FJowners.com

 BMW's R1200RT has several riding modes for your conveniance. Two riding modes, Rain and Road, allow the R1200RT to be adapted to most road conditions. The optional riding mode Pro, includes the additional riding mode dynamic plus the hill start control function. The R1200RT can be experienced to the full in Dynamic mode, while hill start control helps to make light work of stopping and starting on an uphill slope. But wait theres more. Gear Shift Assistant Pro. Available as an option and according to BMW is a first for a production made motorcycle. Basically allows upshifts and down shifts to be made without operation of the clutch or need to adjust the throttle. Seems to me this takes most of the fun out of riding one. Anyone remember the 750 Hondamatic of the mid 70's (yea I'm that old)? no clutch lever and Honda couldn't give those things away. Hold on I think I see the future now.......... federally mandated computer controlled training wheels so we don't fall over. :flag_of_truce:   Dave

As someone who crashed not more than six months ago...If I were told there was a technology that would have prevented that crash...by essentially taking me and my decision making process out of the equation...I'll gladly crash again.

Cap'n Ron. . .

+1 Cap'n Ron. I just think manufacturers are taking the motorcyclist out of motorcycling. AND sooner or later some government bureacrat will decide these features are required on all motorcycles to keeper us safer. OR I may be getting older and grumpier with accepting new technology. :unknown:  Dave

My bikes have a hill start feature, called a back brake.  They also have a performance and rain settings that are infinitely adjustable, called throttle control.

It's bad enough in a car when you feel like you're controlling the computer that's driving, instead of part of the action yourself.

Big Brother is out there and waiting to wrap us all in cotton wool for our own good.
While it can be shown that certain items can provide an increased measure of safety, shouldn't it be our choice, as adults who have been certified by the state to have adequate skills, to decide for ourselves which if any of these safety systems we choose to use?
The answer is; OBVIOUSLY NOT
Helmets are mandatory in most places, so are daytime running lights or headlights.  Some jurisdictions mandate certified safety clothing.  I expect ABS braking will become mandatory in many places soon.
In cars, seatbelts, ABS, and even both Traction and Stability Control are required in all new cars sold.
It will not be long until the auto-drive mode systems that Volvo and others are demonstrating become mandatory at least in metropolitan areas.  It is surprising that "black box" devices are not required now.

Future of motorcycles?  You gotta be kidding!  The only future is tiddlers in "developing countries", maybe.
If you want a high performance motorcycle, better get one and enjoy it now.
IMO, the future of motorcycles is nought. (and probably within my lifetime)  :dash2:
 

Quote from: Arnie on February 06, 2014, 08:10:20 AM
It is surprising that "black box" devices are not required now.

Most modern cars record some information. My brother is currently running an insurance fraud case involving a BMW M6. The black box was sent back to Germany to have all the info downloaded.
At the point of impact it records location, speed, G-forces, air bag deployment etc. and probably to which side the driver dresses. Scary stuff.

This is what my simple GPS collects now, downloaded after a ride.

(http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7282/9047546479_787de9ea7e_z.jpg)

(http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7358/9047548119_6c4c67e610_z.jpg)

Fortunately the Police are not allowed to seize them unless they believe a crime has been committed and it will provide useful information.

Noel

Noel why is your max speed blacked out ?  :rofl2:  Dave

Europe has manditory ABS starting in 2016 for all new bikes.

What brand of GPS do you have Noel.

ABS on a Bike?!?!? :dash1:

Look at many of the modern Super-Bikes or Sports-Bikes. Many have various throttle control settings like what was already discussed, plus an anti-wheelie function. What the hell is up with all these extra electronic controls? Just more weight & complexity. What ever happened to "Learning How To Ride"?

I have a raging stiffy for an Aprilia Tuono. But it has the ride by wire throttle control, plus all the various traction control settings. I can see myself buying one of these bikes & then trying to strip all that BS off of the bike. :ireful: The bike would probably default to the No Ride function & never be the same.

My FJ kind of freaked me out at first for being the first bike that I've ever owned with a fuel pump. :lol:

~JM~

The modern bikes with all the electronic rider assist gizmos are no doubt safer bikes.
There are lots of gizmos to go wrong. Think you can work on them? Forget it. Take it to the dealer $$$.
Even down to the basic engine design with Niksil plated cylinder bores. Yes, they are efficient.
You want to replace your piston rings and do a simple hone on the bores? Forget it.

I remember back in the 50's, standing with my dad, looking down at the new Corvette's fuel injection and my dad saying, "I'm glad I don't have to work on that..."

Gotta love the old school FJ....

OK NOEL--NOW YOU HAVE DONE IT !!!!!   :diablo: I absolutely do NOT appreciate the shameless display of (new to me) GPS technology on this post! I had no idea of the amount of information these units can track and display. Now I have to have one! I am impressed with your GPS and the way you can use it. Could you please let me know what brand/model you have and any programs you have added. I don't like the idea of the displayed top speed either because I too have my kookaloo moments. It would give you an accurate indicated top speed----hmmm.  Dave

Quote from: Bones on February 07, 2014, 03:43:12 AM
What brand of GPS do you have Noel.

I have a Garmin Zumo 550 (the old model)

All the cool info you can download is not so much the device as the website. It is called (I think) "My Garmin Connect"
Once registered on it you can save all that info, file it, add notes, give it titles, catalogue them.

When you select 'play', the icon moves over the map (or satellite image) and the bar graphs all at the same time (as circled in yellow on my post of it)

If I want to retrace a ride I did a few years back, I simply look it up, connect the Garmin to the computer and download it into the unit. Get up next morning and just hit "Go"

Someone else can also send you a ride they did, recorded in every detail, which you load straight into the unit. I have someone I do this with occasionally.
It's like a mystery ride, I love it. Particularly if you don't scroll ahead to see your destination.

Some modern bike technology is good.

Noel

Thanks Noel. I researched GPS and almost everything on site had to do with location and mounting. Not much on units or programs. Again thanks.  Dave

Back to technology.  It won't be the future if people don't buy into it.  Let them sit on the showroom and they will hear you. 

When the tech drives up the price beyond what we're willing to pay for it, it will go away.

I was talking to a Yamaha salesman a few weeks ago and he told me that the clutchless FJR is no longer imported into the USA.  It didn't sell well; however, he also said it is still popular outside the states.  Same with the dual transmission VFR1200.  Are either of these bikes popular in Oz or Europe?

Its pretty difficult to tell which FJR you're looking at unless you get very up close.
I haven't noticed any of the clutchless FJRs.
As far as the VFR1200, I've only ever seen one outside of a dealer's showroom.

Arnie

Quote from: Arnie on February 07, 2014, 10:40:16 PM

I haven't noticed any of the clutchless FJRs.

Arnie

There's a brand new one in Stafford Motorcycles Preston. They have had it on the showroom floor for 4 years.
Can't give it away.

Noel

Quote from: FJ_Hooligan on February 07, 2014, 07:39:40 PM
"Back to technology.  It won't be the future if people don't buy into it.  Let them sit on the showroom and they will hear you...."

Yep, I agree, and the opposite is true...that's why the new FZ9's are flying out the doors... Yamaha decided to extend the 2014 production run to meet the demand.
A basic no frills hot rod with a $8k killer price.  

I'll bet a jelly donut that the new FZ9 will be 2014 bike of the year.

The VFR1200s seem to be languishing on the showroom floors over here too.  I visited a Honda dealer back in the summer and they were selling them for $10,999 a $5000 discount (1/3 off!).

I thought that was a reasonable price, but it was only for the cobweb bikes that were not current models.  Not that they've changed anything on them, I guess the dealer was tired of them sitting around.  They are nice bikes and I'd like to have one but I don't think the 1200 model is going to last, just not enough sales.  Besides, I won't be giving up the FJ anytime soon.

Quote from: TexasDave on February 07, 2014, 06:11:25 PM
Thanks Noel. I researched GPS and almost everything on site had to do with location and mounting. Not much on units or programs. Again thanks.  Dave

Yeah, you won't find much on here about the units themselves. I have a bluetooth intercom in my helmet so I can make and receive phone calls through my GPS as well, it also displays my contacts. I could get the spoken directions through my helmet but I hate that function, even in the car, and mute it.

I have the original finned screen (non USA) on my bike and find the GPS rarely gets any rain on it, only if I stop and the rain is coming from behind me. I can ride all day in heavy rain, or to use an old meteorology term, when it's pissing down, and it stays dry.

My point is, at around $775 (US) for the current model I would not contemplate replacing this with a motorcycle specific GPS when it dies. I will buy a car unit for about $150 that has all the same features and the same screen size. If I am really worried about the elements, I can get a purpose made w'proof cover for it for $20.

GPS on the bike has let me find more new roads in the last 4 years than I discovered in the previous 40, let alone the obvious of general navigation.
If on a trip you still need a map though to give you some perspective.

Going on a trip without my GPS would be like riding a Harley, you'd get there eventually but it would only be half the fun. No taking off down roads that generally head where your going on a whim and paralleling the main roads and highways. It has become a habit now and I no longer have to ride in traffic, I plan all my rides on secondary roads and have found some stunning country as a result. Did I mention no traffic?

You could do this with a map but the fact is we don't.

There is no shortage of Luddites out there (and probably here) that shun new technology on principle. They are missing out.

Noel

Stating that there are "no shortage of Luddites out there (and probably here)" as it pertains to GPS is as pertinent as saying that riding an FJ instead of a modern motorcycle with new technology makes a person a Luddite.

And believing that without a GPS a person is "missing out" on excellent roads and rides, or even secondary roads is not logical , it is ridiculous.

Mike Ramos.

 I agree with Mike. 

Hello. My name is Dave. I am a Luddite. Not by choice but by circumstance. Technology is advancing faster than I am. No computers in school when I grew up. My youngest daughter has been playing with them since she was 2yrs old. She cannot stand to see her Dad sit and fight one. On my last trip going through Oregon with just a road map all it showed were main roads. A GPS would have made life easy. Noels idea of taking secondary roads to avoid traffic makes sense to me. My motorcycle survival depends on avoiding traffic and half of the women drivers I see on the phone not paying attention to me.  Dave

Yes, like Dave, I'm a Luddite. There, I said it....no I don't ride Harley's, yes I do like maps.

Yes, I do understand what Noel is saying about the accuracy and repeat ability of a programmed GPS.
I find GPS distracting while riding, then again I find trying to read a map distracting while riding.

There is something special about sitting down in the morning with a map and your coffee and bacon and eggs to plan your days ride. Sharing the route with your riding friends. It's tradition.

So I don't get distracted while riding I write down the basic route in abbreviations and put that note in the map window of my tank bag. It's easy to see at a quick glance.
Looks like: Hwy 62 west ...(R)Hwy138 north.....(L) Hwy 38 west....(R) Copper Canyon....etc, etc..
Been doing that way all my life.

I (we) do get lost often, but that's the fun part....
....except when your gas tank is on reserve...then, not so fun.....hmmm GPS?  

Might be not so bad....it's just too much like watching tv...

I like maps, but I also like GPS, too.    :pardon:

That's why I like to plot routes on Google Maps, then get them into the GPS.

Quote from: andyb on February 06, 2014, 08:07:12 AM
My bikes have a hill start feature, called a back brake.  They also have a performance and rain settings that are infinitely adjustable, called throttle control.

It's bad enough in a car when you feel like you're controlling the computer that's driving, instead of part of the action yourself.

+1. Perfectly stated.

A GPS is good for telling you where you are or if you have a programmable one, where you are on your pre-defined route.  That's great I love to know exactly where I am.

One thing I HATE about Garmin is by the time I zoom out enough to see the bigger picture, I lose all the good roads.  When zoomed in enough to see the roads I want to see, I can't see enough to find a good route.

I use a combination of maps and Garmin's Mapsource to plan routes.   Unfortunately, Mapsource has the same problem as the GPS software with road resolution.  The Garmin road database leaves a lot to be desired.  If I have a destination without a specific route planned, I find myself fighting with it a lot.  With a GPS it really helps to know where you're going so you can know when to ignore stupid instructions. 

I love maps old and new.  And have bad mouthed GPS's to some degree in the past.  But last year I mounted a small hand held GPS on a RAM mount.  I thought more to use as a route log and to check my speed out.  I got caught up in heavy traffic on a freeway coming into Sacramento and rather than "jinking" wildly across the lanes of traffic it was safer to just go with the flow and sort it out in a calmer environment.  I ended up on downtown Sacramento and after a few choice words I had to find my way back on to the correct freeway.  The small hand held GPS was a pain to look at but it worked great to dead recon me toward the freeway I needed.  It displayed streets but was so small you couldn't ride and use it, so I would check it at a stop light or pull over.

When I had my crash at the WCR being on a strange road, quiet frankly I had no idea where exactly where the hell I was except West of the freeway somewhere.  Thanks to Jeff for his help sorting and coordinating that out.  The "scoop team" (Randy and company) had a GPS with them and used it quiet successively.  As I was being picked up another "rider down" call came in and they were able to navigate to there position also.

In my "after action" debriefing to myself (yea, I am old and talk to myself..)  I decided to get a better GPS as an aid.

I ordered a Garmin nuvi 2555LMT and installed it in the my truck before I went down to Randy's to pick up my bike.  And gave it a few tests on back roads I had never been on and just followed its instructions.  And it worked great ! In the end it put me right in RPM's parking area.

I still read and carry maps.  But the GPS is still nice to have.

Plots my current position (moving map display)
Reads out how fast I am traveling
Calculates my arrival time (recalculates with my speed adjustments and stops) accurate within a few min.
Gives me a current read out of the posted speed limit where I am (and it's pretty accurate and handier than you might think) Also turns red if you are over.
Gives me information on my current Lat/long in case of an emergency.  Me or someone else.
Records max speed
Records average speed
Records distant traveled
Gives warning of congested traffic ahead (must receive fairly real time satellite data? Beats me, it just works)
Gives me a route log
I can enter a trip or route also.

When I am destinated it will tell me where the nearest restaurants, fuel stations, hospitals, shopping etc is.  If I push GO it will navigate me to it.

I have to say for a 1/2 inch thick and 5 or 6 inch's across it supplies a lot of information.  I just use a auto version at a cost of 129.00.  It will take a few drops of rain I am sure.  If the rain gets to hard I can just put it in my tank bag ? RAM makes a nice mount for it.

On a bike it might be nice to have a 7 inch display ? Just have make one under 150.00....
They make some with bluetooth if you want to listen to "bitchen Betty" talk to you.  For right now I will keep my helmet as quiet as I can....

George :drinks:

Being a sailor, I've navigated with about everything out there.  Paper charts, sextant ,three-point fixes, dead-reckoning, following depth contours on the ocean floor, line-of-sight, LORAN-C and finally GPS (with and without chart plotting).  Knowing where you are, where you're going, how much fuel or time that will take and will the rations of women and water hold out are most important!

The road is different for sure...I've crossed the country a few times with just a Rand McNally road atlas, and managed to find an interesting road now and again, but that was mostly by stopping and asking people.  When GPS mapping became available for cars, I jumped on it.  On long road trips, it would put my mind at ease knowing there was a gas station up ahead not long before my tank was empty...kept me from pulling over for fuel every 100 miles in the desert.  Like others have pointed out, the ability to locate about ANY service is outstanding and worth having for that reason alone.

On the motorcycle, I carry a paper map for backup, but use a navigation app on the iPhone mounted to the dash with a RAM mount.  It's easy to just glance down at and gives me as much detail as I could want...or just a simple giant "LEFT ARROW" with "23.2 miles" below that.  That's all I really need while I'm busy with motorcycling tasks.  I find though, that the key to finding interesting places, is the ability to drag the route line to something squiggly looking, well off the main drag.  I'd ride more interesting roads, with less traffic, more scenery and better stories.  I ended up finding the weirdest little nooks in the country!  It makes taking the "road less traveled" less intimidating and therefore I'm more likely to do it.  The app will even find me the nearest winery!   :good2:  Good stuff and a lot of richness would have been lost in my last trip with paper maps alone.

Cap'n Ron. . .

I found the same thing, you can get off the beaten path without the concern of back tracking.  You can just focus on whats around you and explore.  When you are done just punch in where you need to go and follow the instructions.

Ron, I don't know to much about water navigation and I am in amazement of the task.  In 1976 I spent 21 days at sea and never seen any land going from Hunters Point, Calif. and Viet Nam.  As I remember we seen a ship once or twice in the whole trip. The navigation just amazes me. Another thing that befuddles me is submarines. How in the heck do they navigate......
I spent some time in a P3 with a navigator that did some celestial navigation with some thick ass book and charts. Gave me a head ache just watching him....
I just went back up to my seat and power levers hoping he would get it figured out..... My job was to keep the funny things outside spinning not to worry about where we were going.
George

Quote from: Mike Ramos on February 10, 2014, 11:24:41 AM

Stating that there are "no shortage of Luddites out there (and probably here)" as it pertains to GPS is as pertinent as saying that riding an FJ instead of a modern motorcycle with new technology makes a person a Luddite.

And believing that without a GPS a person is "missing out" on excellent roads and rides, or even secondary roads is not logical , it is ridiculous.

Mike Ramos.

Mike, I gave a little thought to a reply to your post while at work this afternoon ( I didn't expect anyone to respond) but I see it has been pretty much covered.
I don't see any relevance in you FJ analogy. It would be more appropriate if you were comparing 1st gen GPS to current ones.
The FJ is a modern bike.

You may shun the freedom that GPS gives you but to say it's ridiculous is a bit extreme, particularly when you're in the minority.

If you read my post, I did say you could do it with a map but GPS was easier. I used maps for 40 years, perhaps that's why I have embraced the GPS so enthusiastically.

I also said if travelling, you need a map as well but you don't need to consult it constantly.
It has also been my experience that if stored somewhere moderately accessable, maps and road atlas' are water magnets.

No, I have stared at my last ripped, sodden map in the headlight in pouring rain and howling wind with frozen fingers and still ended up flipping a coin because there is no way of determining where I am so the map can't tell me where to go.

It's surprising how many times the GPS tells you to make a turn that is against your gut feel only to find out it was right.

Yes, they occasionally have glitches and don't the Luddites love reciting them. But to someone of moderate intelligence with a dash of common sense, this is not an issue.

What they do is free you from the burden and uncertainty of navigating and leaves you nothing to do but enjoy the ride. I like that.

Once you become accustomed to using one, and stop staring at it the whole time, they actually enhance your riding pleasure.

I have had many a portion of a ride spoilt by fretting over being lost and running out of fuel, not any more.

Noel

Cap'n,
Have you read Francis Chichester's book, I think it is "The lonely Sea and Sky"
What I enjoyed most was his early days as a pilot and his pioneering work with navigation.
Most people don't realise that sailing was just something he turned to in retirement.
As a sailor and and a reader though, I suspect you might have read it.
Noel

Quote from: FJ_Hooligan on February 10, 2014, 09:14:38 PM

One thing I HATE about Garmin is by the time I zoom out enough to see the bigger picture, I lose all the good roads.  When zoomed in enough to see the roads I want to see, I can't see enough to find a good route.

I use a combination of maps and Garmin's Mapsource to plan routes.   Unfortunately, Mapsource has the same problem as the GPS software with road resolution.  The Garmin road database leaves a lot to be desired.  If I have a destination without a specific route planned, I find myself fighting with it a lot. 

I think I used the zoom out feature once, that's what maps are for. I don't find it a practical tool for planning.
After entering your destination, do you enter a few towns and intersections as way points so it selects the route you want?

Quote from: not a lib on February 10, 2014, 08:41:45 PM

That's why I like to plot routes on Google Maps, then get them into the GPS.

Yep, that's me.

Quote from: TexasDave on February 10, 2014, 08:17:30 PM
Hello. My name is Dave. I am a Luddite. Not by choice but by circumstance.

Fear not Dave, you can't be a Luddite by circumstance, only choice.

Quote from: fj johnnie on February 10, 2014, 06:46:19 PM
I agree with Mike. 

Hey guy's, we've been here an hour already, anyone seen Mike Ramos or FJ Johnnie?

Quote from: ribbert on February 11, 2014, 02:02:07 AM

It's surprising how many times the GPS tells you to make a turn that is against your gut feel only to find out it was right.

Yes, they occasionally have glitches and don't the Luddites love reciting them. But to someone of moderate intelligence with a dash of common sense, this is not an issue.

Noel

Spot-on Noel!  I have said for years, that a good GPS based nav tool COMBINED with a bit of common sense will get you about anywhere.  Leave off the common sense part and you'll find yourself yelling at an inanimate object for no good reason.   :unknown:

Sailors...scratch that...good sailors will always back up the first location result by using a second method.  Really good sailors will use a third method to verify the first two results.  So, let's say I take a 3-point fix....you sight an object on shore with a handheld compass, then you draw a line on your paper chart from that object going in the direction you noted on your compass.  Okay, so you must be somewhere on that line.  Now you find a second object on shore and repeat the above by drawing a second line.  Where those two lines intersect is your location.  Taking a third sighting makes this a three-point fix and all three lines should intersect on your chart.  Good enough?  Not a chance.  Now you note the depth of water at that location on your chart...If it says you should be in 60 feet of water, verify this with your depth sounder.  If the two agree...(On a high-visibility day), that's typically enough considering these two methods were likely backing up what you've been seeing on your GPS.  On VERY foggy nights...when I couldn't see the crew member on the bow from the helm, I have resorted to dead reckoning my way through...backing that up with GPS AND depth...AND sound.  The breakwater at the entrance of the harbor should be on the port side...do I hear water breaking on the port side?  Check!   :good2:

In the early days of GPS, the system was referred to as "differential GPS" where the military would purposely skew the satellite data three times a day!  One minute you think you know where you are on the ocean, next minute you appear 300 yards to the west!!  Good if you're the U.S. military trying to dissuade the use of GPS by an enemy...terrible if you're a sailboat navigating your way through a channel at night in the fog!   :shok:

Point is, not one of these methods is 100% reliable and you have to apply common sense and use your best judgement given the situation.  To me, having more information available to make a decision is always a good thing.   :yes:

Cap'n Ron. . .

Quote from: ribbert on February 11, 2014, 02:42:36 AM
Cap'n,
Have you read Francis Chichester's book, I think it is "The lonely Sea and Sky"
What I enjoyed most was his early days as a pilot and his pioneering work with navigation.
Most people don't realise that sailing was just something he turned to in retirement.
As a sailor and and a reader though, I suspect you might have read it.
Noel

I also loved this book, it's quite short and you of all people would find it fascinating.

(http://d202m5krfqbpi5.cloudfront.net/books/1388462711l/4806.jpg)

Noel

Thanks for the book recommendations...looks like both of those would be perfect for the next long passage!

"And all I ask is a tall ship and a star to steer her by" -John Masefield-

Cap'n Ron. . .

Quote from: movenon on February 10, 2014, 11:58:42 PM
submarines. How in the heck do they navigate......

SINS (Ships Inertial Navigation System) uses some dinky spinning ball bearings levitated magnetically and monitored with lasers in 3 directions...  any acceleration of the boat in any direction is measured and used to correct velocity and the system does a fancy Dead Reckoning for you.  As you move along the small errors in this system build up, leading to a positioning uncertainty represented as a circle around where the SINS says you are.  When this circle gets close to anything you don't want to possibly hit (shallow water, the edge of the "box" USN has given you to stay in, etc), it's time to come to periscope depth and stick your antenna up to get a satellite fix (GPS)...  then you reset SINS and get back to business.

We also had to learn and practice celestial navigation and would use the sighting method Ron describes (through periscope) if we were close enough to land, but general procedure is SINS with a daily satellite fix to shrink the uncertainty circle.

Frank (ex-Submarine Officer)

Thanks for the summary Frank !  Its something I have wondered about.  Flying I understand but being underwater always mystifies me.  So now we are in the box with trench's, mountains, underwater volcano's, misc. crap on the floor, nets and other subs and you don't prong into anything (well, not often)...
My hats off to you Frank  :hi:  Takes a very special person to stay in one of those tubes...
When in San Diego we often stay at the Sub base in Point Loma. Hard to beat the view.
George

Another Luddite checking in...and another book recommendation (sort of).

While I use GPS (I've got 3 of 'em, with bike-specific mounts), I much prefer paper maps. The GPS is for telling me WHERE I AM RIGHT NOW. The paper map stays folded and visible in the windowed pocket of my tankbag.

As for the "book recommendation":

DeLorme, and probably others, publishes State Atlases. The state is divided into sections, and shows a great level of detail. Every county road (by number), dinky towns that don't appear on the regular state maps...even every grass landing strip (for those aeronauts among us, and I know there at least a couple). I grew up in an extremely small Illinois town and the Illinois state atlas shows roads around my home town that I had no idea existed. It's made for some very interesting days spent exploring.


Rossi

Quote from: rlucas on February 11, 2014, 02:05:53 PM
Another Luddite checking in...and another book recommendation (sort of).

While I use GPS (I've got 3 of 'em, with bike-specific mounts), I much prefer paper maps. The GPS is for telling me WHERE I AM RIGHT NOW. The paper map stays folded and visible in the windowed pocket of my tankbag.

As for the "book recommendation":

DeLorme, and probably others, publishes State Atlases. The state is divided into sections, and shows a great level of detail. Every county road (by number), dinky towns that don't appear on the regular state maps...even every grass landing strip (for those aeronauts among us, and I know there at least a couple). I grew up in an extremely small Illinois town and the Illinois state atlas shows roads around my home town that I had no idea existed. It's made for some very interesting days spent exploring.


Rossi

Rossi,

Great recommendation there!  I have picked up a few of the Delorme Atlas & Gazetteer series for states I've lived in.  They're tailored to outdoor recreation and show amazing detail...Things like topographical lines, old mine locations, 4WD roads and places to camp.  I haven't found a GPS based tool that can represent all this great exploring in that level of detail and usability.

A state road atlas would be great to have...My girl likes to flip though paper maps as we're traveling by car.  She'll often come up with a "Hey, pull off at the next exit...I want to go see something!"

Cap'n Ron. . .

Quote from: Flynt on February 11, 2014, 09:17:34 AM

Quote from: movenon on February 10, 2014, 11:58:42 PM
submarines. How in the heck do they navigate......

SINS (Ships Inertial Navigation System) uses some dinky spinning ball bearings levitated magnetically and monitored with lasers in 3 directions...  any acceleration of the boat in any direction is measured and used to correct velocity and the system does a fancy Dead Reckoning for you.  As you move along the small errors in this system build up, leading to a positioning uncertainty represented as a circle around where the SINS says you are.  When this circle gets close to anything you don't want to possibly hit (shallow water, the edge of the "box" USN has given you to stay in, etc), it's time to come to periscope depth and stick your antenna up to get a satellite fix (GPS)...  then you reset SINS and get back to business.

We also had to learn and practice celestial navigation and would use the sighting method Ron describes (through periscope) if we were close enough to land, but general procedure is SINS with a daily satellite fix to shrink the uncertainty circle.

Frank (ex-Submarine Officer)

Yeah, thanks for explaining that...very cool!

I swear the collective knowledge of the members of this board is amazing.  We've got Pilots, divers, mechanics, welders, IT folks, house framers, machinists, ex-military, current military...sub-mariners!!!

As helpful as folks are around here, there should be a non-motorcycle category for "Anyone know how to ______?"  The blank could be anything from fabrication to cooking the perfect ribs.  Note to self:  Pick up ribs.   :good2:

Cap'n Ron. . .

 Hey yes I am still lurking here and reading. I have a GPS, and I can read a map. I use both. It's funny to read all the response too. Some like one for this reason and some like something else for another reason. I only agreed with Mike because it doesn't really matter what you use or enjoy using. If you use one or the other I will not call you a Luddite or anything else. When I looked at new GPS unit this past spring, something I could use to plan my trip to Nova Scotia it was impossible to find anyone at any store that had the remotest clue how to operate one of them. My idea was to use  Google maps to plan my route, dragging the trip all over the unique and fun looking roads. Once done I wanted to install that route onto the GPS and go. Unfortunately no one I spoke to had a clue how to do this nor heard of anything that could. So we took a GPS along for all the benefits that they come with. Finding fuel lodging etc. One of the riders on the trip only used maps, one only a GPS. The guy with the map penchant typically found the best roads and had the best sense of direction. The guy leading with the GPS never got lost , but sometimes following it took us to an area ( like Boston) or in a direction that took much longer than the maps guy or locals would use.
  In summary no one is wrong. No one is right. Each offers something unique the other cannot duplicate. Also some will allow their prejudice to help then believe whatever theory they are pre-disposed to believe.

Quote from: fj johnnie on February 11, 2014, 07:07:51 PM
My idea was to use  Google maps to plan my route, dragging the trip all over the unique and fun looking roads. Once done I wanted to install that route onto the GPS and go. Unfortunately no one I spoke to had a clue how to do this nor heard of anything that could.

There are a few select Garmin models that allow to transfer your home made 'Routes' from the computer to the GPS using MapSource.  MapSource isn't as good as Google (what is??) and it is painstakingly slow to make an interesting 'route---at least for me it is. But I'm getting the hang of it and have found some interesting ways to get from point A to B because of it.  It isn't perfect, but I love the GPS, and yes, I still always bring a map. I've tried it without one--not good.     As mentioned, the Delorme state atlases are hard to beat if you're riding the back roads in the US and compliment the GPS well as many of the interesting roads don't always show up on a regular road atlas.

Errr Ummmm.  :blush: Mapquest has a direct link to Garmin devices....

Quote from: markmartin on February 11, 2014, 08:03:03 PM

Quote from: fj johnnie on February 11, 2014, 07:07:51 PM
My idea was to use  Google maps to plan my route, dragging the trip all over the unique and fun looking roads. Once done I wanted to install that route onto the GPS and go. Unfortunately no one I spoke to had a clue how to do this nor heard of anything that could.

There are a few select Garmin models that allow to transfer your home made 'Routes' from the computer to the GPS using MapSource.  MapSource isn't as good as Google (what is??) and it is painstakingly slow to make an interesting 'route---at least for me it is. But I'm getting the hang of it and have found some interesting ways to get from point A to B because of it.  It isn't perfect, but I love the GPS, and yes, I still always bring a map. I've tried it without one--not good.     As mentioned, the Delorme state atlases are hard to beat if you're riding the back roads in the US and compliment the GPS well as many of the interesting roads don't always show up on a regular road atlas.

On my Streetpilot 2820, I've had luck in converting Google Maps to .csv or .gpx files and loading them to the GPS.  Problem is, no more often than I do it, I have to relearn the process each time.   :unknown:

For our trek to Alaska last summer I relied on my Garmin Zumo 550 and Microsoft Streets & Trips (2013 edition) on the laptop. With MS S&T you can save your routes to gpx files and import them to the GPS. It worked quite well for the most part. What I did learn as I went was to insert more waypoints than needed as the gpx file is nothing more than a series of waypoints and the Zumo would calculate the route differently than MS S&T. I also imported some of the gpx files to my buddy's Zumo 665 and was surprised that it didn't always calculate the route exactly the same as my Zumo 550. We made sure both GPS units had the same route setting (quickest, no avoidances...) but that didn't seem to help. The GPS units must use slightly different algorithms to calculate the route.

Regarding GPS vs. maps, there is no contest (in my opinion) between the two. GPS (and a good map laptop for reference) has made riding on trips, especially in a group way more enjoyable. I would also argue that it's a safer way to travel as it beats constantly having to glance down at the tank-bag map to figure out where you are and where your next turn is. Fewer U-turns and when you do miss a turn just wait for the GPS to recalculate and carry on! Since using GPS units on our trips we've ridden some incredible back roads that we would not have found with our normal assortment of maps (usually State and Provincial maps).

Next favourite technology upgrade / gadget has been Bluetooth communicators - specifically the Cardo SCALA Q3.

Zwartie

Well, it appears the Jury is in.
Maps (or Google) to decide where you want to go and GPS to tell you how to get there.

I have always loved maps and atlas' but poring over the computer and Google maps has elevated the experience exponentially.
I look at a paper map now and it now longer excites me the way it used to, it's just lines on a piece of paper. On-line maps and the world of information that is only a tap away has taken over, for the better.

I too travel with a paper map in the window of my tank bag but rarely need to refer to it. In fact, it has been displaying the same section for the last year. I seem to have the planning and the execution of the route fine tuned to the point where I have not needed the map, but I still make sure I have one with me, just in case.

Like Pat with his bacon and eggs on the morning of the ride planning the day with his paper maps and mates, I too have a tradition, I retreat to the computer room with a coffee after dinner the night before a ride and lose myself in Google maps. I love Google maps. Planning is a part of the ride I thoroughly enjoy.
I am like the kid in the lolly shop, so many choices, so much information. I can spend hours on this part of a ride sometimes, It's something to be savoured, not rushed.

Once the ride has been decided on, I enter the destination and way points into the GPS, mount it on the bike and go to bed well satisfied, dreaming of the day to follow and can't wait for the alarm to ring. I get on the bike next morning, hit 'GO' and I'm off.

How you get there really doesn't matter, as long as you're out there. If you choose maps, fine, as long as it's an informed decision. For those that feel they may have been unfairly categorised here, there is a difference between not having it yet and shunning it on principle (Luddites).

You often hear people say "I've done it this way all my life and it works just fine". Dragged kicking and screaming into the current century, it then becomes "I don't know how I ever did without it"

This is one application of modern technology that greatly enhances motorbike riding and over time I'm sure will be embraced by everyone.

Zwartie, I find if I keep adding way points (not many needed) on Google maps until it picks the route I want, I then just enter those same points into the Garmin and it will pick the same route.
I agree with the Q3. I have a Q2 that has done around 140,000km's and has just recently become unreliable after many years of brilliant service. After much research I will be replacing it with a Sena SMH10.
A few years back there was an icon on Google maps that would let you download direct to the Garmin. I believe there was some legal dispute that resulted in it being removed. A great shame, it made it so easy.


Noel

What the hell is a "Luddite"?

I'm wondering if I'm one.

Is it cool to be a Luddite? Is it contagious? Can I get a vaccination that will prevent it?

C'mon man, spill it. Perspiring minds need to know!

~JM~

Just in case you missed my post, Mapquest has a direct link to Garmin devices. Not exactly helpful if you don't use Garmin GPS units but it may help a few members.

(http://fjowners.com/gallery/6/104_12_02_14_11_18_18.jpeg)

Quote from: ~JM~ on February 12, 2014, 11:18:57 AM
What the hell is a "Luddite"?

I'm wondering if I'm one.

Is it cool to be a Luddite? Is it contagious? Can I get a vaccination that will prevent it?

C'mon man, spill it. Perspiring minds need to know!

~JM~

Lud·dite   ˈlədˌīt/

noun: Luddite; plural noun: Luddites
1.
a member of any of the bands of English workers who destroyed machinery, esp. in cotton and woolen mills, that they believed was threatening their jobs (1811–16).
a person opposed to increased industrialization or new technology.
"a small-minded Luddite resisting progress"
Origin

perhaps named after Ned Lud, a participant in the destruction of machinery, + -ite


NeoLuddite

A slang term used to describe an individual who believes that using science and technology will have moral and social implications on society. Neo-Luddite is used to describe those who are considered to be anti-technology, or those who dislike or have a difficult time understanding and using modern science and technology. The word Luddite is a historical political movement term used to describe people who are opposed to technological innovations. Neo-Luddite is the modern term used to describe a Luddite.

Quote from: FJmonkey on February 12, 2014, 11:21:40 AM
Just in case you missed my post, Mapquest has a direct link to Garmin devices. Not exactly helpful if you don't use Garmin GPS units but it may help a few members.

(http://fjowners.com/gallery/6/104_12_02_14_11_18_18.jpeg)

I saw it, but after being misled a time or two by the old Mapquest site, I won't use them.   :pardon:

How about "Semi-Luddite"?

Someone who is on the fence & can swing either way as far as technological advances are concerned. Someone who believes that the influx of many modern pieces of equipment actually contribute to the dumbing down of society. How many of you use speed dial & can't remember anyones phone number, sometimes even your own. Or the several Search & Rescue missions that are sent up the mountain to retrieve the unprepared casual hiker that is lost but has dialed 911? Etc.

Yes... I'm a Semi-Luddite

~JM~

I actually considered getting a personalized "LUDDITE" license plate for my unrestored '58 Chevy truck, but then I ride to work to go fly a $30 million dollar piece of heavy equipment around with all the bells and whistles.
I'm so conflicted. :empathy3:

There's a time and a place for everything, you can go both ways. :nyam1:

The problem isn't really the glut of tech.  Honestly, it isn't.

GPS absolutely rocks.  Sometimes.  Like when you're a zillionty miles from home, navigating an ugly city that you don't know at all, and it gets you through the maze of one-way streets to your destination.  Of course, it's usually most useless for the last two turns, when you're actually trying to get someplace that actually is on the alley despite what the address says.  It's no replacement for knowing where you're going, or good, logical directions.

Side story:  I went to visit a friend who was going to a college a few hour's drive away from home.  I was a fairly recent driver, and had only had a liscence for a year or two at the time.  His directions were brilliant though; take this road into town, exit where it makes sense, and from that exit ramp, look for the highest building around.  Get to the base of it, and be wary of one-way streets.  I made it in record time, with no missed turns.  Much easier than a more specific set of instructions, because it forced me to think (!) and pay attention to what I was doing.

The problem with technology being applied to cars/bikes/etc that I've had is a very simple one. 

ABS is no replacement for having good brakes.
Traction control is no replacement for having a decent chassis.
Stability control isn't either.

And none of these are a replacement for skill of the operator.

A friend recently bought a new Focus.  It's got all the fancy shiny gadgets on it, a kickass stereo, bluetooth integration, etc etc etc.  The problem is that it sucks to drive, because the chassis is crap, and the motor doesn't respond well.

I recently bought a GTI.  It's got many of the fancy shiny gadgets on it.  The stereo is kinda crap, no bluetooth, etc.  But fundamentally it's a fairly good chassis, with sharp steering, good feedback from powerful brakes (admittedly they could be more linear!), a fair chunk of power, lots of grip.  The biggest problem with it is the stupid damned computer power in it.  When you hit the gas, there's a very perceptible delay before the throttle blades open, followed by a bit of turbo lag.  It's easily the most difficult car to drive smoothly that I've ever driven, because of this delay.  The delay is noticable when you turn the cruise off, when you use the throttle, when you do pretty much anything that the computer has any control over.

If I could only buy a bike that had this lack of immediacy, I'd stop riding, frankly.  To me, the big appeal of riding is the control.  My bike does exactly what I tell it to do, WHEN I tell it to do it.  Grab the brakes hard and it'll flip over.  Grab the gas hard, and it'll flip over.  It's not often that you hit WOT on a big bike and are left wanting more, nor left waiting for it to start pulling hard.

People will tend to shop based on how many gadgets and tricks and toys something has, because it's much easier to compare two things and buy the one with more features.  It's much more difficult to buy based on which has a good chassis or feel.

Frankly, I'll trade all the stupid electronic trickery for a brilliant ride in the first place.  Sure, without an onboard GPS I'll get lost more, circling the block twice before finding the damned turn, and so on.  But if the machine is worth riding for pleasure, then there's a great reason to go get lost.

Because I'll enjoy it.  Lost or not.

About the GPS: in our summer travels we use the old and classic Michelin maps. The GPS is absolutely useful. It is all time crying "unknown road" mainly when we are at the most fabulous roads, in lost places with fantastic views with no traffic, no gatsos, no cops....

GPS is great for telling me where I am relative to where I want to go.  Otherwise, man, you can wander around on 221 and 321 south of Boone forever.  "I'm ON 221!  How on earth can I possibly be crossing 221???  Which one of these damn roads gets me to the KOA?  Do I make a left, or a right, or go straight?"  But yeah, it's no substitute for a big ol' map, which itself is no substitute for knowing where you're going.

On longer trips through the unknown, GPS is infamous for routing you along horrible surface streets. "That 67 mile highway route will take you over an hour.  Here, try this 45 mile stretch of Shopping Center Boulevard, which will only take you an hour with its 45 mph speed limit.  You're welcome!"

Andy, there are a handful of people here, that in my opinion, consistently offer good, sound advice, you are one of them (not that I always agree with you)
But in this case I disagree with pretty much everything you say.

Quote from: andyb on February 13, 2014, 02:02:42 PM



........His directions were brilliant though; take this road into town, exit where it makes sense, and from that exit ramp, look for the highest building around.  Get to the base of it, and be wary of one-way streets.  I made it in record time, with no missed turns.  Much easier than a more specific set of instructions, because it forced me to think (!) and pay attention to what I was doing.

Verbal directions from someone who knows how to get there trying to think like someone who doesn't rarely works. They get so focused on the detail, they forget the big things.

The problem with technology being applied to cars/bikes/etc that I've had is a very simple one. 

ABS is no replacement for having good brakes.

ABS is in addition to good brakes. Under ideal conditions I'm sure you can out brake ABS, I can. The other 95% of the time the ABS equipped bike will have stopped well short of you, unless you locked the front wheel on that bit of gravel you didn't see and fell off or hit whatever it was you were trying to avoid because you were light on the brakes in the wet.
Govt accident research says that in accidents where the bike has hit something, 80% could have stopped short of impact had they used maximum braking. Most riders have no idea how hard they can brake but they are all shit scared of locking up the front wheel.

Traction control is no replacement for having a decent chassis.
Stability control isn't either.

I don't understand either of these been seen as a negative. They remain inactive up until the point at which you are on the brink of losing control (I'm talking about road driving/riding here)
The significant decline in high sides in MotoGP is attributed entirely to traction control. R1's were the most over represented bikes at wreckers when they were new for the same reason. I'm sure some very skilled riders could have explained from their hospital beds what it feels like to light up the back wheel, cranked over, mid corner.
I've experienced traction control both in a test environment on a racetrack and on the road, brilliant.

And none of these are a replacement for skill of the operator.

Yes they are, you can't out drive/ride the electronics. Do not forget we are talking about mass production vehicles here and if the Rossi's and Stoner's can't do it, what hope do we mere mortals have.


A friend recently bought a new Focus.  It's got all the fancy shiny gadgets on it, a kickass stereo, bluetooth integration, etc etc etc.  The problem is that it sucks to drive, because the chassis is crap, and the motor doesn't respond well.

Ford Focus? It's a shopping trolley. What did you expect?  I have driven the current Focus and it is an excellent car FOR WHAT IT IS. I wouldn't have one if you gave it to me but I can appreciate it for what it is.

I recently bought a GTI.  It's got many of the fancy shiny gadgets on it.  The stereo is kinda crap, no bluetooth, etc.  But fundamentally it's a fairly good chassis, with sharp steering, good feedback from powerful brakes (admittedly they could be more linear!), a fair chunk of power, lots of grip.  The biggest problem with it is the stupid damned computer power in it.  When you hit the gas, there's a very perceptible delay before the throttle blades open, followed by a bit of turbo lag.  It's easily the most difficult car to drive smoothly that I've ever driven, because of this delay.  The delay is noticable when you turn the cruise off, when you use the throttle, when you do pretty much anything that the computer has any control over.

The problem with the Focus and the GTI is not the cars but your expectations. You are talking about cars built in their hundreds of thousands for the masses. If you want a car with crisp handling and super brakes you will have to buy a dedicated, low volume sports car or tap into the huge GTI aftermarket scene.


If I could only buy a bike that had this lack of immediacy, I'd stop riding, frankly.  To me, the big appeal of riding is the control.  My bike does exactly what I tell it to do, WHEN I tell it to do it.  Grab the brakes hard and it'll flip over.  Grab the gas hard, and it'll flip over.  It's not often that you hit WOT on a big bike and are left wanting more, nor left waiting for it to start pulling hard.

The lack of immediacy is more your particular car than a consequence of modern technology and you will get used to it. The lag on the Focus is only noticeable between idle and redline in all gears anyway.

People will tend to shop based on how many gadgets and tricks and toys something has, because it's much easier to compare two things and buy the one with more features.  It's much more difficult to buy based on which has a good chassis or feel.

That's because 99.9% of the people want gadgets, toys, electronic bling and will never get even remotely near the cars outer limits, unless of course they get into trouble, in which case the electronic trickery will save them.

Frankly, I'll trade all the stupid electronic trickery for a brilliant ride in the first place.  Sure, without an onboard GPS I'll get lost more, circling the block twice before finding the damned turn, and so on.  But if the machine is worth riding for pleasure, then there's a great reason to go get lost.

The electronic trickery doesn't detract from the brilliant ride, it's not a case of one or the other. You wouldn't know it was there until you were on the threshold of an 'oh shit' moment.

A light weight, near enough to 200hp sports bike ridden on the road in all conditions is going to do two things without electronic aids. Either you are never going to get any where near using it's full power on a regular basis (but why else would you buy one) or you're going to crash it.
You can't tell me that cranked right over at 100mph in a corner that you have never seen until this very second, that you can pick the point just a whisker before the wheel lets go under power and know exactly how fast you can feed it on as you exit. Then we've got dips, bumps, pot holes, tar snakes, gravel, water AND what if right at the point you needed to stand it on it's nose to avoid some hazard.

Andy, I fully understand your sentiments, the purity of the simple machine, it has a lot to do with what I like about the FJ. In cars I love the gadgets, ALL of them, from the oscillating air vents to the voice commands because my car has a different role. It's not an excitement machine or a toy. It's just transport, and for that I like comfort and don't need sports car handling or power and that is what most of the world wants, car makers spend millions researching this and that's why they make the cars they do. dull as most of them are, like the Focus.
As well as the FJ, I have a couple of 1920's cars that I enjoy for there simplicity.
The pilot of a modern passenger plane will tell you that these days, rather than being in control of the plane, they monitor the device flying the plane.

Now, THAT would be the day to stop riding.

Noel

[/i][/color]

Noel: about the traction control. Sorry, but I disagree with you

What is it the necessity for a lightweight 200 CV machine if the traction control only let you apply 40?

Last summer I´ve been fortunate enough to test a 2002 MV Augusta 750 and a 2003 GSXR 750 in a closed track, without electronic gizmos. Well, both bikes were considerably faster in acceleration than much modern machines with controlled traction and in theory more powerful, and not only in my hands

Well, yes, with a computer at the levers the bike will run faster, like drones...

Thanks for correcting Andy's homework. It looks like he gets a zero on his report card. Everything he said is wrong wrong wrong. All hail the chief!!!!
In case anyone doesn't get it that is sarcasm.

Quote from: fj johnnie on February 14, 2014, 03:50:12 PM
Thanks for correcting Andy's homework. It looks like he gets a zero on his report card. Everything he said is wrong wrong wrong. All hail the chief!!!!
In case anyone doesn't get it that is sarcasm.

Johnnie,

Credit where credit is due. I acknowledged that Andy, in my opinion, is one of a few members that consistently offers good advice and knows his stuff.
I didn't say he was wrong, I said I disagreed with him.
This is a forum, you are as entitled to comment on my views as I am on his if you don't agree with me.
There was nothing malicious in my post and I expressed my views without sarcasm and I'd be surprised if Andy felt slighted by my comments.
Andy is no stranger to disagreeing with other members himself, and saying so.
I like the fact that people comment on each others views, if done so respectfully (Klavdy?) it just puts more information out there.

Noel

Quote from: Alf on February 14, 2014, 09:42:32 AM

What is it the necessity for a lightweight 200 CV machine if the traction control only let you apply 40?

Alf, the traction control only kicks in when the wheel starts to spin. It does not rob you of any power. If you want to spin the tyre out of corners, turn it off and it is the same as a bike that does not have it fitted.

Unless you are talking about adjustable engine mapping with settings like "rain mode" which does make the bike dull but that is not traction control. And, if you don't select it, it has no effect on engine power.

Quote from: Alf on February 14, 2014, 09:42:32 AM
Well, both bikes were considerably faster in acceleration than much modern machines with controlled traction and in theory more powerful, and not only in my hands

What can I say? MotoGP bikes use it and reckon it's faster. You lose drive when the wheel starts to spin so I can't see how this would be faster.

Noel

I´m much faster without traction control in a closed track, since I apply rear brake to slide the rear to situate the bike on in the apex while I accelerate hard. Well, I´m not Rossi, but I could be the representative of the medium rider with a little sporty pretensions.

On the streets, for the medium rider I reckon that electronic guided bikes are safer... but it is safer too drive a car, so I don´t see the necesity

Maybe I´m getting old and not too wise

On Moto GP the parameters are GPS guided along the circuit, so it is not representative

Quote from: ribbert on February 14, 2014, 08:51:07 AM
Verbal directions from someone who knows how to get there trying to think like someone who doesn't rarely works. They get so focused on the detail, they forget the big things.

Actually it worked precisely because there was no detail.  Instead of directions from my wife, which include things like "at the next stoplight, there's a grocery store to the left, go straight" (which helps not at all, seeing as it's something to remember/follow that isn't necessary; exclusions include a landmark right after a really ugly intersection to ensure you're on the right path).

Quote
ABS is in addition to good brakes. Under ideal conditions I'm sure you can out brake ABS, I can. The other 95% of the time the ABS equipped bike will have stopped well short of you, unless you locked the front wheel on that bit of gravel you didn't see and fell off or hit whatever it was you were trying to avoid because you were light on the brakes in the wet.
Govt accident research says that in accidents where the bike has hit something, 80% could have stopped short of impact had they used maximum braking. Most riders have no idea how hard they can brake but they are all shit scared of locking up the front wheel.

Under non-ideal conditions, I can out-brake ABS, as can anyone with a foot and the ability to apply pressure with it.  An example would be when rolling at a low speed on soft snow.  Yes, the car will lock the wheels and perhaps slide a bit out of line, but it will stop shorter.  Stopping shorter is more important than stopping straight (which ABS is designed for) frequently.  I'm coming up to the stop sign at the end of the street--if I stop short and a little cockeyed, I'm safe.... rolling farther and stopping straight means that I'm unsafely poking into the intersection.

The more important issue here is subtle, and I don't think it's been addressed when applied to driving aids other than GPS:

There's ABS, and there's ABS.  (This will also hold true for other driving aids, GPS included.)  I would imagine that the ABS on an F1 car is significantly better than on a consumer passenger car.  BMW ABS is reputed to be very, very good indeed, though I've not experienced it myself.  By comparison, I have experienced one of the early ABS systems as used on a 1995-ish Chevy Berretta, and it was so bad that I assume it wasn't operating correctly from new.

Today, drivers are taught that in a panic situation, you should stand on the brakes and steer around whatever you're trying to avoid.  The brake pedal should pulse at a high rate (~10hz or so), but you should apply as much pedal as you've got the strength to use, and let the car do the work.  You can get significantly shorter, while still straight, braking if you apply the brakes as a motorcyclist would, using the ABS as a warning that you need to back off a pinch (threshold braking).  It takes a significant amount of skill to do this, which explains the rationale for teaching new or other low-skill drivers to use the brakes as taught.  The problem is that it teaches bad habits.

Yet, when you buy a car, it just says ABS.  It doesn't say that it's a Bosch multitronic fascinator brake application assistance device or that it's Bob's Discount House of Brakes best.  Because it's now a legal requirement for US cars, including the low-end ones, it's just another checkbox that has to be marked when shopping for the components for that car, and the unit's implementation will likely be crap due to the cost of engineering to improve it to a driving standard instead of just having it.

This issue is known to GPS users, who can remember that their Tomtom wasn't worth a damned at that one intersection next to the church where it wanted them to go backwards down the one-way, but their Garmin routes them correctly (brands pulled straight from ass, not a judgement, just an illustration).

Quote
I don't understand either of these been seen as a negative. They remain inactive up until the point at which you are on the brink of losing control (I'm talking about road driving/riding here)
The significant decline in high sides in MotoGP is attributed entirely to traction control. R1's were the most over represented bikes at wreckers when they were new for the same reason. I'm sure some very skilled riders could have explained from their hospital beds what it feels like to light up the back wheel, cranked over, mid corner.
I've experienced traction control both in a test environment on a racetrack and on the road, brilliant.

Nevermind the massive changes in tire technology in the same timeframe.  :)  Tires have improved to an incredible degree even in the past 20 years, leaps and bounds over what they once were!

But again, go back to the prior thought:  I'll bet a reasonably expensive lunch that the world-class racing machines have more development done on the tuning of their traction control.  They're also going to be tuned for a given surface, one that lacks some of the problems we find on our own roads.  Traction control is a good idea, but I've yet to experience an implementation of it that works as well as the technology promises.  Perhaps I just need a chance to drive an F1 car, yes?(!!).

The reason why ABS isn't generally tuned to an optimal state is the same reason why traction control isn't tuned to an optimal state:  Cost.  If you add $5k to the cost of your car, it's going to be a very rough sale against other cars that have "ABS and TC just like the expensive one!".  That cost has to come from the development budget for a given car/bike/truck/etc, and it's all going to go against the bottom line.  At the same time, they're making cuts in other places in the engineering/design, because there's no point in making something that prices itself out of the market.  Ferrari has reputedly made one of the best traction control systems of any carmaker, but I'll betcha that they make less money than Toyota gets for the Camry overall, and money is going to drive things.

Quote
Yes they are, you can't out drive/ride the electronics. Do not forget we are talking about mass production vehicles here and if the Rossi's and Stoner's can't do it, what hope do we mere mortals have.

A mass market bike is not going to have a team of engineers working on it to make sure that my traction control is set up exactly right for my commute to work.  Because of this, it's going to be a safe compromise setting, and that means that it's going to be sub-optimal.

I wonder if flattrackers would use traction control.

*Doohan clearly is better than Rossi and/or Stoner.  This is not here nor there, though.

Quote
Ford Focus? It's a shopping trolley. What did you expect?  I have driven the current Focus and it is an excellent car FOR WHAT IT IS. I wouldn't have one if you gave it to me but I can appreciate it for what it is.

Actually it's not an excellent car for what it is.  It's a crappy car with a bunch of tinsel on it, for what it is.  That's my point.

Quote
The problem with the Focus and the GTI is not the cars but your expectations. You are talking about cars built in their hundreds of thousands for the masses. If you want a car with crisp handling and super brakes you will have to buy a dedicated, low volume sports car or tap into the huge GTI aftermarket scene.

I almost agree, except that you're absolutely incorrect.  The GTI I purchased in part because the MKV variant recieved the highest awards (car of the year, etc) from pretty much everyone that reviews cars.  That doesn't mean that it has to have such nastiness when it's driven, and I've got a lovely counterexample that argues my point well:

The Mazda Miata (or MX-5, or Eunos, depending on your market) had a magnificent chassis for driving hard.  Crisp steering, powerful brakes (if lacking in feel in stock form, the OEM pads are crap).  It wasn't an ideal daily driver for a multitude of reasons, but was a mass-market, inexpensive car that sold in the hundreds of thousands.  The earlier MR2 (not the third generation) had a nearly telepathic chassis as well.  So did the earlier RX7.  I understand later RX7's did as well, but never had the pleasure.  I'm sure there's other cars that also fit the bill, I'm just going from cars that I've driven personally.  These cars were satisfying even just driving up the street to the shop, because they all shared a tight, connected feel, and involved you as a driver.  

A Miata grabs you by the lapels and shouts at you, giving a constant stream of unmistakable feedback about the attitude of the car, the road's surface, even the smell of the air outside.  Very much like a motorcycle!  Unfortunately, they can get very tiring because they will NOT shut up!  Even when you just want a relaxed drive home, they've got the big clown shoes on and shake you to death while shouting about the road condition.  Not good when the road is suboptimal and it's been doing it for the past five hours.  Not an enjoyable car when the outside temperature is -5F.  Driving one on a tight, curvy bit of road, on street tires, through 2-3" of virgin snow is one of the great joys in life, though.

As an aside, I bought the GTI because I wanted an ideal all-arounder, instead of a focused car.  I've done the handling thing, the power thing, etc.  I wanted a bit more of a GT car this time around, something that's fun to drive at a 70% pace, but can also make you relax and just get you home at a 10% pace without beating you to death with the various compromises (NVH).  On the whole, it's magnificent.  Once it starts to slide, either due to the road conditions being awful or your pace being a bit too enthusiastic, it turns into an overweight, overpriced, FWD box.

Quote
The lack of immediacy is more your particular car than a consequence of modern technology and you will get used to it. The lag on the Focus is only noticeable between idle and redline in all gears anyway.

Partially true.  The lack of immediacy is (IMO) due to the fact that it was still built to a price.  I'm sure a different ECU and some significant development would fix things adequately.  I'm slowly getting used to it, but the lack of throttle response makes heel-toe difficult, to put it mildly.  I'm also learning left-foot braking, being the first FWD that I've owned in a long time.  I think it's a consequence of poor implementation of modern technology going up against the bottom line, really, and I'm sure it'll improve over time--but only if people can buy other things.  Kinda a least common denominator sort of thing.

For an example, look at your computer.  It's faster than the one you had in 1998.  It's probably a LOT faster than the one you had in 1998 (I hope!).  But even then, even when your computer was new, it had that irritating delay when you asked it to do something.  Want to open your browser?  That'll take 3 seconds, please.  That length of time hasn't really changed since your 1998 computer.  The newer one is vastly more powerful, but where does the power go?  It's going into tinsel.  Gadgets.  Crap.  It's being used so that you have shiny buttons that change color when your cursor passes over, a shiny interface with plugin compatability, automatic updating, etc etc etc.  Result?  That little delay has stuck with us for all these years.  There are ways around it, of course, but you need to do a fairly substantial reworking of the software and often the hardware as well.

On the plus side, we're now seeing more and more people developing and reverse engineering ECU's.  So there is hope for all of us who want immediacy in our machinery.

Quote
That's because 99.9% of the people want gadgets, toys, electronic bling and will never get even remotely near the cars outer limits, unless of course they get into trouble, in which case the electronic trickery will save them.

Sadly correct.  That said, when I owned the Miata, frequently people would tell me that it was too small to be safe and I'd surely die and so on and so forth, because they'd be vastly safer in their SUV's with ABS and so on.  Never actually hit anything in the little Mazda though, and for a simple pair of reasons.  The first was that it was so involving to drive, you were firmly connected to the driving experience, and that meant that you were always paying attention.  Nothing will shorten your braking distance as much as braking earlier, right?  The other thing was because it was such a controllable and inspiring chassis that you could use all of it when necessary.  (Nevermind the fact that something that's 2400lbs will stop rather better than something that weighs 5000lbs.)

I let a few people drive it, and unanimously they said it was amazingly easy to drive, despite the alien third pedal at their feet.  Because the feedback was so strong and so instant, it was exceedingly rewarding and easy to control.

Another aside:  [rant] The current model of MX-5 Miata is crap.  Same awesome chassis, but the new and significantly more powerful engine is almost hilariously unsuited to the car's character.  They may as well have put a damned diesel in the thing.  [/rant]

Quote
The electronic trickery doesn't detract from the brilliant ride, it's not a case of one or the other. You wouldn't know it was there until you were on the threshold of an 'oh shit' moment.

A light weight, near enough to 200hp sports bike ridden on the road in all conditions is going to do two things without electronic aids. Either you are never going to get any where near using it's full power on a regular basis (but why else would you buy one) or you're going to crash it.
You can't tell me that cranked right over at 100mph in a corner that you have never seen until this very second, that you can pick the point just a whisker before the wheel lets go under power and know exactly how fast you can feed it on as you exit. Then we've got dips, bumps, pot holes, tar snakes, gravel, water AND what if right at the point you needed to stand it on it's nose to avoid some hazard.

Yes, it does.  The trickery costs money.  That money comes from the development of the machine.  To keep the cost remotely under control, something gets shorted, and it seems that it's the chassis, the braking feedback, the unseen bits of it.  It probably won't cut into things that are noticable as much, such as paint quality, because those things are easily visible in the showroom.

If you're heading into a unknown corner at 100mph, not to put too fine a point on things, but you're probably asking for it.  If you're lucky, it'll be a speedtrap.  The truth is, HP figures sell bikes (and cars, and trucks, and boats, and so on!).  The reality is that you only rarely use all of it if you have any intent to keep your liscence and life.  If you're coming out of a corner at near full lean, no matter the machine, you're only going to use a fairly small fraction of the throttle in any case, unless you're on something very underpowered indeed.  Even an underpowered bike has enough power to get you into serious trouble in a hurry!

While we're talking about it as it relates to pro-level racing, I should mention that the fastest dragbikes don't use traction control.  It's no substitute for a great chassis.  Yes, traction control is not legal in most classes, but I'm talking about more of the grudge bikes, where the only rules are being able to get someone to bet against you.  Yes, they do use other ways to manipulate the power, but it's typical time/gear based (boost controllers, nitrous stages and controllers, and so on).

Quote
Andy, I fully understand your sentiments, the purity of the simple machine, it has a lot to do with what I like about the FJ. In cars I love the gadgets, ALL of them, from the oscillating air vents to the voice commands because my car has a different role. It's not an excitement machine or a toy. It's just transport, and for that I like comfort and don't need sports car handling or power and that is what most of the world wants, car makers spend millions researching this and that's why they make the cars they do. dull as most of them are, like the Focus.
As well as the FJ, I have a couple of 1920's cars that I enjoy for there simplicity.
The pilot of a modern passenger plane will tell you that these days, rather than being in control of the plane, they monitor the device flying the plane.

I don't like gadgets in cars/bikes.  I like fundamentally good cars, if they have toys or not is not relevant.  On of my mental tests is to think, "How would I feel if I was stuck in traffic in/on this".  I like cars and bikes that are enjoyable to drive, that can put a grin on my face when it's raining or not, if the road is clear or not, if there's potholes and frost heaves or not.  It's not just transport to me; if it was, I'd simply buy whatever was cheapest and/or most practical.  I'd probably have a 50cc scooter for the summer and some horrible box for the winter.

But because of (people who think like) you, I'm not allowed to buy a new car without ABS or stability control anymore, and motorcycling is heading the same direction.  There will always be something for the enthusiast to buy, but because of these added requirements, the cost of admission is rising faster than it otherwise would be.  In France, this same thinking means that there's much less issue, you simply can't have more than a given power limit.  In Japan, your top speed is strictly governed by law.  These are not things the rest of the world should be wanting to emulate.

Ask those same pilots if they'd be happier flying a 285hp biplane that doesn't even have a roof instead of a DC-10.  Enthusiast's machines are a compromise, just as something for the masses would be, but the lines are drawn in different places.

No matter the gadgetry, no matter the safety features, there is absolutely nothing that will ever make up the difference that an attentive and reasonably competent operater will make.  And that, really, is my point.  ABS is teaching people how to brake ineffectively, and annoying those of us who know how to use them reasonably well.  Traction control is less problematic because it can almost always be turned off.  When it's good, it's a genuinely helpful tool... but it frequently isn't good, it's just a button on the dash that doesn't do much.  GPS is great when it's good, but it's also another distraction, either taking the driver's attention away from the task at hand or helping them turn their head into autopilot mode.

I think there's a place for cars that sing and dance and whatever (Acura RL, Mercedes S-class, and so on).  I just think that if more people drove cars that were good to drive, instead of good to sit inside, people would pay more attention to the task, and the result would be a more attentive and happier.  If you're not looking for this in your driving, you're doing something very silly.  Take the bus, because then you can have a beer or two.  :)

Quote from: ribbert on February 15, 2014, 04:14:36 AM
What can I say? MotoGP bikes use it and reckon it's faster. You lose drive when the wheel starts to spin so I can't see how this would be faster.

Top Fuel bikes don't use it, and are better at accelleration than anything else on two wheels. 

Optimal traction actually includes a small amount of controlled slip. 

Most of us ride neither GP class machines nor nitro powered machines.

Wow, lots of good stuff in this thread.....keeps getting better.
The points raised makes me think from a different view point. OK, I'll give GPS a try. I can always turn it off.
There have been times where, out in the boonies, beyond cell coverage, where I have *almost* run out of gas.
Late at night, after a long day, riding tired, and I'm running out of gas..I don't like riding that way.

Like Andy, I too enjoy my Miata. It's a drivers car for sure. In the twisties, if you can't go fast with 100hp, 500hp won't help you....Miatas are all about carrying corner speed ('cause they are really slow in the straights)

Back to the future of motorcycling.... How about that new Skully helmet with the 180* rear view camera and HUD which incorporates GPS? http://www.skullyhelmets.com/heads-up-display-helmet/ (http://www.skullyhelmets.com/heads-up-display-helmet/)
If I show up to the WCR with that little bugger, will I still be called a Luddite...or Neo-Luddite?
(Not too sure on the Reevu mirror system)

Quote from: Pat Conlon on February 15, 2014, 02:52:22 PM

Like Andy, I too enjoy my Miata. It's a drivers car for sure. In the twisties, if you can't go fast with 100hp, 500hp won't help you....Miatas are all about carrying corner speed ('cause they are really slow in the straights)

Pat, I totally agree. I love my Miata...it's like driving a go-cart. Pretty basic, and an amazingly well-balanced car. I've even learned to deal with the inevitable comments: "Oh, you drive a chick car." (You think so? Drive one.). "Oooooh, what a cyoooooot caaaaaar!" (You think so? Drive one.). "How in the hell do you get in and out of that thing?". (I'm 6'3" and 57 years old. Gettin' in is not the problem, but gettin' back out gets harder every year.)


Rossi

Quote from: fj johnnie on February 14, 2014, 03:50:12 PM
Thanks for correcting Andy's homework. It looks like he gets a zero on his report card. Everything he said is wrong wrong wrong. All hail the chief!!!!
In case anyone doesn't get it that is sarcasm.

I guess I should thank Andy for correcting my homework. It looks like I get a zero on my report card. Everything I said was wrong, wrong, wrong. Does this make Andy the new chief!!!!?

Damn, I was just warming to that title too.

Quote from: Pat Conlon on February 05, 2014, 12:54:19 AM
......why not cut to the chase and have you tell me why it's a stupid idea....
You being a master mechanic and all.....

Can I still be the master mechanic, can I, huh, can I?

  :sarcastic: :lol:

Quote from: ribbert on February 15, 2014, 05:54:06 PM
...Can I still be the master mechanic, can I, huh, can I?

:sarcastic: :lol:

Ok, I'll give you another bite at the apple.....Again, what is the reason race bikes use this?
(http://www.constructorsrg.com/images/levers/image_large_remote_lever.jpg)

Think hard.... If you know someone who races motorcycles, it's ok to ask them....
after all...they *might* know more than you, but then again, probably not....

All teasing aside (yes Noel, I'm teasing) I'm with Noel, I have to side on safety.
Thru my years (61) I seen a lot of blow back when new features, systems and materials were first introduced.
Plywood for roof sheathing? Are you kidding? That's just sawdust, glue and veneer. Give me 1x6 any day.
ABS instead of cast iron for plumbing? You really want to put plastic pipe in your house? What about in a fire?
Copper pipe for water lines? Really? You think that soldered joints are as strong a the threaded joints we use with galvanized pipe? You know what happens when copper and water gets together..right? The copper oxidizes turns green. Want that in your water? Want your kids to have green teeth?
CPVC or PE for water lines instead of copper? Are you nuts? Plastic? That just fancy lawn sprinkler pipe. Do you let your kids drink out of your lawn sprinklers? What about all the carcinogens that will leach out of the plastic?
Ground Fault Circuit Interruption? Silly. That's going to be a nuisance.
Seat belts, what a farce. Everyone knows is safer to be ejected. Get away from that car. It could burn.
Helmets? You can't hear. You can't see. In a crash you're gonna break your neck.
Fuel injection for cars? Electronic ignition control? What happens when the black voodoo box stops working? With carbs you can repair them by the roadside. Gap the points with the cover of a match book.
The list goes on and on...

I have a good friend who was spit off his Ducati on Palomar Hwy.  A nasty high side, broke his collar bone and shoulder. His fault? Yep. Too much throttle coming out of a curve. Could traction control have saved him? Yep.
Charlie was a very good rider. Now he has retired from riding. His 916 was totaled but he pulled the engine and now it's mounted on his garage wall...a sad but beautiful piece of art work.

I practice threshold braking religiously. On a clean dry road. Would I ever be in a situation where ABS could save me? Yep, all the time. Linked braking? Yep. Traction control? Yep, the big torque on Randy's 1350 can overwhelm the 180 back tire. On a stock FJ, not so much unless really leaned over..

Andy's point that there is no replacement for training, continued practice and experience I totally agree with, and I think we all do....but are all these new safety systems neutering motorcycling?
I've heard this argument before with other issues (see above) I gotta go with safety. Charlie agrees.

That said, there will be a price to pay for all these new systems $$ and a price to pay for maintaining them.

Yep, gotta go with safety too. You may be able to outperform your black box, but that's at a time and place of your choosing. You won't have a say when your number gets pulled and you have to be perfect right now.
Good luck. I enjoy working on my skills, but I'd rather not rely on chance, I'll take that insurance policy if it's available.
My beef with all this electronic trickery/gadgets? It's letting all the stupid ones survive too. Evolution used to take care of this little problem, but we're interfering and saving all the cagers. I often wish cars were more lethal to their inhabitants, it'd make them pay more attention.

I've never forgotten a bumper sticker I saw once: "The gene pool needs more bleach." :good:

  I too enjoyed a Miata for many years. 1991, no ABS , no traction control, no stability control. No power either but the joy of handling and momentum. Fun, reliable and economical. Kind of like an FJ!!

Quote from: Pat Conlon on February 15, 2014, 06:15:25 PM

Quote from: ribbert on February 15, 2014, 05:54:06 PM
...Can I still be the master mechanic, can I, huh, can I?

:sarcastic: :lol:

Ok, I'll give you another bite at the apple.....Again, what is the reason race bikes use this?
(http://www.constructorsrg.com/images/levers/image_large_remote_lever.jpg)

Think hard.... If you know someone who races motorcycles, it's ok to ask them....
after all...they *might* know more than you, but then again, probably not....

(https://i.chzbgr.com/maxW500/2369785600/h8D1DFE82/)


Pat, I assume you are referring to my post on this quite a while back?

While you may well have been teasing, there is probably now a whole bunch of people left wondering. :scratch_one-s_head:

Noel

 (popcorn)