Countersteering: Putting theory to practice, my experience

[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.

vs.


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?
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NdWVMR6m_hc[/youtube]

[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......(just to lighten the mood)

[mctshirt]

And what about the traction circle?



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.