Reading between the lines or wishful thinking? (rideforever.co.nz)

[Mr Skid]

Reading through some of the newer content on rideforver.co.nz and came across these two sections:


Cornering at safe speeds is easier to live with if you're riding a powerful bike, because acceleration helps regain cruising speed quickly once you're through. Low-powered bikes create the temptation to carry more corner speed than is necessary. If you've been travelling at high speeds along a straight section of road, slow down more than you think.

Currently, learner riders are limited to bikes with 250cc engine capacity. Most of these are low powered and quite small physically. You can also ride anything with an engine output of 1.8kW (50cc capacity) or less with just a car licence, as it is not legally considered a motorcycle. From there, engine sizes range up to a maximum of 2,300cc, the equivalent of a mid-sized car.

Larger riders should choose the biggest learner bike permitted. Past the novice stage, choosing the biggest bike you can comfortably support makes more sense: a big rider on a small bike will have a higher 'C of G' (centre of gravity) and hence more difficulty maintaining balance at low speeds than a smaller rider on a heavy bike. Got it?

Maybe I'm looking too closely at the semantics, and taking this out of context, but I find these comments interesting.

In the first quote it's acknowledged that bigger capacity bikes can afford to corner slower, and regain their speed afterwards. Most 250 riders would agree that they need to carry higher corner speed to keep pace with a larger bike.

In the second quote, they point out that most learner bikes are small and low powered. In light of the first quote I'd wonder if the author would have prefered to susbstitute 'under powered' for 'low powered'.

Finally, the other curiosity in there is the comment that "Currently, learner riders are limited to bikes with 250cc engine capacity." Seems superfluous to describe that as the current situaiton, unless there was the possibility that there would be changes in the future.

Thoughts?

[Ixion]

..
Finally, the other curiosity in there is the comment that "Currently, learner riders are limited to bikes with 250cc engine capacity." Seems superfluous to describe that as the current situaiton, unless there was the possibility that there would be changes in the future.

Thoughts?

Yep.There's rumours that soem want it REDUCED to 125cc (as in UK)

[justsomeguy]

Get a life.

[Coyote]

Yep.There's rumours that some want it REDUCED to 125cc (as in UK)
I've heard opposite that it might go to 400cc

[Flyingpony]

Originally Posted by http://www.rideforever.co.nz/ride_smart/control_cornering.html
Cornering at safe speeds is easier to live with if you're riding a powerful bike, because acceleration helps regain cruising speed quickly once you're through. Low-powered bikes create the temptation to carry more corner speed than is necessary.

I think it's all related to safe driving practices, experience, bike handling confidence and being prepared for the unexpected.

[Ixion]

I've heard opposite that it might go to 400cc


Hope you're right. Or that they're sensible enough (if they do change it) to go the Ozzie road and have an approved list. Their's goes to 650's

[Kickaha]

Most 250 riders would agree that they need to carry higher corner speed to keep pace with a larger bike.



Why do you need to keep pace?

[Mr Skid]

Hope you're right. Or that they're sensible enough (if they do change it) to go the Ozzie road and have an approved list. Their's goes to 650's
How long has the limit been set at 250cc? 30 years or so?

I understand the historical reasoning behind it, and also how it's becomming increasingly irrelvant- both due to the potential of 250cc sport bikes (which started over a decade ago) and the arms race in the 600cc-1000cc sports bike market (which makes the step up from a 15 year old 250cc sports bike to a new 1000cc sports bike rather large).

It's obvious that there is some interest in motorcycle safety in the ACC, else they wouldn't have spent the resources on the rideforever website. Although LTNZ would have the dominant position in any decision making about learner limits, I'd speculate (based upon the website) that ACC might be in favor of something other than gutless 250 singes, or highly strung 250 multis.

[thehollowmen]

How long has the limit been set at 250cc? 30 years or so?

I understand the historical reasoning behind it, and also how it's becomming increasingly irrelvant- both due to the potential of 250cc sport bikes (which started over a decade ago) and the arms race in the 600cc-1000cc sports bike market (which makes the step up from a 15 year old 250cc sports bike to a new 1000cc sports bike rather large).

It's obvious that there is some interest in motorcycle safety in the ACC, else they wouldn't have spent the resources on the rideforever website. Although LTNZ would have the dominant position in any decision making about learner limits, I'd speculate (based upon the website) that ACC might be in favor of something other than gutless 250 singes, or highly strung 250 multis.

Well said.
An 800cc cruiser would be safer than the aprilla 250. This is the last year they're making that one though.

[Mr Skid]

Why do you need to keep pace?That's a good point, and one that's often missed in these discussions. Short answer is that you don't need to.

I think the point here is that on a less powerful bike speed is hard won, and as such people are less inclinded to want to give it up.
Thus committing to higher corner speeds, which increases the expectations placed upon the road and the bike.
Is it smart? Probably not. But it does happen.

[Skyryder]

I've always maintained the bigger the bike the safer it is. While the rideforever site does not say that directly I can not help but interpret their comments in this manner. A bin off at 70 k's on a 250 is no different than on a 650 or for that matter a 1200. Same goes for a bin off at 100 k's.
Speed is the common denominator not cc rating.

Skyryder

[Bonez]

Well said.
An 800cc cruiser would be safer than the aprilla 250. This is the last year they're making that one though.
Depends on your definition of safer. The aprilla 250 probably goes around tight corners safer than an 800cc cruiser...................

[Will]

I think that ACC may "relax" the 250 law so that "older" bikes can be ridden by learners. By that, I mean bikes like the old single BSA or Aeriel, or that sort of bike. :ride:

[Motu]

I think a low powered bike that encourages higher corner speeds also produces a better rider,rather than the high powered bike where the rider just squirts the straight bits between corners,they can go fast alright....but never need to stretch themselves like the poor guy on a low powered bike like Mr Skid rides,they learn the unforgiving nature of a big powerful bike rather quickly.The 250 learner rule is long overdue for an overhaul - power to weight is obvious....but not too much on the weight part,I don't think a heavy gutless bike is that great either.I'm just thankful I don't have to learn how to ride in this day and age - in my day we were born knowing how to ride....but not how to drive a computer.....

[Gremlin]

Most of these are low powered and quite small physically.
Small?? I know they are not huge, but I wouldn't call my ZZR small. As my dad remarked, at 6" 3, and 100kg, I don't dwarf the bike.

Some of the naked bikes such as the comet and ?hornet? haven't seemed that small either. But I can't wait to see if I'll be able to get an exemption when I have a restricted to get a bigger (size, not cc) bike...

[justsomeguy]

But I can't wait to see if I'll be able to get an exemption when I have a restricted to get a bigger (size, not cc) bike...

I don't think you'll need an exemption to ride a bigger bike with the same cc.

And the ZZR is one of the bigger ones out there anyway...... that's one of the things I love about it..... doubt most cops (who aren't into bikes) realise it's a 250.

[XP@]

Small?? I know they are not huge, but I wouldn't call my ZZR small. As my dad remarked, at 6" 3, and 100kg, I don't dwarf the bike.

Some of the naked bikes such as the comet and ?hornet? haven't seemed that small either. But I can't wait to see if I'll be able to get an exemption when I have a restricted to get a bigger (size, not cc) bike...
Have you ever thought about an off road or super motard style bike?
I borrowed a motard 250 a few year ago. Was heaps more fun than i could ever imagine but also way too tall for me (about a foot shorter than you)! However not fantastic for more than a few hundy km's at a time.

[Gremlin]

I don't think you'll need an exemption to ride a bigger bike with the same cc.
Who said the same cc??? I'm thinking 400 or 600. :devil2:

With the increased size comes better brakes (well if you look for twin caliper), and sometimes I find (in the rain mostly) that the ZZR seems a little underbraked - which could be related to my weight.

I lurve road bikes, and really love the road look (ie fairings) so off road and motard are out (also want to do heaps of long distance country riding). What I really would like is more room between seat and pegs, and I don't think many 400s would offer more, so another step up would be needed.

But first, I need the restricted (which also means stupid 70 goes) and then I can see about an exemption...

[Mr Skid]

With the increased size comes better brakes (well if you look for twin caliper), and sometimes I find (in the rain mostly) that the ZZR seems a little underbraked - which could be related to my weight.What do you mean by under braked in the rain?
Are you refering to the brakes not scrubbing off speed as well, the front skiding or what?

[RiderInBlack]

[QUOTE=Gremlin]With the increased size comes better brakes (well if you look for twin caliper), [QUOTE]Which you need to scrub the momentum created by the heavy weight going faster:whistle: "Roxanne" may pick up speed quickly but there is 230kg's of her dry alone. It takes some pretty heavy braking to slow her down.

[Gremlin]

What do you mean by under braked in the rain?
Are you refering to the brakes not scrubbing off speed as well, the front skiding or what?
No skidding or anything, not slamming the brakes on or anything, just in the wet it seems to take abnormally (ie, taking into account it being wet) long to stop, using the same amount of pressure, and if you are expecting to be able to stop well before the intersection, and you stop just before the white lines, it's a bit of a surprise.

Being a learner, I don't really like surprises yet.

[Mr Skid]

No skidding or anything, not slamming the brakes on or anything, just in the wet it seems to take abnormally (ie, taking into account it being wet) long to stop, using the same amount of pressure, and if you are expecting to be able to stop well before the intersection, and you stop just before the white lines, it's a bit of a surprise.

Being a learner, I don't really like surprises yet.
Strange. Never had any problems myself with the front end in the wet.

Supposedly when the discs/pads are wet they won't won't grip well until any moisture is off them. The only time I've had trouble with that is when trying to lock up the rear of my pushbike in the rain. But then that is slightly different.

Mebbe try doing some testing. Find a empty carpark, and see quickly you can brake from a set speed in the wet and the dry.

[Gremlin]

Supposedly when the discs/pads are wet they won't won't grip well until any moisture is off them. The only time I've had trouble with that is when trying to lock up the rear of my pushbike in the rain. But then that is slightly different.

Mebbe try doing some testing. Find a empty carpark, and see quickly you can brake from a set speed in the wet and the dry.
Yeah, might have to do some testing. Otherwise the bike has been great, but when you suspect something isn't quite right, it does your confidence in because there is always that nagging in the back of your mind.

Ooh, I used to have some really bad ones on my bike when they had those ?calliper brakes? was it?? horse shoe things, never worked in the wet, and cars used to love getting in my way, then looked horrified as I slid towards them. :oi-grr:

With the testing I might also be able to figure exactly how much the braking varies.

[Mr Skid]

Ooh, I used to have some really bad ones on my bike when they had those ?calliper brakes? was it?? horse shoe things, never worked in the wet, and cars used to love getting in my way, then looked horrified as I slid towards them. :oi-grr:Yes, they're v brakes. They work reasonably well, though when the rim is wet I can't lock up the rear wheel.

The other problem is to lock them up you need to be quite agressive with the rear brake, which means that it'll step out rather quickly. You can't feather them like you would with a disc rear brake.

[Gremlin]

I have v brakes on my customised bike (built ground up to my specs) and they are excellent. It all depends on how you want them to brake, and what levers you are using.

Setting the block to hit the rim just write means it becomes extremely difficult to lock the brakes, or you can set them to lock easily. Use non v brake levers and you are in for a massive surprise if you brake suddenly.

I worked in a city bicycle shop years ago to learn about bicycles, and the owner (an old guy who knew everything) had one courier come in, got himself a fully customised bike, took hours and heaps of $$$. Came in to collect, was told to take it easy and bed the brakes in... he went off like a madman, speeding down a hill, car pulls out, he went over the car and by by bike. :oi-grr:

never used discs, they were expensive, I couldn't service them myself, and apparently the mech I spoke to said from testing my brakes I wouldn't gain much for the cost. All depends on the v brake pads you use.

And you don't want brakes that lock whenever. Otherwise the rear overtakes the front and it usually turns to custard.

[Ixion]

No skidding or anything, not slamming the brakes on or anything, just in the wet it seems to take abnormally (ie, taking into account it being wet) long to stop, using the same amount of pressure, and if you are expecting to be able to stop well before the intersection, and you stop just before the white lines, it's a bit of a surprise.

Being a learner, I don't really like surprises yet.

I notice the Whale loses some initial braking efficiency in the wet. It's cause the discs and pads are wer and water is a good lubricant. Shouldn't cause a problem though because the water will be dispelled after a revolution or two of the wheel. Just a momentary "eek wheres the brakes, oh there they go" Li'l Rat Bike doesn't do it, no doubt cos it's less than half the weight of the Whale.

[Gremlin]

Yeah, this was this one traffic light on the way to uni one morning, it was just after a downhill so I might have been going a bit faster than usual, but the light turned orange so I confidently pulled the brakes, and probably looked sorta horrified as the bike eventually stopped, but the smile was definitely gone.

All in all, I guess the bike has to stop about 260 - 270 kg, but during the stop I didn't notice the brakes suddenly get better. Damn, I guess I had better do some more riding... sigh...

[Mr Skid]

I have v brakes on my customised bike (built ground up to my specs) and they are excellent. It all depends on how you want them to brake, and what levers you are using.

Setting the block to hit the rim just write means it becomes extremely difficult to lock the brakes, or you can set them to lock easily. Use non v brake levers and you are in for a massive surprise if you brake suddenly.

I worked in a city bicycle shop years ago to learn about bicycles, and the owner (an old guy who knew everything) had one courier come in, got himself a fully customised bike, took hours and heaps of $$$. Came in to collect, was told to take it easy and bed the brakes in... he went off like a madman, speeding down a hill, car pulls out, he went over the car and by by bike. :oi-grr:

never used discs, they were expensive, I couldn't service them myself, and apparently the mech I spoke to said from testing my brakes I wouldn't gain much for the cost. All depends on the v brake pads you use.

And you don't want brakes that lock whenever. Otherwise the rear overtakes the front and it usually turns to custard.
Ah, useful information. Cheers.

I'll have a play with the rear pads, see what I can get them to do.

The problem I find with the pushbike, is that I can't cause the rear to progressively lock. I still have trouble dealing with the rear quickly locking, and starting to yaw around the steering head. As long as the transition is slow I can deal with it.

I'd like to get the hang of steering the push bike with the rear brake, but I think that'll take some time and crashes.

[Gremlin]

try having the front of the pad (ie the front of the pad is the first part to make contact with the rim) connect first, it also usually makes the brakes squeak less.

Whatever you do, don't do what my dad did as a child. He oiled his chain then rode down a hill, just before the bottom (as a car came along) he realised the oil had got on his rim...

You will obviously wear the pad unevenly, but not majorly so. Also, if you have the correct levers and its wet, or grass and you really slam on the back brake you should have no problem at all making it lock completely.

By setting the blocks right, and easing the brakes on progressively, it should also be easy to stop quickly and safely as well, at the same time as still being able to lock them.

[RiderInBlack]

It might pay to give your disc's and pads a clean with Brake-cleaner. There could be some oily crap on them, making them less affective in the wet than they should be. Regularly clean mine to get rid of possible crap, usually just after lubeing the chain. After cleaning ride the bike for stort bit with the brakes part on. This will "burn-off" anything left and the discs. You'll feel the brakes grip better.