Please tell me you didn't manage to go through the 11 years of compulsory education without coming across a chap called Newton and a few laws he wrote down, the basic laws of motion are part of the second lot of Sats.
Please tell me you didn't manage to go through the 11 years of compulsory education without coming across a chap called Newton and a few laws he wrote down, the basic laws of motion are part of the second lot of Sats.
I probably did but can't remember. 
Actually, that's quite a bold statement to make considering it's untrue, i've only been driving for two years and i've only had two cars but still i've been lucky enough to experience good and bad tyres.
I got a set of alloys for my corsa a few months after buying it, they were just average tyres, can't recall the make, but they had pleanty of tread and were good in the dry. In the wet they were garbage, massive understeer, but I just figured that's just how it goes with a corsa in the rain. So I get a new set of alloys with Toyos all round, the fronts had about 5mm of tread left, the rears only about 1mm before being illegal. The differnce in the grip in the wet was massive, the car held the road so much better, being in the rain no longer felt like running on ice.
So I get another set of part worn tyres for the rear, meaning 2 toyos on the front and 2 "Good average" tyres for the rear, similar tread pattern etc. Now, in the rain the car would oversteer every chance it got, I can think of countless amount of times when the rear completely let go, sometimes when not even pushing the front tyres at all.
The golf I have just now has yokohamas on the front and they are awfull, as soon as the rain is falling the grip just disapears. The guy who painted my gold told me as soon as I put these wheels on it that the yokohamas were awful rain tyres, he used to have them on a 1.9tdi passat and it would wheel spin in 3rd year.....
Anyway, sorry to interupt your massive multiquote arguments here, but I just figured i'd throw in my 2cents...
Worn, budget and mismatched tyres don't count. Of course if you take fundamentally different tyres there will be a huge difference, but standard road tyres have a tiny difference, not large enough to worry about so long as you don't just pile into a corner too fast your first time on them. Notions about grip can be very deceptive people make up bullshit based on what the break away behaviour and mostly the noise they make, not actually on the amount of grip they have.
Clutching at straws now aren't we by insulting Alex based on his choice of car. Not that you'll have ever driven a Lada (I have, once).
Or I didn't believe everything I'm told in magazines and down the pub
Buying them for looks is even worse! I won't say Lulz back, as I'm not 5.
Your point is made? The fact that you were wrong, and that they don't have a harder life proves your point? Can you narrow it down to a sentence that proves your point.
Was it you that decided to leave a jammed, crossthreaded bolt in your seat because you were too lazy (or too weak) to get it out? That's very competent. No really, that's really great.
This is why you know very little. Relying on the internet to teach you complex stuff will get you nowhere in life.
And you aren't? You're the one making claims like 5 times better, or that 2 seconds per lap far more than 5%...
Just because you think it happened doesn't make it valid.
But you see my point.
Yes, I do, and yes, I did. Thank you for trying.
Getting tetchy now. The adolescent anger problems coming back again James? If you want to 'win' the 'argument' then stop making up shit like it grips twice as well (that's 200%, nearly 100 times what the 2 second per lap test showed).
And why do you say that? You've owned a couple of bikes. You're barely an adult. You have no practical or theoretical experience with them. You are incapable of doing simple jobs to your bike, and you can't cope with science or numbers. I think you probably know more about the current specs of bikes than I do, for the simple reason you probably follow the market more closely. But you're on soft ground if you think you know more about how they actually work and why things are done as they are done.
But they're not formed from fact or from scientific fact. So you must be pulling them out from where the sun doesn't shine. Sources for my statements? I haven't really made any statements, I've just debunked yours slightly.
You think the userbase is capable of making an informed judgement themselves?!
Or to set the bike up properly for your weight and size, and make sure everything is in good condition. As I've stated, the different between a great tyre and a shit one will be measured in single figure percentages.
Yes, accelerating over bumps can cause the equivalent of a tankslapper in a car. Yes, overbanding can present problems in a car. Why can't one compare two wheels to four. I know you don't WANT me to, as it'll devalue your impression that bikes are somehow better, but perhaps you've just not driven many (any?) cars. The formula car is just an example - I drive one fairly regularly (as well as the other cars I mentioned, bar the Noble). If I'm not allowed to compare cars I driven to bikes, then how about you don't compare bikes you ridden to cars you've not driven. Perhaps you have no idea what a decent car feels like? But then, you won't know what a decent bike feels like as you've only got an SV (blatent baiting attempt).
I never said they were all dual compound. Stop taking things out of context (or whatever you tell Alex off for doing when he quotes your words).
But you don't have any experience.
Right, so bikes obey different laws of physics now? Do you even know why countersteering works on a bike (and thus why it doesn't work on a car)? You'll probably Google it, which means you don't and you won't.
Based on what? What cars, specifically, have you driven, and in what conditions? Have you driven a bike and a car on semi-slicks on snow? Before you answer that, consider this - I have.
And this is why you fail...
Which means. What's the difference between on and in when it comes to feel. I have driven a few cars that are effectively 'on' rather than 'in' (vintage grand prixesque cars), and the feel was... the same (ignoring the obvious differences in the cars - but the change wasn't due to the seating position). I know you want to think that 'on' is somehow better by definition, but that's just not true. I bet you I can feel more IN my F3 car than you can ON your bike. Thus disproving your argument in one swoop.
Woah there. At no point have I said you were right about suspension importance exactly - please don't take my words out of context. I still think you're an ignorant fool when it comes to machines.
If you can't remember basic teachings from school (that rival the ability to read and write for simplicity) then you don't have a leg to stand on, metaphorically...
This thread is ****ed up by a useless discussion.
It's called thread evolution. This is a discussion forum, and there is a discussion taking place. It may be that you can't cope with more than 50 words at a time, but James, Alex and I are coping just fine with the long posts. If it's too complicated for you, or doesn't interest you then, simply, don't read it.
It's not really evolution, because nobody seems willing to give any space at all. Obviously both sides have a point, it's really just down to how well it can be put into words and communicated.
Obviously there's going to be some sort of difference in the quality of a tyre across every brand, same as any product. Cheap brands use cheaper materials which can affect the end result. Tesco Value Corn Flakes aren't going to be as good as Kelloggs
However, the extent to which these differences go is debatable. Tyres undergo serious testing before they're allowed to be put on the market. It depends on the car you're driving, the way you drive it, the weather, the temperature of the road, the condition of the tarmac/gravel, the state of your suspension and steering among other things. To blankly say one is 100 times better or worse than another is silly and naiive.
There'll be maximum and minimum allowed forces, just like the speed ratings. And until you're putting those tyres through those kinds of paces you're unlikely to really notice a difference. I could put T1s on my car, but since it's never likely to pass 120mph even on a track, and certainly never round a corner, I don't need to know that (for example) they can take me round a 90 degree bend at 160mph in the wet without losing traction.
I always assumed that it was merely the extremes that seperated the brands. That and longevity, of course. It's all still black rubber (compound) circles pushing you along the road. I'm still of the opinion that you should buy the best you can afford since it's your only contact with the road and you never know when you might unintentionally break traction, but by that point for most people it's too late anyway.
Obviously there's going to be some sort of difference in the quality of a tyre across every brand, same as any product. Cheap brands use cheaper materials which can affect the end result. Tesco Value Corn Flakes aren't going to be as good as Kelloggs
However, the extent to which these differences go is debatable. Tyres undergo serious testing before they're allowed to be put on the market. It depends on the car you're driving, the way you drive it, the weather, the temperature of the road, the condition of the tarmac/gravel, the state of your suspension and steering among other things. To blankly say one is 100 times better or worse than another is silly and naiive.
There'll be maximum and minimum allowed forces, just like the speed ratings. And until you're putting those tyres through those kinds of paces you're unlikely to really notice a difference. I could put T1s on my car, but since it's never likely to pass 120mph even on a track, and certainly never round a corner, I don't need to know that (for example) they can take me round a 90 degree bend at 160mph in the wet without losing traction.
I always assumed that it was merely the extremes that seperated the brands. That and longevity, of course. It's all still black rubber (compound) circles pushing you along the road. I'm still of the opinion that you should buy the best you can afford since it's your only contact with the road and you never know when you might unintentionally break traction, but by that point for most people it's too late anyway.
All good points that I would stuggle to disagree with. I'm not arguing for arguing's sake - I can't argue with you because you are right. But James is wrong - he seems to think there are magnitudes of difference between tyres and that bikes are somehow more special than cars because you sit on them rather than in them, yet it's unlikely he's driven anything vaguely bike-like in the world of cars.
A Ford Focus is to cars what, say, a moped is to bikes - cheap, utilitarian transport to get you from A-B. A ZX-6R is more like a Seven, Atom or Exige - raw, pure machines for going fast on. Yet in ALL circumstances the car is quicker and has just as much feel as the bike (comparing machines meant for similar tasks) - A soggy moped has as much feel as a Focus, whereas my Exige has as much feel as a ZX-6R. And a racing bike will probably be far less sensitive than a downforce producing racing car (although as I've not driven a racing bike that's a refutable point, I admit).
A Ford Focus is to cars what, say, a moped is to bikes - cheap, utilitarian transport to get you from A-B. A ZX-6R is more like a Seven, Atom or Exige - raw, pure machines for going fast on. Yet in ALL circumstances the car is quicker and has just as much feel as the bike (comparing machines meant for similar tasks) - A soggy moped has as much feel as a Focus, whereas my Exige has as much feel as a ZX-6R. And a racing bike will probably be far less sensitive than a downforce producing racing car (although as I've not driven a racing bike that's a refutable point, I admit).
Not that I'd ever want to drive a Lada
As I have said MULTIPLE times before I do not.
Sorry it doesn't suit you. But at the end of the day that's the reason people buy them and we don't need your praises and we don't need your approval.
I was perhaps referring to the fact bike setups are much more important than in a car, I know how to set up a bike...
I don't have a helicoil, or similar rethreading tool, surprisingly. It was holding the seat on firmly and posed no threat or danger.
Actually most of the things I know about bikes my Dad explained to me while learning to ride. The more you know about the physics of your bike the better you can be at riding it. Some of the other things I've picked up myself and some things I've learnt from reading magazines, this tends to be more technical things such as when I was learning about suspension. Read it in a magazine, try it out and note changes. Now I am fairly capable of setting up my own machine for my needs
I've never been one for maths. You haven't used the tyres, I have. My opinion is more valid than yours in this case
Again my point about you assuming my points are invalid are unfounded.
Then you should know that different tyres have different properties
Jamie.
I'm not arguing to "win", I'm just arguing for the sake of it, and because there's alot of bullshit, moreso early on. I'm not making "shit" up, no less than either yourself or Alex has done in previous posts.
Sorry what? How does my age relate to this? Exactly just what "experience" are you looking for? I know how to do most maintenance tasks, and I know the physics of a bike and the fact I don't do maths means I'm not anal enough to have to resort to a load of sums to prove a practical point
..... Apparently 95% (or whatever it was, cba to scroll down) of drivers are terrible. Where are your sources? That has no fact or scientific and, if we apply your critical way of thinking, is no more valid than any of my points.
I do believe the market speaks for itself
Perhaps in PHYSICAL terms. But then you trying to get there will be much easier. Regardless certain tyres are much better in certain conditions than others from the same class
It's a far less likely occurance. 4 wheels = greater stability..
You can do whatever you want, I don't mind.
Or indeed why don't you perhaps stop claiming my views as invalid because they don't suit you. I don't think bikes are "better". I just think they are more fun - Idk where else you can go to 60mph in under 4 seconds, and to 100mph in 8.something while still having the opportunity to do 210 miles on 13 litres of fuel.
FTR I'm very happy with my SV.
I wasn't? I was just clarifying for your own future reference. You're welcome!
And just what is this magical experience?
I have explained it briefly earlier to Alex. I know exactly what counter steering is as that's how you turn a bike! Leaning does not create a turning momentum from a straight away at speed
Based on what? What cars, specifically, have you driven, and in what conditions? Have you driven a bike and a car on semi-slicks on snow? Before you answer that, consider this - I have.[/quote]
No I haven't. I don' have a deathwish. Further more I don't even use my bike in snowy conditions as that would be retarded.
I thought I'd throw that in there just for you
Would you rather be on your girlfriend or in your girlfriend? Oh wait.....
Seriously though, being on a bike is far more sensitive than being in a car, you're out in the wind, the elements, you're directly part of the machine. Every single tiny slide you can feel and every minute bump is amplified. Only the hardest of racing machines will get anywhere near it and I don't think they'd work on the A4155 just past Henley On Thames!
Indeed since you conceded my point. And I'm glad to know.
Maybe because basic teachings from school are there to help you pass tests, not lead a normal life.
Woah woah woah. You try driving to work in 5 minutes. Didn't know cars suddenly could filter. The ZX6 would blitz the Exige on acceleration and while it may not be as fast round the corners (try having 4 sticky contact patches compared to 2 far smaller ones. I find your statement sweeping and ignorant. Seems like you're one for the cars, I understand why now.
Why? What aspect is it that you don't like? The stereotype image? That fact that it's a rear engined RWD machine that's actually not that bad (well, the one I drove wasn't. Can't speak for Alex).
Of course you don't.
Not saying you do. As long as you know that is effectively ricing up a bike, and are happy to be labelled by me (at least) as a bike-ricer, especially as you claimed bikers don't rice.
Sure you do. That's why people who have been biking for 20 years, and making/modifying bikes along the way still frequently take their bikes to 'experts' for setting up. I'm sure you understand what preload does, and how damping curves translate to real world behaviour in varying conditions. How could you not after a bit of riding... [/sarcasm]
The very fact you fecked it up in the first place, and were unwilling to follow the advice given suggests to me that it was way of out of your depth before the helicoiling stage...
You know the physics, yet you can't do maths (one relies heavily on the other). You can set up a bike when so many people can't? Maybe you should work in MotoGP - they sometimes struggle too...
Or it would be if you hadn't spent ages making stuff up like 5 times better...
See previous answer
I do. Not disputing that.
James for now. Let's keep it formal.
I've not made shit up, and I don't think Alex has either. Arguing for the sake of it is just silly. But I admit, since we got you all cross and bad tempered you have started to write less bullshit.
The fact you've been riding for a timescale measured in weeks. You refuse to ride in 'bad' conditions. You can't cope with bolts. You don't know anything about physics (remember Alex mentioned Newton - remember him? Oh no, you admitted you don't). And you think that 'maths' means writing equations to prove a point.
It's not meant to be valid or accurate. The difference with your figures is that '5 times better' or 'twice as hot' or whatever it was are ludicrous claims. But to suggest that the masses, as a whole, are pretty crap at driving or riding isn't very far at all from the truth. If you'd said 'it feels like tyre xxx runs about 10° warmer' then I'd have probably accepted it. But the claims to make are just stupid, and prove how little you know.
Thick people buying crap products, you mean?
All three of those sentences are just utter rubbish. Do you think I was originally talking in imaginary terms? You think that a tyre with more grip automatically means that it's easier to find the limit 'safely' (you'll find it's more likely to be opposite)?
and?
I don't know where you are legally allowed to do that either. I don't know what bikes you can corner at more than 1g, or brake and turn at the same time (properly). Or where you can carry a passenger without having to do much to your vehicle. Or where you can arrive in a dinner suit feeling refreshed. Or that you can crash without dying nearly all the time. See you silly your claims look? Granted, bikes are cheaper, but you'll find the equivalent car is just as much fun, and just as quick. In fact, with vaguely equalised machinery a car is far, far quicker in the real world. But I maintain, I did, do and will always enjoy biking, and I want one. I'm not being a car fanboy, as I have experience in both.
Seat time, basically. You lack it. You've only had two bikes, neither of which are all that impressive in the biking world.
Are you sure you understand the principles behind countersteering? Please explain (breifly) then, without (and I can't check, but it'll be fairly obvious if you do) cheating.
I have. I don't have a deathwish either. But to get to school when I was younger or to work now I'm a bit older I had to ride in whatever conditions were prevailing. Otherwise I'd have failed my exams or been sacked. So yes, I've ridden in snow 4 inches deep (shut up you Scandinavians!). I've also played with a few cars on semi-slicks (cut slicks if you will) during the winter and been caught out by snow... I wouldn't, however, claim to have masses of experience in the snow, as it doesn't snow that often!
The same applies to a decent car
Same in a decent car.
The Exige does. And I don't need to dress up to use it.
That doesn't make sense.
Do you honestly believe that? The reason children are sent to school for the first 18 years of their lives is not to help them in life, but to get them through exams? This explains a lot about you...
Try driving to work in five minutes? That's not technically possible even if I bought a Veyron and had a straight road all the way to work. Yes, I miss 'filtering', but as I'd probably only lose a couple of minutes, and as it only applies in cities I'm not that fussed.
The ZX6 would accelerate a little faster. And then, because a bike cannot generate any meaningful lateral acceleration (and this is nothing to do with quantity or size of contact patches) it loses. Including under braking. It's not my fault decent cars are quicker than decent bikes, and I'm not sure that the laws of physics being what they are means I must be 'one for the cars'.
I have no idea why I'd want be driving around in a piece of communism, because in Soviet Russia, Lada drives me.
Sticks and stones, call it what you like so long as you don't start saying they're for aerodynamic reasons or some other completely silly notion.
I'd like to think that perhaps that's because I've bothered to read into it. I don't look at curves I run by feel. Cross threading a bolt is easily done, for anyone... It bolted onto a piece of the frame which I didn't want to risk damaging. Is that ok sir? *bows*
Context. Road use for my bike would not win world championships
Indeed but my point stands
Good
My name is Jamie. My name on my birth certificate is Jamie. Calling me James is akin to calling you Reginald.
Didn't write bullshit before, neither am I worked up. I feel this is a discussion I/we could easily be having over a pub lunch and a few beers
It's not long off a years riding on the road, and don't forget before that I did motorcross before that. I don't know the mathematical (calculative) side but I sure as heck know the practical side. I know about how a motorcycle works and the reason why it leans left when you steer right, etc.
Apologises, I don't have a laser thermometer. To the touch, it felt twice as hot but that could easily be 10 or 15 degrees difference if actual temperatures were measured. Feel is immeasurable and I can safely say I feel 5 times more comfortable in the wet on the Road attacks than I did the BT014s.
As for the drivers well, it's all relative and I counter your point by saying "Well if you had of said many drivers are easily distracted then I'd probably have accepted it".
It's not what you THINK I know it's what I know I know.
Among the most popular mods include a Scottoiler, braided brake lines and loud fart cans (that also happen to improve performance, looks and noise in one fell swoop as proved earlier
Not everything is about finding the limits. It's about making safe progress at 7 or 8 tenths with that safe feeling you get. I know that tyres with higher limits can be more unsafe to try to reach but who does that on the way to work when it's 4 degrees outside..
I don't go out to corner at 1g, or to brake and turn. I may trail brake very slightly but I tend to brake and then corner
At most you'd have add a few more PSI to your tyres (which you'd have to in cars when carrying heavy loads or multiple passengers:Source Handbook of 2004 Vauxhall Vectra and handbook of 2003 Vauxhall Corsa) or fiddle with the preload (normally only one or two clicks and easily done, takes 2 minutes)
You can get fairly lightweight overcoats&trousers that are waterproof and are designed to be worn over other clothes. Granted though it's not as easy as a car
I'm still breathing....
No, actually!
Lol? You'd need a hypercar to beat even my bike in terms of acceleration to the far side of 100mph and above. Round a track it'd be a different matter but I'd be having more fun. As for REAL world, well not that you'd believe me but the same journey to work takes 15-20 minutes in the car during rush hour. Sometimes though it's even worse than rush-hour with long tailbacks. I still arrive on time when my colleagues arrive 20-30 minutes late. By this time my hair gel had dried.
Seat time, basically. You lack it. You've only had two bikes, neither of which are all that impressive in the biking world.[/quote]
3 bikes. RS125 which is very highly rated. Z750 which is rated fairly well (bar a few suspension issues) and the SV which is rated highly, and even more in my books as it handles very well with the suspension modifications. I may read reviews of bikes but I don't judge them purely because of that. I'll ride a bike before I cast a final judgement.
Basically the centrifugal force is what provides grip, as why you feel more planted as you go faster (also the crank spinning has this effect but that's another matter). A motorcycle is naturally unstable and you embrace this instability by countersteering. By unbalancing the motorcycle and turning the bars to the right, thus turning the wheel (well, it's not turning, it's just a pressure on the bars), you cause the motorcycle to turn in. The centrifugal force from cornering balances with the gravitational force trying to pull your bike down. Hence why the faster you turn the more you have to lean in order to make the corner....
Walk or bus.
Now quite in the elements the same way.
Point above
Maybe true but you'd look like even more of a cock.
Glad to have confused you.
I never was one for the classroom.
Perhaps some of us mere mortals live in more built up areas. I can commute the 3 or 4 miles in between 5 and 10 minutes depending on traffic. As I said in a car it would take 10-15 minutes AT BEST and perhaps even treble that at worse
It's nothing to do with being quicker. It's about having fun, being involved and getting home and being able to think you've had a good day.
...doesn't exist. It's a ficticious reaction encountered when dealing with objects rotating relative to your reference frame. Tyres don't need to rotate in order to provide grip (although they are sensitive to their angular velocity and the relative surface speed).
Gravity always pulls 'downwards' (at least as far as we're concerned in this limited situation) and is essentially always trying to make the bike fall over. It's the lateral movement of the CoG, through bike leaning, that balances the opposing torques generated by gravity and the tyres. Also, (balanced) bike leaning is directly related to lateral acceleration, not speed.
You're totaly correct Bob, they don't need to rotate in order to provide grip, however when you are moving faster (at the very least on a motorcycle) it not only feels more stable but I feel produces more grip (that's in my personal opinion). I'm rubbish at explaining..
*takes a deep breathe* xD
In my second quote I meant the centrifugal force*
My mistake. (and updated)
Anyway, taking a sharp left hand bend at 30mph makes the front end feel like it's going to wash. I can take a corner that requires the same amount of angle (and probably more grip) at 70 without it feeling like it's going to fall out from underneath me.
I've always been told the faster you go the more stable you are.. but also the harder you hit the tree.
When I started to ride I read alot into countersteering as a technique and also watched a few videos about it, as people mentioning countersteering would freak me out and make me worry.. the practise was fine, but I'll keep an eye out for them if I find them again I'll give you the link.
*takes a deep breathe* xD
In my second quote I meant the centrifugal force*
My mistake. (and updated)Anyway, taking a sharp left hand bend at 30mph makes the front end feel like it's going to wash. I can take a corner that requires the same amount of angle (and probably more grip) at 70 without it feeling like it's going to fall out from underneath me.
I've always been told the faster you go the more stable you are.. but also the harder you hit the tree.
When I started to ride I read alot into countersteering as a technique and also watched a few videos about it, as people mentioning countersteering would freak me out and make me worry.. the practise was fine, but I'll keep an eye out for them if I find them again I'll give you the link.
/bored of long replies
1. Everyone countersteers
2. Centrifugal force doesn't exist.
3. You'll change your mind if/when you drive a decent car
Then you'll be able to leave all your biker friends crying in your dust
1. Everyone countersteers
2. Centrifugal force doesn't exist.
3. You'll change your mind if/when you drive a decent car
Then you'll be able to leave all your biker friends crying in your dust Braking and cornering are essential to going fast anywhere but in a straight line, here the bike fails badly. Even my car wouldn't be any slower than your 125 (despite costing less and being a practical form of transport for 4) round a track and a lightweight sportscar or well built production racer will leave road bikes in their dust, despite the fact that car specials often use bike engines...
I'm fairly certain mine is front engined RWD
How are you going to damage the frame tapping a hole and inserting a heli-coil unless you're incompetent and have no idea what you're doing?
A year on the road? I've driven for over 2, done rallies and had track time (unlike you?), I don't consider myself a good driver, better than a lot sure but that doesn't mean anything. You cannot understand anything about how a car or bike works by operating it, you simply find out effects nothing about how or why it works.
What's the point in braided brake lines other than a bit of bike rice and biker bullshit? The effect of brake lines getting compressed is minimal and better feel is a side effect of braided lines, presumably bike racers think they look cool? Braided lines are a safety feature that are only really relevant to vehicles that are likely to be at risk of having their lines damaged, ie. competition vehicles and off-roaders. I'm considering braided lines on mine along with a sump guard for rough rallies and PCTs, not because they look cool or make the brakes feel better...
:doh:
I'll wait and see how it goes with the car Tristan. 
i dont haz a 125 me haz big see sees ):
You can pick up a brand new Honda CBF125 for like I think it's £1800? It'll do something crazy like 280 miles on a tank of like 12 litres or something and it'll last forever and it's like £120 insurance, even for me. Yes that would be slower round a track but I'd give you a race with my SV650 in something and it'd be interesting results.
Either way I found this : Completely unbiased and impatial, AFAIK - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vxDeXmAA5_Y
I.
Don't.
Have.
A.
Helicoil.
Or.
Similar.
Product.
Nice to know the extent of your experience. I will be attending track days this year, funds at the moment mean things are spent on more necessary things. You lean the practise and an interesting person will then go home and read up about it out of interest.
They improve lever feel and "sponginess" and yes, the look trick
Please stop analysing everything from a competition point of view, it's very downgrading.
i dont haz a 125 me haz big see sees ):
You can pick up a brand new Honda CBF125 for like I think it's £1800? It'll do something crazy like 280 miles on a tank of like 12 litres or something and it'll last forever and it's like £120 insurance, even for me. Yes that would be slower round a track but I'd give you a race with my SV650 in something and it'd be interesting results.
Either way I found this : Completely unbiased and impatial, AFAIK - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vxDeXmAA5_Y
I.
Don't.
Have.
A.
Helicoil.
Or.
Similar.
Product.
Nice to know the extent of your experience. I will be attending track days this year, funds at the moment mean things are spent on more necessary things. You lean the practise and an interesting person will then go home and read up about it out of interest.
They improve lever feel and "sponginess" and yes, the look trick
Please stop analysing everything from a competition point of view, it's very downgrading.
except it isnt
its how you lean a bike
turning happens by steering in the "right" direction
you cannot do physics without math
understanding physics is impossible without understanding the math behind it as you have proven quite well throughout this (and other) thread(s)
no mr cliffe i expect you to die
To be fair how do you steer a bike once you go above around 10mph? You lean it. Even at lower speed countersteering works it's just "harder"
And I'll freely admit I'm a dumbass with numbers (among other things)
And I'll freely admit I'm a dumbass with numbers (among other things)
Just for the record tristan, lada riva's are NOT rear engined.
Rear wheel drive, yes, rear engined, no.
Bloody good and pretty much unstoppable as a banger, also yes!
Rear wheel drive, yes, rear engined, no.
Bloody good and pretty much unstoppable as a banger, also yes!
According to what measurement? I've blasted around a track (both tarmac and dirt) in a car and on a bike and always had more fun in the car, purely because I knew I could push harder than I ever would on a bike and know if everything went wrong I'd just walk away slightly embarrassed rather than with all my organs in someone else's body. I still enjoyed riding a bike, but not quite as much as throwing a 1.5ton block of steel around a track. That could be down to the fact I've come off enough bikes when pushing too hard to always be slightly cautious of them, again it is a personal thing, doesn't make my preference definitive.
What you two have done is argued about opinion, well that is a flawed argument from the offset. I like black coffee, I know people who hate it, does that mean they are wrong? No it means my preferences are not the same as theirs. I like using an ergonomic keyboard others do not, personal preference, I have a specific way of setting up my computers which makes me most comfortable when using them, again others do not like it. It isn't right or wrong, just a preference.
So lets all stop the silly arguing and enjoy a nice spot of tea.
No, I haven't bothered to read the whole thread for fear of dieing of boredom, but what I fail to see is how any person can actually be bothered to argue about things like this....
Ladas and the laws of physics, how much of a fail you may/may not look when driving a Lada, Helicoils, braided brake lines and arguing about god knows what else
How can you actually give a flying f*cking toss about random rediculous things like these to the extent where you can waste your time writing huge posts about it, arguing with some guy on the interwebs?
O-o-order :smash3d:
Ladas and the laws of physics, how much of a fail you may/may not look when driving a Lada, Helicoils, braided brake lines and arguing about god knows what else
How can you actually give a flying f*cking toss about random rediculous things like these to the extent where you can waste your time writing huge posts about it, arguing with some guy on the interwebs?
O-o-order :smash3d:
Personally I enjoy riding my bike more than I did driving a car. Just my opinion.
However I agree with your post. *sits back and sips some lovleh Tea.*
Yes but the Lambo is much like a bike, it goes very fast in a straight line but can't go round corners due to its weight and size, take any decent sports/track car (ie. completely road worthy and practical unlike the bike, but under 1000kg, RWD, low centre of gravity, sticky tyres and over 200bhp) and it will leave both the bike and the car standing at a track like Angelsey in the video.
I.
Don't.
Have.
A.
Bottle.
Of.
Milk.
Or.
Similar.
Product.
In.
My.
Fridge.
So.
I.
Can't.
Have.
A.
Cup.
Of.
Tea.
I'm.
About.
To.
Go.
To.
The.
Shop.
To.
Buy.
Some.
Which.
You.
Could.
Do.
If.
You.
Could.
Be.
Bothered.
To.
Get.
Off.
Your.
Arse.
You're the one who insisted that bikers don't rice, by all accounts they do, far more than a lot of car drivers.
I've provided proof that a bike you can buy today for £5000 is quicker than a £120,000 supercar and again you refute it. Shame.
Bottles
Of
Milk
Cost
79p.
You're the one that insists EVERYONE rices ALL of the time.
The evolving car discussion thread
(120 posts, started )
FGED GREDG RDFGDR GSFDG