Left right, left right

Does anyone know what the original thinking behind the placing of gear
lever and brake on the left or right foot was? Or whether there was any
specific logic behind the later adoption of left foot gearchange as
standard was?

 

I believe it was to standardise using your right foot for braking, as in
cars, for the benefit of the Septics.

 

Before foot changes became the norm bikes had a hand change mounted on the
tank. This was on the right hand side so that you could operate clutch with
left hand while changing gear with right hand. A rod ran down to the right
side of gearbox. When positive stop foot-change mechanisms became popular
they were often grafted on to existing gearboxes so the lever was on the
right side.

The shift pattern most adopted was to press gearlever down to change up.
This is logical & safest as you are more likely to want to change up while
leaned over & don't have to put foot under lever to do it, which if you are
well leaned over is a bit risky. Racing bikes in general still use the press
down to change up configuration for this same reason. A few manufacturers,
like Triumph, set theirs up the other way like Jap bikes but still on the
right. Then along came the Japanese who decided to switch the gear change &
rear brake from one side to the other. Ultimately everyone followed suit. I
have no idea why they did this & would be interested to know.

Iggy..

________________
No I don't have a sig.

 

I don't know why either but I do know that the first positive-stop
gearchange for a bike was used on the Velocette KTT in 1929.


--
Steve
1996 Triumph Trophy 1200 For sale
Velocette Clubman
Velocette Thruxton
Milk floats, stainless steel sinks

 

my BMW has a left-hand change, and so do other continentals, and have done
for ages, AIUI.

 

Roger () wrote:
: Does anyone know what the original thinking behind the placing of gear
: lever and brake on the left or right foot was? Or whether there was any
: specific logic behind the later adoption of left foot gearchange as
: standard was?

And why did european bikes have the chain on the right but british
and japanese have it on the left?
Blair.
'97 CBR600

 

Didn't Laverdas have a right foot gear change up until the sixties or
early seventies? I think that guzzis and ducatis may have had right foot
change too in the early days.

 

The Adler motorcycles had a left foot change that had neutral at the bottom
and four gears up from there.

 

British bikes have it on the left 'cos it's *traditional*. Pioneer machines
have pedals and the pedal chain goes on the right because that's where
bicycles have it (and it means the free-wheel can be RH threaded), therefore
they had the engine driving the other side.

 

British Bikes had the gears on the right , Japs the other way round . To
suit the "septics" it was made law in the US that gears should be on the
left same as Harleys , which explains why you get left and right shift
Bonnies + Tigers. Steve the grease

 

Do you mean why everyone followed suit?

That was because of the US Government, who decided that they would
make it mandatory for there to be standard sides for the brake and the
gearshift. At this time, British bikes were standardised to right-foot
shift and Japanese bikes to wrong-foot shift. Harley Davidson were
rubbing their hands about this, as obviously the US Government would
favour them - excvept that they didn't. HDs also had right-foot shift,
and The Motor Company was apparently most dischuffed that the Japanese
standard won out over the Anglo-American one.

With the US being a big market, manufacturers obviously wanted to keep
selling there, and as it would have been stupid to build bikes with
both arrangements of foot controls, all the manufacturers (except
Enfield) standardised on the current pattern.

 

Guzzi's (pre the all disc T3) had the option of swapping gear and brake
levers over.

 

Same with some early Suzukis - T500 etc.

 

Mike Fleming wrote:

Pretty close. The Sportster was right foot shift, as was it's
predecessor, the K model.

http://www.ironharley.com/kr750.htm


The Americans did get their way. The big twins made them more money than
the other models. This is the shift pattern they wanted to standardize.

The big twins, sold to police forces, were left foot shift. That was a
carry over from the tank shifter that used to be located on that side of
the bike, along with the foot clutch. They took off the foot clutch
pedal and put a booster spring assist to the actuating rod and ran a
cable up to the handlebar.

mike

 

Normal motorcycle manufacturers don't like hanging a clutch basket
farther from the bearings than they have to. When you stick a rear chain
sprocket on a shaft that surrounds the input shaft, you have to. Most
English stuff had the clutch and primary chain on the left side, with
the rear wheel drive sprocket right under it. The big twin Harley still
does. It's stupid. On quite a few models you had to dismantle the outer
primary cover, take the primary chain off, remove the clutch, remove
inner primary cover, remove rear wheel, remove swing arm
The original reasoning (?) was perhaps that in top gear, with an
internal 1:1 ratio, both shafts were spinning at the same speed, saving
wear on the bearings holding both shafts.


There is a BSA transmission here. It's a typical design of the time.

http://www.velocedge.com/42Harley/Drivetrain/Default.asp



With higher outputs, the rest of the world went with a geared primary
drive. At the same time, it was better to shorten input shaft lengths to
prevent fatigue from flexing. That meant the output shaft had to be
moved to RIGHT case side, opposite the input shaft.

This gave both shafts much greater support and stopped the need for the
flimsy sleeve arrangement previously used in combining shaft inputs/outputs.

That's my story and I'm sticking to it.



mike


--
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __
/ /\ / /\ / /\ / /\ / /\ / /\ / /\ / /
/ /\ \/ /\ \/ /\ \/ /
/_/ \/_/ \/_/ \/_/ \/_/ \/_/ \/_/ \/_/

..let the cat out to reply..