Russ
Guest
remarkably similar to politicians then!
In fact i wonder if journos are failed politicians?
In fact i wonder if journos are failed politicians?
laughingBob
Guest
Russ said:
I think it more likely that politicians are failed journo's, obviously not biking journo's though, no one could fail at that!
No they didn't quote distances. However, I would be extremely surprised if the stopping distances weren't in inverse proportion to the time. The braking characteristics i.e. decelleration vs speed will be similar for all machines - none of them have a different type of brake i.e. carbon fibre, drum, etc.Kropotkin said:
Kropotkin
Registered user
Well, braking isn't linear. Stuff like weight shifts and momentum complicate braking enormously. I remember seeing braking tests done in Performance Bikes a year or so ago, and what was surprising was that the order of shortest braking time was different to braking distance. Not radically different, but not identical either.
An example of why it might be different:
If one bike takes 0.2 seconds longer to brake from 60mph to 50 mph than another, but 0.2 seconds shorter from 10 mph to 0 mph, then it will have a greater braking distance, even though the braking times are the same. After all, you travel a much further distance in 0.2 seconds at 55 mph than at 5 mph.
Just a thought.
An example of why it might be different:
If one bike takes 0.2 seconds longer to brake from 60mph to 50 mph than another, but 0.2 seconds shorter from 10 mph to 0 mph, then it will have a greater braking distance, even though the braking times are the same. After all, you travel a much further distance in 0.2 seconds at 55 mph than at 5 mph.
Just a thought.
There's an article in this weeks MCN, I was reading in WHSmiths
about ABS on bikes. A bike instructor was recalling a recent event when he had a class that was learning about braking in corners.
They sent each student into a corner at 60, they then had to stand the bike up and brake as fast as possible. The bikes were blades, gixers and the likes. They all went in turn, all concentrating very hard at the tricky task in hand. Then it came to the "old man on the R1200GS".
Apparently they all took the piss as he set off down the track without any worry or concern for what he was about to do. He 'barrelled into the corner' at 70mph, grabbing a handfull and stopping in 1/3 the time of the other bikes. The instructor made him repeat the feat and he did it again and again.
Seems the brakes work well in corners as well!!!!
about ABS on bikes. A bike instructor was recalling a recent event when he had a class that was learning about braking in corners.They sent each student into a corner at 60, they then had to stand the bike up and brake as fast as possible. The bikes were blades, gixers and the likes. They all went in turn, all concentrating very hard at the tricky task in hand. Then it came to the "old man on the R1200GS".
Apparently they all took the piss as he set off down the track without any worry or concern for what he was about to do. He 'barrelled into the corner' at 70mph, grabbing a handfull and stopping in 1/3 the time of the other bikes. The instructor made him repeat the feat and he did it again and again.
Seems the brakes work well in corners as well!!!!
Kropotkin
Registered user
That's more down to the lack of dive from the telelever (bugger to spell, that) than anything else, I think. I can make the GS stand up in corners a bit, but I have to brake really, really hard. On my Bandit, just a light squeeze would have the bike wanting to sit up.
Separation of suspension from braking forces is good.
Separation of suspension from braking forces is good.
Russ
Guest
I think its down to the linked braking system, as my VFRs (all of them) wouldn't stand up as easily when braking in a bend than a sports bike.
I think the linked braking adds to the effect of taking the weight away from the nose, meaning the bike is less inclined to tuck under as the suspension is compressed altering its geometry
I think the linked braking adds to the effect of taking the weight away from the nose, meaning the bike is less inclined to tuck under as the suspension is compressed altering its geometry
Kropotkin
Registered user
Russ said:
It works on my bike ('00 1150 GS), and it doesn't have linked brakes.
Russ said:
This is exactly what the telelever front suspension does. Less dive when braking equals more control. It has nothing to do with the linked brakes.
Mouse
Registered user
To be fair I think it may have a little to do with linked brakes, as if you apply the rear brake the bike "squats" down, which offsets the front dive. This would explain the relative lack of dive on the VFR I suppose. But on the GS the telelever is going to be by far the main factor, after all that's what it's there for.
Mouse, that story was also in Bike (February 2005), though I think the R1200GS reference is an error as the story starts of quoting Sean Hayes saying "some years back". So there can now be some debate over which version of ABS works that well in corners...
The rest of the article in Bike about Honda's move towards ABS on their range... It notes near the end that "BMW's servo-assisted ABS is a far more complicated affair...".
The rest of the article in Bike about Honda's move towards ABS on their range... It notes near the end that "BMW's servo-assisted ABS is a far more complicated affair...".
Mouse
Registered user
That wasn't mouse that was monkey 
Yeah, I'm sure you're right - didn't study the article in detail as I think they were going to kick me out of WHSmiths, as I'd already read, Bike, Ride, Fast Bikes and was just moving to MCNChisurz said:Mouse, that story was also in Bike (February 2005), though I think the R1200GS reference is an error as the story starts of quoting Sean Hayes saying "some years back". So there can now be some debate over which version of ABS works that well in corners...
The rest of the article in Bike about Honda's move towards ABS on their range... It notes near the end that "BMW's servo-assisted ABS is a far more complicated affair...".
TheJoker
Registered user
GSmonkey said:Yeah, I'm sure you're right - didn't study the article in detail as I think they were going to kick me out of WHSmiths, as I'd already read, Bike, Ride, Fast Bikes and was just moving to MCN
Next time, don't bring the recliner chair - I've noticed that it raises quite a suspicion on how long you're going to stay...
Arch
Guest
Hi guys,
Glancing at the latest Motorcycle Consumer News, here are their 60-0 numbers, plus some others for reference..
2005 R1200GS - 125'
KTM 950 Adventure - 128'
2001 R1150R - 122'
1999 R1100S - 123'
1997 K1200RS - 114'
2000 Buell Blast - 115'
2001 Harley-Davidson Fat Boy - 123'
1999 Harley-Davidson Road King - - 122'
1999 Harley-Davidson Road King - 120'
2002 Harley-Davidson V-Rod - 109
1999 Suzuki Hayabusa - 112'
Yamaha FJR1300 - 126'
(Numbers are rounded down to the nearest foot.)
Glancing at the latest Motorcycle Consumer News, here are their 60-0 numbers, plus some others for reference..
2005 R1200GS - 125'
KTM 950 Adventure - 128'
2001 R1150R - 122'
1999 R1100S - 123'
1997 K1200RS - 114'
2000 Buell Blast - 115'
2001 Harley-Davidson Fat Boy - 123'
1999 Harley-Davidson Road King - - 122'
1999 Harley-Davidson Road King - 120'
2002 Harley-Davidson V-Rod - 109
1999 Suzuki Hayabusa - 112'
Yamaha FJR1300 - 126'
(Numbers are rounded down to the nearest foot.)
TerryM
Guest
GSmonkey said:
Monkey,
The spread is so wide between similar bikes all competing for sales that I think the journos have got it wrong somewhere.
Probably just loaded data from spreadsheets/charts having different values on the axes. Otherwise someone would have been shouting about his Kwak outbraking Blades by light years.
Terry
