Countersteering: Putting theory to practice, my experience

[Bren]

Well, since I have been back on a bike from a 10 year hiatus I have been hearing this term flung about . Countersteering.
I have never really known what it involved so a few weeeks back I googled it and youtubed it. There is a vast amount of practical info to be found on this new fangled interweeb thing. The gist of it I found out is if you push say the left bar the bike leans to the left and thus starts turning to the left, and of course the same is said of the right. I think as a rider I have been doing this on a small scale anyway subconciously.

Well, I have been practicing this over the last few weeks trying to get my head around how hard you need to countersteer to get a desired effect. Tonight whilst riding back from Palmy to Otaki a hare bounded across the road with the intention of taking on my front tyre. Instincts got the better of me and I countersteered to the left to miss the hair by a hairs breadth (excuse the pun folks).

So Putting theory into practice enough times has made countersteering a skill that I can now safely apply to my riding, not to mention possibly saving my skin and definately saving a bunnies arse!:banana:

[mctshirt]

Well, since I have been back on a bike from a 10 year hiatus I have been hearing this term flung about . Countersteering.
I think as a rider I have been doing this on a small scale anyway subconciously.

I take it on faith that since there's not a pile of wrecked bikes on every corner countersteering is happening without conscious effort all over the country...

[CookMySock]

a hare bounded across the road with the intention of taking on my front tyre. Instincts got the better of me and I countersteered to the left to miss the hair by a hairs breadthUh, suggest you don't dodge little things. Hitting it square on is far less dangerous than hitting it with some lean on.

Well done of getting you steering sorted. Many are unable.

Steve

[Deano]

Uh, suggest you don't dodge little things. Hitting it square on is far less dangerous than hitting it with some lean on.

Steve

Missing them is better still. I'll keep dodging them.

[CookMySock]

Missing them is better still. I'll keep dodging them.Yeah but now are talking "luck" - rabbits dodge and dive like a bitch. You have no say in the matter of hitting it or not.

Have you hit a rabbit? They give a dull thud and thats it, unless you are leaned way over then they give a dull thud followed by a loud scraping sound followed by sky-road-sky-road-sky-road-sky-road-sky-road.

I don't ride on "luck". I'm not that lucky. Don't dodge little things. If you have the option, hit them head on with the bike upright.

Steve

[sinfull]

Yeah but now are talking "luck" - rabbits dodge and dive like a bitch. You have no say in the matter of hitting it or not.

Have you hit a rabbit? They give a dull thud and thats it, unless you are leaned way over then they give a dull thud followed by a loud scraping sound followed by sky-road-sky-road-sky-road-sky-road-sky-road.

I don't ride on "luck". I'm not that lucky. Don't dodge little things. If you have the option, hit them head on with the bike upright.

Steve
Murderous bastard

[CookMySock]

Murderous bastardBetter him than me, mate.

Steve

[Headbanger]

As mentioned already, everyone riding a bike counter-steers, Its the mechanics that enable a bike to lean around a corner. Putting it into practice would be more along the lines of tightening a line and speeding up through a corner when your already at your regular limit.

Advanced Kiwibikers wave while counter-steering and mulling over the continuable degradation of the written word as exemplified by common usage on the internet.

[newbould]

As mentioned already, everyone riding a bike counter-steers, Its the mechanics that enable a bike to lean around a corner. Putting it into practice would be more along the lines of tightening a line and speeding up through a corner when your already at your regular limit.

Advanced Kiwibikers wave while counter-steering and mulling over the continuable degradation of the written word as exemplified by common usage on the internet.

Yee hah a waving thread!


Yeah but now are talking "luck" - rabbits dodge and dive like a bitch. You have no say in the matter of hitting it or not.

Have you hit a rabbit? They give a dull thud and thats it, unless you are leaned way over then they give a dull thud followed by a loud scraping sound followed by sky-road-sky-road-sky-road-sky-road-sky-road.

I don't ride on "luck". I'm not that lucky. Don't dodge little things. If you have the option, hit them head on with the bike upright.

Steve
Can you define "little" Hares (Hare not rabbit was mentioned although later called bunny just to confuse) can get pretty big. What about a possum? Maybe yuse a dog scale - fox terrier Ok great dane swerve collie dog trying to get you back in line ??????? I'm serious on this question by the way. I have often wondered about hitting a dead possum so your comments are useful - hit it square and upright no problem - on a lean then it's more like a patch of oil yeah?

Murderous bastard
LOL (but Steve seemed to take offense)

[Katman]

Better him than me, mate.



Sometimes I wonder.

[CookMySock]

Can you define "little" Hares (Hare not rabbit was mentioned although later called bunny just to confuse) can get pretty big. What about a possum? Maybe yuse a dog scale - fox terrier Ok great dane swerve collie dog trying to get you back in line ??????? I'm serious on this question by the way. I have often wondered about hitting a dead possum so your comments are useful - hit it square and upright no problem - on a lean then it's more like a patch of oil yeah?Left as an exercise for the reader, lol. I haven't exactly taken the scientific approach here.. You might try hitting larger and larger obstacles until one of them lunches you. :eek:

Steve

[newbould]

Left as an exercise for the reader, lol. I haven't exactly taken the scientific approach here.. You might try hitting larger and larger obstacles until one of them lunches you. :eek:

Steve
I'll film it and post it on you tube

[sinfull]

I'll film it and post it on you tube
You might like to take note of the name before the advise !

[Bren]

Yee hah a waving thread!


Can you define "little" Hares (Hare not rabbit was mentioned although later called bunny just to confuse) can get pretty big. What about a possum? Maybe yuse a dog scale - fox terrier Ok great dane swerve collie dog trying to get you back in line ??????? I'm serious on this question by the way. I have often wondered about hitting a dead possum so your comments are useful - hit it square and upright no problem - on a lean then it's more like a patch of oil yeah?

LOL (but Steve seemed to take offense)

It was a Hare..probably a jack hare as it was resembly large by hare standards...The mention of a bunny was purely to highlight its luck...people dont care if hares get killed, but a "bunny" draws a different response!

[CookMySock]

I'll film it and post it on you tubeHeres two totally different outcomes, both bike vs deer.

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/kOkYu04R_kQ&hl=en_US&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/kOkYu04R_kQ&hl=en_US&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/58KocluKOKU&hl=en_US&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/58KocluKOKU&hl=en_US&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

Steve

[varminter]

I ran over a fairly flat possum once, just to see what it's like. They're solid suckers even when pre-rolled.

[BMWST?]

any two wheeled vehicle is controlled by countersteering once you get past about 15km hr.

[rok-the-boat]

I take it on faith that since there's not a pile of wrecked bikes on every corner countersteering is happening without conscious effort all over the country...

I don't think so - you need to train it. Get a big heavy 1970's or 80's four and try going fast around a corner. Some people just can't go past more than an average speed, they can't get it down. They they discover counter steering. Also, find a safe road or corner and imagine a car suddenly veering towards you. 1 Try leaning and see how fast you get, then, 2 Try quickly - but carefully - steering the wrong way for a moment, and you will change the 'track' of your bike scarily fast. Keep pressure on the opposite bar end. If you want to use it to avoid an accident in a split second, you need to train it a lot because our normal reaction to a sudden even would be to try to lean away.
Just my opinion - try it and see. Then, get off road and try it - now that is fun.

[Headbanger]

I don't think so - you need to train it. Get a big heavy 1970's or 80's four and try going fast around a corner. Some people just can't go past more than an average speed, they can't get it down. They they discover counter steering.

The point being made and missed is that counter-steering is part of the mechanics of riding a motorcycle around a corner, even at average speeds. Irrelevant to the handling charestics of any motorcycle it needs to be done at average speeds (and even below average speed) in order to successfully negotiate the corner, failing to counter-steer (even at average speeds, whatever that maybe) would result in a huge pile of crashed bikes who have run straight off the very first corner.

Its not something you discover to enable you to corner faster, Though like all skills it can certainly be practiced and aid in increasing performance.

[newbould]

any two wheeled vehicle is controlled by countersteering once you get past about 15km hr.
This is the bit I find really interesting about about countersteering. I propose that it doesn't matter how fast you are going coutersteering works to lean the bike over and start the cornering. I base this on the following logic:
look at the countersteering you do to stop cornering ie to lift the bike up again. Leaning left you push on the right bar to get her up again. this is naturally the opposite of what you did to get it there. I interpret this as steering the front wheel under the fall of the bike, thus making it stand up again. So what countersteering does to induce the lean is steer the front end away from the direction of travel letting the bike fall over to where the fron end used to be. Now for the slow speed stuff. we all think when turning in the carpark that we point the front weheel and follow it. BUT what do you do when the bike starts to tip over at very slow speed - you steer into the fall - EXACTLY what you do when lifting up out of a corner. If you do the same to reverse the fall at slow speed, surely you also do the same thing at slow speed to induce a slight (very slight because you are going slowly) fall in the direction you want to turn.

My 2c on countersteering and when it is used (all speeds!)

[Deano]

Yeah but now are talking "luck" - rabbits dodge and dive like a bitch.
Steve

What about possoms, cats and hedgehogs ? The latter 2 I have successfully dodged on occasion. And you don't need to lean a bike "way over" to swerve in your own lane either.

[Headbanger]

I had a cute as a button kitten throw itself through the front wheel of my bike, Came out the other side as a puff of blood and furr.

Was a bugger to clean off, so I just didn't bother.

Luckily it happened right outside a school as kids were entering, so they go a few life lessons in a short amount of time.

[Drew]

I get a bit wound up with the use of "counter steering" like it's something new. Leaning on the inside bar steers the wheels out from under the bike, makes you lean. The turning itself is done to balance that lean, so you don't fall right over.

It's NOT counter steering, it's just steering. You cannot practice counter steering, you are practising TURNING. Weather that be dodging stuff, or high speed cornering, it's all the same shit.

Why the fuck do people on here try and over think everything? I don't understand it.

If you want to ride better, get some tuition. Half the mentors on here are likely not the best candidates mind, they mostly over think too. Someone like me is worse, 'cause I'm an idiot on a bike. There are many capable riders around, who couldn't tell you what they do that you dont. But there are more muppets that think they can tell you how to ride unfortunately, when they should not be listened to.

[Conquiztador]

Heres two totally different outcomes, both bike vs deer.



Steve

And the reason for the different outcomes?

First one does not use brake. Second one does.
So should the second one (that crashes) not have had the better outcome?

No! The reason being:

When the second one hit the front brake and then the deer his frontwheel went up in the air when hitting the deer. Then when the frontwheel hit the ground again it was rock solidly stopped. And so as a result the bike does a somersault.

Te lesson: if what jumps out in fron of you is not big, ride over AND DO NOT BRAKE!

Re the countersteering: Yes, it is automatic. But you can push harder and lay the bike lower and get your self outta trouble. Try it on a track. You be surprised!

[CookMySock]

When the second one hit the front brake and then the deer his frontwheel went up in the air when hitting the deer. Then when the frontwheel hit the ground again it was rock solidly stopped. And so as a result the bike does a somersault.You can tell all that from the fuzzy video? You are doing well. I don't disagree with your logic though. Also one of the bikes had a much lower centre of gravity and was probably heavier.


Te lesson: if what jumps out in fron of you is not big, ride over AND DO NOT BRAKE!Yep, just hunker down and clout it square on. In the end it's up to the individual what they dodge and what they do not.


Re the countersteering: Yes, it is automatic. But you can push harder and lay the bike lower and get your self outta trouble. Try it on a track. You be surprised!THIS is what many people can't do. It's fair to say that any steering on a bike is done with countersteering, but all the science aside, what many people are still unable to do, is tighten a widening line by adding force (not displacement) on the inside bar. While this is a limitation, they are vulnerable. The only way to shock people through and get them used to large angles of lean is to do just that and put them on a trainer frame until they get it, or else it takes years and years of them adding micromillimeter bits to their lean angle as they relax and trust their bike.

Steve

[hayd3n]

Heres two totally different outcomes, both bike vs deer.



Steve
yea both head on luck saved the day

[sinfull]

I don't countersteer ! I bond with my steed and just think turn left or turn right or dodge this wabbit !

You only have to ride with someone, who for years rode with flat wide bars (talkin Harley here) and rode very well in the windies, considering the bike !
But talk to the guy about countersteering and ya get a dumb look, he couldn't comprehend the science of it !
Take away his flat wide bars and give him a set of semi apehangers (stupid looking things) and he all of a sudden slowed down heaps in the same windies, even though he still leans the same ! He lost that countersteering (or the ease of it) without even realising he's subconciously doing it !
He's suddenly come to terms with the science of it and the ape hangers are going !

[terbang]

We all countersteer, except in carparks. Most of us don't realise if for a while. But its the way they turn. Its all about gyroscopic precession...

[Headbanger]

I don't countersteer ! I bond with my steed and just think turn left or turn right or dodge this wabbit !

You only have to ride with someone, who for years rode with flat wide bars (talkin Harley here) and rode very well in the windies, considering the bike !
But talk to the guy about countersteering and ya get a dumb look, he couldn't comprehend the science of it !
Take away his flat wide bars and give him a set of semi apehangers (stupid looking things) and he all of a sudden slowed down heaps in the same windies, even though he still leans the same ! He lost that countersteering (or the ease of it) without even realising he's subconciously doing it !
He's suddenly come to terms with the science of it and the ape hangers are going !

Meh, The counter-steering is exactly the same with apes, More likely the rider in your scenario lost some confidence due to the changed geometry and the different inputs required,Probally just needed a bit of riding to get the hang of it, or maybe they sucked.

When I had a big set of smell-my-armpits apes fitted I had no problems hanging with everyone else, and they were mad fuckers.

[CookMySock]

We all countersteer, except in carparks.Even in carparks.

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/C848R9xWrjc&hl=en_US&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/C848R9xWrjc&hl=en_US&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

Steve

[Headbanger]

Even in carparks.


Steve

Thats a good vid, Should be mandatory viewing for all new sign-ups.....

[Mikkel]

And the reason for the different outcomes?

First one does not use brake. Second one does.
So should the second one (that crashes) not have had the better outcome?

No! The reason being:

When the second one hit the front brake and then the deer his frontwheel went up in the air when hitting the deer. Then when the frontwheel hit the ground again it was rock solidly stopped. And so as a result the bike does a somersault.

The videos are a bit too murky to really tell in detail what is going on...

However, there's deer and then there's Deer.
<img src=http://kinshipcircle.files.wordpress.com/2009/02/deer.jpg>
vs.
<img src=http://www.wildaboutbritain.co.uk/gallery/files/8/2/9/6/RedDeerRut180a.jpg>

I don't think your analysis holds up, if you lock up your front wheel you'll generally have a lowside, not a somersault. By your analysis anyone who did a wheelie and applied their brakes while having the front hoisted would do a somersault upon touching back down again - don't get me wrong I wouldn't advise anyone into trying this out - I doubt that very much. Besides it looks to me as if the fella goes head-over-heels the moment he hits the dear - not slightly after.

Braking hard gives your front-rear weight distribution a forward bias and, as a result of the geometry, the center of mass rises relative to your front axel (i.e your forks are being compressed). When you then sustain an impact at the front wheel you have a higher risk of doing an over-ender.

[Conquiztador]

The videos are a bit too murky to really tell in detail what is going on...

However, there's deer and then there's Deer.

I don't think your analysis holds up, if you lock up your front wheel you'll generally have a lowside, not a somersault. By your analysis anyone who did a wheelie and applied their brakes while having the front hoisted would do a somersault upon touching back down again - don't get me wrong I wouldn't advise anyone into trying this out - I doubt that very much. Besides it looks to me as if the fella goes head-over-heels the moment he hits the dear - not slightly after.

Braking hard gives your front-rear weight distribution a forward bias and, as a result of the geometry, the center of mass rises relative to your front axel (i.e your forks are being compressed). When you then sustain an impact at the front wheel you have a higher risk of doing an over-ender.

Agree re deer size. As long as it is something you can ride over I would recommend to do it instead of braking.

So lets have a closer look on what I tried to say and why I still recon I have a point:

First: We have all seen the vid's of guys using the front brake to lift the backwheel from the ground. This is not tricky to do, but the trick is to keep the balance. In a situation where there is an animal in fron of the bike you can forget trying to balance on the front wheel.

- You are riding at 100k/h and suddenly there is that animal. No warning. You grab the frontbrake with full force (you probably also push the back brake, but as all the weight is now transferred to the frontwheel the backwheel does zilch). With both wheels at full brake there is not much leaning left or right going on. Your body is pushed forward and the forks are compressed.
- You hit the animal with the frontwheel and you still have a handful of brake.
- Your frontwheel is pushed up from the ground as the wheel goes up on the animal.
- You still hold on to the brake (all this is a split second stuff). The wheel is now not touching ground anymore and so the wheel stops spinning and the brake is still fully on. You are still forward on the bike and weigh is on frontend. (You might have pushed the animal to one side or gone over it partly or fully)
- The frontwheel hits ground again still with brake full on and wheel locked. Your weight is forward. And the backend comes up (remember the initial stuff re the tricksters who balance bike on frontwheel while braking).
- Too late you realise that you need to release the frontbrake and the backend goes over your head, and the flip is complete.

As this all happens very quickly you do not have any chance to reason re what you should do. Therefore my recommendation is to ride right through the animal. OK, if it is a horse or a cow you are fucked. But a cat, a dog, even a sheep and you should be able to go over IF YOU DO NOT BRAKE. The wheel will actually try to get over the animal as long as the animal is below 75% of the wheel. And as you hit the animal at 100k/h it will fall down.

Anyhow, that is my theory. I have done possums and rabbits, even a cat. I have not braked. Luckily I have not had anything bigger come in my way. But I would do the same as I recon it is my best chance of coming out of it alive.

[CookMySock]

For a really large obstacle, I would be tempted to abandon the bike and leap over it. I'd hit the ground hard, but at least it would be on some angle and not smack straight into it.

Steve

[newbould]

Even in carparks.

Steve
That vid was spot on and confirmed what I thoiught - you always first steer away from where you want to go then follow through. Thanks


I get a bit wound up with the use of "counter steering" like it's something new. Leaning on the inside bar steers the wheels out from under the bike, makes you lean. The turning itself is done to balance that lean, so you don't fall right over.

It's NOT counter steering, it's just steering. You cannot practice counter steering, you are practising TURNING. Weather that be dodging stuff, or high speed cornering, it's all the same shit.

Why the fuck do people on here try and over think everything? I don't understand it.

.

I guess I just enjoy overthinking stuff. But being aware of the pressure you put on the bars to make things happen makes it easier to do the trickier stuff like swerving or adjusting cornering lines. And you should listen to me coz I've been riding al;most 2 years now !!!!!!! hahahahahahahahahaha

[CookMySock]

[...] then follow through.This is the bit I have had people argue with me about - that the bars actually turn towards the corner after the countersteer. Of course they must, or the bike isn't going around the corner. Take note as you hand a left at any sharp corner such as a roundbout - tip in and get established in the turn and glance down at the bars, or if you dare, glance at the bars as you tip in.

I don't think it is "over doing it" looking through all this crap extensively. I think it's essential and necessary self-training.

Steve

[Corse1]

I like counter steering. Its natural and essential and enabled me to enjoy motorbikes from a young age.

I still like to actively explore the effects of excessive counter steering on every ride. I hope it helps me to make it become instinctive when faced with road obstacles.

It may well save me one day ;)

[mister.koz]

After a few talks with mates about this "thing" called counter steering i went to the specific effort of intentionally trying it on corners that i have gone through 100s of times, back and forth (sorry farmer) i tried varying pressure's and speeds. (this was a while ago)

There's a couple of things i noticed...

Firstly someone mentioned that its all part of steering and that you have to do it to corner, this is quite true but i reckon knowing that its there and learning more about it is allot better than just being happy you get around corners.

Secondly i noticed that the pressure and speed i move the bars (have steering damper) directly related to the speed the bike tipped into the corners - not surprising really.

Thirdly it felt like i couldn't push the bars too hard, either the weight of the bike and the friction of the road stopped me or the voices in my head wouldn't let me fall.

And lastly i realised after all of this that i had unintentionally been counter-steering the bike upright out of corners the whole time... funny how you can be doing something for a couple of years and not realise it...

[Mikkel]

First: We have all seen the vid's of guys using the front brake to lift the backwheel from the ground. This is not tricky to do, but the trick is to keep the balance. In a situation where there is an animal in fron of the bike you can forget trying to balance on the front wheel.

- You are riding at 100k/h and suddenly there is that animal. No warning. You grab the frontbrake with full force (you probably also push the back brake, but as all the weight is now transferred to the frontwheel the backwheel does zilch). With both wheels at full brake there is not much leaning left or right going on. Your body is pushed forward and the forks are compressed.
- You hit the animal with the frontwheel and you still have a handful of brake.
- Your frontwheel is pushed up from the ground as the wheel goes up on the animal.
- You still hold on to the brake (all this is a split second stuff). The wheel is now not touching ground anymore and so the wheel stops spinning and the brake is still fully on. You are still forward on the bike and weigh is on frontend. (You might have pushed the animal to one side or gone over it partly or fully)
- The frontwheel hits ground again still with brake full on and wheel locked. Your weight is forward. And the backend comes up (remember the initial stuff re the tricksters who balance bike on frontwheel while braking).
- Too late you realise that you need to release the frontbrake and the backend goes over your head, and the flip is complete.

I agree with most of what you are saying - except a few quite important bits:

1) You are assuming that the rider keeps a clear head and applies braking progressively up to, and not beyond, the maximum achievable stopping force. If he panics and applies the brakes too fast the front will lock-up and skid. If he applies the brakes progressively but exceeds the maximum he will do a rolling stoppie and increase the likelihood of him doing a over-ender.
2) Once the wheel has stopped rotating all together - and is being held immobile relative to the bike - we start to rely upon the dynamic coefficient of friction which is significantly smaller than the static coefficient of friction (wheel rotating, matching the speed relative to the road at the tyre-road interface). I have never seen anyone doing a stoppie once the front wheel has already locked up and started sliding.

I am not saying that what you propose could not happen - just that it would be rather unlikely. Also, it would depend quite strongly upon the bike's geometry - i.e. you'd be worse off on a motocross bike than on a cruiser (higher center of mass and low weight vs. low center of mass and high weight).


As this all happens very quickly you do not have any chance to reason re what you should do. Therefore my recommendation is to ride right through the animal. OK, if it is a horse or a cow you are fucked. But a cat, a dog, even a sheep and you should be able to go over IF YOU DO NOT BRAKE. The wheel will actually try to get over the animal as long as the animal is below 75% of the wheel. And as you hit the animal at 100k/h it will fall down.

Indeed, this stuff happens very quickly indeed. Luckily we haven't got Volvo-busters around here (mooses).

I am not sure what you mean about 75% - do you mean that the animal isn't higher than 75% of the wheel's height or do you mean that 75% of the wheel's height is above the animal?
There will be an upwards force applied to the wheel if the point of contact is anywhere below the level of the axel - the exact force depends upon a lot of factors, but the vertical component will be there.


For a really large obstacle, I would be tempted to abandon the bike and leap over it. I'd hit the ground hard, but at least it would be on some angle and not smack straight into it.

A bit like this maybe?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NdWVMR6m_hc

[Drew]

Why? You saying that knowing about physics makes you able to alter it somehow.

[Drew]

I can find a hundred explanations of "counter" steering, and not one of them tells how much force to put on a bar. Since it is COMPLETELY different on each bike, EVERY time you turn.

Don't think, ride.

[Headbanger]

I can find a hundred explanations of "counter" steering, and not one of them tells how much force to put on a bar. Since it is COMPLETELY different on each bike, EVERY time you turn.

Don't think, ride.

For the record I completely and utterly disagree with you.

Theory and practice go hand in hand. Why in hell would you expect to be told how much pressure to apply when its a constantly changing variable?

Thinking is good, except when your thinking stupid.

[KiWiP]

Even in carparks.

Nicely put together video but please ignore the Physics as it i very WishyWashy. If you bore easily please move on.

Two elements of Physics are at work. First Circular motion - This is what keeps planets revolving round a star, water in a bucket when you wing it round your head and bikes on roads when you go round corners.

The active force is the "centripetal" force (forget centrifugal it should never enter polite conversation). This acts towards the center of the curve that you are turning around. It is represented by the friction between your tyres and the tarmac. Proof - lose the friction (hit a wet bunny) and you go in a straight line, bing-bang-bong.

The forces horizontally are not balanced, If they were there would be no acceleration, no acceleration no force. (this is the tricky bit) As you go round a corner you are accelerating to the center of the corner, when you accelerate a force is placed on the mass (F=ma) the acceleration is described by a=v^2/r (v^2 is velocity squared, r is radius of corner) and so the Friction force keeping us on the road is F=m x v^2/r. the radius bit just means the wider the corner the faster you can go round it

So going round a corner is governed by your velocity squared and your mass. So a small increase in speed pitches you much closer to the breakaway point (but you knew that). What you might not have considered is your mass (bike and you) has a major impact. If you are a fat bastard following a skinny runt and you are on the same setup don't expect to go round corners at the same speed. Fatties will slide earlier than skinnies.

Vertically, gravity is trying to kill you by pulling you into the tarmac. A reaction force upwards, the vertical component is equal to gravity so we don't move up or down (our centre of mass might but this is small beer compared to everything else that is going on). To go faster round a corner we need to increase the friction holding us onto the road so we lean, by leaning we increase the horizontal component of friction and so can go faster but only up to the maximum friction possible. The vertical component has got to stay the same whether we lean or not.

Second - gyroscopic precession as been mentioned before
This is really a fancy manifestation of Newton's Third Law of Motion for every force there is an equal and opposite force. That is whack the handlebars one way creating a force that way there is going to be a force trying to move the bike in the other. Both these forces are provided by our old mate friction.
As your wheels are stuck to the road (hopefully) the flick of the front wheel causes you to tip the other. When you are tipped over you are increasing the friction as discussed earlier.

That was fun wasn't it right your homework is......:bleh:(just to lighten the mood)

[mctshirt]

And what about the traction circle?

http://www.teamassociated.com/racerhub/techhelp/marc/Handling-8.gif

A circle where force "a" represents a side force and force "b" represents acceleration or braking force, but the tire will only handle a given amount of force represented by "c". The circumference of this circle represents some given amount of traction. When the given amount of traction "c" is exceeded by the forces acting on the tire, the given amount of traction "c" drops. The size of the circle grows smaller quickly. On asphalt, a thin layer of the tire melts because of the fiction, this layer then acts as a lubricant for the tire to slip on. On dirt, the spikes of the tire will break up the dirt of the track and this loose dirt then acts like bearings for the tire to slip on. On either surface the given amount of traction gets smaller the moment the given amount of traction is exceeded.

Tires will provide a given amount of traction. The tire does not care in what direction the force is applied. It only has a given amount of traction.

P.S. I still haven't seen a pile of wrecked motorcycles on every corner despite our collective ignorance of science ;)

[Drew]

How has the theory of steering a bike helped anyone practice? All it does is force you to think at what you are doing at that exact point, instead of instinctively being three steps ahead.

Pretty sure I can live with not winning this argument, enjoy.

[Eyegasm]

Well, All I can say is now I get it.

After watching the Video put up by DB I now understand all this countersteering stuff.
Went for a ride and tried it on a straight, then tried it on a corner. I now see how you get better
lean into a corner. Don't know if I was doing it before but it felt better to do than what I was previously
so I might not have been.

Or I was just paying more attention to my turning.

Cheers

[rok-the-boat]

That vid does not really explain enough. It shows it working at low speed, but really, it is unnecessary at low speed, since you can just turn the wheel where you want to go without counter-steering at all. Also, the main way a bike turns is like how an ice cream cone rolls in a circle on the floor. That is how the tyres are designed. When you lean, you are putting the bike on a cone and it turns, and this is enough for most people. It also explains why front and rear tyres need to match, otherwise the back might try to overtake the front, or vice-cersa, if you get what I mean. And finally, if you can't get your heavy 1980's bike down in a corner at speed, counter-steering is the answer. And unlike as shown in that vid, you do not turn the 'wrong way' for a moment to get it down: at high speed, you need constant pressure on the bar nearest the ground to give you constant counter steer to keep the bike down. If you don't apply constant pressure the bike will right itself and you won't get around the corner. If you can't make this work (I mean - get a good feel for it) you ain't goin' fast enough, and if so, you may not know what you are doing, and might kill yourself trying. If you have a light bike with a small 16" front wheel, you probably don't even need to do this and if you try it you'll fall off unless you are going around a tight bend at high speed. It can also be useful as a skill to avoid an object - instantly - when travelling at slow or high speed in a straight line - but you have to train it with care as one twitch of the bars will soon send you off the road (twitch one way, then reverse, to get back on track). Be careful - it is not a game. For super extreme counter-steer, try speedway style, off road of course. Now that is a lark.

[KiWiP]

And what about the traction circle?

I'd ignore that one as well it is even more of a mish-mash of collective ignorance :dodge:

The only force is towards the center of the curve This is provided by the friction between you and the road. The amount of friction is given by the velocity you're travelling at, your mass and the radius of the curve. There is a limit to this. Go beyond this and you lose friction, i.e you stop going round and go straight (bing-bang-bong)

Another interesting point to note :yes: is that if you change speed in a corner then something else must change, either friction, radius of corner or mass. This I think you know by experience. Open the throttle before you exit and you will drift out (change radius) or lose the back end (lose friction). As an experiment when you are going round a corner and you feel the back end going trying pushing your pillion off. This will reduce the mass and so you should get friction back and probably be able to go faster.

Now stop talking at the back and get on with your work :bleh:

[mister.koz]

How has the theory of steering a bike helped anyone practice? All it does is force you to think at what you are doing at that exact point, instead of instinctively being three steps ahead.

Pretty sure I can live with not winning this argument, enjoy.

After learning and practicing the principles of counter-steering (from a couple of books) i found that i was utilizing it better rather than coming out the other end of a corner thinking "wicked, wonder how i got through that without effort" knowing how counter-steering works has also helped me avoid gravel, potholes, cowshit and other threats by adjusting my line (its a last resort) using counter steering.

You're right tho, too much theory and not enough knowledge can leave you baffled by science...

One of the books i read on riding said that you need to gain enough instinctual knowledge so when something goes differently you don't need to think you can just act.

[Mikkel]

I'd ignore that one as well it is even more of a mish-mash of collective ignorance :dodge:

I'd be careful about labelling something ignorance - at least I'd strive very hard to make sure I wasn't guilty of same...


So going round a corner is governed by your velocity squared and your mass. So a small increase in speed pitches you much closer to the breakaway point (but you knew that). What you might not have considered is your mass (bike and you) has a major impact. If you are a fat bastard following a skinny runt and you are on the same setup don't expect to go round corners at the same speed. Fatties will slide earlier than skinnies.

Thus, I put to you the questions: "What provides the lateral force that allows you to turn in the first place?", "How does this depend upon the mass of the object being considered?"

I'll give you a hint: fatties will not slide earlier than skinnies. You should be able to work out why this is if you think about it for a second.


Pretty sure I can live with not winning this argument, enjoy.

There really is no argument to win. The world behaves in a certain manner, and that manner does not change depending upon what people believe.

I am all with you though - understanding the theory behind this doesn't make you a better rider and spending time thinking too much about it while riding is not advisable. However, it might help you understand why things behave as they do - counter-steering defies common sense, i.e. it is counter-intuitive.

[Headbanger]

How has the theory of steering a bike helped anyone practice? All it does is force you to think at what you are doing at that exact point, instead of instinctively being three steps ahead.

Pretty sure I can live with not winning this argument, enjoy.

You must then find it difficult to learn,develop and improve skills if you believe its a case of doing something over and over and over with no concept of what you are doing or why you are doing it.

[mctshirt]

You must then find it difficult to learn,develop and improve skills if you believe its a case of doing something over and over and over with no concept of what you are doing or why you are doing it.

I have no concept what i am doing or why I am doing it.
I do know riding a motorcycle scratches an itch.
I do know I don't need to ride like Rossi to enjoy the ride.
I do know there's not a pile of wrecked motorcycles on every corner.
<_<

[Headbanger]

I have no concept what i am doing or why I am doing it.
I do know riding a motorcycle scratches an itch.
I do know I don't need to ride like Rossi to enjoy the ride.
I do know there's not a pile of wrecked motorcycles on every corner.
<_<

Rubbish, You have the capacity to understand the basic mechanics of what you are doing, and are able to refine how you do them how you do them, applying the brake for instance. And you have learned plenty from reading threads such as this one and I'm certain your subconscious has taken it on board even if you are in denial.

Takes a strange breed to claim that ignorance is the preferred state, But there ya go, Each to their own.

[Drew]

You must then find it difficult to learn,develop and improve skills if you believe its a case of doing something over and over and over with no concept of what you are doing or why you are doing it.

I feel compelled to reply, but I know I am not going to convey what works for me very well.

I have learnt a great deal about riding, through many different methods. I have learnt NOTHING of how to ride, via the internet.

[Conquiztador]

Well here a thought to the ones stating that they do not use countersteering, or that they are sure they use it but have never worried about it: Try practicing it in a corner on a traffic free road. If you focus on putting pressure on the inside handlebar (pushing it the wrong way) you will find that you can ride around the corner with higher speed and you do not have to wrestle the bike. I love doing this when I travel Napier-Taupo. When I hit the straights coming closer to Taupo I often consider turning around just so I can do more of it.

[rok-the-boat]

Well, was bored today so, while zooming around on my Jetski I thought - let's try it. Well, it nearly spat me off! Nope, counter steering definitely does not work on a Jetski. It rides more like a sidecar ...

[Pixie]

Well, since I have been back on a bike from a 10 year hiatus I have been hearing this term flung about . Countersteering.
I have never really known what it involved so a few weeeks back I googled it and youtubed it. There is a vast amount of practical info to be found on this new fangled interweeb thing. The gist of it I found out is if you push say the left bar the bike leans to the left and thus starts turning to the left, and of course the same is said of the right. I think as a rider I have been doing this on a small scale anyway subconciously.

Well, I have been practicing this over the last few weeks trying to get my head around how hard you need to countersteer to get a desired effect. Tonight whilst riding back from Palmy to Otaki a hare bounded across the road with the intention of taking on my front tyre. Instincts got the better of me and I countersteered to the left to miss the hair by a hairs breadth (excuse the pun folks).

So Putting theory into practice enough times has made countersteering a skill that I can now safely apply to my riding, not to mention possibly saving my skin and definately saving a bunnies arse!:banana:
You always did it.
It is necessary at all speeds.
It is,of course, the only way bikes are steered:

The No BS (Body Steering) Machine... Thats Correct Brothers It shouldn't be alarming to me that riders still question how to steer their motorcycles but it is.

Apparently, even after 90 years when it was first observed by the Wright brothers some confusion remains on this subject . Yes, their first engineering attempts were as bicycle manufacturers; the very observant brothers determined that tandem (one wheel in front of the other) wheeled vehicles counter steer. That was and still is correct.

Maybe there was something in it after all. I hate to miss anything. The Experiments For my part, experimenting with pressure on the pegs, the tank, adjusting my body mass and combinations of all three on the bike resulted in nothing I would consider steering. In other words, something that could be used in an emergency maneuver or to aggressively flick the bike into a corner or through a set of esses. Eventually I arrived at a potential solution to my questions that would eliminate my opinions and/or misunderstanding on the subject.

The Solution ...... Make a bike that has two sets of bars. One set as normal, the other set would be solid mounted to the frame so they were not connected to and did not rotate the forks........ This, as my theory went, would answer the question. And it does.

The Machine ..... one of our Kawasaki ZX 6Rs and solid mounting a set of bars 8" above the standard ones would positively isolate the various body shifting from the countersteering. If body-steering had any effect it would be simple to show it. I created a bike with that setup. One necessary detail was to mount an additional throttle on the upper, solid mounted, bars so the bike's stability could be maintained as the user rode down the road. So we wound up with two sets of handlebars and two operating throttles on the bike.

Machine Dirty Exceptions Before I go any further, ......... I want to address off-road motorcycles. An off-road motorcycle will easily steer by pressing down on the inside peg, and in conjunction with shifting the upper body mass, will go over pretty easily . Still not what I would call good control but it can be done fairly efficiently. Again, I am not a true tech guy but it occurs to me that the small contact patch on knobbies or dual sport tires and dirt bike steering geometry, which is not intended to provide an enormous amount of stability at speed, contribute to the reasons why steering results from weight shifts to the degree it does on a dirt bike. No Body Steering.

At this writing, we have run nearly 100 riders of all experience levels on this double barred bike. It has made believers out of every single one in the actuality of countersteering of course. At 20 to 35 mph, no matter how much you tug or push or pull or jump around on the bike, the best we saw was that the bike wiggled and became somewhat unstable. Did it turn? Not really. Would it turn at higher speed? Absolutely not.

The Bottom Line Steering a motorcycle results from the process of pushing the inside bar forward, the same angle and direction the forks rotate in the steering head bearings. You can also pull on the outside bar. You can do both push and pull. That is what turns it, that is all that turns it with any degree of accuracy, efficiency, quickness or smoothness. That and only that, No BS.

Keith Code


Read more:http://www.vf750fd.com/blurbs/countercode.html

[Pixie]

Also, the main way a bike turns is like how an ice cream cone rolls in a circle on the floor. That is how the tyres are designed. When you lean, you are putting the bike on a cone and it turns,


More,often voiced bullshit,If this was the case then bikes fitted with car tyres or square classic bike tyres could not be steered,and this is certainly not the case.

[Drew]

I am perplexed at what Keith says here. Since it's quite easy to ride along with no hands on the bars and negotiate turns. Chris Pfeifer manages to do no handed, full lock circles and drag a hand on the ground at the same time.

A bike can be turned without any pressure on the bars, Keith is WRONG.

Oddly, (or perhaps obviously), the trick to it is leaning your body back. It kinda makes sense to lean back since you are leaning into the turn, perhaps this is what allows the front wheel to steer out from under you and make the bike lean.

Certainly not something that helps in an emergency situation, but very doable anyway.

[p.dath]

I am perplexed at what Keith says here. Since it's quite easy to ride along with no hands on the bars and negotiate turns. Chris Pfeifer manages to do no handed, full lock circles and drag a hand on the ground at the same time.

A bike can be turned without any pressure on the bars, Keith is WRONG.

Oddly, (or perhaps obviously), the trick to it is leaning your body back. It kinda makes sense to lean back since you are leaning into the turn, perhaps this is what allows the front wheel to steer out from under you and make the bike lean.

Certainly not something that helps in an emergency situation, but very doable anyway.

This is probably the most convincing article I have read about the fallacy of body steering, and why you need to lean to steer:
http://www.superbikeschool.com/machinery/no-bs-machine.php

[p.dath]

More,often voiced bullshit,If this was the case then bikes fitted with car tyres or square classic bike tyres could not be steered,and this is certainly not the case.

I concur with rok-the-boat. The central and outside diameter of bike tyres are different by design, because of the assistance to turning.

Sure you can use flat car tyres, sure you can still turn, but the handling is poor, which is why it is seldom done anymore.

[Drew]

This is probably the most convincing article I have read about the fallacy of body steering, and why you need to lean to steer:
http://www.superbikeschool.com/machinery/no-bs-machine.php

I know why you need to steer, but the article is WRONG!!!

Can a bike be ridden with no hands on the bars? YES.

Only conclusion to be taken from that is... A bike CAN be steered with the body.

[p.dath]

I know why you need to steer, but the article is WRONG!!!

Can a bike be ridden with no hands on the bars? YES.

Only conclusion to be taken from that is... A bike CAN be steered with the body.

I don't have sufficient experience to argue the point either way.

I do sometimes ride downhill with no-hands at low speed - I've been doing it to practice balancing my weight on my bike. But I don't reckon I could deliberatly steer. Sure if the bike started turning one way I could keep it going that way, but that's not deliberate steering.

And the California Superbike School, the famous Keith Codes creation, is very well respected. I think they have been running something like 25 years. They have invited lots of very experienced riders to try out the "No BS Machine" to see if they could deliberately body steer, and they couldn't.

All in all, the vast reputation of the organisation involved, the calibre of the riders who have tried - I tend to believe them. Maybe one day I might meet you and you might be able to show me something that all these top riders could not achieve.


So can a bike be ridden with no hands, sure. Can body weight be used to assist steering, sure. Can body weight on its own, without the use of the bars be used solely as the only method for deliberately steering - I don't think so.

[marty]

I take it on faith that since there's not a pile of wrecked bikes on every corner countersteering is happening without conscious effort all over the country...

have you ever been on a coro loop KB ride?

[Drew]

I dont doubt, that when holding the bar that is solid mounted you cant steer the bike, but when riding no hands and leaning back, it's easy to steer. Exactly the same as on a push bike riding with no hands. You throw your weight to the inside, and then back up again forcing the bike to lean over, thus turning it.

Please explain to me how that is not steering the bike with body position. Anyone.

I am only pointing this out to be argumentative, but for them to say it cant be done at all is wrong, it should say it cant be done whilst holding the solid bar on the front of a sports bike.

I am intrigued now though, so will mount a bar on my pit beast and test it myself. He mentions that he thinks knobly tyres make it possible, so I'll find some street tyres to put on for the purpose of satisfying my curiosity. (That'll make my bike better for the bucket track too).

[Headbanger]

I know why you need to steer, but the article is WRONG!!!

Can a bike be ridden with no hands on the bars? YES.

Only conclusion to be taken from that is... A bike CAN be steered with the body.

The conclusion to be taken is that you can't steer a bike with a locked front end, no matter what input you use, Which is why only dumb fucks have a locked front end and then write articles about not being able to steer.

[Drew]

The conclusion to be taken is that you can't steer a bike with a locked front end, no matter what input you use, Which is why only dumb fucks have a locked front end and then write articles about not being able to steer.

Wasn't a locked front end, it's just a solid mounted bar to frame, instead of the triple clamps I think.

[Pixie]

This is probably the most convincing article I have read about the fallacy of body steering, and why you need to lean to steer:
http://www.superbikeschool.com/machinery/no-bs-machine.php

You obviously didn't go to the link in my first post,then?

[Pixie]

I am perplexed at what Keith says here. Since it's quite easy to ride along with no hands on the bars and negotiate turns. Chris Pfeifer manages to do no handed, full lock circles and drag a hand on the ground at the same time.

A bike can be turned without any pressure on the bars, Keith is WRONG.

Oddly, (or perhaps obviously), the trick to it is leaning your body back. It kinda makes sense to lean back since you are leaning into the turn, perhaps this is what allows the front wheel to steer out from under you and make the bike lean.

Certainly not something that helps in an emergency situation, but very doable anyway.

I suggest you set up a No BS bike like Code did and prove it to us 193398193399

At this writing, we have run nearly 100 riders of all experience levels on this double barred bike. It has made believers out of every single one in the actuality of countersteering of course. At 20 to 35 mph, no matter how much you tug or push or pull or jump around on the bike, the best we saw was that the bike wiggled and became somewhat unstable. Did it turn? Not really. Would it turn at higher speed? Absolutely not.

[Pixie]

The conclusion to be taken is that you can't steer a bike with a locked front end, no matter what input you use, Which is why only dumb fucks have a locked front end and then write articles about not being able to steer.

Ignoramus the No BS bike does not have locked steering

[Headbanger]

Ignoramus the No BS bike does not have locked steering

Big wank, I couldn't give a fuck about the facts.

LMFAO.

besides, I can go around corners on my bicycle without touching the bars, That's good enough for me.

And I'm fuckin awesome so its all good.

[Pixie]

I concur with rok-the-boat. The central and outside diameter of bike tyres are different by design, because of the assistance to turning.

Sure you can use flat car tyres, sure you can still turn, but the handling is poor, which is why it is seldom done anymore.

Bollocks.This is as wrong as the body steering theory. The parabolic curve of the tyre profile ensures that the bike CoG drops slightly when the bike is countersteered into a corner.
This will make the bike stable in a lean and require energy input into the steering to bring it upright again.This is in combination with the steering geometry of the bike and the lateral tension angle of the front tyre in a turn and other factors..193415
That's why some tyres suit some bikes and not others

[newbould]

No hands steering on a push bike (aqnd therefore on a motorbike) is done by countersteering with your body then leaning into the ocrner - still countersteering first. Go out and do it. You give a little flick of weight to the left to wobble the front wheel that direction - when the bike leans right in response you balance it round the corner . All from memory but not from too many years ago.

[Headbanger]

No hands steering on a push bike (aqnd therefore on a motorbike) is done by countersteering with your body then leaning into the ocrner - still countersteering first. Go out and do it. You give a little flick of weight to the left to wobble the front wheel that direction - when the bike leans right in response you balance it round the corner . All from memory but not from too many years ago.

Yep, I'm aware of that, I recorgnise the wiggle of the bike for what it is, and I'm sure I could corner a bike with a second set of handle bars as long as the front end wasn't locked solid, Hence my calling locking the front end the work of a fuckwit.

Hence lots of noise being made as it turns out the front end on the bike all these drop-kicks couldn't corner wasn't locked in place after all, Useless bastards couldn't instigate a bit of counter-steering with their bodies. Might as well be pushing prams.

[Drew]

I suggest you set up a No BS bike like Code did and prove it to us 193398193399

At this writing, we have run nearly 100 riders of all experience levels on this double barred bike. It has made believers out of every single one in the actuality of countersteering of course. At 20 to 35 mph, no matter how much you tug or push or pull or jump around on the bike, the best we saw was that the bike wiggled and became somewhat unstable. Did it turn? Not really. Would it turn at higher speed? Absolutely not.So you're saying a bike cannot be ridden no hands?


No hands steering on a push bike (aqnd therefore on a motorbike) is done by countersteering with your body then leaning into the ocrner - still countersteering first. Go out and do it. You give a little flick of weight to the left to wobble the front wheel that direction - when the bike leans right in response you balance it round the corner . All from memory but not from too many years ago.

Never said it didn't involve counter steering, all I said was this. "A bike does not turn, with body positioning alone", is an incorrect statement. It can clearly be turned with nothing more than body input.

[Pixie]

So you're saying a bike cannot be ridden no hands?



Never said it didn't involve counter steering, all I said was this. "A bike does not turn, with body positioning alone", is an incorrect statement. It can clearly be turned with nothing more than body input.
Ok it is easily proven.
Find yourself a nice straight downhill section of road.Head down it in a high gear so that engine braking does not slow you down too quickly.
Once going, place your hands on the tank,and do what ever you want,throw your weight this way and that,push down on the pegs,what ever.
If you can make the bike do more than wobble or take on a very wide arc let us know.
Better still, if you can steer the bike in this manner through a slalom of cones and can do it in front of me,I will give you $1000.

[Drew]

I grow tired of repeating myself. I am not making stuff up. I am not saying I can do something no-one else can do. I'm saying a bike can be turned with our hands off the bars.

It is harder with your hands on the tank, possibly because your weight stays more forward than when leaning back.

[Pixie]

I've tried the above.
It's harder with your hands on the tank because they are not on the bars to do the necessary countersteering. :laugh:

[roogazza]

I tried a bit of this pushing and pulling on the bars Saturday on an early morning ride. I came to the conclusion I'd never really thought about it, I just did it naturally as part of steering a bike.

I do remember the first time I took a Mach4 Kawasaki to Levin Race circuit, It wobbled so much I had turned the central steering damper up really tight during the race. Coming back into the pits I very nearly fell off the thing the steering would not turn ! I had to come to a stop. Unnerving at the time. G.

[manxkiwi]

I saw a great photo in a mag a few months back, that was talking about 'steering'. It was a 250 GP, Mika Kallio was one rider with two others all line astern. 1st bike was in the turn witht the front wheel pointing into the turn. 2nd bike was mid entry and the front wheel was pointing slightly outwards. The bike at the back however was just initiating the turn and the front wheel was pointing way outside of the turn! Looked like he was losing it or in the middle of a tank slapper! Was a great shot and graphically showed how extremely the top racer guys use this to their advantage.

[Drew]

I tried a bit of this pushing and pulling on the bars Saturday on an early morning ride. I came to the conclusion I'd never really thought about it, I just did it naturally as part of steering a bike.

I do remember the first time I took a Mach4 Kawasaki to Levin Race circuit, It wobbled so much I had turned the central steering damper up really tight during the race. Coming back into the pits I very nearly fell off the thing the steering would not turn ! I had to come to a stop. Unnerving at the time. G.

My Titan 500 was the same, had to have the centre steering damper so tight to corner it, the thing was hard to ride in a straight line. Due to not being able to weave from side to side at low speed.

[Mikkel]

Alright, let's stop the non-sense. Drew is correct, you can affect a change of direction without using counter-steering. I've done so myself and I have seen it done plenty of times.
And no, it will never be viable substitution for proper steering - which relies on the counter-steering effect.

Anyone who claims otherwise should take the time to watch the bit starting at 1:50 in this video:
<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/xBw0yH509lw&hl=en_GB&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/xBw0yH509lw&hl=en_GB&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

[MSTRS]

Alright, let's stop the non-sense. Drew is correct, you can affect a change of direction without using counter-steering. I've done so myself and I have seen it done plenty of times.
And no, it will never be viable substitution for proper steering - which relies on the counter-steering effect.



Correct. Try using body-steer, with hands off the bars, at 'higher' speeds and see how tight you CAN'T turn the bike.
The speed you are rolling at, coupled with the steering geometry of your particular bike, will determine just what sort of turn radius is achieveable.
And if you reckon you are doing the body-steer at road speeds, but with your hands on the bars, then like it or not, you are still counter-steering through the bars.

[Drew]

Correct. Try using body-steer, with hands off the bars, at 'higher' speeds and see how tight you CAN'T turn the bike.
The speed you are rolling at, coupled with the steering geometry of your particular bike, will determine just what sort of turn radius is achieveable.
And if you reckon you are doing the body-steer at road speeds, but with your hands on the bars, then like it or not, you are still counter-steering through the bars.

Condescending prick aren't ya. Try and wrap your never wrong squash around this though.

The article written by Keith Code, says they were doing the experiment at 25-30mph, at those speeds it is fuckin easy to turn the bike quite noticibly with your hands off the bars. He says they could get little more than a wobble whilst holding onto the rigid bar on the bike they set up, which proves a bike cannot be steered with the body. I am saying the statement is incorrect.

I have been out playing around to figure out what happens when riding no handed, here's the skinny.

When you first lean off the side of the bike, it leans in the opposite direction. Then when you stop leaning the bike starts to come over in the same direction. It's simple physics. The initial lean of the bike steers the front wheel away from the turn, then when the bike starts to lean with you it has effectively done the same as "counter steering".

But THE WHOLE THING was done with nothing more than body positioning.

Pfft, and a mentor to boot. I pity the poor sap you're rubbing off on.

[Mikkel]

Correct. Try using body-steer, with hands off the bars, at 'higher' speeds and see how tight you CAN'T turn the bike.
The speed you are rolling at, coupled with the steering geometry of your particular bike, will determine just what sort of turn radius is achieveable.
And if you reckon you are doing the body-steer at road speeds, but with your hands on the bars, then like it or not, you are still counter-steering through the bars.

Yup. The real issue is really the speed at which you steer - not your actual rate of turn, but how quickly you can adjust your rate of turn.

Even at speed, if you hang your arse off, the bike will eventually adjust itself to accommodate the shift of the center of mass relative to the bike's contact patches. This will equate a certain turning rate, but the time it takes to reach that equilibrium, without counter steering, will see you running off the road on anything but the most gentle of bends.

The really clever thing about counter steering is that it allows you to easily tip the bike - very quickly shifting the center of mass relative to the line described by the contact patches. If you think about it - compare how long it takes for the bike to get any appreciative lean by hanging yourself off without counter steering with the lean achieved by a nearly effort-less push on one handlebar.

[Pixie]

Alright, let's stop the non-sense. Drew is correct, you can affect a change of direction without using counter-steering. I've done so myself and I have seen it done plenty of times.
And no, it will never be viable substitution for proper steering - which relies on the counter-steering effect.

Anyone who claims otherwise should take the time to watch the bit starting at 1:50 in this video:
<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/xBw0yH509lw&hl=en_GB&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/xBw0yH509lw&hl=en_GB&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

What the guy in the clip is doing is well below the speed at which the inherent stability of a rotating wheel becomes the predominant force keeping the steering straight.
Any idiot knows that if you lean a bike over at low speed the front wheel will flop in the direction of the lean.
Lets see you or Chris Pfieffer do it at 50 kmh
Physics is physics

"If you think about it - compare how long it takes for the bike to get any appreciative lean by hanging yourself off without counter steering with the lean achieved by a nearly effort-less push on one handlebar."

"Like turning an oil tanker ship, start at noon and be on the turning arc at around 1:00 PM. It wasn't very smooth and it wasn't very effective."

[MSTRS]

Condescending prick aren't ya. Try and wrap your never wrong squash around this though.

The article written by Keith Code, says they were doing the experiment at 25-30mph, at those speeds it is fuckin easy to turn the bike quite noticibly with your hands off the bars. He says they could get little more than a wobble whilst holding onto the rigid bar on the bike they set up, which proves a bike cannot be steered with the body. I am saying the statement is incorrect.

I have been out playing around to figure out what happens when riding no handed, here's the skinny.

When you first lean off the side of the bike, it leans in the opposite direction. Then when you stop leaning the bike starts to come over in the same direction. It's simple physics. The initial lean of the bike steers the front wheel away from the turn, then when the bike starts to lean with you it has effectively done the same as "counter steering".

But THE WHOLE THING was done with nothing more than body positioning.

Pfft, and a mentor to boot. I pity the poor sap you're rubbing off on.

Ya what? Condescending? Prick? Poor mentor?
You, sir, seem to have a problem with comprehension.
You also seem to have a problem with keeping a bike on the track, from what I've seen of your numerous attempts at racing.
One wonders whether you might try steering with the bars, instead of your 'fabulous' body steer style. I'm sure you will find yourself staying on the track side of the tyre wall for a start.

[Mikkel]

What the guy in the clip is doing is well below the speed at which the inherent stability of a rotating wheel becomes the predominant force keeping the steering straight.
Any idiot knows that if you lean a bike over at low speed the front wheel will flop in the direction of the lean.
Lets see you or Chris Pfieffer do it at 50 kmh
Physics is physics

And you apparently know naught about it. (Btw. it's physics are physics - and it's a completely banal sentence, devoid of any information, too. No more interesting, or relevant, than "Cupcakes are cupcakes" or "Rat poison is rat poison".)

And yes, "any idiot" now know that you can indeed turn a bike without using the bars - and even turn it tightly. Even you. No one ever advocated that riding no-hands is a viable approach for street riding.

"The inherent stability of a rotating wheel" is present from the second it starts turning and increases proportionally to the angular velocity. The slowest speed at which you can ride forward, without wobbling too much, is the speed at which it become the predominant force in regards to keeping you balanced.

[tcpdump]

Hi,

I don't have any issues counter steering at speeds over 30km/h but below that speed I find it very difficult.

Is this normal or do I need more practice?

Thanks.

[p.dath]

Hi,

I don't have any issues counter steering at speeds over 30km/h but below that speed I find it very difficult.

Is this normal or do I need more practice?

Thanks.

Your observation is 100% correct. You can't counter steer or counter balance below about 30km/h. Don't know the reason. Probably something to do with the gyroscopic forces being too weak or something.

[MSTRS]

Your observation is 100% correct. You can't counter steer or counter balance below about 30km/h. Don't know the reason. Probably something to do with the gyroscopic forces being too weak or something.

I think it's a little lower than 30kph...closer to 20? Whatever, you are about right on the reason, though. Cornering at 'speed' requires the bike/rider to lean, primarily to counteract the centripetal force that would have you otherwise drift to the outside of your turn, and secondarily to counteract the gyroscopic effect of the wheel that would have you otherwise continue in a straight line. Something like that anyway. Someone in a white labcoat c/w pocket protector will be along shortly to clarify the physics of it all...I only know enough to make it sound good. :blink:
At low speeds, the forces generated (gyro- and centri-) are not great enough to require that counteracting lean, so a simple turn (and hold) of the bars is all that is required to change direction. Of course, it is entirely possible to lean the bike into the turn, which will help turn tighter, but the rider must correspondingly lean away from the turn to keep the bike balanced.

[Drew]

Ya what? Condescending? Prick? Poor mentor?
You, sir, seem to have a problem with comprehension.
You also seem to have a problem with keeping a bike on the track, from what I've seen of your numerous attempts at racing.
One wonders whether you might try steering with the bars, instead of your 'fabulous' body steer style. I'm sure you will find yourself staying on the track side of the tyre wall for a start.

For fuck sake man. Actually read what I am writing, rather than assume you know what I'm saying and this will go a lot easier.

Yes, you are being condescending. Look it up and then read what you have written and tell me I'm wrong.

I am not saying I turn a bike with my body rather than counter steering, never even hinted it.

I am saying that what Keith wrote is an incorrect statement. Just because the bike with solid bar cannot be turned whilst holding said bar, does not mean a bike cant be turned with body position at all. That's it, nothing else, the long and the short of it.

What you have seen of my racing attempts? It is fair enough to call me a crasher I suppose, but unless you wanna come show me how great you are on the track, you can go eat shit before trying to give me advice.

[tcpdump]

Of course, it is entirely possible to lean the bike into the turn, which will help turn tighter, but the rider must correspondingly lean away from the turn to keep the bike balanced.

I've been meaning to ask this for a while now. When do you lean with the bike and when do you lean the other way?
Do you lean with the bike on higher speeds and "counter lean" on low speeds?

Thanks.

[sinfull]

I've been meaning to ask this for a while now. When do you lean with the bike and when do you lean the other way?
Do you lean with the bike on higher speeds and "counter lean" on low speeds?

Thanks.
No !!!!!!!!!

[p.dath]

If you are going around 30km/h or faster, lean with the bike in the direction you are turning. So push down/lean on the left bar, and lean left, to turn left. You don't really need to worry about leaning with your body for a little while when your starting. It will happen naturally. Pushing down on the bar (or pulling the other bar) is what you'll want to learn first.
My experience is it takes about 3 months of riding before you can start to appreciate counter-steering.

Below 30km/h (or perhaps a tad lower as suggested by MSTRS) you steer by actually turning the bars, and you tend to be vertical. There isn't enough force for you to counteract by leaning.

[MSTRS]

I am saying that what Keith wrote is an incorrect statement. Just because the bike with solid bar cannot be turned whilst holding said bar, does not mean a bike cant be turned with body position at all. That's it, nothing else, the long and the short of it.

Whoa! Calling Keith Code wrong is very brave of you.
I've not read his book, but from what I understand of the fixed bars experiment, the idea was to deny bar instigated lean to turn the bike. Since push/pull on the bars wasn't gonna work, the riders had to lean, and indeed the bike did turn. But not enough at the speed they were doing to actually get around the corner they were trying to negotiate..
We all know that a bike can turn by leaning alone, but not effectively for real-world riding. So how is Keith wrong?

[MSTRS]

I've been meaning to ask this for a while now. When do you lean with the bike and when do you lean the other way?
Do you lean with the bike on higher speeds and "counter lean" on low speeds?

Thanks.

The 'counter lean' is only useful in situations like carpark handling skill sessions, where you wish to turn the bike in a full-lock circle. In the real world of riding on the road etc, it isn't necessary.

[Mikkel]

Whoa! Calling Keith Code wrong is very brave of you.
I've not read his book, but from what I understand of the fixed bars experiment, the idea was to deny bar instigated lean to turn the bike. Since push/pull on the bars wasn't gonna work, the riders had to lean, and indeed the bike did turn. But not enough at the speed they were doing to actually get around the corner they were trying to negotiate..
We all know that a bike can turn by leaning alone, but not effectively for real-world riding. So how is Keith wrong?

You guys are just arguing semantics now.

What does Keith Code mean when he says you can not turn the bike? If he means you can not turn it all, then he is - as Drew says - incorrect. And so are those who agree with Keith Code's explanation of physical reality.
If Keith, by "can not turn", means that you can not negotiate a corner effectively - in most circumstances - without applying counter steering, then he is correct. But the people who interpret this as to mean "can not turn the bike at all, without counter steering" are still incorrect and have merely misunderstood Keith.

Now let's move forward.

[BMWST?]

This is probably the most convincing article I have read about the fallacy of body steering, and why you need to lean to steer:
http://www.superbikeschool.com/machinery/no-bs-machine.php

the front wheel needs to be able to "steer" but you can lean and turn a motorcycle without actually touching the handlebars.The front wheel is probably doing what it would do if you actully steered with the bars....

[p.dath]

This is outside my area of knowledge, but I decided to read up more about it. The best article I found on the subject was, not surprisingly (now that I have found it), on Wikipedia.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Countersteering

I think this quote sums it up best:

At the same time, the rider technique of applying pressure to the handlebars to initiate a lean is not always necessary, since, on a sufficiently light bike (especially a bicycle), the rider can initiate a lean and turn by shifting body weight, called counter-lean by some authors.[1][2][3] Documented physical experimentation shows that on heavy bikes (many motorcycles) shifting body weight is less effective at initiating leans.[4]

So basically, the heavier the two wheeled vehicle is, the less chance you have of being able to turn using only body weight. So perhaps a super-light 50cc trick motorbike with a slip of a girl rider might be able to do it, while a 200kg cruiser with a 100kg rider might make it next to impossible.

[FlyingKiwi]

A bike will automatically lean if you are counter-steering right!!! More counter-steer= more lean.

[p.dath]

Let me add this quote as well:

It is often claimed that two-wheeled vehicles can be steered using only weight shifts. While this is true for small "trim" inputs to direction, complex maneuvers are not possible using weightshifting alone because even for a light machine there is insufficient control authority.[6] Although on a sufficiently light bike (especially a bicycle), the rider can initiate a lean and turn by shifting body weight,[1], there is no evidence that complex maneuvers can be performed by bodyweight alone [4].

There are some mathematical formulas for those interested in disputing it (don't ask me - I don't know).

[p.dath]

Wow, this is the best [and most believable] explanation I have seen of why counter-steering works. You need to read the bit beforehand about how a motorcycle is an inverted pendulum, and the theory or turning. I'll try and quote the most important bits.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Countersteering


A single-track vehicle such as a bicycle or a motorcycle is an inverted pendulum—it will fall over unless balanced.


A bike can negotiate a curve only when the combined center of mass of bike and rider leans toward the inside of the turn at an angle appropriate for the velocity and the radius of the turn ...


When riding a bicycle or a motorcycle, countersteering is a method of initiating a turn by a small, momentary turn of the front wheel, usually via the handlebars, in the opposite (counter) direction. This moves the pivot point (the wheels' contact patches) out from under the center of mass to establish the lean angle for a turn. While necessary at all speeds, the need to countersteer becomes more noticeable as speed increases.

Hence, to turn to the right, the rider first throws the bike off balance by momentarily pointing the front wheel slightly to the left. The center of mass of the bike plus rider will continue in a straight line, but the contact patches of the tires move to the left with respect to this straight line.

So basically counter-steering works by deliberately unbalancing the bike for a short period of time, so that your centre of mass is shifted out of alignment with the bike and placed over the inside of the corner. And then you supply sufficient speed to prevent the bike falling over, effectively pulling you around the corner.

[Mikkel]

Wow, this is the best [and most believable] explanation I have seen of why counter-steering works. You need to read the bit beforehand about how a motorcycle is an inverted pendulum, and the theory or turning.

It's all good - but belief has got nothing to do with it...

[p.dath]

A further summary about no-hands steering (same article):


No hands

This is how countersteering works when riding no-hands. In order to turn left, a rider applies a momentary torque, either at the seat via the legs or in the torso that causes the bike itself to lean to the right, called counter lean by some authors.[3] The combined center of mass of the bike and rider is only lowered, of course. However, if the front of the bike is free to swivel about its steering axis, the lean to the right will cause it to steer to the right by some combination of gyroscopic precession (as mentioned above), ground reaction forces, gravitational force on an off-axis center of mass, or simply the inertia of an off-axis center of mass, depending on the exact geometry and mass distribution of the particular bike, and the amount of torque and the speed at which it is applied.[1][9]

This countersteering to the right causes the ground contact to move to the right of the center of mass, as the bike moves forward, thus generating a leftward lean. Finally the front end steers to the left and the bike enters the left turn. The amount of leftward steering necessary to balance the leftward lean appropriate for the forward speed and radius of the turn is controlled by the torque generated by the rider, again either at the seat or in the torso.

To straighten back out of the turn, the rider simply reverses the procedure for entering it: cause the bike to lean farther to the left; this causes it to steer farther to the left which moves the wheel contact patches farther to the left, eventually reducing the leftward lean and exiting the turn.

The reason this no-hands steering is less effective on heavy bikes, such as motorcycles, is that the rider weighs so much less than the bike that leaning the torso with respect to the bike does not cause the bike to lean far enough to generate anything but the shallowest turns. No-hands riders may be able to keep a heavy bike centered in a lane and negotiate shallow highway turns, but not much else.

[rok-the-boat]

My tyres rolling as cones explanation seems to have been mostly ignored (one agreed, one dissented - rest forgotten). Counter steering gets the bike down. What gets you round the corner is the profile of the tyres - they work like cones when you lean over. If you can't lean over - going too fast / corner too tight - countersteer to get the bike down. The tyres do the rest. You don't countersteer round the corner, you do it to get/keep the bike down. Am I the only one who sees this?

At slow speed, the wheel turns towords the corner, and as you speed up it becomes more difficult to do that (depending upon the mass/speed of the bike - the heavier and the faster the more difficult it becomes).

As you speed up a little, you have to lean to get the bike down. You could countersteer on purpose but there is no need and the bike would be too responsive - easy to over-cook it. When going faster, it becomes essential to countersteer (but moderate speed for one person is fast for another so difficult to talk about it accurately).

Look no hands: You can corner at low speed with no hands because the wheel turns as you lean. Try it in a fast corner and you won't be returning here to post the result.

[rok-the-boat]

OK - did a search - found a link to the 'cone'.
http://www.ommriders.org/t/01/sub.jsp?p=3837

Imagine this: two plastic coffee cups stuck together at the wide ends. They resemble a tyre, right? Now roll 'it' and see what happens.

[p.dath]

My tyres rolling as cones explanation seems to have been mostly ignored (one agreed, one dissented - rest forgotten). Counter steering gets the bike down. What gets you round the corner is the profile of the tyres - they work like cones when you lean over. If you can't lean over - going too fast / corner too tight - countersteer to get the bike down. The tyres do the rest. You don't countersteer round the corner, you do it to get/keep the bike down. Am I the only one who sees this?

I guess I dissent after the reading I have done - but do agree the cone shape greatly assists the process of the turn and the bikes stability. I also agree that counter-steering gets the bike down (and is absolutely essential to a turn).

Consider a left turn, after you have commenced the turn (counter steering no longer in effect, bike leaned over). Your tyres grip at the bottom of your bike (this bit is important). They are trying to pull the bike around to the left. However the top of your bike (actually the centre of gravity) wants to go straight ahead, and pushes the top of the bike right (actually the centre of gravity wants to go straight ahead, but if your turning left it appears to push the top of the bike to the right). How do you counteract the force trying to tip the top of your bike over? You lean to the left (or rather, you are already leaning at this stage).

If you did not have a cone shaped tyre your front tyre would have a sudden reduction in grip. Bad. So it needs to be coned shaped to keep as much of a contact patch as possible to stick on the road. But it's not the reason you turn.

[Drew]

Whoa! Calling Keith Code wrong is very brave of you.
I've not read his book, but from what I understand of the fixed bars experiment, the idea was to deny bar instigated lean to turn the bike. Since push/pull on the bars wasn't gonna work, the riders had to lean, and indeed the bike did turn. But not enough at the speed they were doing to actually get around the corner they were trying to negotiate..
We all know that a bike can turn by leaning alone, but not effectively for real-world riding. So how is Keith wrong?Mr Code is not wrong, the statement he made IS. A motorcycle can be turned without pushing the inside handle bar. It is not an effective method of cornering, and I have flat out said so a couple of times now.

I got pissed off that my point was being missed, it's an ego thing.

It's the statement that is wrong, not the meaning.

[Pixie]

OK - did a search - found a link to the 'cone'.
http://www.ommriders.org/t/01/sub.jsp?p=3837

Imagine this: two plastic coffee cups stuck together at the wide ends. They resemble a tyre, right? Now roll 'it' and see what happens.

If this were true bikes would only be able to make turns of one fixed radius,And bicycles couldn't turn at all.
The cone theory is just a very poor attempt by some people to explain pneumatic trail.

[MSTRS]

Mr Code is not wrong, the statement he made IS. A motorcycle can be turned without pushing the inside handle bar. It is not an effective method of cornering, and I have flat out said so a couple of times now.

I got pissed off that my point was being missed, it's an ego thing.

It's the statement that is wrong, not the meaning.Does he categorically state that a bike "can't turn without bar input"? Or does he mean "without countersteering"? World of difference in those...



This is how countersteering works when riding no-hands. In order to turn left, a rider applies a momentary torque, either at the seat via the legs or in the torso that causes the bike itself to lean to the right, called counter lean by some authors.[3] The combined center of mass of the bike and rider is only lowered, of course. However, if the front of the bike is free to swivel about its steering axis, the lean to the right will cause it to steer to the right by some combination of gyroscopic precession (as mentioned above), ground reaction forces, gravitational force on an off-axis center of mass, or simply the inertia of an off-axis center of mass, depending on the exact geometry and mass distribution of the particular bike, and the amount of torque and the speed at which it is applied.[1][9]

This countersteering to the right causes the ground contact to move to the right of the center of mass, as the bike moves forward, thus generating a leftward lean. Finally the front end steers to the left and the bike enters the left turn. The amount of leftward steering necessary to balance the leftward lean appropriate for the forward speed and radius of the turn is controlled by the torque generated by the rider, again either at the seat or in the torso.

To straighten back out of the turn, the rider simply reverses the procedure for entering it: cause the bike to lean farther to the left; this causes it to steer farther to the left which moves the wheel contact patches farther to the left, eventually reducing the leftward lean and exiting the turn.

The reason this no-hands steering is less effective on heavy bikes, such as motorcycles, is that the rider weighs so much less than the bike that leaning the torso with respect to the bike does not cause the bike to lean far enough to generate anything but the shallowest turns. No-hands riders may be able to keep a heavy bike centered in a lane and negotiate shallow highway turns, but not much else.

The bolded bits I'm not so sure about. Thinking about that part of the process, I come up with visualising an upright tyre rolling forward...tyre's contact patch is dead centre...turn the tyre to the right (still upright) and it resists that turn...it wants to keep going in the original direction...which means that the forces acting on the contact patch move it forward (in the original direction of travel)...effectively, the patch moves towards the outside of the turn (ie the left side of the tyre)...the whole thing is now quite unstable...it wants to lean to the left, while the tyre is actually pointing to the right...because the forces acting on the contact patch are greater than those acting on the tyre's facing direction, the left lean turns the tyre's direction of travel back towards the left...so now the tyre and all forces acting on it are once more in balance, it happily keeps rolling forwards..because the contact patch is now off-center (to the left) and because of gravity, the tyre is actually trying to fall over, but the gyroscopic effect of it revolving tries to keep it upright...as long as those two forces are in balance, the tyre will describe an arc to the left as it moves forward...how tight that arc is, depends on the amount of force applied when the tyre was first turned, coupled with the speed of rotation...for a given radius of turn, the faster the tyre rotates, the more force is required to shift the contact patch further off the centre line...which is why body steering works at low speeds, but decreases in effectiveness as the speed increases...requiring the push (or pull) on the bars (what we call countersteering)...which, at higher still speeds, leads to using both bar- and body- steering (leaning off the bike).
It's all about maintaining a balance of the forces acting on the bike, and managing the results of any change of input (rider or bike), in order to have control over where the bike goes.

[p.dath]

The bolded bits I'm not so sure about. Thinking about that part of the process, I come up with visualising an upright tyre rolling forward...tyre's contact patch is dead centre...turn the tyre to the right (still upright) and it resists that turn...it wants to keep going in the original direction...which means that the forces acting on the contact patch move it forward (in the original direction of travel)...effectively, the patch moves towards the outside of the turn (ie the left side of the tyre)...the whole thing is now quite unstable...it wants to lean to the left, while the tyre is actually pointing to the right...

Here is my take on reading it. The tyre turns right, which thanks to the tyres grip wants to pull the bottom of the bike right. It only acts on the bottom of the tyre because that is obviously were the contact patch is with the ground.
However the forces continue to act on the centre of mass. Lets pretend that is at a place we call the "top" of the bike. That force wants to continue going straight ahead (nothing has acted to change that direction yet). So the bottom of the bike is being pulled right, the top is being pushed straight ahead, which forces the bike to tip over to the left.
Now that the centre of mass is leaning over the left hand side of the bike, you stop counter steering and start steering left to prevent yourself from falling over.


The article does mention the gyroscopic affect that you speak off, but says the effect is not large (in their example, it has a 12% effect). They said the gyroscopic effect is controlled by the mass of the wheel, the mass of the rider, and the angular velocity of the wheel.

[MSTRS]

Here is my take on reading it. The tyre turns right, which thanks to the tyres grip wants to pull the bottom of the bike right. It only acts on the bottom of the tyre because that is obviously were the contact patch is with the ground.
However the forces continue to act on the centre of mass. Lets pretend that is at a place we call the "top" of the bike. That force wants to continue going straight ahead (nothing has acted to change that direction yet). So the bottom of the bike is being pulled right, the top is being pushed straight ahead, which forces the bike to tip over to the left.
Now that the centre of mass is leaning over the left hand side of the bike, you stop counter steering and start steering left to prevent yourself from falling over.



That's about right. But at no point does the contact patch move to the side of intial push....when that happens the tyre remains upright...the fact that the top of the bike wants to continue straight ahead, but the tyre is pointing (to the right) means that the patch is moved to the furthest forward contact area of the bottom of the tyre...that is, to the left of the tyre centre...that is, the part actually touching the road.

[steve_t]

Here is my take on reading it. The tyre turns right, which thanks to the tyres grip wants to pull the bottom of the bike right. It only acts on the bottom of the tyre because that is obviously were the contact patch is with the ground.
However the forces continue to act on the centre of mass. Lets pretend that is at a place we call the "top" of the bike. That force wants to continue going straight ahead (nothing has acted to change that direction yet). So the bottom of the bike is being pulled right, the top is being pushed straight ahead, which forces the bike to tip over to the left.
Now that the centre of mass is leaning over the left hand side of the bike, you stop counter steering and start steering left to prevent yourself from falling over.



Exactly
10 chars

[MSTRS]

I've tried to draw what I'm visualising...
The grey oblong is the tyre, the black oval is the contact patch, the red dot is the point of greatest contact with the road, the green lines show direction of travel and patch centre.
The red dot 'wants' to stay in the centre of the black oval, but what the rider does when steering is move the dot, whereby the bike/tyre adjusts to bring that dot back to the centre.
First one is straight ahead, all forces in balance.
Second one shows what happens with a nudge forwards on the left bar.
Third one shows the tyre moving back into a state of balance.
Fourth one shows that balance achieved. Which is where it will remain, unless more input occurs.

[rok-the-boat]

If this were true bikes would only be able to make turns of one fixed radius,And bicycles couldn't turn at all.
The cone theory is just a very poor attempt by some people to explain pneumatic trail.

The cone is not fixed, as you lean over the cone angle changes. Read up on it - the stuff is out there.

[Mikkel]

The cone is not fixed, as you lean over the cone angle changes. Read up on it - the stuff is out there.

Counter-steering files... the truth is out there.

[queue ominous music]

[boomer]

Mr Code is not wrong, the statement he made IS. A motorcycle can be turned without pushing the inside handle bar. It is not an effective method of cornering, and I have flat out said so a couple of times now.

I got pissed off that my point was being missed, it's an ego thing.

It's the statement that is wrong, not the meaning.


You should know by now Drew the level of a) intelligence and b) practical riding skills you're up against in this thread.

I'd hold my hand up and let these people talk about shit until they;re blue in the face, Keith code told D path to keep 40 60 throttle control... !!! ( imagine whats going through that poor blokes head ALL THE TIME, as he pootles along trying to keep his bike from falling over ... "40 60 .. 40 .. 60.. 40.. 60.. OH FARK..... up hill.. now how do i compensate...... does not compute.... exterminate, exterminate.. exterminate!!!!!")


Enough said mate, walk away and let them think they know what they like, your jobs not to convert idiots into rational thinkers/do-ers



<object height="344" width="425">


<embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/aBPt-GuGyB4&hl=en_US&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" height="344" width="425"></object>

[Smifffy]

Read this:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Countersteering

Explains the physics, the natural Vs over-thinking approach, the no-hands, the lean and the rest of it. It cites a number of refs including a link to Code's no BS machine.

Read all the refs too, then go out & ride: ;) ;) ;)

1. ^ a b c d Fajans, Joel (July 2000). "Steering in bicycles and motorcycles" (PDF). American Journal of Physics 68 (7): 654–659. doi:10.1119/1.19504. http://socrates.berkeley.edu/~fajans/pub/pdffiles/SteerBikeAJP.PDF. Retrieved 2006-08-04.
2. ^ Cocco, Gaetano (2004). Motorcycle Design and Technology. Motorbooks. p. 25. ISBN 978-0-7603-1990-1.
3. ^ a b Foale, Tony (2006). Motorcycle Handling and Chassis Design, the Art and Science (2nd ed.). Tony Foale Designs. p. 4–7. ISBN 978-84-933286-3-4.
4. ^ a b Gromer, Cliff (2001-02-01). "STEER GEAR So how do you actually turn a motorcycle?". Popular Mechanics. http://www.popularmechanics.com/outdoors/outdoors/1277436.html. Retrieved 2006-08-07.
5. ^ Jones, David (1970). "The Stability of the Bicycle" (PDF). http://www.phys.lsu.edu/faculty/gonzalez/Teaching/Phys7221/vol59no9p51_56.pdf. Retrieved 2009-03-31.
6. ^ Evangelou, S, 2004 "The Control and Stability Analysis of Two-Wheeled Road Vehicles", PhD Thesis, Imperial College London
7. ^ a b Wilson, David Gordon; Jim Papadopoulos (2004). Bicycling Science (Third ed.). The MIT Press. pp. 270–272. ISBN 0-262-73154-1.
8. ^ a b c Cossalter, Vittore (2006). Motorcycle Dynamics (Second ed.). Lulu.com. pp. 241–342. ISBN 978-1-4303-0861-4.
9. ^ Brandt, Jobst (1997-09-16). "What keeps the bicycle upright?". sheldonbrown.com. http://www.sheldonbrown.com/brandt/gyro.html. Retrieved 2007-10-17.
10. ^ Forester, John (1993). Effective Cycling (Sixth ed.). The MIT Press. pp. 204–205. ISBN 0-262-56070-4.
11. ^ "Emergency: Instant Turn". League of American Bicyclists. http://www.bikeleague.org/resources/better/miscellaneous.php. Retrieved 2008-08-07.
12. ^ Jon Taylor & Stefan Bartlett (2009). How to be a Better Rider. Institute of Advanced Motorists. ISBN 978-0956223913.
13. ^ "Novice Motorcycle Riders to Learn Positive Steering". Biker 24/7 News. 29 June 2009. http://www.biker247.com/News/10785.asp. Retrieved 2009-12-31.
14. ^ Crouch, Tom D. (1989). The Bishop's Boys. New York: W. W. Norton. p. 170. ISBN 0-393-30695-X. http://books.google.com/books?id=ytw11Bmxcz8C&pg=PA170&lpg=PA170&dq=I+have+asked+dozens+of+bicycle+riders+how+they+ turn+to&source=web&ots=I4sE9HF0Lx&sig=aHXI0sA0XwTVmIT1rjCGAJPWAlc&hl=en&sa=X&oi=book_result&resnum=4&ct=result.
15. ^ Kelly, Fred C. (1989). The Wright Brothers. Courier Dover Publications. pp. 297–299. ISBN 9780486260563.

[edit] External links

* Balance and Steering, by Tony Foale
* "No B.S. Machine" physical experimentation

[rok-the-boat]

Read this:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Countersteering


Yeah I read that - half OK, half not in my opinion. Just because it is on a Wiki does not make it all 100% right. I learned what I know years ago. Can you corner tightly at high speed no hands? Why not? Have you ridden a big heavy 1979s 4 cyl around a corner at high speed on a regular basis? Have you ridden fast off road, speedway counter steering style? (try doing it slow - you need to get to a certain speed break thru point - impossible on a road bike unless you have serious rear wheel spin - anyway, this method of steering is different - more like rear wheel steering if you ask me). I come from 35 years of biking and learned 'my paradigm' years back. I could be wrong, often am, but am not convinced to change my thinking at all. Luckily, our bikes get around corners regardless of how we think we do it ...

[Pixie]

Counter-steering files... the truth is out there.

[queue ominous music]

And about as believable as the X-files

[Pixie]

Read this:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Countersteering


* Balance and Steering, by Tony Foale
* "No B.S. Machine" physical experimentation

Let's have a wiki war
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motorcycle_dynamics
My link has more calculus :bleh:

I put a lot of store in Tony Foale's opinions.

For the book "Motorcycle Chassis Design",he built a bike with a fully adjustable front end.With the rake reduced to nearly zero degrees,he found that:"The most noticeable effect was the total insensitivity of the steering to bumps.Not only could the bike be ridden hands-off,but it could be weaved from side to side across ruts with little effort and no detectable deflection of the steering."

The book explodes many of the myths about motorcycle geometry and how steering actually occurs.

[avgas]

The book explodes many of the myths about motorcycle geometry and how steering actually occurs.

While I found it a great book......it also created many myths for me.
Its funny how facts and figures all go out the window with natural things. Goes to show that some things are shaded in perception.
I suppose thats why somethings feel like autopilot when riding/driving and others just leave us uneasy. I still like a rock solid rear (suspensioned of course) where I know this doesn't improve the handling - but it gives more confidence in my riding.

[avgas]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/countersteering
yay for matlab!!!

[Conquiztador]

For the book "Motorcycle Chassis Design",he built a bike with a fully adjustable front end.With the rake reduced to nearly zero degrees,he found that:"The most noticeable effect was the total insensitivity of the steering to bumps.Not only could the bike be ridden hands-off,but it could be weaved from side to side across ruts with little effort and no detectable deflection of the steering."

The book explodes many of the myths about motorcycle geometry and how steering actually occurs.

You have forgotten to mention the most important factor in stability of the forks/frontwheel: Trail. Here: http://www.american-v.co.uk/technical/handling/geometry/body.html

[scracha]

I'm sorry, can someone please tell me in layman's terms what countersteering is?

[Pixie]

I'm sorry, can someone please tell me in layman's terms what countersteering is?

It's what you are doing,after going for a ride,when you are bullshitting to the barmaid about what a hero biker you are.

[Str8 Jacket]

Here ya go Scracha:

http://cache2.asset-cache.net/xc/84748588.jpg?v=1&c=IWSAsset&k=2&d=A5C9C13351D9C3B76DDFA1223BB0EE5BE88A04D77D4BC135 AC4CE25472D8DFE1