If you were wondering...

In aus.motorcycles on Sun, 8 Feb 2004 22:57:17 +1100

Funny, I've never been in situations where backing off didn't work just
as well.

Except for ones I put myself in, through impaitence or carelessness.

Zebee

 

Rumour has it, that if only one letter is obscured, they'll issue the
infringement to all vehicles with that combination of letters/numbers that
vaugely fit the description of the vehicle.

But at the moment, as far as I know, it's just a rumour.

 

Oooh, oooh, and loud pipes save lives!

How loud is an Acrapovic on a ZX6 anyway, Marko? ;-)


BTH

 

You've heard it... pretty darn quiet, in the scheme of those things... and
that thing's on there to boost the top end, so it's easier for me to power
out of trouble.

 

You don't ride in melbourne or you don't ride like others
just becuase you don't ride a certain way doesn't make you the be all
and end all Zeb.
Face facts different strokes for different folks.
There have always been 2 schools of thought with the powere and backing
off debate.
there are times when power is good and lack of power is bad.
there other times when power is bad and lack of power changes attitude
to adjust accordingly.
What you do with the wrist depends on the situation.
there are way too many variables to say one way is better than the other.
so lets end this here or we be arguing in circles again.

 

A few of examples for you:
1. Cruising along about 40 or 50, a 4WD comes reversing out of a driveway at
speed without looking (or rather without seeing). There's no way I could
stop in time, as soon I had comprehended his trajectory I gunned it and
swerved. Had I tried to slow down I would've lost my ability to turn and
ended up in his back seat. I thought it was all over but somehow missed.

2. Cruising along about 30 or 40, a 4WD which has parked on the side of the
road just pulls out when I'm right next to him. I can se his big front tyre
pointed right at me and he's not slowing down. Again I gunned it and shot
around in front of him. Any form of braking or deceleration would have most
certainly ended up with me under his vehicle

3. Rush hour traffic travels in waves. If you get caught in it, you get
stuck amongst a dangerous mix of slow boats, and impatient lane changers. I
find by lane splitting at appropriate times and accelerating through this
traffic you can get to the gaps between the waves. You can then sit in this
zone without fear of a lunatic ramming you.

 

In aus.motorcycles on Mon, 9 Feb 2004 17:18:37 +1100

Did you need to gun? Or was swerving enough?

When that happened to me, swerving was enough. Sure, guning helped, but
it wasn't *essential*.

I lanesplit, but don't find I need horsepower to find the gaps. I was
able to do it as well on the MZ as on the Guzzi,

Horsepower is a tool, but I don't think it's ever the only tool for a
situation, and I do think it can add more trouble at more times than it
can stop trouble.

Going faster is seldom about horsepower, it's just going faster. Going
a *lot* faster is about horsepower, and I think it's seldom if ever the only
answer.

Zebee

 

Ok, I take your point, but a few points you may not have thought of.

Ok, so at 40-50, assume you brake as heavily as possible. Yes you'll
hit him. At maybe 20km/h. What if instead getting around him when you gunned
it, you had just clipped the edge of his bumper. At, say 60. Then been
knocked off course and into oncoming traffic. Also going 60 (yeah right!).
So, instead of you getting a few bumps at a combined speed of 20, you get
whacked by a Datsun 180B, with an approach velocity of 120kmh. It's not
going to be pretty.

Have you heard of honking? I've found that a good honk does wonders.
Also, same deal as above. If you brake, you might hit him slowly, but that's
better than the possible alternatives.

This is very true. But you can be at the front of the pack by simple
lane-splitting without needing to speed at all. Also, you could also sit at
the back of the wave.

Sorry. I'm not trying to pick on you or anything, but you're using safety to
justify something which is inevitably going to end up with us all having
front number plates. Road safety is no where near as simple as anything like
that. There are a _few_ (and they are VERY occasional) times where exceeding
the speed limit will get you out of danger. But there are a _LOT_ more where
braking will do just as good, if not a better job.

For my money, I'd rather hit the car at 20kmh, rather than risk hitting an
oncoming car with a combined speed of a lot more than that. If it's a choice
between arriving late and a bit battered and bruised or possibly not
arriving at all, it's late, battered, and bruised every time.

 

Yes but it *can* be under certain circumstances.
YMMV

 

You spin me right round, baby, right round, like a record, baby, right
round, round, round...

 

and so the circular argument of whatifs continues.
lets put it into perspective.
there are times when power is good
there are times when it isnt
Throwing the speed issue and fnp in the mix is not the issue here.

 

thats the concept of arguing in circles ik

 

And yet, the majority always seem to advocate the 'power is good'
mantra, without seeming to give due consideration to the converse.


---
Cheers

PeterC [aka MildThing]
'81 Suzuki GS450-s
'87 BMW K100RT

www.dmcsc.org.au

 

If you expect him to help you keep your image as a responsible rider, the
least you can do is chip in and help him pay his speeding fines.

Nev..
'03 ZX12R
'02 CBR1100XX

 

Maybe the majority gave due consideration to the converse and decided that
'power is good' is better? Perhaps you didn't give that due consideration.


Nev..
'03 ZX12R
'02 CBR1100XX

 

I have a 250. What is fast to me, is sedate to you. Perhaps we're talking
about the same thing but using different words?

 

In aus.motorcycles on Mon, 9 Feb 2004 22:17:02 +1100

Perhaps. But I did a lot of 250 riding too, I owned and rode 250s for
commuting and touring for what, 10 years after I got my bigbike licence.
(and they were commuter bikes, not powerful 250s)

Even on a 250, there are seldom times a sudden increase in speed is
needed. A swerve works as well in most cases, and braking ans sewerving
can be even better. Because it gives you more time to determine which
way to go and how far. Acellerating and swerving shortens the time you
have to scout your path, and requires you to see more of it, as youll
travel further in a shorter time. That last is less of a problemn with
250s than with high horsepower bikes.

In the case of the 4WD backing out, doesn't matter which bike I'm on,
I'd just have swerved. On a low horespower one, or one out of its
revrange, twisting the throttle won't do much except distract me. ON a
high horsepower one, or one that is able to leap forward, it might put
me in a bad situation, especially if the bike is new and I'm not used to
its reactions. (And as I ride lots of different bikes regularly, I use
techniques that work no matter what I'm on. )

I probably wouldn't have braked, it depends on how far the car is out of
ther driveway, how fast, and what it's likely to do next. Braking and
swerving might give it enough time to get out as far as it's going to,
so I know how far I have to swerve, and know where it's going next.

I note that a couple of weeks ago, I saw a bod who lived on a moderately
busy road back out of their driveway. At mach 1. Seems that's how they
coped, they figured "the faster I barrel out of here, the smaller the
gap I can get into". The road wasn't that busy at the time, the
highspeed reversing manouvere, right across 2 lanes and into the other
side of the road, then gunning in that direction, was probably habit.

If they are coming at any sort of speed, then you have to brake, because
you don't know how far they are coming, so you don't know how far to
swerve. And acellerating means you'll hit them.

I was far enough away that I didn't have to brake. I was in my usual
spot travelling that road - in the outer of the 2 lanes in my direction,
travelling close to the dividing line between them. If I'd been closer
to Our Hero, my instinct would have been to brake because of the speed
they were moving, and then I'd have time to work out which side to go and
how far. If I'd thought beforehand "if this happens, I gun it and
swerve around the arse end", then I think I'd have just as likely hit
the car. I was *not* expecting it to back allthe way into the other side
of the road....

If they hadn't been going so fast, then I would probably have had time to
just swerve, and braking would have given me lots of time to swerve.
Gunning it would probably have worked too, if I'd been sure which side
of it to go, except that I doubt I've have expected it to keep on coming
at that speed....

Zebee

 

[hangs head in shame]

'tis true. My motto is - "when in doubt - STOP!"

It'll kill me, one day.

---
Cheers

PeterC [aka MildThing]
'81 Suzuki GS450-s
'87 BMW K100RT

www.dmcsc.org.au

 

"Knobdoodle" wrote

Second option please sir.

Theo

 

"Peter Cremasco" wrote

What a dumb motto. What's wrong with "twist the throttle to the stop
and close your eyes"?

Theo