Does this look wrong to you?

[Bob]

Take a look at this link to a feature on wet weather riding on MCN Australia - more specifically, the photos at the end of the article.

The one they say is "incorrect" is the one I'd have thought was right! Shoulders relaxed, arms bent, leaning with the bike.

The one they say is correct? Riders' left arm is almost straight, which must reduce his control - straight arm has to limit your ability to adjust your line if something happens, surely?

Maybe they've put the wrong photo against the wrong caption?

What do you guys (and gals) think?

[White trash]

I couldn't give two shits what anyone else tells me about how I should ride in the wet.

I'll ride however feels comfortable to me.

Definitely wouldn't take advise from a Transalp rider

[Devil]

The point they're making is that its safer to have the bike as upright as possible to avoid sliding. Using the riders bodyweight shifted toward the centre of the turn to do this, hence the extended arm.

You can still be plenty relaxed while doing so.

[James Deuce]

I've been practising riding in the wet all week, and relaxed is definitely better than rigid freaking out terror.

[NordieBoy]

And the bit about stopping distances of cars v bikes in the wet.

I read a mag article a whild ago that tested some cars with abs against some bikes with and without abs in the wet.

The bikes stopped far better than the cars.

The best car was approaching the ability of the worst bike.

They may have 4 wheels and a much larger contact patch but what about momentum.

[DrHook]

Agree with Devil (never thought I'd say that!). It's the bike angle that they're pointing out and yes, one can also be relaxed in that position.

Been getting lots of wet weather practice here in Wellly!

NordieBoy: Do you remember where you came across that article?

Cheers!

[James Deuce]

The point they're making is that its safer to have the bike as upright as possible to avoid sliding. Using the riders bodyweight shifted toward the centre of the turn to do this, hence the extended arm.

You can still be plenty relaxed while doing so.

If so they definitely overstated the case. With due respect, are they suggesting we hang off and potentially upset weight distribution and smoothness?

Or are they still subscribing to 1970s research done on bikes with crap brakes and narrow ribbed tyres, whose tread only covers 30% of the tyre?

I'm with Bob it looks wrong, and from my perspective appears to be based on ancient research

[Devil]

If so they definitely overstated the case. With due respect, are they suggesting we hang off and potentially upset weight distribution and smoothness?

Or are they still subscribing to 1970s research done on bikes with crap brakes and narrow ribbed tyres, whose tread only covers 30% of the tyre?

I'm with Bob it looks wrong, and from my perspective appears to be based on ancient research

*shrug* Take it with a grain of salt. Theres many factors that come in depending on what you ride. Tyre shape, riding position rah rah.

For your general motorbike with a not too agressive tyre profile, the further upright you keep the bike the lower the chance of a shitty piece of the road or a bump sending the front or back straight out from under you on a corner.

As for weight distribution, thats something you need to learn for your specific bike. Just because you're hanging out the side doesnt mean you cant adjust your position backwards or forwards to keep your ideal weight balance.

Of course it isnt exactly law, you can do what you like, but in the wet I do the above though to what extent, how far I lean depends on the exact conditions and the particular corner.

Id expect the rider in the photo to be making it obvious for the sake of the photo anyway.

[Devil]

Typical, after my post I come up with the perfect example to use.

Ok, take this scenario. Motorcycle race, dry track.

Cornering is limited by traction, the more tyre you can get to the road the more traction you have.

When the riders are leant right into a turn, they're hanging off the bike because any more lean and there's just not enough tyre on the road to keep traction up.

Same philosophy in the wet, though this time, potential traction is reduced so the max lean angle has to be less, so you'd have to hang off earlier.

I think my point could be far better articulated by someone else, but reh, thats what happens when you're in middle of some javascript that JUST ISNT FUCKING WORKIGN!!!!

[vifferman]

I think my point could be far better articulated by someone else, but reh, thats what happens when you're in middle of some javascript that JUST ISNT FUCKING WORKIGN!!!!

Maybe your javascript needs more caffeine

Could be worse - could be that stupid Microslop J-script (or whatever the hell it's called).

[750Y]

thats what happens when you're in middle of some javascript that JUST ISNT FUCKING WORKIGN!!!!

syntax perhaps?

[Motu]

And the bit about stopping distances of cars v bikes in the wet.

I read a mag article a whild ago that tested some cars with abs against some bikes with and without abs in the wet.

The bikes stopped far better than the cars.

The best car was approaching the ability of the worst bike.

They may have 4 wheels and a much larger contact patch but what about momentum.

Performance Bike I think it was,the rider was pretty good,not just some commuter type,but we're all undiscovered Champions eh? Brake testing cars for a living with an electronic brake meter I find the deacceleration figures for an ABS car to be far lower than non ABS,specialy in the wet.Just reading last test for a 96 Bluebird with ABS shows 53% (pass is 50%) average deacceleration for a damp day,the one before was a crappy 84 Corona at 60%.

[Devil]

Maybe your javascript needs more caffeine

Could be worse - could be that stupid Microslop J-script (or whatever the hell it's called).

Dont get me started on the Microslut script debugger. The fucking thing keeps crashing my app when im trying to step through a function. gah!

Modding someone elses uncommented code. Fcking code monkeys.

oh wait...

[Devil]

Performance Bike I think it was,the rider was pretty good,not just some commuter type,but we're all undiscovered Champions eh? Brake testing cars for a living with an electronic brake meter I find the deacceleration figures for an ABS car to be far lower than non ABS,specialy in the wet.Just reading last test for a 96 Bluebird with ABS shows 53% (pass is 50%) average deacceleration for a damp day,the one before was a crappy 84 Corona at 60%.

Hey how much does that take into account tyre quality (if at all).
Only just figured out what the Active Stability Control does on my VR4 (shifting braking forces around the wheels for optimum braking (including engine braking))

[James Deuce]

Typical, after my post I come up with the perfect example to use.

Ok, take this scenario. Motorcycle race, dry track.

Cornering is limited by traction, the more tyre you can get to the road the more traction you have.

When the riders are leant right into a turn, they're hanging off the bike because any more lean and there's just not enough tyre on the road to keep traction up.

Same philosophy in the wet, though this time, potential traction is reduced so the max lean angle has to be less, so you'd have to hang off earlier.

I think my point could be far better articulated by someone else, but reh, thats what happens when you're in middle of some javascript that JUST ISNT FUCKING WORKIGN!!!!

Bad luck with the Java script. I refuse to do scripting at work because there are people who are better at it than me, and it just makes me GRUMPY. I loathe it.

Which probably explains why I was a bit testy in my reply, because I'm recompiling an exe that a customer screwed up, and fixing the ini that goes with it plus fixing the script that runs as a scheduled task and kicks the exe off. I hate it.

Back to the point though, goodness knows I'm not the most agressive wet weather rider, but after a 10 year break I've noticed that modern tyres have improved 1000% in terms of wet and dry grip, but at a cost in tyre life. They still cost the about the same for a set of performance tyres as 10 years ago so in real terms they're cheaper. I guess my point is that training organisations seem to take a much more conservative approach than is sensible, especially in light of the examples such as the Performance Bikes car vs bike wet weather braking test someone mentioned above. I've noticed that as long as there is no standing water on the road, I can ride pretty much the same as I do in the dry at reletively legal limits, thanks to these advancements in tyre technology.

On racing wets, you still see the top guys at big angles of dangle with knee wedged between fairing and road, so I really don't accept the conservative approach detailed above as being representative of recent bike and tyre technology capability. I've just replaced my tyres with ones of the same model but a different high silica filler compound and it they are amazing in the wet, compared to the previous version that slithered and wheelspun at the first hint of dampness.