn - we're in full agreement here.

 

It's interesting to note that in Level 1, one of the main points that stuck out to me aside from opening the throttle as early as possible, was that this would ideally be before the apex.

Are you talking about the maintenance throttle required to maintain the 40/60 balance or really 'gassing it'?

The throttle should cracked on as soon as you have completed your leaning action.

 

If you look at some of the diagrams in Twist II you can see this really clearly. Using a late turn point combined with a quick steer it's possible to achieve more or less a straight line from your turn point, to apex, to exit.

Thank you sir, you are so kind!

 

Point taken, although I'd say that if you can straighten out the turn like that, you're not going anywhere fast enough to make your lean angle a problem

 

So, the conclusion should be that the quick-turn helps with reducing your lean angle ... until you stand the bike up again? (seems like a tautology when you read it).

[Lnewqban]

As the discussion has evolved from selection of entry speeds to quick flick and turning points, how are those related to the Code's statement about the flick rate determining the entry speed?

"Your quick turn abilities determine your corner entry speed. Period."

 

For me it reads like this:

 

You can turn the bike X degrees by either following a long radius turn or one or several very short radius turns.

 

By quick flicking the bike, you can achieve a great amount of degrees of turn without going to extreme sustained lean angles.

[mugget]

My reason for saying "not before the apex" is that IF you need to stand the bike up before the apex, you did not need to lean the bike as much in the first place.

Could you come with a more specific example of where this is not correct?

 

Yep, that's absolutely right. So let's say that you don't change your speed in the corner, but you increase your quick flick rate, you'll arrive at the above result of using less lean angle for your speed. This gives you the option of getting on the throttle much sooner, OR increasing your speed into the turn to use more lean angle. I suppose there is a third option to also increase your quick flick rate along with your speed, and then the cycle starts again.

 

It's not so much a case of being true or not, just that it's not a "universal truth" for every corner, because some situations may require waiting until after the apex. But also waiting until the apex or after is not required in every single situation (there are always alot of options available). Just that the way you said it sounded like it was "best practice" or the ideal way to ride any corner.

 

Are you talking about the maintenance throttle required to maintain the 40/60 balance or really 'gassing it'?

The throttle should cracked on as soon as you have completed your leaning action.

For the particular example that I had in mind, I was talking about getting on the throttle proper (maintenance? I just wanna go fast! )

I don't always open the throttle as soon as I've stopped steering, a common exception is when I'm aiming for a late apex and use a fast entry speed, I coast a little bit to get to the apex. Am breaking some rules?

 

 

Point taken, although I'd say that if you can straighten out the turn like that, you're not going anywhere fast enough to make your lean angle a problem

 

That's true as well. Actually I have never even had my knee down (maybe some tiny, tiny millisecond scrapes). That's a kind of funny thing about the quick flick - I have been going faster and faster into turns, but also increasing my turning rate and so I don't use any more lean angle (or very little). But I'm also riding the fastest I ever have by a fair margin, moved up a group at track days, and alot of that is simply because of working on my quick flick. At the rate I'm going it may be a while before I have to worry about lean angle, because now that I can see the speed that is possible I know it's probably going to take a little while until I become comfortable going that fast. But I'm kind of looking forward to mixing it up with guys on their track bikes and slicks while I'm on my road bike with street tyres.

 

 

By quick flicking the bike, you can achieve a great amount of degrees of turn without going to extreme sustained lean angles.

Exactly right. And to expand on that: if you can increase your quick flick ability you can also go faster through the turn without increasing your lean angle.

 

Now back to the original topic of finding the entry speed for each turn... Isn't this mainly a question of having the correct vision, and being able to know where you're going so you can actually see what speed will be required? That's why I spent a couple of posts on the subject of the two step - because it's a vision technique. You don't need reference points to be able to use correct vision. Who has ever found themselves needing a RP to be able to use their "wide view"? Needing a reference point to be able to use two step makes about as much sense. Those vision techniques will are just what's needed to be able to find your reference points. Can you see how that all ties in with selecting a corner entry speed?

[Stewal]

that two step is exactly what is needed when riding unfamiliar roads.

 

Agree completely!! If there is anywhere that looking as far ahead of you into the turn as possible is useful its unfamiliar turns. Assuming your goal Dae is to make it through the turn, and not see how far into the moor you can make it, you have to select a turn point eventually(step one). The sooner the better! The second step of looking into the turn is to decide where you should go and is a tool to gather valuable and needed info for selecting the required speed, quickness of turn, lean angle for your turn point...as mugget said

 

By using the two step and looking ahead into the turn you will be able to find out how quickly to turn and how far to lean it over, simply because you know where you're going.

 

If you're realizing afterward that you were going way slower than you needed, maybe you're distracted as Hotfoot stated and are turning in too early? Before you have the info that would tell you that you could go faster. Possibly SR 3? 4? 5? 6? 7? All of these seem like they could apply. Which do you think fit best? As stated in Twist II "Knowing where you're going also gives a better picture of the turn and allows you to set the speed more accurately for the turn-entry point."

[faffi]

Do you honestly choose a turn point for every corner on the road? And to you commit to it? I just turn when it feels right, typically as late as possible to give me as much view ahead as possible. I have never thought "that's my turning point". First, there are virtually endless opportunities where you can turn in; slow, fast, late, early, wide, narrow and so forth. Then you need the freedom to adjust if the corner turns out to be different than expected, avoiding bumps and dips and gravel etc.

 

Personally, I like to keep my options open. After all, it doesn't take long to turn in once you've reached the point in the corner where it feels right.

[Stewal]

Do you honestly choose a turn point for every corner on the road? And to you commit to it? I just turn when it feels right, typically as late as possible to give me as much view ahead as possible. I have never thought "that's my turning point". First, there are virtually endless opportunities where you can turn in; slow, fast, late, early, wide, narrow and so forth. Then you need the freedom to adjust if the corner turns out to be different than expected, avoiding bumps and dips and gravel etc.

 

Personally, I like to keep my options open. After all, it doesn't take long to turn in once you've reached the point in the corner where it feels right.

 

Actually Eirik, it sounds to me like you pick a turn point and do the Two-Step and just dont realize it. I don't consider picking an entry point in step 1 a final/perfect turn point, at least not on the street. If it was then there wouldn't be any need for step 2. Its picking a point based on the info you have about the corner when you are lets say 50ft out. Then you move on to Step 2 of moving your vision and concentration further into the corner instead of at the entry so that you can gather the info needed to adjust your turn rate, lean, speed and even entry point. That way by the time you're 10ft from the corner you know where, how, and how fast your line will be. Would you rather adjust for the unexpected gravel, oil, etc. before you turn in or as you're leaning the bike over?

[mugget]

Well said Stewal.

 

Do you honestly choose a turn point for every corner on the road?

 

Well let's look at the options, it seems to me that there are only two: 1. You choose your turn point. 2. You don't choose your turn point. If you don't choose your turn point, where is that going to leave you? It will just leave the door wide open for alot of SR's. Correct? Or if you leave it to your subconscious, you can't be sure that you're not reacting to SR's either.

 

You say that you leave your turn point as late as possible, so it seems like you already have an idea of where you want to turn - but would it be possible to have an even better outcome if you had a more accurate idea of your turn point?

 

The main point is to direct your vision towards the turn. In a series of very close turns I can see how one may not even have time to spot a turn point, but they would already be looking into the turn, so they have the information about the next corner (or two). In that case you have got your information about the turn and will know your entry speed etc. You do need to be looking into the turn to be able to find your entry speed, turn rate etc. I would say that using the Two Step is (one of?) the most reliable method to do so.

 

 

[faffi]

I do decide when to turn in based on a number of factors, but it's not like I 300 yards up the road aim for that point where I plan to turn. It's like running over rough terrain; feet will find almost find their way on their own, decisions are made in split seconds. I cannot plan where I will place my foot 20 steps from now, although I do plan a route. However, it is planned - and re-planned - without very accurate thoughts. Just like when I ride. As mention, I decide when to turn in, bit it is sudden and not planned well in front. I'm pretty sure I follow the 2-step, and we may agree in what we do, just not one how we do it?

 

As to the question about when I want to dodge whatever, it is best not to have to Secondly in a straight line. I do not mind altering my trajectory mid-corner, but risk is higher during cornering than when going straight.

[bradvanhorn]

Well said Stewal.

 

Do you honestly choose a turn point for every corner on the road?

 

Well let's look at the options, it seems to me that there are only two: 1. You choose your turn point. 2. You don't choose your turn point. If you don't choose your turn point, where is that going to leave you? It will just leave the door wide open for alot of SR's. Correct? Or if you leave it to your subconscious, you can't be sure that you're not reacting to SR's either.

 

You say that you leave your turn point as late as possible, so it seems like you already have an idea of where you want to turn - but would it be possible to have an even better outcome if you had a more accurate idea of your turn point?

 

The main point is to direct your vision towards the turn. In a series of very close turns I can see how one may not even have time to spot a turn point, but they would already be looking into the turn, so they have the information about the next corner (or two). In that case you have got your information about the turn and will know your entry speed etc. You do need to be looking into the turn to be able to find your entry speed, turn rate etc. I would say that using the Two Step is (one of?) the most reliable method to do so.

 

 

I like how you've presented your point. In my recent 2-day camp I spent 9 of 14 sessions working visual skills (2-step, 3-step, wide-view) and it made a tremendous improvement in my riding. My entry and exit speed went up, my lines were tighter to the apex and more consistent, and I never felt I was out of time or space to act. An additional thought on close turns (esses): your next turn point may well be your exit point so the 2-step still works just fine. This became quite apparent for me in the fast esses at NOLA; once I started looking at the exit as also my next turn point, then things started flowing much better.

[mugget]

An additional thought on close turns (esses): your next turn point may well be your exit point so the 2-step still works just fine. This became quite apparent for me in the fast esses at NOLA; once I started looking at the exit as also my next turn point, then things started flowing much better.

 

Good one - I never thought of it that way before. I'll try that out next time I hit my favourite mountain twisties!

[czeebBusa]

Maybe I am being too critical - it's something I'm guilty of in everything I do!

 

I wasn't so much wanting a way to absolutely decide the entry speed, just a way to judge it better. I hope that makes sense.

 

I always ride to stop in the distance I can see to be clear on my side of the road and am familiar with the VP from doing my IAM test. However, even though I passed the test the examiner did say that I could pick the pace up a bit and still be completely safe, it just doesn't feel like it when I'm approaching the bends. As soon as I'm in them, however, it's obvious that I've over compensated and slowed too much. As I said above, I find the VP method doesn't give you a decisive TP or definitive action point. It encourages lazy steering as the tendency is to speed up and slow down as the VP moves away/comes closer. It also makes it difficult to only use 1 steering input per turn.

 

At no point on level 1 did we discuss how to select the TP for unfamiliar roads. We discussed how most people turn early and slowly and discussed moving it further into the turn but there was no real discussion of unfamiliar street riding. This was always 1 of my concerns before doing the school - most stuff is very easy on a track that you go over and over but can be very different on some of Yorkshire's finest roads. I'm not saying that the school skills don't apply to the road, just that it can be a bit difficult to transfer them over easily.

 

I guess I should just accept the way I ride and get over it.

 

Dae.

I have the same issues you are facing. I started video taping my rides, then watching them after. Stepping through the vid very slowly for each turn and keeping my eyes on the VP really opened things up for me. I could see where I dropped my line of sight and when I charged the apex when I actually thought I was going in deep.

[daesimps]

Maybe I am being too critical - it's something I'm guilty of in everything I do!

 

I wasn't so much wanting a way to absolutely decide the entry speed, just a way to judge it better. I hope that makes sense.

 

I always ride to stop in the distance I can see to be clear on my side of the road and am familiar with the VP from doing my IAM test. However, even though I passed the test the examiner did say that I could pick the pace up a bit and still be completely safe, it just doesn't feel like it when I'm approaching the bends. As soon as I'm in them, however, it's obvious that I've over compensated and slowed too much. As I said above, I find the VP method doesn't give you a decisive TP or definitive action point. It encourages lazy steering as the tendency is to speed up and slow down as the VP moves away/comes closer. It also makes it difficult to only use 1 steering input per turn.

 

At no point on level 1 did we discuss how to select the TP for unfamiliar roads. We discussed how most people turn early and slowly and discussed moving it further into the turn but there was no real discussion of unfamiliar street riding. This was always 1 of my concerns before doing the school - most stuff is very easy on a track that you go over and over but can be very different on some of Yorkshire's finest roads. I'm not saying that the school skills don't apply to the road, just that it can be a bit difficult to transfer them over easily.

 

I guess I should just accept the way I ride and get over it.

 

Dae.

I have the same issues you are facing. I started video taping my rides, then watching them after. Stepping through the vid very slowly for each turn and keeping my eyes on the VP really opened things up for me. I could see where I dropped my line of sight and when I charged the apex when I actually thought I was going in deep.

 

That sounds like a good idea. I'll see if I can rig something up. Maybe one of the HD keychain cameras that are doing the rounds may help as I don't have a lot of room on the helmet due to having a Scala G4 on one side of it. Don't want it to look like I've ridden through a gadget shop with a magnetised lid.

[mblaster]

I spend a fair amout of time in the canyons and mountains here in socal. Sometimes its hard to judge entry speed if the road is unfamiliar. I rely on road signs for guides on speed. Also the 2 step. I dont mind entering a bit slow on blind unfamiliar corners. You never know whats around the bend that you cant see on entry...