Quick Flick/ Counter Steer

[mugget]

 

PS. if you up the fueling so much that engine braking is almost nonexistent (or setup a slipper clutch for such) (its a common setup for racing here)

 

, you can technically chop the throttle straight up and not upset the bike, leaving you with more of the $10 of attention to do other things beneficial to turning

 

I personally use both the front and rear brakes to prep for entry speed , use vision to find the turn in point and the 2 step for accelerating out of the turn.

 

I practice until its 2nd nature.

 

 

How does the fuelling affect engine braking? It's basically the restricted airflow caused by the closed throttle that causes a vacuum effect in the engine, causing more resistance and slowing it down. If you change that, wouldn't it mean you would still have some drive where there used to just be idle?

[ktk_ace]

 

 

PS. if you up the fueling so much that engine braking is almost nonexistent (or setup a slipper clutch for such) (its a common setup for racing here)

 

, you can technically chop the throttle straight up and not upset the bike, leaving you with more of the $10 of attention to do other things beneficial to turning

 

I personally use both the front and rear brakes to prep for entry speed , use vision to find the turn in point and the 2 step for accelerating out of the turn.

 

I practice until its 2nd nature.

 

 

How does the fuelling affect engine braking? It's basically the restricted airflow caused by the closed throttle that causes a vacuum effect in the engine, causing more resistance and slowing it down. If you change that, wouldn't it mean you would still have some drive where there used to just be idle?

 

 

Try upping the idling speed (very easy for a carburated bike) from stock to +/- 500 RPM and chop the throttle.

 

Its gonna feel very different.

[ktk_ace]

 

 

Googled the xdrive and... I can say its an interesting system!

 

 

Lots of ways to shave unsprung weight thats for sure

 

 

some others i have seen:

 

analog> digital speedometer ,

 

 

magtek/carbon wheel hubs ,

 

 

ceramic bearings

 

air shocks :(Showa SFF Air )

 

kevlar pads instead of sintered metal pads for short races

 

tires (michelin has that on their website)

 

aluminium air nipples (the stock ones on some are brass)

 

lightened racing calipers (GP grade stuff is EXPENSIVE!)

 

 

Absolutely. The new Dunlop Q3 uses carbon fibre inside to reduce weight.

 

One important thing to keep in mind. One of the bikes I own is an MV Agusta and many of the owners of those bikes go absolutely bonkers trying to shave weight from them using exotic components. There's a huge point of diminishing returns on weight savings even in the unsprung weight category. I have watched people go absolutely insane spending 50K just modifying their bikes for weight savings. At that point the bike becomes so expensive it haunts you out on the track.

 

You can certainly stack the deck in your favor by hitting the "big things" like heavy rotors, fuel tanks, batteries and other big stuff to save weight but don't worry about the small stuff. You pay a lot for the small items and don't get much return for your investment. Probably one of the easiest and logical weight savings things you can do is to get rid of your heavy lead acid battery. Not only can you shave almost 5lbs off the bike you don't have acid that may corrode your frame in a crash and have a bike that you can leave for almost a year without starting. Shorai makes a lithium Ion cell that I have in both my MV and my FZR. My main interest was getting the acid away and being able to have extended storage time but the weight was a nice plus as well.

 

 

Im not sure about weight savings on the Q3; im only sure that its more supportive in the corners while loading up the sidewalls, the CF is there for tuned rigidity~

I'll go look into the batteries , kinda missed that one! (YIKES!)

[rchase]

 

Im not sure about weight savings on the Q3; im only sure that its more supportive in the corners while loading up the sidewalls, the CF is there for tuned rigidity~

I'll go look into the batteries , kinda missed that one! (YIKES!)

 

 

You may be quite right about that on the tires. Whenever I hear carbon fiber it's usually followed by someone describing how an $800 part saved them x grams of weight. Looked over the Dunlop site and did not see any references to the weight of the tire. What is kind of neat is their Intuitive Response Profile that gives you a big contact patch when you have the bike really cranked over. I'm sort of glad I bought them for my R6 now.

[Cobie Fair]

Hi CS,

 

I'm not sure I'm following you 100%. To clarify, a bike sitting on the sidestand is about 50/50 weight distribution (more or less). Same if being ridden (edit: in a straight line), but not accelerating. So any slowing willing will put more on the front.

 

What are you trying to set your suspension for, cornering, or braking?

 

I'll try and get back to this, but we leave tomorrow for a week (our last schools).

 

Best,

Cobie

[csmith12]

Of course! 50/50 front and rear and any input, throttle or brake will change that distribution accordingly. What I was referring to is the "feel" of the roll off part. Since I never related it to the static weight, it now makes perfect and logical sense. As it relates to this thread's context, since a 50/50 weight distro will cause no "feel" of load, rolling off the throttle "feels" nowhere near the loading that is possible with the brakes. I think that is where I had a miss in what was posted in this thread.

 

Also, I am very happy with my current R6's setup and trying to mirror that "feel" as best as possible, on the 250, but that is another thread altogether.

 

Thanks