Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 2
Posted: 3/17/2006 6:49:16 PM EDT

Two words: GROUND CLEARANCE.









If this had been a sportbike, that momentary lapse in concentration caused by his posing would only have resulted in a late apex. Provided the rider knew how to ride, that is. On that HD with all that crap hanging off of it, he never had a chance.

Also, I wonder if he looks as "cool" with roadrash all over him as he thought he did in his half-helmet, jeans and t-shirt? Personally, I prefer leathers and a sportbike to "the harley look" and an inferior motorcycle. YMMV.
Link Posted: 3/17/2006 7:03:00 PM EDT
Yep... miss my sport bike!
Link Posted: 3/17/2006 7:17:42 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 3/18/2006 5:26:24 PM EDT by hkusp]
Cruisers are for show and riding in straight lines.

Sportbikes will handle the twisties with no problem.
Link Posted: 3/17/2006 7:26:20 PM EDT
That's a really nice picture. What sort of camera did you use?
Link Posted: 3/17/2006 7:32:03 PM EDT
Nice bike!!!
Link Posted: 3/18/2006 4:18:30 AM EDT
You guys are being generous..... a cruiser is not much more than parking lot jewelry.
Link Posted: 3/18/2006 4:51:35 AM EDT
He also stopped riding the bike before it was done...

Front wheel locked in pic #2 at that point if he had shifted his body over the right hand side of the saddle and feathered the front brake, the bike would have recovered. He would have finished the corner way outside, but he would have "saved" it.

Pic #3... He gone and the bike is still ridable. As it is still scrubbing speed (and paint and chrome) he should have stayed with it.

You are lucky that you weren't at the apex... lol... I can't imagine trying to miss that mass of steel coming at you.
Link Posted: 3/18/2006 4:59:24 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 3/18/2006 5:02:20 AM EDT by OLY-M4gery]

Originally Posted By CattleDog:
He also stopped riding the bike before it was done...

Front wheel locked in pic #2 at that point if he had shifted his body over the right hand side of the saddle and feathered the front brake, the bike would have recovered. He would have finished the corner way outside, but he would have "saved" it.

Pic #3... He gone and the bike is still ridable. As it is still scrubbing speed (and paint and chrome) he should have stayed with it.

You are lucky that you weren't at the apex... lol... I can't imagine trying to miss that mass of steel coming at you.



It looks like in pic #2 that the front wheel is no longer on the ground.

I think he whacked the side of the bike down hard enough, that the front wheel came off the ground, and he lost his balance, and fell off the bike, before the bike "bounced" back off the ground.

Also, in pic #1, he is fairly close to the white fog stripe, on the right side of the road.

in pic #2, he looks like he is in the center of the lane.

In pic #3, with all the sparking, and basically riderless bike, he is just on the centerline.

He tried to turn to hard, and didn't use the raod that was avialable to him to make a wider turn.
Link Posted: 3/18/2006 5:22:06 AM EDT
That's gonna leave a mark that won't buff out - OUCH

Looks to be more rider error than anything else.
Link Posted: 3/18/2006 6:11:54 AM EDT
I never like to laugh at someone else's injury....

So I'll hope he came out mostly OK.

<­BR>

Then I'll laugh.
Link Posted: 3/18/2006 7:24:22 AM EDT
Maybe he can get a Genuine Harley rubber-covered pen so he can easily hold it in his teeth. That way, he can tap out on the adding machine all those little shiny bits he'll need to replace...IF Mommy lets him keep it. AND a pair of decent gloves. And helmet. BTW ... I'd love to see the next photo ... I'm with CattleDog ... that bike was way still rideable. I'm betting that after he bailed off to the inside, that the bike high-sided ... which probably doubled the repair bill. Wanna bet he'll be telling his buddies how he "laid it down" ??? Riiiiiiight ..... Stay safe
Link Posted: 3/18/2006 7:40:09 AM EDT
Looks to me buy putting all the weight on the pegs he un-loaded the tire and started to slide. Locking up the front didn't help a all.
Link Posted: 3/18/2006 7:51:42 AM EDT
In the second pic you can see the look on his face says "this will not end well"



I put 500 miles in a brand new 2002 FLTRI before running to the BMW dealer to trade it in on a K1200LT, one reason, dragging the damn pipes all the time.
Link Posted: 3/18/2006 9:29:52 AM EDT
chances are the bike came out ok. i know a lot better than him. if the bike stayed on its right side the front and rear crash bars pretty much kept all the sheetmetal unscathed and just put some road rash on the guards. but if it flipped back on its left, well....

i guess in pic 2 he is committed
Link Posted: 3/18/2006 12:29:23 PM EDT
id hate to see how his right side came out in all that...

just one more reason that the proper gear always helps...bet that sleeveless shirt isnt "cool" anymore
Link Posted: 3/18/2006 12:42:24 PM EDT
Anyone notice that in pic #1 that his left hand is not even on the handlebar?

And as shown in pic #2, the front tire is not rotating at all, which means he grabbed a handful of front brake.

Bet he wishes he wasn't posing and had on some gear.......
Link Posted: 3/18/2006 12:49:16 PM EDT
Nothing in those pictures says a crotch rocket is safer than a cruiser. All that shows is that the rider exceeded the limites of both his machine and his skill level.


I've ridden everything from crotch rockets to mid level cruisers to top end touring bikes. Each one has it's plus's and minus's. NONE of them are what my mother would consider safe.

Saying that a crotch rocket is safer than a cruiser is like saying a glock is better than a 1911. Both statements are bound to cause trouble and both statements make you look dumb at the end of the day.
Link Posted: 3/18/2006 1:45:49 PM EDT
If it stops faster and corners harder you have more chances to fix a mistake. So all sport bikes are inherently safer.

However, most hyperbikes have a magic twist stick that get you into these situations more often...

But in this case, entering this corner at 30 mph, I bet he would have rather been on a sport bike for a few moments.

Go to an amateur track day and you will see all kinds of crashes that are well within the bikes capability. They get off only because mentally, they have crashed and stop riding the bike. Ya gotta be like a bull rider, you don't let go until the world is upside down or 8 seconds are up. Wrecks never last longer than 8 seconds by the way.
Link Posted: 3/18/2006 1:50:54 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 3/18/2006 1:52:39 PM EDT by MlTCHELL]

Originally Posted By JH225:
Anyone notice that in pic #1 that his left hand is not even on the handlebar?

And as shown in pic #2, the front tire is not rotating at all, which means he grabbed a handful of front brake.

Bet he wishes he wasn't posing and had on some gear.......


Hah, in pic #1, you can tell he was pointing at the camera man instead of paying attention with his hands on the bars.

ETA, he wouldn't have had to have been on the brake very hard to stop the wheel, because it wasn't on the ground in that picture. Though, by the looks of his hand, he was probably squeezing hard enough.
Link Posted: 3/18/2006 2:20:28 PM EDT
Ya can't ride a cruiser fast through corners. I have a low glide and I really have to watch the speed through corners comapred to my sportster that will go a lot further in the lean angle compared to the low glide. Of course compared to a sport bike, the Sportster (originally designed for dirt track) doesnt lean at all. But it all depends on what the bike was designed for.

I saw these on another site and everybody said the same things as here..posing won't get ya home!
Link Posted: 3/18/2006 2:40:57 PM EDT

Originally Posted By MlTCHELL:
Hah, in pic #1, you can tell he was pointing at the camera man instead of paying attention with his hands on the bars.
ETA, he wouldn't have had to have been on the brake very hard to stop the wheel, because it wasn't on the ground in that picture. Though, by the looks of his hand, he was probably squeezing hard enough.



BAN CAMERAS! Do it for the children Motorcyclists!

No Expert
Link Posted: 3/18/2006 3:06:50 PM EDT
Those pictures say nothing about the safety of a bike, but they say a shit load about the skill of the rider!


Travis
Link Posted: 3/18/2006 3:13:34 PM EDT
Look at the area AROUND the road..... Once it had no rider the bike looks like it may have straightened up...... right off a cliff!!!
Link Posted: 3/18/2006 3:15:11 PM EDT
Link Posted: 3/18/2006 3:18:51 PM EDT
I bought my first bike last year, and traded it in for another bike a couple of months ago. Both times, I considered getting a cruiser. The cruisers just didn't feel right to me. I never rode one before, but I could tell just by sitting on one that you can't get yourself out of trouble in a panic situation like you can on a sportbike. I decided to get the best of both worlds - the SV650. It handles like a sportbike, but sounds cool like a Harley (sorta) and has no front fairing. It's the perfect compromise for me.
Link Posted: 3/18/2006 9:54:27 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 3/18/2006 10:01:55 PM EDT by Gabriel]

Originally Posted By TravisJ1:
Those pictures say nothing about the safety of a bike, but they say a shit load about the skill of the rider!


Travis



Exactly. Even though I dislike cruisers...this is a rider problem, not a bike problem.

For one thing, (besides looking at the tires and such) he isn't leaning into the corner at all with his body. His ass is still centered on the seat in the second picture. He would have had to lean the bike less if he had adjusted his weight properly.

It's easy to critique these things afterward.

I chased a guy up a mountain in the Smokies last year. He was on a Connie and his right hardbag hit the ground in a tight right hand decreasing radius turn. It lifted his rear tire off the ground and sent him off the edge near the top of the mountain. I was right behind him and watched the entire thing (luckily I kept watch of the roadway and didn't follow him off). He was alright and the bike only dropped about 75 feet down the mountain. After the towtruck pulled it back up, we went over the Connie and he rode it back to the hotel. That guy was a great rider, these things happen
Link Posted: 3/18/2006 10:43:08 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 3/18/2006 11:19:01 PM EDT by K2QB3]
Looks to me like what really did him in was a nasty headshake, something I'm sure he had no experience with whatsoever, since dragging hard parts is the only way to get the front wheel off the ground on a dresser like that.

I bet when the front wheel lifted he was only lightly on the brake, but he turned in trying to hold his line, and when it came back down the tankslapper kicked him clean off the bike, and then of course straightened right back out again and the bike probably rolled on without him if it didn't highside.

Bet he was totally locked up trying to muscle his way through, looks that way from his expression, he could have saved it if he'd had some experience on a performance bike. I bet it felt like he'd been kicked by a mule before he even hit the pavement, all that weight and those long, high, swept back bars, threw him clean off and didn't even upset the bikes line.

I ride an SV too, sounds more like a Duc than a hog, a very sweet song through a full system.
Link Posted: 3/19/2006 12:50:19 AM EDT
Duc...

Quackquackquackquackquackquack.

Hog...

Oink....oink....oink....oink....oink....oink...

Sorry.
Link Posted: 3/19/2006 11:26:00 AM EDT
You're right. They're nice pix, but I can't claim them as my own. Another guy posted them on a motorcycle roadracing website I frequent.

It's easy to see where it happened for anyone who's been there. Deal's Gap, on the TN/NC state line, where motorcyclists of all sorts congregate for the great riding in the area ("318 curves in 11 miles", etc). A riding friend of mine has eaten it in that same curve. - And I can tell you with certainty that the bike didn't come through it well. Straight off the cliff on the other side of the road.

As for weather the pix show the fact that sportbikes are safer than cruisers... they obviously do for anyone who knows anything about how to ride. Before you tell me "bullshit", know that I've been riding since 1972 and have ridden motocross, harescrambles, roadracing, and countless miles of trackdays and trail rides, etc, not to mention motocross and roadracing schools. Not saying that to sound like an arrogant asshole (which some would argue I'm good at ), but to point out that I'm not some newby making a "guess". As someone pointed out above, the point here is that sportbikes offer vastly superior engineering and offer a lot more ground clearance and braking/steering performance. These things will give any experienced rider a _world_ of additional time and ability to recover from mistakes that can and have caused many cruiser riders to be hurt and killed. If you can't understand this, you're obviously limited in your experience level or comprehension.

The one thing that could be argued as "dangerous" about sportbikes that cruisers don't usually have is massive power which, as mentioned by someone else, can lead to problems for squids who don't know how to ride and/or don't have self control. However, some of the larger japanese cruisers (1800cc, etc) do have a significant amount of power (maybe near as much as a 600cc sportbike) which can lead to the same issues for newbies as well as for certain riders who've been riding for many years but who refuse to learn how to ride with any degree of expertise (ego won't let them be taught).

Hell, I've ridden the road in that picture many many times and I can tell you with certainty that the harley guys riding through there are dragging hard parts of their "bikes" on the ground when they're not going over 20mph through those curves. On a sportbike, I can go through there with my knee dragging on the ground and no part of the bike will drag. Well, on some of the older sportbikes it's possible to drag footpegs and exhaust pipes if you're _really_ hauling ass, but it only happened at speeds waaay above that possible for cruisers. - Now, before you rag on me for going that fast on the street, let me say that I don't do that anymore. I only do that on the track now. Just too much potential for unexpected things to go wrong on public roads.

One last thing... Whoever stated above that this rider could have made it through the curve if he'd understood about proper "body english", etc, is absolutely right. I'd be willing to bet a pretty handy sum of cash that if he'd known how to ride, he'd have saved it as long as a vehical wasn't coming from the other direction, because he definitely would have crossed the yellow line into the other lane in the process. - But the truth is that he should have been paying attention to where he was going instead of posing for the camera.
Link Posted: 3/19/2006 11:47:56 AM EDT
How's that insurance commercial go, "...You can make everything safe, but not the driver..."

In this case, the rider...

I don't think Maddog McDinglenutz would have been any safer on a sport bike, he's too busy looking cool to ride!

Link Posted: 3/19/2006 4:21:03 PM EDT

Originally Posted By usp45c:
....

I saw these on another site and everybody said the same things as here..posing won't get ya home!



So what happened to the bike and the guy??

Merlin
Link Posted: 3/19/2006 5:50:03 PM EDT

Originally Posted By IchWarrior:

I don't think Maddog McDinglenutz would have been any safer on a sport bike, he's too busy looking cool to ride!




He definitely didn't belong on a bike.

- I don't know what happened to him. I can make an educated guess based on where it looks like he is though. It's a given that he got some pretty good road rash at the very least. As slow as those harleys go through there, he probably didn't slide far enough to go off the cliff/drop off on the outside of the curve. If by some chance he did though, then he would have some broken bones for sure. There are so many trees on and below the drop off, I'm sure he wouldn't have gone too far down the mountain before he'd have gotten stopped/hung up in or on one of them. He's probably "okay" (but with serious medical bills). Now, if his bike went off the side... well, it's screwed. Based on the fact that the bike was still moving right along in the last photo, I'd say it probably did.

Here's one of the websites dedicated to riding in that area: www.tailofthedragon.com/
Check out some of the pictures on the site, many of which are here: www.tailofthedragon.com/dragonslayers.html

- Also check out the campground/gas station/store website at: www.dealsgap.com/
This is the main "congregation point" in the area for bikes, and used to be called the "Crossroads of Time" under the previous owners. Obviously, they cater mainly to motorcycles, but sports car clubs come to the area as well. Fun place as long as you don't get stupid.
Link Posted: 3/20/2006 4:42:52 AM EDT

Originally Posted By timb3:
As someone pointed out above, the point here is that sportbikes offer vastly superior engineering and offer a lot more ground clearance and braking/steering performance. These things will give any experienced rider a _world_ of additional time and ability to recover from mistakes that can and have caused many cruiser riders to be hurt and killed. If you can't understand this, you're obviously limited in your experience level or comprehension.



Those points are neither here nor there if we are talking about an experienced rider. An experienced rider would be less likely to get himself into that type of situation regardless of what type of bike he is on. He will know the limitations of the bike he is riding. And if he does get into something like that, he will have a better chance of using the bike's abilities to safe himself.

If we are talking about new or inexperienced riders, i'll argue that sportbikes are more dangerous than cruisers. The power, handleing, brakeing etc. will get them into trouble far quicker/easier than a cruiser would. Since they are inexperienced they won't be able to take advantage of the better power, handleing, and brakeing to get them out of a sticky situation. However, they will be able to use those things to get them into a sticky situation.
Link Posted: 3/20/2006 7:04:03 AM EDT
I went on a charity ride once when I had my fat-boy. The only ride with a large group.

Those damn things are dangerous!

Tons of badass yuppies on new Harleys weaving in and out of traffic and the group was like an accordian of near misses and hair raising shenanigans. I split the group after two guys went off the side of the road into a ravine.

I exited stage right.

Accidents don't just happen on Harleys, but when you read reports of accidents in the paper a lot read like this: motorcycle rider dies. local rider on 2001/2/3/4/5 Harley crashes as he underestimates turn on cobra canyon road.

Link Posted: 3/20/2006 4:58:11 PM EDT
Sportbikes are safer than cruisers like ferraris are safer than lincolns. They are made for different kinds of riding. A person who rides everyday is probably a lot safer on their cruiser than a person who rides every couple of months on their sportbike. In this case it appears that some poser with more money than brains took his pretty little garage ornament back to the Harley shop for some repairs.
Link Posted: 3/21/2006 2:54:11 AM EDT
My take on this is that the ONLY way a sport bike is less safe than a cuiser is because they don't feel as fast and it lulls you into complacency. This is why young kids write checks thier asshole can't cash on sport bikes. Looking at that pic sequence above, a sport bike would do the same thing-only it would be happening about 30 mph faster.

At the end of the day, Mr. Marlboro Man exceeded his and his bike's capabilities. Nothing more.

Dave

P.S. Squids crash showing off all the time..
Link Posted: 3/21/2006 11:11:49 AM EDT


The look on that dude's face is like "Shit, I should have worn my leather jacket"!


The HD dude's need to remember what the bikes limits are. I see so many wreck because they have no clue.


Samuel
Link Posted: 3/21/2006 11:17:04 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Camel:
Those points are neither here nor there if we are talking about an experienced rider. An experienced rider would be less likely to get himself into that type of situation regardless of what type of bike he is on. He will know the limitations of the bike he is riding. And if he does get into something like that, he will have a better chance of using the bike's abilities to safe himself.



While you are correct that an experienced rider will allow for the limitations of the bike he's on, just making that statement is admitting that cruisers are more limited than sportbikes in their abilities and applications. Also, accidents and unexpected things happen to the best riders just as they happen to inexperienced ones. The experienced rider will have a better chance of getting through each event unscathed, obviously. Let me put it this way... Lets say that an experienced rider is riding the harley shown in the photos on the same road, same place. Now, he's going down the road within the limited capabilities of the HD's cornering clearance, but all of the sudden a semi comes around the curve going in the other direction and is partially or totally in the wrong lane. On that harley there is only a very limited amount of cornering clearance, so even the best rider might not be able to haul that thing over into the right hand ditch quick enough to avoid an accident without hitting hard parts on the ground lifting the wheels in the air and sliding straight into the oncoming vehical. - Now, put that same experienced rider on a sportbike *riding at the same speed* and put him in the same situation and he will come through it with no problems bigger than having to stop and change his pants afterward. Arguing that a sportbike is less safe because it offers increased performance just because _some_ riders can't control themselves and end up crashing is no different than saying "assult weapons" with "high capacity" magazines are more dangerous than "regular" guns just because the occational nut decides to use one to shoot up a mall. You are confusing unsafe RIDERS with unsafe MOTORCYCLES. The better engineered bike (sportbikes) will always be safer provided all other things are equal.


If we are talking about new or inexperienced riders, i'll argue that sportbikes are more dangerous than cruisers. The power, handleing, brakeing etc. will get them into trouble far quicker/easier than a cruiser would. Since they are inexperienced they won't be able to take advantage of the better power, handleing, and brakeing to get them out of a sticky situation. However, they will be able to use those things to get them into a sticky situation.


Once again, you're talking about what *some* inexperienced and irresponsible riders might do. There are potential troubles for new riders on either style bike. On cruisers those potential problems are based on lack of performance, where on sportbikes they're based on _added_ performance. The bottom line is that new riders are _always_ at more risk (see the HURT report). For that reason, new riders need to go to as many riding schools as possible to learn proper techniques, and then they need to spend as much time as possible practicing what they learn there. - But if I'm gonna recommend a type of bike for a newbie (provided it's a street bike at all) I would not hesitate to put them on a sportbike instead of a cruiser. If a person is _responsible_ enough to be on a bike in the first place, I want them to have every advantage that modern technology can provide so they can use that both for fun and for safety. Cruisers are just plain inferior products when it comes to steering/braking/handling performance and I see no reason to limit a new rider to that based on what some few idiots might do with the additional performance of a sportbike. Once again, the potential problems you're talking about are entirely based on the riders irresponsible actions.
- That being said - It has for many many years been my position that new riders should initially learn on _dirtbikes_. The reasoning for this should be obvious, but to spell it out for anyone who doesn't understand why I'd say that, it's basically because in the dirt you will learn much more about how to handle a bike under adverse conditions such as sliding, etc, much more quickly than you will on a streetbike. Also, newbies will be able to fall down in the dirt without as much potential for serious injury. Not to mention the fact that dropping a dirt bike doesn't mean replacing thousands of dollars of parts the way it does on a streetbike.

Oh... and to the person who made the comment about ferraries/lincolns. - Ferraris ARE safer than Lincolins. - In the sense that the potential handling and engine performance of the ferrari is always gonna make it easier to speed up, slow down, or dodge left/right to avoid bad situations. The potential performance of a vehical is not "at fault" for irresponsible actions taken by a limited number of squidly individuals. Once again, I'll refer you back to the assault weapon/high cap mag comparison above.
Link Posted: 3/21/2006 2:31:25 PM EDT

Originally Posted By timb3:

Oh... and to the person who made the comment about ferraries/lincolns. - Ferraris ARE safer than Lincolins. - In the sense that the potential handling and engine performance of the ferrari is always gonna make it easier to speed up, slow down, or dodge left/right to avoid bad situations. The potential performance of a vehical is not "at fault" for irresponsible actions taken by a limited number of squidly individuals. Once again, I'll refer you back to the assault weapon/high cap mag comparison above.



timb3, If you read what I said I DID NOT SAY THAT FERRARIS ARE NOT SAFER THAN LINCOLNS, I did say that a person who rides every day is probably a lot safer on their motorcycle than someone with a garage ornament. By the way, I rode my cruiser to work twice this week, being as this is only Tuesday thats not too bad. When is the last time your bike came out the garage to play.
Link Posted: 3/21/2006 3:40:36 PM EDT

Originally Posted By tcmech:

Originally Posted By timb3:

Oh... and to the person who made the comment about ferraries/lincolns. - Ferraris ARE safer than Lincolins. - In the sense that the potential handling and engine performance of the ferrari is always gonna make it easier to speed up, slow down, or dodge left/right to avoid bad situations. The potential performance of a vehical is not "at fault" for irresponsible actions taken by a limited number of squidly individuals. Once again, I'll refer you back to the assault weapon/high cap mag comparison above.



timb3, If you read what I said I DID NOT SAY THAT FERRARIS ARE NOT SAFER THAN LINCOLNS, I did say that a person who rides every day is probably a lot safer on their motorcycle than someone with a garage ornament. By the way, I rode my cruiser to work twice this week, being as this is only Tuesday thats not too bad. When is the last time your bike came out the garage to play.




Hmmm... that would be today. Getting it ready for more track days and upcoming races. On that subject though, I'll have to say that I know quite a good number of people who have ridden streetbikes very regularly (a couple of them every single day) as commuter bikes and who after having done that for years (and decades in some cases) _still_ suck as riders and are really only alive through luck. Hell, one of them owns a motorcycle shop. The problem with that guy (and others) is that his head is planted firmly up his ass and he refuses to push himself to learn how to ride better. Apparently he can't imagine that someone knows how to ride better than he does after all these years, so he won't go to any schools, etc. This guy recently swore off riding 'cause while riding at a local track where his dealership was about to hold a track day, he caused a crash because of his refusal to learn how to use his brakes properly. Specifically, he only uses his rear brake. The short version of the story is that another guy (who knew how to ride) hit the brakes (properly... the front ones) hard in front of him, and so the idiot locks up his rear wheel and slides into the rider in front of him causing both of them to crash. - Of course, mr motorcycle shop owner won't admit that the whole thing was his fault and can't seem to imagine how it is that other people ride so much faster/better than him without crashing their brains out. To hear him tell it, _we're_ all crazy and only alive out of luck. Never mind that it's him who won't go to any riding schools. So... my point is that you can cruise around a looong time (if you're lucky) and still be a dumbass if you don't work to become a better rider. Regardless of what kind of bike you ride. Think about that while you're cruising to work.

Link Posted: 3/21/2006 5:18:06 PM EDT
Alot has been said, both within and above my skill levels. I don't ride sportbikes, I don't trust myself and don't think that I would like falling over (bastards are top-heavy as hell). Many would laugh at my bike, but I guarantee that I can ride it quite well, and make it do things that a 250 v-twin cruiser shouldn't, like the curves it seems to love.

IMO, this guy should have explored the limits of his bike in a less threatening atmosphere before taking it on something that he has no knowledge of. And worked a little more back brake instead.
Link Posted: 3/21/2006 6:53:52 PM EDT
His problems weren't caused by using the front brake. What caused his front wheel to lock was the fact that he leaned the bike hard over to the right, bottomed out on all that crap hanging off his bike (see the sparks?), and levered the front wheel up into the air. As soon as there was no resistance from the road rolling under it, it locked. No big deal. If he'd had more ground clearance he'd have been fine. Hell, I rarely _ever_ use the rear brake. Especially not for emergencies. That damned thing'll get ya killed. Seriously. Your front brake is waaaay more powerful than the rear and is much easier to get back under control if it does lock. All you have to do is loosen up on the lever pressure and it straightens right back out. But if you lock the _rear_ wheel (which is much easier to do), and then let off the pressure it's quite likely to launch your ass into the clouds when it snaps back in line. Ever heard of a "flying W"? One problem a lot of inexperienced riders run into is that when they first start trying to use both of their brakes, they'll grab a whole handful of front brake _and_ slam on the rear brake... which will put you on your ass really fast. What happens is that when you use your front brake really hard, up to 100 percent of the weight of the bike is transferred to the front tire's contact patch (ever seen someone do a "stoppie?), and the rear of the bike becomes very light and in some cases will be up in the air. Now, if the rider even touches the rear brake in that situation the rear wheel locks up, and that changes the gyroscopic effect on the frame of the bike causing the lifting effect on the rear to be even more pronounced. At the same time this is going on all of the weight of the bike that is behind the steering head is trying to turn around it one way or the other (path of least resistance), so if you're leaning even slightly to the right or left, the rear of the bike will start to slide out in that direction. This situation is an accident in the making, and often results in a "highside" crash. - The best "keep it simple" technique for making sure you don't lock the rear brake while using the front brake is to simply not use the rear brake at all (except to hold the bike still while stopped while you're doing something else with your front brake hand). This way, you'll be so used to only using the front brake that when the inevitable minivan pulls out in front of you, you won't accidentally touch the back brake while the rear wheel is in the air due to your using the front brake so hard.

Okay... all you rear brake lovers flame away. But tell me what expert level racer taught you how to ride while you're at it.
Link Posted: 3/22/2006 5:07:56 AM EDT

Originally Posted By timb3:
just making that statement is admitting that cruisers are more limited than sportbikes in their abilities and applications....

The better engineered bike (sportbikes) will always be safer provided all other things are equal.

On cruisers those potential problems are based on lack of performance, where on sportbikes they're based on _added_ performance.

I want them to have every advantage that modern technology can provide so they can use that both for fun and for safety.

Cruisers are just plain inferior products when it comes to steering/braking/handling performance



Ok, I found the issue here. Its obvious you have a real chip on your shoulder towards cruisers. I thought your original post seemed that way,and this one confirms it. Why do you have such a dislike for cruisers?

You'll never hear me say cruisers handle/steer/brake/are faster than a sportbike. If anyone does say that they have no clue what they're talking about. But to say sportbikes have better engineering/cruisers don't have modern technology isn't accurate at all. The two types of bikes were engineered for a different purposes.

Other than your cruiser chip, you make good points on learning to ride/brakeing and such.


Link Posted: 3/22/2006 6:04:31 PM EDT

If this had been a sportbike, that momentary lapse in concentration caused by his posing would only have resulted in a late apex. Provided the rider knew how to ride, that is. On that HD with all that crap hanging off of it, he never had a chance.

Also, I wonder if he looks as "cool" with roadrash all over him as he thought he did in his half-helmet, jeans and t-shirt? Personally, I prefer leathers and a sportbike to "the harley look" and an inferior motorcycle. YMMV.




He had all the chance in the world. That crash is rider error.
Link Posted: 3/22/2006 6:26:44 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Camel:
Ok, I found the issue here. Its obvious you have a real chip on your shoulder towards cruisers. I thought your original post seemed that way,and this one confirms it. Why do you have such a dislike for cruisers?

You'll never hear me say cruisers handle/steer/brake/are faster than a sportbike. If anyone does say that they have no clue what they're talking about. But to say sportbikes have better engineering/cruisers don't have modern technology isn't accurate at all. The two types of bikes were engineered for a different purposes.

Other than your cruiser chip, you make good points on learning to ride/brakeing and such.



No chip for cruisers in general. I wouldn't put it that way. They just aren't engineered for maximum performance. That's all. Now, that doesn't mean that some cruisers aren't better than other cruisers. There are certainly many that stand head and shoulders above others in the performance and safety areas. I suppose you could say I have a "chip" for harley though. They build antiquated crap product and run around telling the world how they are "the best". HA. What horseshit. The ford model-t just about makes them look old tech. - And on top of that, they're generally lots worse than the other manufacturers ground clearance wise... and I see that as a major safety issue. For instance, a friend of mine has a Honda VTX1800, and that thing is *light years* better than any HD product in every way (unless you're a harley guy who just isn't "cool" on a "rice burner"). It has power, reliability and much better ground clearance, etc. - But that's just one bike of many that make HD look like crap. - But back to the main points you made - The bottom line is that cruisers just aren't on the "leading edge" of technology the way sportbikes are. Am I saying that none of them have any relatively modern technology? No. Not at all. But sportbikes are what they are because they're designed for compettition. Any company in their right mind puts the very best and newest of everything on them in order to try to win races. - That's also why they have such incredible ground clearance these days. To win races. More ground clearance means higher cornering speeds to racers. - But that results in a safer bike for the public. Granted, the rider has to do his/her part by being responsible and learning about good riding techinque... but the point I'm trying to make here is about the machines inherent qualities. The rider will always be a variable so that's really another discussion entirely. Sorry to come off as "hating" all cruisers. I don't. Would I buy one? No. But I'll grant that some are plenty safe to be on the road. Especially compared to that shined up turd the guy is riding in the pix on page one of this thread.

Heck, I really and truely believe that it's just about a criminal act to sell or ride a bike that has such limited cornering clearance as that HD in the pix... or any of countless other of their products I've watched dragging hard parts in curves on that road and others. I mean, follow one through that road sometime. Or any twisty road. Those things are dragging stuff when they're only going 20mph.
Link Posted: 3/22/2006 6:32:31 PM EDT

Originally Posted By captainpooby:
He had all the chance in the world. That crash is rider error.



Yes, it was rider error. He did plenty wrong. All I'm saying is that a bike with greater cornering clearance would be more forgiving of rider error because the rider could lean further over to "save it" without putting hard parts on the ground and levering the front wheel into the air.
Link Posted: 3/22/2006 6:59:00 PM EDT

Originally Posted By timb3:

Originally Posted By captainpooby:
He had all the chance in the world. That crash is rider error.



Yes, it was rider error. He did plenty wrong. All I'm saying is that a bike with greater cornering clearance would be more forgiving of rider error because the rider could lean further over to "save it" without putting hard parts on the ground and levering the front wheel into the air.



He "over-steered" his bike. No matter what type of bike he was on, a rider that is intent enough, can oversteer the bike.

He should've used all of the lane, instead of steering to maintain his line.

Or he could have used the room he had to brake FORCEFULLY, while going straight, then tried to make the corner.

The type of bike is a minor part of the crash that was caused by rider error.
Link Posted: 3/22/2006 7:24:31 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 3/22/2006 7:27:36 PM EDT by captainpooby]

Originally Posted By timb3:

Originally Posted By captainpooby:
He had all the chance in the world. That crash is rider error.



Yes, it was rider error. He did plenty wrong. All I'm saying is that a bike with greater cornering clearance would be more forgiving of rider error because the rider could lean further over to "save it" without putting hard parts on the ground and levering the front wheel into the air.




On that HD with all that crap hanging off of it, he never had a chance.




That's what you said and you are full of shit. That crash was rider error, not the bike.

Link Posted: 3/23/2006 7:52:01 AM EDT
Look. I've "oversteered" a bike enough times to know about that and every other potential rider error there is. Many times over. I have also stated that the rider issue is a totally different argument. I'm talking here about the fact that the HD in the picture has limited ground clearance, which - regardless of what error got the rider to need to lean the bike that far over - caused the front tire to lift off the ground when all the crap hanging off the bike started dragging on the pavement. Seen it happen many times before. Some of you guys are just either dumb as rocks or you just don't want to see the truth for what it is (you sound like a bunch of liberals). Whining and coming up with excuses while ignoring the obvious drawbacks of the bikes design, etc, isn't gonna ever change the fact that the bike sucks. Personally, I think you just don't like being forced to admit that sportbikes are better. It's just a fact of life though. Get over it.

I'm not gonna keep making the same arguments over and over here. Especially to ears that don't want to hear it. If you want to live in a deusional little world of your own where you think that an inferior bike can deal with unexpected problems as well as a modern one, fine with me. It's your life to throw away.

Oh, and by the way... Have a nice day.
Link Posted: 3/23/2006 8:02:28 AM EDT

Originally Posted By timb3:
Look. I've "oversteered" a bike enough times to know about that and every other potential rider error there is. Many times over. I have also stated that the rider issue is a totally different argument. I'm talking here about the fact that the HD in the picture has limited ground clearance, which - regardless of what error got the rider to need to lean the bike that far over - caused the front tire to lift off the ground when all the crap hanging off the bike started dragging on the pavement. Seen it happen many times before. Some of you guys are just either dumb as rocks or you just don't want to see the truth for what it is (you sound like a bunch of liberals). Whining and coming up with excuses while ignoring the obvious drawbacks of the bikes design, etc, isn't gonna ever change the fact that the bike sucks. Personally, I think you just don't like being forced to admit that sportbikes are better. It's just a fact of life though. Get over it.

I'm not gonna keep making the same arguments over and over here. Especially to ears that don't want to hear it. If you want to live in a deusional little world of your own where you think that an inferior bike can deal with unexpected problems as well as a modern one, fine with me. It's your life to throw away.

Oh, and by the way... Have a nice day.



I'm just glad I could read your posts to pass the time, until it is warm enough to get my rocket bike out...........................
Link Posted: 3/24/2006 6:53:48 AM EDT
Glad to be here for your entertainment.

Oh... and I forgot to mention before... Captainpooby, I think you're full of shit too.

I do however, like your avatar.
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 2
Top Top