(Please visit one of our advertisers)

No donations or subscriptions are required

   OR   
   
Subscription choices:
Board Karma = 40  (3488 positive of 3870 votes is 40 %pts higher than a neutral 50%)
All Things (Safety Oriented) Motorcycle   
Username:
Password:
Save Password
Forgot your Password?

You can the entire collection of Safety Tip articles in a 33 Megabyte PDF Portfolio

 All Forums
 Motorcycle Safety
 Contrary Opinions
 Turning causes leaning?
Previous Page | Next Page
Member Previous Topic Discussion Topic Next Topic
Page: of 4

James R. Davis
Male Administrator
17292 Posts
[Mentor]


Houston, TX
USA

Honda

GoldWing 1500

Posted - 07/13/2010 :  8:37 AM Follow poster on Twitter  Join poster on Facebook as Friend  
quote:
And it seems to me that 'causing' or 'changing' are two words to describe the same relationship.


This discussion is going nowhere because you insist on making up reality.

There clearly is a difference between causing and changing despite what it 'seems like' to you.

Steering is an act of CHANGING the steering angle. Being in a turn without changing the steering angle (or speed) - that is, turning - results in a bike being in a lean. One must conclude that turning causes that lean angle to exist. So too does the math. There is no 'change in steering angle' factor in the equation to determine centrifugal force. There is just speed and radius of the turn.

Arguing that there is no difference between changing and causing is like arguing that there is no difference between speed and acceleration.

So, we agree that we have different opinions on the matter.

Ride safe.
Go to Top of Page

Daddio
Male Advanced Member
775 Posts
[Mentor]


Calera, AL
USA

Suzuki

Bandit 1250

Posted - 07/18/2010 :  11:48 AM
I am sorry that trailrider is gone because I want to try and defend that steering causes leaning and then the bike turns because of the lean. My argument is purely observational but compelling.

In an earlier post James states -
quote:
Because your motorcycle is a single track device, when you turn it leans. That is not at all the same as saying that if your bike leans, it is turning. You can drive in a perfectly straight line with a strong cross wind and your bike will be leaning but not turning, right?


Absolutely right.

What is causing the lean in this case? You are not turning, but you are steering. You actively must steer into the crosswind to avoid being blown off your straight course. That steering input is keeping your bike straight down the road. No turning is involved, but the lean is clearly there. From this observation it is clear that the corrective steering input is causing the lean and turning has nothing to do with the lean. I postulate that if this corrective steering input were not applied that the bike would enter a turn with no lean from forces other than steering. A turn with no lean.

This special case aside, let us look at what happens in a turn.

You are going nice and straight down the road. You are then presented with a turn. Now you must steer into that turn. Speed appropriate you put a turning force into your bars. The bike momentarilly out tracks and then falls int the turn. It is this lean that creates the centripital/centrifugal force that makes the bike go into a curved path.

Following the chain of events -

Steering input creates lean.
Lean creates centripital force.
Bike turns to counteract the centripital force.

After analyzing the behaviour of the bike in a crosswind, this argument makes sense. The bike leaning but not turning with steering input. The bike not leaning but turning withoutsteering input.

Now look at the case of a rider guiding the bike by transfer of body weight - look ma no hands. A rider takes his hands off the bars and as expected the bike continues staight down its path, other forces like a crosswind not in play. The rider then leans their body off the bike. The bike now enters a lean and follows a curve to counteract the centripital force introduced by the lean. This is not a precise steering effort, but a steering effort none-the-less.

Steering input creates the lean. The bike then follows a curve to counteract the centriptital force created by the lean.

From what I observe - steering causes a lean. Absent other forces (crosswind) the lean causes the centripital forces that create a turn.

Go to Top of Page

James R. Davis
Male Administrator
17292 Posts
[Mentor]


Houston, TX
USA

Honda

GoldWing 1500

Posted - 07/18/2010 :  12:48 PM Follow poster on Twitter  Join poster on Facebook as Friend  
Yikes, another one!

Centrifugal force is the friction pushing against your contact patch which is the result of that contact patch NOT moving in a straight line. It is, essentially, an inertial consequence - that is, the bike's mass trying to continue moving in a straight line.

Leaning does NOT cause friction, nor does it try to affect the direction of travel of the bike's mass. TURNING does that. STEERING changes direction of travel, which changes centrifugal force, which changes the lean angle. Quit steering and the bike continues to turn, and centrifugal force continues unchanged, as does the lean angle.

Your 'logic' would have it that leaning causes a change of direction that causes centrifugal force that causes leaning. Rather circular, wouldn't you agree?

So, I claim that centrifugal force causes leaning and you claim that leaning causes centrifugal force. If your claim is true then if a passenger in car lean to the right, the car will turn to the left which will, in turn, result in the passenger leaning to the right. If my claim is correct, the car will not change directions, nor will there be any centrifugal force.
Go to Top of Page

Daddio
Male Advanced Member
775 Posts
[Mentor]


Calera, AL
USA

Suzuki

Bandit 1250

Posted - 07/18/2010 :  3:33 PM
One more question - How do you account for the leaning bike travelling straight in a crosswind?

Turning is not entering into the system. Steering and leaning are evident.

Yikes - I really am trying to have fun with this.

Once the curve is determined, lean angle is set by speed and radius of the turn. No doubt about that. Faster means more lean is required. Steering input adjusts the lean. That lean must be dialed in in order not to under or overshoot the curve for any given speed. Tighter/smaller radius means more lean is required. Once again, you must steer/adjust the lean so the bike follows the appropriate path. Yes you can adjust the lean angle of the bike through hanging off - the lean of the combined CoG will not change.

I am looking for the cause of the turn. The steering input happens and makes the bike lean. What exactly is wrong with that observation? What chain of events in order happen to make the bike turn? I see steering input happening first. What then causes the bike to turn or go straight in the case of the crosswind. I see lean.
Go to Top of Page

CaptCrash
Male Advanced Member
744 Posts
[Mentor]


Nampa, ID
USA

Honda

Phantom

Posted - 07/18/2010 :  4:30 PM
quote:
Originally posted by Daddio

One more question - How do you account for the leaning bike travelling straight in a crosswind?

Turning is not entering into the system. Steering and leaning are evident.




Not to jump in and muddy things but what you're not taking into account is the very thing you're basing a lot of your concerns on: HOW IT FEELS.

Go out into a heavy cross wind, and rather than simply concentrating on surviving--concentrate on what the handlebar is doing in your hands...I know it sure feels to me like I'm pressed LEFT into crosswinds from the left. With no math on my side (and feel free to correct me) I ride, wind blows from left, bike moves RIGHT, I press left to counteract...wind relents, bike starts to turn left, I change my press.

The only reason I'm in here is to try and help my fellow "it sure feeeeels like" people. The math is a pretty brutal business, I can't understand or calculate it BUT I do respect it.
Go to Top of Page

DataDan
Advanced Member
542 Posts
[Mentor]


Central Coast, CA
USA

Yamaha

FJR1300

Posted - 07/18/2010 :  4:56 PM
quote:
Originally posted by Daddio

How do you account for the leaning bike travelling straight in a crosswind?

The crosswind induces a steering input that causes the lean into the wind, which counters the force of the crosswind.

Traveling straight, a sudden gust rises from right to left, tipping the motorcycle to the left. The front wheel steers left due to trail, the position of the contact patch aft of the intersection of the steering axis with the ground (search Tips--lots of info on trail). After a slight and momentary swerve left, the motorcycle leans right--into the wind--just as it would with a countersteering press on the right bar. Trail then does what it usually does when the motorcycle is leaned and steers the wheel toward the lean. Thus the lean to the right counters the effect of the wind trying to lean the bike left.

The correction is "stable"--i.e., it self-adjusts. By some combination of processes that's probably too complicated for me to understand, steering angle and lean angle adjust to keep the motorcycle moving in a straight line while countering the moment produced by the crosswind.

This usually works out well, as long as the rider is maintaining a light grip on the bars that allows the steering changes to occur. A death grip will impede the motorcycle's extraordinary ability to keep going straight in a crosswind.

Tip 140 has good advice for riding in a crosswind.
Go to Top of Page

James R. Davis
Male Administrator
17292 Posts
[Mentor]


Houston, TX
USA

Honda

GoldWing 1500

Posted - 07/18/2010 :  5:06 PM Follow poster on Twitter  Join poster on Facebook as Friend  
quote:
I am looking for the cause of the turn. The steering input happens and makes the bike lean. What exactly is wrong with that observation?


Not much. The steering input occurs which changes the direction of movement so that it is no longer in a straight line and that, in turn, results in centrifugal force which results in the bike leaning. It is because the bike is not going in a straight line that there is lean - that is, because it is turning.

We are in complete agreement that a steering input changes the lean angle - IF it changes the direction of travel.

If the bike were moving on a totally frictionless surface, vertical, and the rider turned the handlebars to a full stop to the right or the left, the bike would continue moving in a straight line and would not lean. (Actually, of course, it would be impossible to keep it vertical so that it would fall down (lean) with or without steering input.)

So, steering angle CANNOT be what causes lean.

Let's look at what 'lean' means. It is the angular difference between vertical and the line described by the center of the contact patch and the CG of the combined mass of the bike and rider. If the bike is leaning into a turn, then the lean angle is a positive number while if it is leaning toward the outside of the turn, it is a negative number. Thus, while in a vertical position (riding in a straight line), the bike is LEANING zero degrees.

At very slow speeds, if you turn the handlebars while riding on a normal surface (has friction), the bike leans toward the INSIDE of the turn. At counter-steering speeds turning the handlebars results in the bike leaning AWAY from the turn. Can you honestly say that turning the handlebars caused EITHER lean? I mean, if you believe that then you could accept the premise that a gun's trigger can cause a bullet to explode out the nozzle on some occasions and on others it causes a bullet to implode into the nozzle. Since you don't believe that, how on earth can you believe that turning the handlebars sometimes causes a lean into and on other occasions it causes a lean outward?

Because we are all prone to using shorthand to discuss concepts.

The details are required to understand cause and effect. If we look at what is really happening when steering input is provided, we will recognize that what we are doing is disrupting a balanced mass in such a way as to allow gravity and centrifugal force to find a new balance. In the case of a slow moving bike, when we turn the handlebars gravity overwhelms centrifugal force which causes the bike fall DOWN. In the case of a faster moving bike, when we turn the handlebars centrifugal force overwhelms gravity which causes the bike to 'fall up'. Now there is no contradiction or obvious logic failure in our observations.

Since gravity is a constant, the only thing that changes in our brief discussion about the war between gravity and centrifugal force is centrifugal force. That is, steering input changes direction of travel. When that direction is not straight ahead, combined with speed, we change centrifugal force.

Since we can find a steady state (balance) between gravity and centrifugal force when riding in a turn, we can adopt a steady state lean angle while doing so. And since we can increase or decrease speed WITHOUT CHANGING our steering angle, we can can change centrifugal force WITHOUT STEERING INPUT - resulting in a different lean angle.

We now have all we need to know to realize that a lean angle is neither caused by nor changed by steering. Instead, centrifugal force is caused to exist or changed in magnitude via steering input. Since gravity always (for us poor earthbound humans) always exists, changing centrifugal force results in a different lean angle (including zero degrees).


As to leaning into a crosswind ... The crosswind affects the bike's attitude in EXACTLY the same way as if it were centrifugal force - increased lateral friction force on your contact patches.
Go to Top of Page

Daddio
Male Advanced Member
775 Posts
[Mentor]


Calera, AL
USA

Suzuki

Bandit 1250

Posted - 07/18/2010 :  5:21 PM
Crash -

Maybe I am to much about how it feels. I am not convinced of that though. I understand the math - If your bike is going x MPH and you are presented a curve of y radius your bike must lean z degrees to negotiate that turn.

What I am trying to get a handle on is cause and effect. I am saying that you usually don't have the luxury of choosing your curve radius. The pavement will do that for you. Assume a constant radius. You can choose you speed. Once you have chosen your speed assume it remains constant. Given those parameters, your bike must lean a certain amount in order to negotiate the given curve and velocity. At this point you cannot decide what the lean angle is. The radius and velocity have done that for you. Now this is where I am saying you must dial in a certain lean angle through steering input. The force you apply to the bars will cause the bike to lean and negotiate the curve at the speed you have chosen. You can choose the wrong steering input and because your bike is not leaning at the correct angle you will miss the turn. But it is your steering input that will change the angle of lean to satisfy radius and velocity parameters.

If your speed remains constant and the turn has a changing radius you must change your lean angle to stay within that curve. That angle is adjusted by steering inputs.

I am looking for the cause and effect of turning. Which came first? The steering input, the lean or the turn?
Go to Top of Page

James R. Davis
Male Administrator
17292 Posts
[Mentor]


Houston, TX
USA

Honda

GoldWing 1500

Posted - 07/18/2010 :  5:28 PM Follow poster on Twitter  Join poster on Facebook as Friend  
quote:

I am looking for the cause and effect of turning. Which came first? The steering input, the lean or the turn?

NONE. They all occur at the same time.

And,*YOU* do not 'dial in' a lean angle - the bike does that by itself.
Go to Top of Page

rayg50
Male Moderator
2082 Posts
[Mentor]


NYC, NY
USA

Honda

Shadow Spirit 750DC

Posted - 07/18/2010 :  7:03 PM
quote:
Originally posted by Daddio
The force you apply to the bars will cause the bike to lean and negotiate the curve at the speed you have chosen.



The force I apply to my bars changes the radius of my turn (the direction of travel).

Go to Top of Page

CaptCrash
Male Advanced Member
744 Posts
[Mentor]


Nampa, ID
USA

Honda

Phantom

Posted - 07/18/2010 :  7:57 PM
quote:
Originally posted by Daddio

Crash -

Maybe I am to much about how it feels. I am not convinced of that though. I understand the math - If your bike is going x MPH and you are presented a curve of y radius your bike must lean z degrees to negotiate that turn.

What I am trying to get a handle on is cause and effect. I am saying that you usually don't have the luxury of choosing your curve radius.



And I would argue that you DO. You have at least 10 feet of asphalt to deal with. You start with a classic outside/inside/outside curve and you've chosen a path that is slightly more 'open' than the engineered curve. You may come in hot, go "oopsie" and then press hard on the inside grip and literally 'square' the turn.

All that riding is something you feel. BUT there's fabulously intricate math going on...the values change but not the equations.

As far as which comes first, the chicken or the egg, I've watched Trailrider here, and on other forums, just beat his own brains out trying to prove what he's feeling is right when he's fighting the math; then he tries to change all the terms and meanings to make the math match what he thinks he feels.

My question is kinda weird but...what does it matter? Trailrider started this thread to simply "call out" Mr. Davis; a bad, bad idea.

It's wonderful arcane and interesting but does it improve your riding and your overall safety?

For me, the simple knowledge of counter-steering is the most important thing--know it does work, use it to your advantage. The difference between "KNOW" and "APPLY" is measurable and visible; AND, in a world where it looks like more riders hurt themselves running wide in turns than anything else, APPLYING the simple knowledge of "Press the inside grip" seems more important than KNOWING the number of angels on the head of a pin. (Though I'm pretty sure there is a calculation out there somewhere for that...a lot depends on sandal size though...)
Go to Top of Page

rayg50
Male Moderator
2082 Posts
[Mentor]


NYC, NY
USA

Honda

Shadow Spirit 750DC

Posted - 07/18/2010 :  8:22 PM
quote:
Originally posted by CaptCrash

For me, the simple knowledge of counter-steering is the most important thing--know it does work, use it to your advantage.



+1
Go to Top of Page
shaddix
Ex-Member

Posted - 03/28/2012 :  6:01 AM
I know this is super old but it doesn't seem this particular forum section gets much traffic so hopefully this is ok >.>

Now I'm the first to point out an inaccuracy in wikipedia but this article seems to contradict some information in this thread.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Counter-steering

The article explains, and what makes sense to me, that you steer to move the wheels out from under the COG, and then utilize that lean to turn the bike without falling over. As in both lean, and direction are both under the rider's control. The steering geometry usually makes it easy to turn once you have the correct lean dialed in.

For example, I know for a fact that if I am going wide on a turn, I do not change the direction of the bike and then the bike leans over further for me. I push the wheels further out from under the CoG by pressing on the inside grip and cause an even steeper lean angle and then follow that up with whatever force is necessary to hold that lean angle steady(causing a decrease in my turn radius). At a certain lean, you have to be turning a certain radius at a certain speed, irrespective of which way the front wheel is facing.

I would disagree with the contention that decreasing speed decreases lean angle in a curve, becaues if you were to lock the handlebars motionless, then decrease speed in the turn, you would simply fall to the inside due to decreasing cenblahblah force. When slowing in a turn the bike steers to the inside on its own to keep from falling over.

We can control steering, and lean angle. Both controls are functions of the handlebars.
Go to Top of Page

James R. Davis
Male Administrator
17292 Posts
[Mentor]


Houston, TX
USA

Honda

GoldWing 1500

Posted - 03/28/2012 :  8:22 AM Follow poster on Twitter  Join poster on Facebook as Friend  
Welcome aboard.

I hope after you spend some time here your concepts will become more accurate, but though they are not now correct, they are not particularly dangerous.

I'll simply deal with your last contention - that slowing down in a curve without changing the position of your handlebar (steering angle) will cause the bike to fall toward the inside of the turn.

That is ONLY true at speeds less than about 10MPH.

At counter-steering speeds the bike will stand more vertically as you slow down.

Consider that you are going so fast in a curve that you are dragging a peg. Would you go even faster in order to lift that peg? Why has speed caused the peg to be dragging in the first place when in your modeled world it should be causing the bike to be more vertical than leaned over?

Whether you now admit it or not, at counter-steering speeds your bike tends to 'fall' UP, not down as you reduce speed.
Go to Top of Page
shaddix
Ex-Member

Posted - 03/28/2012 :  9:56 AM
quote:
Originally posted by James R. Davis

Welcome aboard.

I hope after you spend some time here your concepts will become more accurate, but though they are not now correct, they are not particularly dangerous.

I'll simply deal with your last contention - that slowing down in a curve without changing the position of your handlebar (steering angle) will cause the bike to fall toward the inside of the turn.

That is ONLY true at speeds less than about 10MPH.

At counter-steering speeds the bike will stand more vertically as you slow down.

Consider that you are going so fast in a curve that you are dragging a peg. Would you go even faster in order to lift that peg? Why has speed caused the peg to be dragging in the first place when in your modeled world it should be causing the bike to be more vertical than leaned over?

Whether you now admit it or not, at counter-steering speeds your bike tends to fall 'UP', not down as you reduce speed.



James thanks for the reply.

Here's what I don't understand: how can it fall UP? If you were to draw a 3" wide line through a curve with a constant radius, and then have the front tire follow that line all the way through the curve. Slowing the bike in the curve while continuing on that line should not make the bike stand up.

Intuitively, slowing down decreases the centrifugal force, but without moving the contact patches further under the bike to decrease the lean angle, the bike should fall inward. Bikes remain upright at speed by the front wheel turning into the direction it's falling causing it to right itself. If you do not allow the front wheel to turn inward to right itself then you need centrifugal force to keep the bike from falling. By removing centrifugal force but disallowing the bike to turn in, gravity should just pull it to the ground.


I do think increasing speed in a turn will cause the bike to become more vertical if you do not turn the wheel further away from the curve in order to match the lean to the corner and your speed.
Go to Top of Page

James R. Davis
Male Administrator
17292 Posts
[Mentor]


Houston, TX
USA

Honda

GoldWing 1500

Posted - 03/28/2012 :  10:21 AM Follow poster on Twitter  Join poster on Facebook as Friend  
Your bike's lean angle is a function of its speed squared and the radius of the curve.

You agree, I assume, that you can change speed and radius independently? That is, you can maintain a certain speed and just make a tighter turn or you can maintain the same turn radius and change speed?

In other words, unlike your mental image, you do NOT always maintain some balance between speed and lean angle. And deviation from that 'balance' results in a different lean angle.

You agree, again I assume, that you can decrease your speed while in a curve without changing your path of travel. To do so will decrease your experienced centrifugal (centripetal) force. If you recognize that increased speed in a given path results in a greater lean angle, how can you not also agree that decreasing your speed in a given path will result is a lesser lean angle?

I invite you to read the article about counter-steering being only half of what changes at about 10 MPH. Here
Go to Top of Page
shaddix
Ex-Member

Posted - 03/28/2012 :  10:35 AM
Getting tough to follow here..

quote:
Originally posted by James R. Davis

Your bike's lean angle is a function of its speed squared and the radius of the curve.

I believe you, though I'm not familiar with the formula.


quote:
You agree, I assume, that you can change speed and radius independently? That is, you can maintain a certain speed and just make a tighter turn or you can maintain the same turn radius and change speed?

In order to tighten a turn at a constant speed, you will steer the front wheel away from the curve, moving the contact patch away from the CoG, increasing lean angle. Utilizing your new lean angle, you can now make a sharper turn since you have more gravity with which to push against the centrifugal force in the turn.

quote:
In other words, unlike your mental image, you do NOT always maintain some balance between speed and lean angle. And deviation from that 'balance' results in a different lean angle.

Correct, you can have many lean angles at a particular speed, which allow you to steer the bike through any number of corner radii.

quote:
You agree, again I assume, that you can decrease your speed while in a curve without changing your path of travel. To do so will decrease your experienced centrifugal (centripetal) force. If you recognize that increased speed in a given path results in a greater lean angle, how can you not also agree that decreasing your speed in a given path will result is a lesser lean angle?

I agree you can decrease speed while in a curve without changing the entire bike's path of travel, but you cannot do it without moving the contact patch closer to the bike's CoG. Without moving the contact patch further underneath the bike, I do not see how the bike will become more vertical by slowing without adjusting the contact patch position in relation to the sprung weight.

Increasing speed in a turn will increase centrifugal force, causing the bike to stand up unless the tire contact patch moves further towards the outside of the curve, increasing gravitational pull that will balance against the increasing centrifugal force(and increasing lean angle).

The concept I have, however incorrect it may be, hinges on the fact that if you lock the front wheel's direction on a bike, it will fall over. The ability of the contact patch to move in relation to the mass of the bike+rider is what gives it the ability to lean correct? And by counter-steering, do we not actively change that contact patch position by moving the wheels out from under the bike, thus dialing in whatever lean angle we wish?
Go to Top of Page

kacinpa
Male Advanced Member
802 Posts
[Mentor]


Lansdale, PA
USA

Triumph

Sprint GT

Posted - 03/28/2012 :  10:54 AM
quote:
Originally posted by shaddix


In order to tighten a turn at a constant speed, you will steer the front wheel away from the curve, moving the contact patch away from the CoG, increasing lean angle. Utilizing your new lean angle, you can now make a sharper turn since you have more gravity with which to push against the centrifugal force in the turn.




The "new lean angle" is a RESULT of the tighter turning radius NOT the CAUSE of the tighter turn radius.

We get to control speed and turning radius. Physics determines the lean angle.

I would suggest that you first read the tip that Mr. Davis pointed out. Then go find a big parking lot and set yourself up riding in a large circle at around 15 to 20 MPH. Maintain a constant turn radius and vary your speed and observe for yourself what happens to the lean angle. You will find that higher speed=more lean and lower speed = less lean, and when you slow from faster to slower, your bike will "Stand up", i.e. the lean angle will be reduced.
Go to Top of Page
shaddix
Ex-Member

Posted - 03/28/2012 :  12:04 PM
quote:
Originally posted by kacinpa

quote:
Originally posted by shaddix


In order to tighten a turn at a constant speed, you will steer the front wheel away from the curve, moving the contact patch away from the CoG, increasing lean angle. Utilizing your new lean angle, you can now make a sharper turn since you have more gravity with which to push against the centrifugal force in the turn.




The "new lean angle" is a RESULT of the tighter turning radius NOT the CAUSE of the tighter turn radius.

We get to control speed and turning radius. Physics determines the lean angle.

I would suggest that you first read the tip that Mr. Davis pointed out. Then go find a big parking lot and set yourself up riding in a large circle at around 15 to 20 MPH. Maintain a constant turn radius and vary your speed and observe for yourself what happens to the lean angle. You will find that higher speed=more lean and lower speed = less lean, and when you slow from faster to slower, your bike will "Stand up", i.e. the lean angle will be reduced.



So if I go and ride in a circle at 20mph, then lock the handlebars so they cannot move from the current position, then increase throttle, I will increase my lean angle? What if I decrease speed, what force is going to push the mass of the bike back on top of the wheels?
Go to Top of Page

James R. Davis
Male Administrator
17292 Posts
[Mentor]


Houston, TX
USA

Honda

GoldWing 1500

Posted - 03/28/2012 :  12:33 PM Follow poster on Twitter  Join poster on Facebook as Friend  
quote:
So if I go and ride in a circle at 20mph, then lock the handlebars so they cannot move from the current position, then increase throttle, I will increase my lean angle? What if I decrease speed, what force is going to push the mass of the bike back on top of the wheels?

Stop.

You are beginning to behave as others have here that turns off the readers. "Yeah, but ..." is a way to signify that you disregard facts in order to further your argument.

You agree that the faster you move in a given radius turn that you will lean farther into the curve, or not.

How can that be if you believe that increased centrifugal force will 'push you more vertical'?

Start with a fact: The faster you move along a given radius, the greater will be your lean angle. Now, instead of arguing that if you go faster, you will lean less (a totally irrational conclusion given the previous fact), you must agree that your lean angle will increase. Then you must agree that if you slow down and maintain that radius, your lean angle will decrease.

If not, you need to revisit a fundamental logic class.

Go to Top of Page
Page: of 4 Previous Topic Discussion Topic Next Topic  
Previous Page | Next Page
Jump To:
All Things (Safety Oriented) Motorcycle © Master Strategy Group Go To Top Of Page
  This page was generated in 0.42 seconds. Powered By: Snitz Forums 2000 Version 3.4.05