Countersteering advice...

[R-Soul]

I agree completely. Weight on either peg doesn't really cause an effect on the bike. The effect gained is the moving of the rider mass - towards the inside.

No - that is what I have been trying to tell you. Weight on the peg has a definite effect on the bike.

Try this:
Move your body to the inside line without pushing down on the inside/outside peg (whichever one you choose). Then, without changing the position of your body, just push down harder on the peg. The bike just stabilises, not because of your body positioing - as that has not changed. But it definitely feels different.

[p.dath]

That is probably the most convincing proof ever of countersteering. It isolates what riders think they are doing to steer, from what they are actually doing.

To me this is probably one of the most important riding articles and experiments ever done. Wish I had read it when I was a teenager...

Note that some of this advice is contrary to Twist of the Wrist II - but he does say in another posting that he got some of his info wrong for the book (based on what he now knows).

But motorcycling is all about learning, and I congratulation someone as experienced as Keith Code continuing to do research and improving his knowledge.

[R-Soul]

Note that some of this advice is contrary to Twist of the Wrist II - but he does say in another posting that he got some of his info wrong for the book (based on what he now knows).

But motorcycling is all about learning, and I congratulation someone as experienced as Keith Code continuing to do research and improving his knowledge.

Yes- and that was a very smart experiment. It effectively separates what the riders say that they do to steer, from secondary effects of what they are doing which actually cause them to steer. If the bars are fixed, then you can have no countersteering.

And if you use those immovable bars when you are moving and shifting body weight and bulldogging or whatever, you will still not get countersteering effects and no steering. Brilliant! Like he said- no BS.

If you dont have countersteering,you have bugger all. I estimated previously that weight steering is about 20% as effective as countersteering- and even I (who preaches countersteering) was wrong, as secondary actions from me moving my ass around must have been causing a certain amount of countersteering (which I thought was caused by weight).

[R-Soul]

Note that some of this advice is contrary to Twist of the Wrist II - but he does say in another posting that he got some of his info wrong for the book (based on what he now knows).

But motorcycling is all about learning, and I congratulation someone as experienced as Keith Code continuing to do research and improving his knowledge.

I really like this article as it finally once and for all proves counter steering.

BUT: A mate of mine pointed out that counter steering /mass shift is the way to get the bike to lean over initially for the corner, but you still need the bars to steer inwardly (i.e. opposite to the counter steering direction) once you are in the corner, to enable the vehicle's wheels to define a turning radius. If you cannot do this then no steering is possible at all.

He reckons that, once leaned over after counter steering, you need to move the handle bars back to enable the wheels to form the turning radius and if you could not do so, then you would not be able to turn through a corner with counter steering either.

I am a proponent of counter steering, but I have to admit what he says makes sense.

[MSTRS:Me]

Counter steering 'rolls' the contact patch towards what is to be the inside of the corner. Once that happens, the bars will naturally turn in the direction of travel. On a neutral handling bike, that is where they will stay, until further input from the rider. That input is a repeat of the pre-turn push (or pull) if you need to tighten your line. Or vice versa to straighten out of the corner, or turn in the opposite direction to now...

[avgas]

Yup, but I charge for the answer...

No thanks deal enough with know nothing consultants thanks

[R-Soul]

Counter steering 'rolls' the contact patch towards what is to be the inside of the corner. Once that happens, the bars will naturally turn in the direction of travel. On a neutral handling bike, that is where they will stay, until further input from the rider. That input is a repeat of the pre-turn push (or pull) if you need to tighten your line. Or vice versa to straighten out of the corner, or turn in the opposite direction to now...

But if the bars can't physically turn at all, then it can't "turn in the direction of travel"?

I think the experiment may have succeeded too much in separating weight steering from steering at all.

The fact is that if you hang your weight off one side (a la weight steering), it WILL cause the bike to fall to that side. No rocket science there. I just think the rate at which it allows the bike to be leaned over is drastically reduced over that available from using counter steering (20 % as effective maybe?).

I always used to wonder how the hell the little Moto GP guys (Rossi is is what, like 65kgs?) used to get their bikes to flic-flac through the chicanes like they did. It could not have been possible with weight steering with their weight. When you think about the weight difference, 65 kgs is not going to easily change the direction of 180kg gyroscopically stabilised bike. Not quickly enough to go through chicanes.

I would not completelty write off weight steering, but for real control of your bike, counter steering is definitely more effective.

[R-Soul]

I hope nobody minds me debating both sides of the arguments here - I am just trying to find a good understanding of what is at play.

Has anyone else seen tehweather warnings for Auckland today?
Dmn, its goingto be a great ride home...

[MSTRS:Me]

But if the bars can't physically turn at all, then it can't "turn in the direction of travel"?

Who'd be stupid enough to ride a bike like that?

[R-Soul]

Who'd be stupid enough to ride a bike like that?

hehe apparently over 100 top riders...

[R-Soul]

Who'd be stupid enough to ride a bike like that?

OK My bad.

I forgot that on this bike there would be turning alowable - the fixed handlebars dont translate into fixed forks (as those are connected to the moving handlebars).

Keith also replied to my question to him and explained that the bike's rake and trail turns the wheel into the turn, and that no rider input is needed on the moving bars. I apologise if this is what you were trying to explain earlier.

[MSTRS:Me]

I missed something that said the bike in question had fixed bars, but turnable headstock etc?
In which case, all that is possible is weight shifting to turn the bike. It works, but is not very efficient.

[R-Soul]

I missed something that said the bike in question had fixed bars, but turnable headstock etc?
In which case, all that is possible is weight shifting to turn the bike. It works, but is not very efficient.

The bike had two sets of bars - one that worked normally, and one that was fixed to the bike frame and not turnable. The turnable one was connected to the forks. They then encouraged people who said they turned by weight shifting to use the fixed bars (to prevent accidental counter steering) to turn teh bike. The headstock could still turn, by the use of the rake and trail of the headstock that would follow the lean of teh bike caused by eth weight shifting.

But the actual turning that riders could do when they did not have countersteeering available to them was negligible. To quote:

"Even at speeds of no more than 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. Could you avoid something in your path? No Way. Could anyone quick turn the bike? Hopeless! The best result was one of my riding coaches. He got into a full hang-off position and was able to persuade the bike, by jerking on it, to start on a wide, wide arc in the paddock at Laguna Seca, a piece of asphalt that is about 500 X 800 feet. Like turning an oil tanker ship, start at noon and be on the turning arc at around 1:00 PM. It wasn't smooth and it wasn't very effective."

[R-Soul]

I missed something that said the bike in question had fixed bars, but turnable headstock etc?
In which case, all that is possible is weight shifting to turn the bike. It works, but is not very efficient.

Yeah that was the point - that ONLY weight shifting turning was available without the "incidental" (or accidental) countersteering turning that actually happens to turn those guys who insist that they actually turn by weight shifting.

I saw a DVD yesterday from the BRONZ website where a Kiwi icon world champ bike rider said that he did not "really believe" in it!! Aaron somebody or other?

[MSTRS:Me]

I saw a DVD yesterday from the BRONZ website where a Kiwi icon world champ bike rider said that he did not "really believe" in it!! Aaron somebody or other?

Saw that ages ago, and I thought WTF?
I guess it doesn't matter what one believes works for one, as long as what ever they do works.
But someone who doesn't believe in countersteering shouldn't be trying to teach/coach others.
I imagine the scene....
Tutor - you just lean off and round she goes
Pupil - ok...whoops...how did I run off the track?
Tutor - you need to 'do something with the bars...I think"