Why 'footdragging' is dangerous (other than the obvious).

[NEOHMark]

...the obvious being you could tear up a foot or be thrown from the bike if it catches on something.

 

I never really thought about it much until yesterday when I saw a 'footdragger' on my way home from shopping with Mrs. Aeromark.

 

We were turning left through an intersection when three cruiser riders approached the intersection from our left - in the left turning lane of the intersection 'leg' we were turning onto. The two in front came to a stop at their redlight and the trailing rider was slowing to a stop - maybe 20-30 feet behind the other two when I caught sight of him. He had both feet 'down' - hovering about 3 inches off the pavement - for the final 20 feet or so of his stop; probably for the last 10 mph or so.

 

At first, I just shook my head and said to myself 'unskilled'. Then it dawned on me - WITH BOTH FEET OFF THE PEGS, HE HAD NO WAY OF USING HIS REAR BRAKE! He was basically stopping ass-backwards - against every rule in the book by using ONLY his front brake to scrub off those last few MPHs and come to a stop. And what happens when you over-use the front brake at slow speeds - especially when turning? Small wonder why most 'get offs' occur at slow speeds. Obviously, he wasn't a BRC or 'Ride Like a Pro' graduate.

 

I know at SOME point you have to get a foot off the peg to stabilize the bike as it comes to a stop, but IMHO - that should be one foot only - and it should be always be your LEFT foot. The right foot should stay on the brake pedal to the very end of your stop - allowing you to stay completely off the front brake lever. No one NEEDS both feet to stabilize a bike when stopped, and certainly no one NEEDS to dangle their feet 3 inches off the pavement while coasting at 5 MPH.

 

If you're a 'footdragger' - or if you know someone who is, I implore you to PUHLEEZE get yourself/them into (or back to) a BRC course or get to a parking lot to practice your rear braking-only at slow speeds. Footdragging is more dangerous than you might think.

[David]

On your bike, there's no such thing as "rear braking only."

[Whip]

I never use the rear brake for anything....and I put both feet down.....years of two up riding....maybe you need to work on your "touch" on the front brake....a parking lot would be a good place to start....please don't get offended I'm having fun.....but really ...I never use the rear brake for anything....unless I'm chasin Benecia and I want to "back it in".....

 

Whip

[NEOHMark]

On your bike, there's no such thing as "rear braking only."

 

Touche!

 

And let me tell ya - that's been one of the more difficult things to get used to. But from what I can tell by 'feel', it seems the foot pedal has at least a bias toward the rr brakes.

[Bob Palin]

I hardly ever use the rear brake for anything other than U turns when I have that option, in 400,000 miles (well 300,000 since the BMW makes up it's own mind) it's never been a problem. There is no need to use the rear for the final few feet or when stopping in a slow corner unless it's really slippery. I don't put both feet down either, no need for that as long as you can reach OK and there are no other surface factors in play. Sometimes I think these schools/books just make up theoretical rules so that they have something to teach/publish.

[NEOHMark]

I never use the rear brake for anything....

 

Seriously?!?!?

 

Why would you purposely sacrifice 30-40% of your braking capabililty (at least on your non-linked brake bikes)?

 

I'm not sure I follow the logic of that.

[Whip]

"Sometimes I think these schools/books just make up theoretical rules so that they have something to teach/publish."

 

[Bob Palin]

I never use the rear brake for anything....

 

Seriously?!?!?

 

Why would you purposely sacrifice 30-40% of your braking capabililty (at least on your non-linked brake bikes)?

 

I'm not sure I follow the logic of that.

In many cases of extreme braking the rear only provides 0-5% of the effective braking since there is almost no weight on the rear wheel. Any time you don't need max braking the front is plenty by itself. The theory is that it is better to spend all your concentration on getting maximum braking from the front rather than splitting your efforts between two brakes. Obviously this doesn't apply to bikes with ABS and/or linked brakes and perhaps not so much to large touring bikes that don't shift so much weight forwards, but my ST1100 only ever needed the front brakes.

[NEOHMark]

In many cases of extreme braking the rear only provides 0-5% of the effective braking since there is almost no weight on the rear wheel.

 

With all due respect, I'd bet a motorcyle engineer would dispute those numbers as being more than a bit low. Yes - there is some diving and unloading of the rr tire as a result of panic braking on all bikes. But 0%?!?!? That means the tire is basically hovering off the ground. I've never seen a 'stoppy' pulled off at anything more than low speeds. Any 'real' panic-braking at 30-40 MPH or more is going to includes SOME weight on the rr tire. Even 5% sounds way too low to me.

 

I've always been a big proponent of grabbing as much front brake as I could in a panic stop situation - but I've always felt feathering the rr brake also to the point of impending lockup (non-linked, non-ABS bikes) was the most efficient way to stop. I never found that to be too 'taxing' on the mind. It just takes a little - not a lot - practice and awareness to pull it off.

 

JMHO

[Dances_With_Wiener_Dogs]

In many cases of extreme braking the rear only provides 0-5% of the effective braking since there is almost no weight on the rear wheel.

 

With all due respect, I'd bet a motorcyle engineer would dispute those numbers as being more than a bit low. Yes - there is some diving and unloading of the rr tire as a result of panic braking on all bikes. But 0%?!?!? That means the tire is basically hovering off the ground. I've never seen a 'stoppy' pulled off at anything more than low speeds. Any 'real' panic-braking at 30-40 MPH or more is going to includes SOME weight on the rr tire. Even 5% sounds way too low to me.

With all due respect back at you, you have no idea either. I have no real world data either to support/refute anything that's been listed here. I'm not Dr. Harry Hurt. You're not Dr. Harry Hurt.

 

You're not comfortable with front brake only. You're not comfortable coasting less than 10 mph with both feet off of the pegs. Don't preach to the rest of us that might have equal or more road miles than you do.

 

Let's get a motorcycle engineer here or even just an Google engineer! You've passionately stated your position and I respect that. But it's time to consider stepping down off of your soapbox and let us make our own decisions based on the real world data we accumulate riding down the road.

 

Me? I almost never use my rear brakes, replacing the pads after nearly 90,000 miles. I regularly roll with both feet down, especially advancing in rush hour traffic because it's sometimes more comfortable than a school-taught both brakes only. And I usually put down my right foot so I can switch between neutral and in-gear and make my clutch hand less work.

 

My experience is riding off/on (mostly on) for 22 years and most recently have 6.5 years on BMWs and 100,000 miles. I commute every day in the Pacific NorthWET. YMMV.

[Whip]

Kevin Schwantz Suzuki School: Motorcycle Race Track Tips, Texas-Style

http://www.motorcyclistonline.com/howto/122_0608_kevin_schwantz_school_track_tips/

 

#15 Ignore the rear brake.

 

Whip

[WayneM]

In many cases of extreme braking the rear only provides 0-5% of the effective braking since there is almost no weight on the rear wheel.

 

With all due respect, I'd bet a motorcyle engineer would dispute those numbers as being more than a bit low. Yes - there is some diving and unloading of the rr tire as a result of panic braking on all bikes. But 0%?!?!? That means the tire is basically hovering off the ground. I've never seen a 'stoppy' pulled off at anything more than low speeds. Any 'real' panic-braking at 30-40 MPH or more is going to includes SOME weight on the rr tire. Even 5% sounds way too low to me.

 

I've always been a big proponent of grabbing as much front brake as I could in a panic stop situation - but I've always felt feathering the rr brake also to the point of impending lockup (non-linked, non-ABS bikes) was the most efficient way to stop. I never found that to be too 'taxing' on the mind. It just takes a little - not a lot - practice and awareness to pull it off.

 

JMHO

For anything other than all-out 'racetrack type', or 'panic stopping', the rear brake can contribute significantly more than 0-5%.

 

Why should we care when the front is more than capable of doing the work under most situations? - Because there are some situations where relying on the front alone to do all the work can be problematic.

 

For example if you need to stop while slowing IN a turn, or when road traction is reduced.

 

Spreading the braking force between two wheels will reduce the likelihood that the front wheel could break loose.

 

Wayne

[Jerry_75_Guy]

Ok, now please bear in mind that my response is offered only in the interest of discussion, and in an effort to eliminate any misconceptions I have here, but the majority of what I've read, and what I've been taught says,

basically, to 'almost' never use the rear brake, and 'almost' always use the front brake in most situations, and this is what I do.

 

The braking technique you use, and claim as canon, is pretty much the antithesis of what 'understand' to be proper technique.

 

The front brake has most of the braking power on the bike; frequent use of, and reliance on, the rear brake as your primary brake unit, not only wears out your rear pads in a hurry (read "$$$" gone unnecessarily), but potentially sets you up to lose control of the rear wheel in a number of critical braking situations.

 

Am I missing something here guys?

 

That said, and braking aside, a rider hanging their feet out 20ft prior to stopping does seem a bit sloppy, and has some risks attached, but come to think of it though, I've been known to 'forget myself' technique wise from time to time too

[Whip]

Jerry

 

Do ya work in politics?.....We were just startin to have some fun and there you go makin all nice..

 

How am gonna kill the rest of the morin if we start aggreein on everything?

 

Whip

[RFW]

The basic principle of using the rear brake for the last few MPH is sound.

 

At such slow speeds, gyroscopic stability of the wheels is nearly absent. At higher speeds, even if your front tire skids, the gyroscopic action of the spinning front wheel ensures the bike remains upright.

 

But at very low speeds, a front wheel skid can result in the front wheel skidding out, and a lowside resultng. It happened to me in a rain storm at not much over a walking speed. The front brake skidded and the bike slid out onto its side in literally the blink of an eye. At a higher speed it would simply have skidded, but remained upright.

 

So, it indeed makes good sense to use that rear brake at very slow speeds.

[DiggerJim]

Then it dawned on me - WITH BOTH FEET OFF THE PEGS, HE HAD NO WAY OF USING HIS REAR BRAKE!

Unless he's riding a bike with linked brakes. Mine does.

...Obviously, he wasn't a BRC or 'Ride Like a Pro' graduate.

Maybe not, but I'm both and I also will drag my feet on occasion. Should I be sending back my BRC/ERC certificates and my RLP DVDs?

...No one NEEDS both feet to stabilize a bike when stopped, and certainly no one NEEDS to dangle their feet 3 inches off the pavement while coasting at 5 MPH.

In your mind maybe. I often will dangle them as I walk the bike or proceed slowly at a stop sign when I'm in a line of cars and we're all going through the "your turn/my turn" cycle. There's not enough room to come up to speed & then stop in that scenario as each car stops before getting their chance to proceed through the intersection. Also, I'm a short guy (5'9") with a 30" inseam so I like the extra support dropping both feet to the pavement gives me when I'm stopped (although, yes I will also use just my left foot at times when I want to trigger the brake light so the guy behind me doesn't forget I'm there). I put a Wunderlich Low Ergo seat on it just so I could double-flatfoot.

 

Technically speaking based on some other posts on the board, I guess you could make an argument that using even 1 foot when stopped isn't needed. There are those folks who can balance their bike (even a big BMW) at a standstill. So, why are you using that one foot? You don't NEED to. Puhleeze learn the correct balancing technique so you don't expose your left foot to so much potential danger.

 

Jim

[Firefight911]

Rear brake? What's that? Ain't touched it in years, and yes, I know it is partially linked on the ST. If it wasn't, it would still have darn near close to new pads. My back braking is typically limited to tight slow turns. For example, u-turn in a parking lot when I am counter-weighting and at full lock.

 

I am also a, "put the right foot down first", kinda guy, even after having taught the MSF course for 8+ years.

 

YMMV, but the percentages of brake bias on modern day bikes is HEAVILY biased to the front. On sportbikes, it would be easy to see 95% + of the potential being front biased. Full boat tourer, perhaps 85% + front bias. Regardless of the %, the front brake is the overwhelmingly dominant factor.

 

I, personally, view the back brake as a redundant system in teh event of front failure.

 

As for the leg dangly thingy, I am a big proponent of getting the feet up on the pegs as quickly as possible and leaving them on the pegs as long as prudent. I usually joke with my wife about it and end up making a game about how long I can keep them on the pegs while slow riding. IMO, you would be surprised how much control you can have with the bike as long as you keep the feet on the pegs and the knees tight to the tank.

 

Practice, practice, practice for that "feel" of both braking and control and understand that each person has their own way of doing it. Not any one way is necessarily the "right" way. As long as it works for them, let it go!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Of, course, YMMV along with your blood pressure!

[JayW]

I have seen convincing demonstrations that a motorcycle stops faster when BOTH brakes are used, with emphasis placed on the front one. With bikes like the R12RT this dicussion is nearly moot since the rear brake is automatically engaged when the front binder is applied, but I have always been taught to get in the habit of using both brakes routinely so that in an emergency stop situation your learned habit will have you engaging both brakes at once, thus stopping more quickly.

 

In my own brake practice exercises I smoothly and quickly apply both brakes with the bike fully upright, with increasing pressure on the front brake as weight transfers forward, allowing more traction and stopping power to that wheel. This is applicable to riding on the STREET - not high speed corners at the track.

 

My source? Proficient Motorcyling by David Hough, and many other teachers who know a lot more than I do.

 

Jay

[russell_bynum]

This is applicable to riding on the STREET - not high speed corners at the track.

 

Same thing works at the track, except that a sport bike's short wheelbase means the weight goes to the front WAY faster than a long wheelbase touring bike like the RT. Also, you're generally on the brakes harder/quicker on the track than on the street, so the amount of help the rear brake gives you is even less.

 

But...the same basic fundamental idea still applies.

[NEOHMark]

Some great follow up points. I never meant to imply that rr brake only is the proper way to stop. I'm actually a big proponent of grabbing as much front brake as I can - especially under panic stop situations - while feathering the rr brake. But when I get down to around 20 MPH, I gradually start loosening up on the front lever and usually let the rr foot lever take complete control at around 10 MPH to the stop.

 

But I guess I'm solidly in the minority regarding footdragging and ultra-low speed maneuvering. Obviously I don't agree - but that's OK. IMHO, using the front brake-only leaves the pilot wide open for the pratfalls of loose gravel, oil spots, rain-soaked painted stripes and other traction-robbing situations usually found in/near intersections. Kudos to you if you can keep the shiny side up while turning on any of these while applying the front brake-only. I'm simply not that good. I've needed to depend on the textbook technique to never have so much as dropped a bike since I first started street riding 25+ years ago. Maybe I'm just lucky? I am assuming of course, that my most vociferous critics have also been able to maintain a 100% record of 'keeping the shiny side up'? And my apologies for not buying into the 'there's two kinds of riders - those who have been down....' yada yada yada.

 

To each his own though - just thought a 'Ride Well' forum was a good place to share a pointer or thought about riding safely. My bad.

 

BTW - tongue firmly planted in cheek.

[Dances_With_Wiener_Dogs]

To each his own though - just thought a 'Ride Well' forum was a good place to share a pointer or thought about riding safely. My bad.

It is, but I was just surprised at the voracity of your statements. Hey, we're all riding and that's what's important.

[Jerry_75_Guy]

Jerry

 

Do ya work in politics?.....We were just startin to have some fun and there you go makin all nice..

 

How am gonna kill the rest of the morin if we start aggreein on everything?

 

Whip

 

Yeah, I may have heard the old Rodney King "Can't we all just get along?" quote one too many times

 

Sometimes a good fight (arguement/discussion) makes for the most fun; I had an old girlfriend like that

 

I think I learned 'conflict avoidance' from the couple of times she chucked an ashtray at my head

 

........Or maybe it was the 'helmet' threads I used to participate in

[tobyzusa]

"With all due respect"..........I just wanted to say that......it seems to be a popular phrase here, right before you verbally pop someone right between the eyes.

[ghaverkamp]

Some of us are perfectly capable of dragging both feet while independently controlling both brakes. (I drag both my feet on occasion, often for no particular reason than that it's different.)

[AdventurePoser]

I know "never" is a very strong word, but I virtually never use my rear brake.

 

Cheers,

Steve in So Cal

[ESokoloff]

Shortly after purchasing my 03 RT I found a weakness in the bike.

I was new to linked brakes & back on motorcycles after a 13 year hiatus. One night while looking for a parking spot in a parking lot I suddenly found myself holding up the bike & gently setting it down on the asphalt

I learned then & there that in certain situations you must not apply front brake while turning the front wheel.

A few years later I was on a group ride with some members of this board. As I entered a particular corner I found that I was carrying to much speed. I don't recall if I applied the hand or foot leaver but it didn't mater as I was on my 03 RT & I had to scrub off some speed. This action caused the bike to go into a tank slap situation

 

I am a firm believer of tail dragging for speed trim in many situations

[ShovelStrokeEd]

Straight line stops, all front brake although a couple of my bikes have hydraulically linked brakes. Low speed turns and the like, still front brake only. I'll drag my rear brake when executing a first gear U-turn but it is to modulate the throttle input and make things smoother, not to slow the bike.

 

I never put my feet down until the bike has come to a complete stop, sometimes not even then as I enjoy the game of maintaining balance, plus, it drives the "paddlers" crazy. My feet are back up on the pegs before the bike has rolled 6 feet in most cases.

 

Unless I have the bars at full lock, I see no danger in applying the front brake to get myself stopped. This is low speed stuff, a little modulation goes a long way. No reason to maintain the turn radius if you need to stop, you are going slow anyway. As for high speeds, or even moderate (25 to 35 mph) speeds, I have locked the front wheel many times. Again, modulation is the key as well as practice. You don't have to fall down if the front wheel locks or slides for that matter. You do need to learn how to recover.

[Carl_T]

Gotta go with Ed and the rest of the front brakers here.

 

I'll use the rear for 10% stopping power ¾ of the time, unless it gets down to SUPER quick stopping where I’ll lighten, then come off the rear, after the start of braking when getting under full weight transfer. Then again I'm riding a shorter wheelbase bike with more weight transfer than a tourer.

 

I most often use the front slowing or full stopping mid corner (for me low sides are more chummy than high sides). As has been said, you modulate to what it can do according to lean/traction.

 

Also I test all my bikes when I first get them under front wheel braking in a turn. If they exhibit undesirable handling quirks, I tune the suspension until they work acceptably in that type of maneuver. Also you have to know better than to overbrake what traction level you have. You can't go full on front OR back braking while well leaned over, and you can't blame the bike if it reacts like a bike if you do that.

 

I use the front to full stop 99% of the time. I may modify that a little on real slick thick gravel parking lots and the like, but still use it often even there (though I don’t necessarily recommend that, and of course not snapping it on, on slick gravel 5mph at full lock, you can’t be foolish or use it without feel).

 

I do come to a stop at stop signs with the front, as does my wife. You can see if the intersection is full of crap or not. The rear is a good U-turn tool, and chassis settler as mentioned but is very often not mandatory, or even useful at all times, most notably on tall shorter wheelbase bikes. It is also nice in the last few feet of a real slick surface, but that is rider sensitivity and planning dependant I think, not an “always necessity” and I don’t bother with “back only at the end” often there either.

 

When dirt racing, we had to use the front on dirt to the point of locking (knobbies) while racing over all manner of variable surface dirt, including slick mud. If we only stuck to the back in the mud we might as well have left the race bike on the truck that day. You had to learn what it would do and what it wouldn’t, and how to tell when it wasn’t doing anymore.

 

Using the front hard on a dirt bike had you down in the beginning of your learning curve. That’s a safer way to learn the edge, and how it feels at slower speeds though. It’s a good way to learn to feedback feel.

 

On the road, in and unusually slick area during rain at about 10mph I've momentarily locked the front wheel before. You just need to be very fast releasing the brake when you perceive the lock. It’s a distinct type of feeling at slow speeds and dirt honed reflexes will transfer with practice to help keep you upright. The trick is noticing it in the first milliseconds and reacting. Being down and wondering what happened is not the level of "feedback/feel/attention" needed.

 

Since it was asked how many of the mainly slow speed front brakers have gone down due to it, I Started riding at 16, I’m 60, I’ve not gone down on macadam due to the front brake at slow speed (or any speed). I’ve not gone down on any surface with a “street bike” due to the front brake period, you have to use it with feedback feel, and be attentive enough to notice subtlety though.

[ednowicki]

- I have an RT but still use front and rear brake controls except when scrubbing off speed in a turn.

- I keep both feet on pegs till the bike stops rolling. Both feet down iff questionable road surface, otherwise left foot down.

- Leave in gear and check my RVM while stopped. My clutch hand does not need a rest, I usually rest it while rolling.

- Feet on the pegs as the clutch is engaging.

 

I figure I paid for front and rear brakes, might as well use them. Also, If I do this all the time I'll do it reactively... like when I see a clear road and then the brown of bambi.

 

Ed

[steve.foote]

I've never seen a 'stoppy' pulled off at anything more than low speeds.

 

Sorry to keep piling on, but I just watched a Discovery program (Stunt Junkies) where some dude broke the previous 87mph stoppie record by 40mph (that's 137mph for those who don't want to do the math ).

[Kevin_Stevens]

...the obvious being you could tear up a foot or be thrown from the bike if it catches on something.

 

Thanks, because no, that wasn't obvious. "Thrown from the bike"?!?

 

him. He had both feet 'down' - hovering about 3 inches off the pavement - for the final 20 feet or so of his stop; probably for the last 10 mph or so.

 

Three inches off the ground isn't "down" or "dragging", is it? How was he going to tear up his foot or be thrown from the bike with his foot three inches above road pavement? My feet, firmly on the pegs, are lots closer to the pavement very frequently. You seem to be talking about two different things.

 

At first, I just shook my head and said to myself 'unskilled'. Then it dawned on me - WITH BOTH FEET OFF THE PEGS, HE HAD NO WAY OF USING HIS REAR BRAKE! He was basically stopping ass-backwards - against every rule in the book by using ONLY his front brake to scrub off those last few MPHs and come to a stop. And what happens when you over-use the front brake at slow speeds - especially when turning? Small wonder why most 'get offs' occur at slow speeds. Obviously, he wasn't a BRC or 'Ride Like a Pro' graduate.

 

a) He can stop from 10mph in 20 feet without the rear brake, AGAINST EVERY RULE IN THE BOOK!, and you call him "unskilled"?

 

b) What book?

 

c) How did you get from "slowing from 10mph in a straight line", to "over-using the front brake when turning"?

 

d) Gee, I'm a multiple ERC graduate, and I've been known to slow to a stop without using ANY BRAKES AT ALL!!! Do I just tear up my card, or do I have to mail it in somewhere?

 

I know at SOME point you have to get a foot off the peg to stabilize the bike as it comes to a stop, but IMHO - that should be one foot only - and it should be always be your LEFT foot. The right foot should stay on the brake pedal to the very end of your stop - allowing you to stay completely off the front brake lever. No one NEEDS both feet to stabilize a bike when stopped, and certainly no one NEEDS to dangle their feet 3 inches off the pavement while coasting at 5 MPH.

 

Finally, and admission that this is all your opinion. Great! IMHO, you should put at least one foot on the ground at some point before the bike falls over. I've been guilty of omitting this step in the past, and I don't recommend it. IMHO you can hold the bike in place with either the front brake, the rear brake, both brakes, or no brakes, depending on the conditions and circumstances. IMHO you can put down your left foot, right foot, both feet, or no feet, depending on the conditions and circumstances. And finally, no one NEEDS to be incredibly rigid and judgemental when assessing the world around them. But it's certainly an option.

 

If you're a 'footdragger' - or if you know someone who is, I implore you to PUHLEEZE get yourself/them into (or back to) a BRC course or get to a parking lot to practice your rear braking-only at slow speeds. Footdragging is more dangerous than you might think.

 

It would have to be. Consider myself implored.

 

KeS

[NEOHMark]

Cool!!! Four pages strong and still as controversial as ever.

[PrinceAZ]

Ladies and Gentlemen,although I have not read every post in the last few days, I base my experience on twenty plus years of dirt riding and twenty plus years of street riding and a few MSF courses. One thing that I have not seen mentioned is the shift of CG when you remove your feet from the pegs. It raises it toward the level of the seat. With your feet up on the pegs, the weight of your legs helps in lowering the CG. So what do we want, higher CG at low speed or lower CG at low speed? I also know you have more control of your motorcycle with your feet on the pegs.

This thread reminds me of the wheel lug bolt discussion

[philbytx]

One observation...

 

Please, let us not forget that those of us that ride with a pillion NEED TO USE THE REAR BRAKE !

 

Only using the front is a bad habit to get into if you also ride non-ABS bikes and take passengers.

[russell_bynum]

One observation...

 

Please, let us not forget that those of us that ride with a pillion NEED TO USE THE REAR BRAKE !

 

Only using the front is a bad habit to get into if you also ride non-ABS bikes and take passengers.

 

Huh?

[Huzband]

One observation...

 

Please, let us not forget that those of us that ride with a pillion NEED TO USE THE REAR BRAKE !

 

Only using the front is a bad habit to get into if you also ride non-ABS bikes and take passengers.

I disagree. Except for my daily commute, virtually all of my riding is with the wife on board. I use this braking technique with or without her, i.e., hardly ever touch the rear brake.

BTW, our last bike did not have linked brakes, nor ABS, & this practice has never been a problem.

[Joe Frickin' Friday]

One thing that I have not seen mentioned is the shift of CG when you remove your feet from the pegs. It raises it toward the level of the seat.

 

This is not true. In fact, if your feet/legs are dangling below the pegs, then your body's CG is actually lower than if your feet are on the pegs.

[Joe Frickin' Friday]

One observation...

 

Please, let us not forget that those of us that ride with a pillion NEED TO USE THE REAR BRAKE !

 

Only using the front is a bad habit to get into if you also ride non-ABS bikes and take passengers.

 

Huh?

 

I don't know about ABS/non-ABS, but I think I understand what he's getting at. If you add 120+ pounds of meat directly over the rear wheel, braking events won't transfer much of that weight to the front wheel, which means if you develop a habit of not using the rear brake under these circumstances (2up), then you will miss out on a lot of the vehicle's max total braking capacity in the event of an emergency stop.

[russell_bynum]

One observation...

 

Please, let us not forget that those of us that ride with a pillion NEED TO USE THE REAR BRAKE !

 

Only using the front is a bad habit to get into if you also ride non-ABS bikes and take passengers.

 

Huh?

 

I don't know about ABS/non-ABS, but I think I understand what he's getting at. If you add 120+ pounds of meat directly over the rear wheel, braking events won't transfer much of that weight to the front wheel, which means if you develop a habit of not using the rear brake under these circumstances (2up), then you will miss out on a lot of the vehicle's max total braking capacity in the event of an emergency stop.

 

OK, right.

 

The same fundamental best practice still applies. Rear brake comes on first, followed by front brake, and rear brake pressure is reduced as front brake pressure is increased. Then, as you approach 0mph, ease front brake pressure, and bring more rear brake pressure back in until you come to a stop with the front brake released and the rear brake on.

[Whip]

One observation...

 

Please, let us not forget that those of us that ride with a pillion NEED TO USE THE REAR BRAKE !

 

Only using the front is a bad habit to get into if you also ride non-ABS bikes and take passengers.

 

I'm good for 20k each year 2/up...more 2up than single....snow,rain,heat,sand,gravel,grass,city, country,asphalt, concrete....never found a need for the rear brake yet....oh I forgot....when I'm talkin on the phone and the cruise is set I use the rear brake to turn the cruise off and slow the bike....so I can talk another couple seconds...because the phone is in my right hand

 

Maybe thats why I have to keep getting new phones.

 

Whip

[ShovelStrokeEd]

Russell,

That is the best description of "proper" braking technique. "Ta DUM" as I think Dick put it. With the Ta being the rear brake and the DUM being the front.

 

Makes the most effective use of the rear brake (before weight transfer renderes it more or less useless) while allowing that gradual increase in pressure to the front. It is particularly effective on my Honda's with their linked braking systems. Done right and the bike just squats and stops, right now.

 

I'm not a big fan of doing my final braking with the rear brake, preferring to use the front right down to 0. No particular reason, I've just always done it that way except on my Harley's which, for the most part only have the front brake as a hill holder.

[russell_bynum]

Russell,

That is the best description of "proper" braking technique. "Ta DUM" as I think Dick put it. With the Ta being the rear brake and the DUM being the front.

 

Right. It's "Ta Dummmmmmmmmmmm ta" since you end on the rear brake.

 

Makes the most effective use of the rear brake (before weight transfer renderes it more or less useless) while allowing that gradual increase in pressure to the front. It is particularly effective on my Honda's with their linked braking systems. Done right and the bike just squats and stops, right now.

 

I'm not a big fan of doing my final braking with the rear brake, preferring to use the front right down to 0. No particular reason, I've just always done it that way except on my Harley's which, for the most part only have the front brake as a hill holder.

 

Certainly, stopping on the front brake works the vast majority of the time, and you can do it smoothly. You can even <gasp> stop in a turn with the front brake <Oh my gosh...did he just say that?> if you're careful with it.

 

On the track, I don't mess with the rear, and about the only time I see racers doing it, is to get the rear sliding at corner entry. (aka "Backing it in") But...on the track bike, the rear brake doesn't do much, and because you're generally braking really hard, you would quickly overwhelm the rear anyway. On the street, on the BMW, I used both brakes, though I was quite comfortable using just the front if I needed my right foot for something else, or if I just felt like doing it differently. On the Tuono, I don't use the rear brake, because it doesn't work. I found a top secret brake bleeding method where you take the caliper off and hold it upside down while bleeding the brakes and chanting in Italian. Hopefully when I try that, I'll get some functionality out of it, but since I've owned the bike, the rear brake has been purely decorative.

[ShovelStrokeEd]

Certainly, stopping on the front brake works the vast majority of the time, and you can do it smoothly. You can even <gasp> stop in a turn with the front brake <Oh my gosh...did he just say that?> if you're careful with it.

 

[steve.foote]

Hmmm, I only use the rear brake on both of my bikes. It helps me stay consistant with my four-wheeled vehicles.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

HA! Just kidding.

[Joe Frickin' Friday]

Certainly, stopping on the front brake works the vast majority of the time, and you can do it smoothly. You can even <gasp> stop in a turn with the front brake <Oh my gosh...did he just say that?> if you're careful with it.

 

I learned all about this with trials riding on my mountain bike. Example: travelling very slowly ( like 2 or 3 MPH) front wheel pointed hard to left; bike starts falling to right, you squeeze the front brake to bring the bike back to vertical. Same physics apply to the motorcycle: if you want to stop in a tight slow turn with the front brake, turn the front wheel toward the inside of the turn to get the bike falling toward the outside of the turn, then modulate the front brake to keep the bike vertical. Granted it's a bit more touchy on the motorcycle because of the added mass, but when you get good at it, it's all one kinda smooth event, and it leaves you free to use both your feet (instead of just the left) for for immediate touchdown upon reaching zero forward speed.

[Shawnee Bill]

Some of us are perfectly capable of dragging both feet while independently controlling both brakes. (I drag both my feet on occasion, often for no particular reason than that it's different.)

 

Can't let this one go

I've learned to do this riding my wife's scooter It's different for sure.

[Green RT]

Sorry to keep piling on, but I just watched a Discovery program (Stunt Junkies) where some dude broke the previous 87mph stoppie record by 40mph (that's 137mph for those who don't want to do the math ).

 

Actually it is 127 mph if you want to do the math right.

 

Just to shock the original poster even more, I have to confess that I commonly drag both feet one half inch off the ground at 80 mph. Usually only for a few seconds, just to stretch out my legs, but I do it once in awhile. I will ride with my feet just skimming the ground. It's kind of fun.

 

I also occasionally drag my feet on the ground at 20 or 30 mph if I have stepped on some oil or something and feel the need to scrub the bottom of my boots so I don't slip the next time I stop.

[russell_bynum]

Just to shock the original poster even more, I have to confess that I commonly drag both feet one half inch off the ground at 80 mph. Usually only for a few seconds, just to stretch out my legs, but I do it once in awhile. I will ride with my feet just skimming the ground. It's kind of fun.

 

<looking around to make sure nobody is within earshot>

I do the same thing.

 

But I can tell you that hitting a bots dot with your foot at 85mph will double your vocabulary.

[steve.foote]

Sorry to keep piling on, but I just watched a Discovery program (Stunt Junkies) where some dude broke the previous 87mph stoppie record by 40mph (that's 137mph for those who don't want to do the math ).

 

Actually it is 127 mph if you want to do the math right.

 

Whoops! My typo. The original record was 97mph not 87. The new record is 137mph.

[steve.foote]

<looking around to make sure nobody is within earshot>

I do the same thing.

 

But I can tell you that hitting a bots dot with your foot at 85mph will double your vocabulary.

 

BTDT. The results of which can cause a sailor to blush.