we'll see. i'm torn between racing and trackdays for next year. if it's trackdays, you better like yuengling and, uh, you provide the sound system...i don't want you in my helmet. :lol:
back to the hate, please. i want to argue about braking. <pa crackle> mr. fastfreddie to the witness stand, please.
no. getting all your braking done before turning in. i disagree with it (and if i remember correctly...the real fast freddie disagrees also)...but i hear it alot...so i'm curious the reasons behind it.
Please do share as much techniques on here as possible. I'm just a track addict with alot to learn. I'm on here an awful lot, but it's not because of my riding ability. :lol: :lol: I'm definitely not one to give advice at this point in my riding addiction either. So please spill the beans and discuss techniques as much as possible!! 8) Whether it be by fighting or singing Koom Ba Ya!!! :shock:
This may sound really stupid, but I find that speed and bumps have a lot to do with whether or not I trailbrake. If the corner is fast and bumpy, I turn in on the throttle. If it's slower and somewhat smooth, I'll trailbrake. Mostly I guess it's about the messages the front end is sending me in a given corner. If front grip is sketchy, I'm getting all my braking done in a straight line.
sorry for the wait. it took my head time to get in gear...i'm pretty rusty on the academics and the attempt was not to say anything stupid, misleading or contradictory. i rewrote this a number of times and it seemed to get shorter and shorter to the point where i thought, "man, they're gonna blow holes all thru this." i found as i proofread and edited that to keep it short, i had to put qualifiers in and i'm not satisfied. smarter people than me have written chapters to relate information along these lines, however, i feel a need to make the attempt at credibility firsthand and out of respect...credentials are shit if they can't be backed up and i think you guys deserve the opportunity to make up your own minds. so, take it for what it's worth...i think it became too clinical for reality. for argument's sake, i dispensed with decreasing/increasing, etc type turns and stuck to a constant radius. i later realized that i was coming at this from a hairpin's perspective. an extreme example of a constant radius turn but i think it may best illustrate the two ideas. _________________ first off, roughly defining the two techniques so we're on the same page. trailbraking...a gradual release of the braking effort while bending the bike in with full release taking place at the apex or max lean angle - somewhere in the meat of the corner. the other...getting all the braking done and fully releasing the brakes as you transition to max lean - at turn in. a tighter turn can be cut with max lean angle and, in a constant radius, max lean angle requires speed throughout the turn to keep the line from tightening further. getting the braking done before the turn allows for reaching max lean angle from/at turn in and the tire only has one job from there on out...a bit more forgiving. this rider carries more speed thru the apex due to the wider arc and is free to start the drive from the onset. trailbraking on the same turn requires progressively slower speeds be engaged to tighten the line and reach max lean. it also traces a hyperbola. it is the quickest way into the turn but, max lean to achieve the exit line comes with the price of reduced speed at the apex due to the tighter radius. during the 'bending it in' process, the front tire is asked to do two jobs, turn and brake...this requires greater skill on the part of the rider. with the reduced apex speed, the 'hole' the rider has to climb out of deepens...this requires greater power on the part of the bike. the way i see it... while the trailbraker may be able to enter the turn faster, their efforts are diminished by still having to slow down to negotiate the apex with a tighter radius. it could be argued that the trailbraker got to the apex first but, they'll still be starting their drive later and at a reduced speed relative to the 'at turn in' rider. the trailbraker also has to switch gears, figuratively, at the apex under full lean...a critical moment made more so by the tightened radius. one thing is for sure, both rides stabilize at the roll-on...the turn-in rider's bike happens do so at the entry. i believe they have more control over the whole turn process as they're not restricted by the attempt to continue slowing down and hold their line. i also believe it's more forgiving to brain fade and easier to correct errors due to blown entries. by those and these tokens, 'at turn in' seems to be a safer approach; max braking is available while in the state of highest stability - upright, we're only asking the tire to perform one job at a time, in turn stability is almost guaranteed by loading the suspension with drive, we're at less risk of blowing the turn due to lowside or running wide. i think it's faster but that's a matter of real world application by the individual. the ability and knowledge of the rider prolly determines the path they take and there will always be a rider that excels at either approach. comfort? as in confidence? maybe to each their own. i'm comfortable thinking i've limited the opportunity to lowside or be more rushed in changing my direction. it's an approach that works for me. taking the argument into full spectrum, it's not the only approach i use. god knows there's devious thinkin' goin' on in the minds of some track designers. if all tracks were constant radius turns we'd be bored to tears...they'd leave little challenge for a rider to show their abilities. the good designers make it hard to beat the track and that's where a full toolbox of skills becomes an asset. both are tools in that box. my head hurts. :lol: yeah, i've been at this since my last post. as varying turns present themselves, they require we take different tactics. i believe those fall between these two ideas and i feel neither are ideal for every situation so, somewhere between those points we reach a compromise. some turns will favor one idea over the other just as some riders will favor one or the other. again, we're back to the rider's abilities. throw racing into the mix and the tools take on a whole other purpose. _________________ btw, if i hadn't already mentioned it, my moniker has been bestowed upon me twice. the first by a bunch of girls in '73 when i was 13. :twisted: kenny roberts was my hero and i had yet to hear of 'the' fastfreddie. the second time was while attending MMI in '99-'00. my new found friends tossed it at me and then my wife made it stick. please, no disrespect, but don't hold it as any relation to freddie spencer.
though i disagree....it is mostly only in preference. a rider is to ride the way they feel most comfortable and safest. i don't think anything you said is unsafe, and if you feel comfortable....cool. the only point i must disagree on is that you feel your method is fastest. if going fast around the track is not your goal...then it's a moot point. i trailbrake into every corner and feel this is the fastest method. here's my rationale: the apex of a corner is point that must be taken at the slowest speed of the turn. if you accelerate from turn in to the apex, then your turn in speed must have been actually slower than apex speed, which is not required. so if you and i are equal riders, and we are side by side employing our different methods. you start and finish your braking earlier and i will blow by on the brakes into the apex of the turn. both of us will be at the same speed at the apex, and drive out of the turn will be equal. the trailbraker will be ahead by whatever the speed differential was over the distance covered from turn in to apex.
Jigmore, The flaw I see in your thinking revolves around the idea of the apex. The apex is the tightest and usually, but not always, slowest point in your LINE around a corner which is often different than the point where you are at the inside edge of the track. For a turn where I complete my braking as I turn in, the turn in is the beginning of the apex. For a turn where I trail brake, it is also still at the point where I release the brakes. This is ideally my lowest speed in the corner. I may be in the middle or even outer part of the track at this point and will be at my closest point to the inside later in the corner when I will be accelerating. This all assumes that I execute my idea properly, which, unfortuneately is sometimes not the case I'm personally convinced not trail brakeing is safer. I also feel that approaching every corner with the same method is far from the ideal approach to a race track. Fred, you nailed that one. Take three aspirin and call me in the morning. I'm sure your head hurts.
I don't know, Jig. What you're saying sounds right in theory, but I've sometimes done the oposite in practice. Say you're going wheel to wheel with another rider. You're trying to get by, but he's using all the road and leaving you no way past. You notice that he's trailbraking to the apex. In this situation, I've dropped back a bit, just to be sure he wouldn't spoil my drive on the way out. Then I get all my braking done in a straight line, pull the trigger at turn-in, and effectively lengthen the next straightaway by several hundred feet. As a result, my drive starts sooner, and my terminal speed at the far end of the next straight is higher. Now I can zoom past the other rider just before we start braking. It seems to me that different corners require different techniques. For sure getting all your braking done in a straight line is safer and requires less precision to deliver a successful result. Furthermore, consider that our motorcycles have been designed to turn in on throttle. What actually steers the bike? It's not countersteering, We've all countersteered into a stiff crosswind riding our bikes down the highway, and the bike kept going straight. Countersteering merely tips the bike into the corner. Rolling on the gas is what steers the bike. What happens if you roll out of the gas halfway around a curve? The bike stands up and runs wide. I teach my students to "Countersteer and carve," the carve part being done with the throttle. Trailbraking works because you're holding the bike back with the front brake, thus collapsing the forks and decreasing rake and trail. There is risk involved, because when trailbraking, the bike makes its shift from front to rear weight bias mid corner, at the point when it is fully leaned over. That's a lot to have going on with the contact patces at once. It's effective for passing on the brakes, but it's surely not as safe as doing all your braking in a straight line. This is one reason why we teach straight line braking in the Novice classes. Trailbraking is very much an advanced riding technique. I'm a long way from sure which is the faster method. It seems like you almost have to be willing to do it either way, depending on what the situation calls for. Some curves seem better suited for trailbraking, while others seem to flow easier by getting the braking done in a straight line. Just like using the "2-stroke line" versus "Squaring the corner off," there are other factors coming into play that affect my decision as to which technique I'll use.
well. instead of calling your ideas 'flawed' and holding my butt-buddy's sperm-soaked hand up in victory, i will simply continue to discuss my 'preference' and the reasons behind it. safer is a relative term. safer is a combination of confidence, physics, relative speed/direction to others on the track. i feel it was a stretch for me to say it is still 'safe' to complete all braking straight up and down. but i stand by that comment in this context (trackday). in a race, it is not safe because you'll get asspacked by fast guys going 'wtf is that guy slowing down for back here'. that being said, to argue which is safer is too broad a context. on the street, whatever you like....is fine. trackday...well...as long as fast guys remember they're at a trackday and keep their distance, you should be alright. at a race, you'd be considered braking too early and would be a victim of ass packing or criss-crossing lines and a collision risk. so if you're wanting to focus this discussion on safety, did you consider that (assuming the trackday rider is trying to take a reasonably quick pace) the upanddown braker will be trying to complete his braking in a shorter distance, while the trailbraker feathers it more to the apex and is allowed more distance to scrub the speed? and yes, i know it is mixed with cornering force....but the idea is you can't make such a broad statement about the way racers go into corners is 'not safe'. now i was more focused on which is the faster line. if we want to discuss safe....don't ride a motorcycle.... now pick the argument...safety? or fast? and we can debate either...but not both. i'm too dumb to talk about two subjects at once. i get dizzy and fall down. how bout pick an topic and a specific corner on a track that we've both been to and explain your reasoning for not trailbraking. pick from these: grattan cw grattan ccw gingerman autobahn s autobahn n putnam mid-ohio road america nelson ledges beaver run barber virginia int'l raceway jennings gp
i think you're assuming a trailbraker can't get the same drive outta the corner. that might be true on 2-smokes, but is not necessarily the case in 600cc+. also, there are two arguments here also. speaking of fastest way through corner side-by-side? or fastest when going for superpole all alone? side-by-side. the trailbraker will beat the upanddowner to the apex, block the line, and finish ahead everytime. assuming the trailbraker didn't go way inside...blow the turn...and run it wide on exit. all alone...i still personally pick the trailbraking but it is a little more swoopy. am i right? i don't know. it's worked so far. back on the safety issue. i agree with us teaching upanddown braking in the novice class. it is the safest for them in that circumstance. i agree that trailbraking is more advanced...but shit if i do it, it can't be that advanced. one other point. do you think we should ride the bikes the way they handle best? or do you think they should build bikes the way that gets us around the track faster? race pace trailbraking makes the bike do funny things....i agree. does that mean i'll let the guy blaze past me because if 'feels better' to go around the turn this way or that? hell no.
here are the few exceptions i can think of where i don't think trailbraking is fastest: kink's that require some brakes ie. nelson kink at the end of the back straight, the right hander before the front straight at autobahn south. reason: like k3 said, the bike is stable and will rail through if you already have it settled. long constant radius ie. carousel at road america, long right hander before back straight at nelson. reason: the turn is so long, you must sacrifice late braking to carry speed through entire turn. getting stable and maintaining speed gains you more distance/time on a long turn than the short distance you gain by late braking entry.
Sorry I offended you Jigmore. If you re-read what I wrote, you'll see that I trail brake in certain corners and not in others. Actually, not in most. I do believe one technique for every corner is not the way to go. I also believe most trailbraking that I see at track days is actually a crutch for innaccurate entry speed that is then explained with pride as trailbraking.