Super quick and dented ego? Or something else?

[Doodle]

Totally agree! My z1000 weighs in at around 230kgs fully fuelled.....

Pah...lightweight! The GSA is nearly 260

Makes the old R100 feel like a bicycle in comparison, even though it's made from pig-iron.

 

[kwakdonut]

Pah...lightweight! The GSA is nearly 260

Makes the old R100 feel like a bicycle in comparison, even though it's made from pig-iron.

My z650 is made from pig iron too and weighs in at a hefty 200+kg when fuelled!!!

 

[Dryce]

Two feet down - not a bad thing - probably means biker is in neutral and waiting for lights to change etc. Check brake light - if its on then biker is holding bike on front brake.

Maybe things have changed but when I went through training the mantra was to keep the right foot on the brake.

And taking off with both legs trailing meant moving off with some loss of control (and I see a lot of foot trailers don't recover their feet to the pegs until they have moved quite a distance).

As said elsewhere esp. two up the argument might be that two feet down is more stable when stationary. However again I was taught that it's better to keep bike leaned away from oncoming traffic and that keeping it upright meant it could go in either direction - whereas resting to one side was more stable.

Filtering - quite legal if done sensibly

The behaviour I was refering to would be better described as weaving than filtering. Changing from outside to inside to outside in moving traffic (which is accelerating or decelerating as well) and leaving no room for error isn't safe. I watched a bike almost get run down by a car after he/she slowed down crossed in front and then didn't accelerate out of the way in time - probably a missed/wrong gear.

 

[kwakdonut]

The behaviour I was refering to would be better described as weaving than filtering. Changing from outside to inside to outside in moving traffic (which is accelerating or decelerating as well) and leaving no room for error isn't safe. I watched a bike almost get run down by a car after he/she slowed down crossed in front and then didn't accelerate out of the way in time - probably a missed/wrong gear.

Agreed - weaving is dangerous and stupid!

 

[Biscuit]

Maybe things have changed but when I went through training the mantra was to keep the right foot on the brake.

And taking off with both legs trailing meant moving off with some loss of control (and I see a lot of foot trailers don't recover their feet to the pegs until they have moved quite a distance).

As said elsewhere esp. two up the argument might be that two feet down is more stable when stationary. However again I was taught that it's better to keep bike leaned away from oncoming traffic and that keeping it upright meant it could go in either direction - whereas resting to one side was more stable.


quote]

I've tried to teach myself to have foot on brake at the light but in my experience the risk massively outweighs the benefit.

the risk for me - out of every few hundred stops there wil be one that I dont have time to double check the gear at the stop line and/or miss the neutral light flash on the way down through the gears and therefore try to pull away in second. a mistimed throttle response and you've stalled at the front of traffic just when you should be getting out the way.

the benefit (?) - allegedly added brake power should you get rear ended - but i dont think the addition of one brake is going to help much in a bad rear end shunt and front should be enough in a nudge (all presuming you didnt see the guy coming and move off ) - thankfully I havnt had the opportunity to test my theory.

and yes quite agree with the weaving and antics. perhaps unfairly bad bikers drag us all down with them (reputation wise) bad car drivers are allocated groups by job or vehicle. ie its always i got cut up by a biker or got cut up by white van man, Beemer, taxi etc etc.

 

[Mudster]

I've never had the urge to ride a motorcycle, I just wouldn't feel safe.

That's not down to any inability that have but based on the number of idiots I experience daily on my short journey to work.

I've prefer to be in a big tin can with airbags in the event of knock thanks.

However I totally understand the thrill of wanting to ride these machines...I just don't think it's suited to todays roads, certainly suitable to track days.

Scooters make more sense particularly the twist and go type for city areas.

 

[CE230]

I would comment that bikers seem in general to have gone down a notch in the last 10 years. I notice more minor and major stupidities and less discipline than there used to be on larger bikes.

That will be the born again brigade no doubt, easily spotted by the 6 month tax disc.

Totally agree! My z1000 weighs in at around 230kgs fully fuelled.....

My scooter weighs in at 244kg dry weight

 

[Sp!ke]

Maybe things have changed but when I went through training the mantra was to keep the right foot on the brake.

And taking off with both legs trailing meant moving off with some loss of control (and I see a lot of foot trailers don't recover their feet to the pegs until they have moved quite a distance).

Back brakes often dont do a lot on modern bikes now - to the point of hardly being of any use other to shift balance a little and steady a head shake.

Having done a bit of drag racing on bikes, I can say that starting with the bike completely level and bringing both feet up at the same time is far safer than starting with the bike leaning slightly and then upsetting the bike balance further by lifting one leg onto the pegs.

The training probably needs to be brought up to date imo.

 

[Biscuit]

Scooters make more sense particularly the twist and go type for city areas.

scooters have got their own issues though

small wheels and basic brakes means stopping in anything other than dry and straight can be hair raising
low power means you can get bullied by other road users who can accelerate nearly as fast
they can get literally picked up and carried off by a thief.

 

[Biscuit]

My scooter weighs in at 244kg dry weight

yes but yours is not so much a scooter as a convertible robin reliant going in reverse all the time.....

 

[Dryce]

Back brakes often dont do a lot on modern bikes now - to the point of hardly being of any use other to shift balance a little and steady a head shake.

Quite useful when stationary to keep the old right fingers from tiring.

How modern is modern? When I started off (long long time ago - before two part tests) we were basically warned off using the rear with some interesting demonstrations by our instructors. You were taught to always use the fronts first and rears second. And always to keep the rear on when stationary.

 

[maddog]

Far more idiot car drivers than bike riders imo

You could post and post about stupid things car drivers do each day there are even whole websites dedicated to complaining about bad driving we are desensitised to it , see it from a couple of bike riders and its something new



FWIW a Z1000 ISNT a Z1000 unless it weighs over 250kgs and is actually 1000cc instead of 953

 

[maddog]

Back brakes often dont do a lot on modern bikes now - to the point of hardly being of any use other to shift balance a little and steady a head shake.

Thats tosh mate

You can stop quicker using just the back brake on a modern sportsbike than a Harley Sportster can with both

In heavy traffic and when filtering the back brake is essential

 

[Dryce]

I've tried to teach myself to have foot on brake at the light but in my experience the risk massively outweighs the benefit.

the risk for me - out of every few hundred stops there wil be one that I dont have time to double check the gear at the stop line and/or miss the neutral light flash on the way down through the gears and therefore try to pull away in second. a mistimed throttle response and you've stalled at the front of traffic just when you should be getting out the way.

I was maybe lucky. On my bikes you go a noticeable feel on the clunk down to first as you went down through the box.

the benefit (?) - allegedly added brake power should you get rear ended - but i dont think the addition of one brake is going to help much in a bad rear end shunt and front should be enough in a nudge (all presuming you didnt see the guy coming and move off ) - thankfully I havnt had the opportunity to test my theory.

We were always warned - especially on right rurns across traffic that if sitting then point straight ahead and keep foot on brake. Concern was being survivably nudged or hit and rolling into oncoming.

Having been nudged once and hit once from behind I'd go with braking. I was almost knocked onto a roundabout by a van but only went forward a few feet. However the efficacy of the rear does come into question where it's more than a nudge as when I was hit the rear was pitched up off the ground and bike rolled forward while I landed in ground behind. So the rear was immaterial. But with bike tilted to left when it was hit it rolled into the side of the road rather than into oncoming.

 

[st13phil]

As said elsewhere esp. two up the argument might be that two feet down is more stable when stationary. However again I was taught that it's better to keep bike leaned away from oncoming traffic and that keeping it upright meant it could go in either direction - whereas resting to one side was more stable.

When I took my first tuition on bikes (>30 years ago ) the teaching was the same as you mention, i.e. foot on back brake pedal and lean the bike away from oncoming traffic. Back then, most bigger bikes weighed in the region of 180kg. The Suzuki GT750 kettle was a real porker at 225kg.

Since then, bikes have got bigger and heavier. A bike like the ST1300 Honda weighs in at about 315kg ready to roll (Z1000's & GSA's heavy? Pah! ), and has a higher and wider seat than older bikes generally had making it harder to reach the ground for any given leg length. By the time I'm two-up with luggage on board the all up weight is approaching half a metric ton. Believe me, you don't want to lean that over very far when stopped because one human leg is totally unequal to the task of holding it upright if you stray over just a little too far

 

[Bobby Dazzler]

Far more idiot car drivers than bike riders imo

You could post and post about stupid things car drivers do each day there are even whole websites dedicated to complaining about bad driving we are desensitised to it , see it from a couple of bike riders and its something new

I agree with what you're saying. Car drivers are no different.

My disclaimers at the start were intended to stop it becoming a bashing thread, and it's not about complaining about bad driving either, just questionning the thinking behind those two instances.

In both cases the bikes would always be quicker than a car - including an AMG - and so it was as if the riders were trying to prove a point that didn't need to be made.

 

[Sp!ke]

Thats tosh mate

You can stop quicker using just the back brake on a modern sportsbike than a Harley Sportster can with both

Thats a bit strong... I counter your tosh with a double tosh.

Everyone I've ridden for the last ten years I've had to literally stand on the back brake for it to lock up. Just look at the size of the tiny disks - there's a reason for them being so small, rears dont do much in the way of stopping you.

Actually a sportsters rear brake disk is probably bigger and better than my Busas rear was.

What sports bikes have you ridden with decent rear brakes then?

 

[Doodle]

Back brakes often dont do a lot on modern bikes now - to the point of hardly being of any use other to shift balance a little and steady a head shake.

The training probably needs to be brought up to date imo.

The GSA has semi-linked brakes, so using the hand lever also brings in a proportional amount of rear brake (but not vice versa). The only time I use the rear pedal is for low speed work.

I would agree on the training front, some of it can be very inflexible indeed. I've seen people chastised on advanced training for not putting their left foot down, despite it being against the camber, on in a big patch of diesel/oil. Now which is more likely to cause a problem?

 

[CE230]

Modern bikes and scooters stop best with 70% front and 30% rear braking, that's why they have twin discs on the front.

 

[Doodle]

Actually a sportsters rear brake disk is probably bigger and better than my Busas rear was.

Sportster's rear disc is 292mm.

Having owned one, I can tell it can also stop a hell of a lot quicker than you're claiming. The rear brake on a Sportster is actually pretty effective compared to a lot of bikes, so using both together is pretty good, especially in combination with the available engine braking. The biggest problem is stopping the back end locking up.

I wouldn't have trusted the back brake on my Tuono for anything more than dragging to stabilise the bike - stopping in a hurry? Forget it. The same goes for the rear on the GSA.