The future of motorcycling

[Alf]

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

[andyb]

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).

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).

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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]

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).

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.  

[andyb]

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.

[Pat Conlon]

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/
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)

[rlucas]

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

[ribbert]

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.

......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?

 

[Pat Conlon]

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

Ok, I'll give you another bite at the apple.....Again, what is the reason race bikes use this?


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....

[Pat Conlon]

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.

[airheadPete]

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."

[fj johnnie]

  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!!

[ribbert]

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

Ok, I'll give you another bite at the apple.....Again, what is the reason race bikes use this?


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....

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.

Noel

[Bones]