Crappy cornering technique

[MDR2]

Harking back to the first post (haven't wasted my time reading the rest.) If i'm visulizing in my head what you have described (bike lent over, rider trynig to sit up the oposite way) It reminds me of how Schwantz used to corner.

[Irontusk]

Just about every kid and his dog learned to counter-steer the day their Dad removed the trainer wheels off their bicycle.

Those that didn't done a lot of walking.

I don't think anyone realises what they were doing until they try it though.
I was somewhat disturbed when I realised that if I don't lean, and I turn the bars, I go in the other direction.. sure is fun though, glad I read this thread Had been meaning to find out what counter-steering was, cause I had seen it mentioned all over the place..

[trumpy]

...Keith Code has a bike set up where they have a second set of bars on it, that doesn't steer... Without actively weighting the bars, they need a huge area to be able to get a knee down. The theory being, you need the bars to be able to regulate the radius of the turning circle....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3nRUeEkS644

[NighthawkNZ:Me]

[MarkH]

Keith Code has a bike set up where they have a second set of bars on it, that doesn't steer... Without actively weighting the bars, they need a huge area to be able to get a knee down. The theory being, you need the bars to be able to regulate the radius of the turning circle.

Here's the link:
http://www.superbikeschool.com/machi...bs-machine.php

[AlBundy]

Here's the link:
http://www.superbikeschool.com/machi...bs-machine.php

Thanks.

That should just about settle the discussion...

[Big Dave]

Thanks.

That should just about settle the discussion...

>>The fact is that countersteering is still being argued in the halls of learning with slide rules, Physics formulas and calculators. Many theories exist but no conclusive statement that I know of as to why has yet been reached. Argue on boys.<<

Theory.


>>There is zero way a bike is going to go around a corner as fast without bar pressure applied... Whether it be pushing/pulling the inside bar, or pulling/pushing the outside...<<

Agree. Can't be done efficently - or as safely obviously. Wasn't the point. Just that there are more than one way to turn (push) the handlebars. Unfortunately most of them involve the first part of crashing!

Grabbing that fixed set isn't it. I do know that I've been riding several vehicles with cruise control lately and have been experimenting quite a bit. None work well, but you can ride a long way and perform a lot of maneuvers without touching any handlebars.

However fixating on what bar is being pushed or pulled is far less important than grasping the entire concept and performing it as a reflex. That was the intention. Countersteering around a hazzard must be instinctive and there is more to it than handlebars. IMO.

More than one way to skin the cat and that there are multiple inputs that vary from machine type to type. Some you lean on the bars - A BMW megamoto eg seems like you only have to 'think' it and and put your body in position.

Ponder this - I can also be 'body steering' at moderate speed around a sweeping bend and counter-steer around a pothole or debris mid-corner at the same time.

As stated early on - there is a point of diminishing return, every machine is different, different ergonomics, and experience levels - there are no rules of thumb I've noted other than there is a velocity where contersteering becomes not viable and that varies from bike to bike.

[Ixion]

Thanks.

That should just about settle the discussion...

Indeed not. For one thing, the very name implies a limited subset of motorcycles . The 'superbike' school. There are other sorts of motorcycle beside superbikes. And techniques well suited to the race track and MotoGP machines (and their squidly emulators) may be less suited to more workaday machines .

And we debated that 'bike with fixed handlebars' before. The logic is flawed, because the bars had the effect of locking the steering . Front wheel displacement is a two way deal. Displace the front wheel, and it will initiate a cornering action. Initiate the cornering action by other means and the front wheel must displace to allow the cornering process. How could it not? The front wheel must follow a different track to the rear and as the rear is locked solid in line with the frame, it follows , inevitably, that whenever a bike corners, the front wheel must displace from the straight ahead position. By locking the front wheel with the fake bars the experiment prevented all cornering.

But noone here is arguing that a bike can corner without the front wheel moving. Merely that there are other ways to initiate (and maintain) that cornering process, besides countersteering.

[AlBundy]

At the end of the day... It's counter STEERING.

What you BD are implying, by not touching the bars, is not steering. It's using other influences to direct the bike, which the bike then compensates for to balance itself. There will be no control.

If you are so convinced, go and set yourself a cone course and zig zag with and without bar inputs at various speeds....

We are happy to be proven wrong.

[Horse]

And we debated that 'bike with fixed handlebars' before. The logic is flawed, because the bars had the effect of locking the steering .

Erm, where does it say on the "No-BS Bike" page that the steering is locked? He doesn't lock the bars, he mounts a 2nd set of bars attached to the bike's frame.

If you watch the video clip on that page it's fairly clear the front steering is unlocked.

[AlBundy]

Amongst other things - sometimes.

I can also do either without touching 'any' handlebars.

Indeed not. For one thing, the very name implies a limited subset of motorcycles . The 'superbike' school. There are other sorts of motorcycle beside superbikes. And techniques well suited to the race track and MotoGP machines (and their squidly emulators) may be less suited to more workaday machines .

And we debated that 'bike with fixed handlebars' before. The logic is flawed, because the bars had the effect of locking the steering . Front wheel displacement is a two way deal. Displace the front wheel, and it will initiate a cornering action. Initiate the cornering action by other means and the front wheel must displace to allow the cornering process. How could it not? The front wheel must follow a different track to the rear and as the rear is locked solid in line with the frame, it follows , inevitably, that whenever a bike corners, the front wheel must displace from the straight ahead position. By locking the front wheel with the fake bars the experiment prevented all cornering.

But noone here is arguing that a bike can corner without the front wheel moving. Merely that there are other ways to initiate (and maintain) that cornering process, besides countersteering.

Those bars are fixed to the fairing stays. They are not locking the steering. That's the whole pont of the demonstration. By not having the use of weighting the bars, there is virtually no steering input.

You state the front needs to be displaced for steering to occur, and that's the whole debate around counter steering. Initiating the turn by steering opposite, which then allows the bike to 'off balance' itself, which then steers into the corner.

As for the comments regarding the BMW Megamoto and trail bikes... Keep in mind they usually have wider bars... To me, that means leverage. What does leverage entail? It means I can do the same job with less effort. That would explain the 'it goes when thinking' statement. There'd be a lot less input required for steering to occur.
Then there's weight and how it's placed. For a start, trail bikes are usually lighter, which will immediately have an effect.

[The Stranger:Me]

What you BD are implying, by not touching the bars, is not steering. It's using other influences to direct the bike,

Well what are bar inputs if not an influence to direct the bike?

Wictionary describes steering as -

steering (plural steerings)
1. Controlling direction, describing something used to steer.

I think Daves description is appropriate, stop trying to split hairs.

[Big Dave]

At the end of the day... It's counter STEERING.

What you BD are implying, by not touching the bars, is not steering. It's using other influences to direct the bike, which the bike then compensates for to balance itself. There will be no control.

If you are so convinced, go and set yourself a cone course and zig zag with and without bar inputs at various speeds....

We are happy to be proven wrong.

As stated

Can't be done efficently - or as safely obviously. Wasn't the point. Just that there are more than one way to turn (push) the handlebars. Unfortunately most of them involve the first part of crashing!

[NighthawkNZ:Me]

Sometimes when I am coasting down Stuart street, I will let go of the bars and sit up and let gravity take over...

I find it very difficult to just lean to steer the bike, including applying pressure on the pegs etc... actually its just about non exsistant...

[AlBundy]

So what? We telling people how to do things inefficiently now?

I don't dispute, you can alter the direction of the bike by weighting or shifting etc. I do it all the time.

What I'm disputing, is the ability to ride down any given road, at a fair pace, and have the same level of control, within the realms of this debate, ie, with bar input and without...