Cross Control/Counter wieghting is better than Ride Smart...

[Whip]

It is my contention that if you ride in an urban environment within ten MPH of the speed limit learning to cross control/counter weight your bike quickly and smoothly is a better and more defensive way of riding. Just picture this. It's raining. Your in the left wheel rut and moving along a little faster that the cars around you. The car ten lengths in front of you runs over a piece of an old truck tire and it end up in your part of the lane. Cars are on both side of you so ya need to get to the right side of the lane. The easiest thing for me to do is keep my head up and and push the right bar forward.

 

Your riding home in the dark. You slow to make a left turn and see somethin slick in your path or a patch of gravel, as the front wheel goes over the slick area it slides, if your using Ride Smart, your down before ya know what happen. If you've moved the bike under ya, you have a good chance of controlling it or it may not slide at all.

 

 

 

You can make sharper turns in parking lots and if there is a little gravel around the bike will slide less if ya move it under you and counter weight the bike.

 

If for some reason the bike starts to slide it feels much more natural and less of an oh shit moment if you are up right and the bike is below ya.

 

These are the same principles that we use on the dirt when your traction is in question.

 

Now of course hoonin and sport touring works much better when you apply the Ride Smart techniques or if your just try to keep up with LimeCreek in the Texas Hill Country so ya don't get lost.

 

 

 

 

[David]

Are you being serious, or are you just in a pissy bad mood? If it's the former, I'll be glad to explain where you're wrong. If it's the latter, I've got better things to do.

[ShovelStrokeEd]

 

I ain't touchin' this. They both are faster than I am.

[Mister Tee]

I'm not even sure what the argument is about. You use the riding technique appropriate for your speed and riding conditions. Do I counterweight on the track? No. Do I counterweight in the parking lot to get to my paddock? Yes.

 

Not being familiar with Ride Smart, I can't comment on that.

[Whip]

Are you being serious, or are you just in a pissy bad mood? If it's the former, I'll be glad to explain where you're wrong. If it's the latter, I've got better things to do.

 

I'm serious. I've experimented almost all the time.

 

You can try to explain it. I've read almost everything you said on the subject on this board. At close to the speed limit the bike can turn sharper and is more maneuverable when you cross control it. If I had been cross controlling the FJR I would not have crashed. Ride Smart sucks if your on anything loose. That is why we cross control the bike off road.

 

I would never cross control the bike on the track or at any speed above say 60 mph.

 

Set up a bunch of cones a few car lengths apart.

 

I bet I can get through em faster by cross control than you can with ride smart.

 

Ewan knows what I'm talking about

 

 

Ride Smart sucks if you ain't got any traction, so if ya don't know why take the chance.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[David]

Not being familiar with Ride Smart, I can't comment on that.

 

He's saying that on paved surfaces with a sport bike at 60 mph it's safer to maximize lean angle so that you can stay on top of the bike. It feels better, which is apparently important.

[Whip]

Go to the 2 minute mark...

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch_popup?v=mp-ZRiVslbM

 

 

[David]

That's not 60 mph and it's a dry, predictable surface.

[Whip]

That's not 60 mph and it's a dry, predictable surface.

 

It looks pretty close to me, but you get the point.

 

 

 

 

[David]

Larry, I'm going to bow out of this discussion. I'll just say that if you're wrong, it matters. The thousands of riders who read this are in effect putting themselves in grave danger by misunderstanding the basic physics at play.

 

The same is true if I'm giving them bad advice.

 

All that to say I don't think this is a topic that mixes well with posturing, and I want no part of it.

 

Best wishes to you.

[Whip]

David David David

 

You know I ride a lot. You know I do track days. You know I am a student of riding.

 

I am not "posturing".

 

My experience and my personal research says Ride Smart has it's place, but it ain't the be all end all it's cracked up to be.

 

I think you need to find a proper balance between the two styles of riding.

 

You wanna call that posturing.....

 

It seems very rational and thoughout to me.

 

 

 

 

[David]

Okay, forget about RidingSmart and whatever it is that set you off about that. I took the initiative and risk of developing a simple curriculum that was designed to cover two things:

 

1) Minimize lean angle.

 

2) Minimize unwanted body input.

 

You're saying--up to ca. 60 mph--that it's safer to maximize lean angle. Counter-leaning the bike is certainly appropriate for slow speed and/or very tight turns, but not anything else.

 

You're essentially countermanding every instructor in the world. So either they're wrong or you are, but you're both not right, and saying stuff like that seems pretty irresponsible, especially without explaining it from a physics standpoint.

 

The reason you ride dirt differently is because the speeds are lower and the traction won't allow the front to steer conventionally: it just skates or pushes. So you change the contact patch to the inside of the tire's maximum perimeter and let the edge "cut" into the dirt. You're also steering with rear throttle. Same thing with flat-tracking, where you WANT to slide. I don't want to slide at high speeds on pavement except in very controlled conditions.

 

What am I missing?

[BanjoBoy]

So Ride Smart is when you squeeze the bike between your legs, keep your lower body planted, have little or no weight on the bars, and keep your upper body in line with the bike for proper cornering technique?

I recon that's what I try to ride most of the time.

But now in the winter here where I ride, there's often rocks and debris in the road, I find I can flick the bike quicker buy splaying my legs, and move the bike under me, where I'm not inline with it.

This wouldn't work at maximum speed and lean angles, but for winter cruising, it seems like the thing to do?

Is this what this debate is about? Whether to keep inline with the bike, or be able to flick it side to side beneath you?

I do both depending on circumstances.

[T__]

Whip, I really don’t want to put my dog in this fight but what you are explaining is how a lot of us ride our dirt bikes (even BIG dirt bikes) off road in the loose, deep,, or slippery stuff.. Much quicker response to get a bike to quickly deviate from travel path & keeps the weight well centered over the tire contact patch..

 

Twisty

 

[Joe Frickin' Friday]

Not being familiar with Ride Smart, I can't comment on that.

 

For those interested in learning/applying the Ride Smart techniques, the details are best conveyed in a weekend-long free (almost-free?) course, taught by experienced volunteer riders who have gone through the course themselves; see the Ride/Event Planning forum for when/if a course may be offered near you.

 

For the sake of discussion here, I’ll provide a brief synopsis of just the relevant part of Ride Smart:

 

Ride Smart is, in large part, a set of riding skills intended to make the best of a heavy street bike with limited cornering clearance. Among other things, it involves moving one’s upper body toward the inside of the turn. Although the outside hip gets raised off of the saddle (to facilitate upper body movement), the lower body, for the most part, stays put. The result is that the bike is more upright than it otherwise would be, which provides several benefits:

 

• The steering no longer wants to self-correct and make the bike straighten up, so you’re not “fighting” the bike to stay in the turn. If your upper body is really far to the inside, the bike will actually want to spiral/lean into an even tighter turn.
   
  
• The hard parts (footpegs, centerstand) of the bike are farther from the road surface. This is important on touring and sport-touring bikes where the tires still have traction to offer during very hard turns, past the point where hard parts would be dragging (if Ride Smart technique were not being used)
   
  
• The suspension is more upright, which means it’s better able to absorb bumps and dips in the road, and less able to upset the lean angle (envision leaning the bike over almost horizontal while you ride across a speed bump, and this becomes clearer.)

Ride Smart technique is appropriate at speeds well below 60 MPH:

 

This pic was taken in Deals Gap in 2006. It was a pretty tight turn, and I’d estimate my speed at only about 30 MPH. This photo does not demonstrate Ride Smart technique, but neither does it demonstrate cross-controlling: I am embarrassingly close to a neutral seating position. Notice how close the pegs and centerstand are to the roadway. What happens if I cross-control, i.e. lean my body to the outside? I’m gonna start dragging hard parts, and later in the day I’ll make a brief appearance on the evening news.

 

At close to the speed limit the bike can turn sharper and is more maneuverable when you cross control it.

 

Let’s talk about that. “Sharper” and “more maneuverable” are somewhat ambiguous terms, and I’d like to try for something clearer. Since cross-controlling doesn’t require repositioning your body at all – it pretty much stays vertical, even as the bike leans over hard – I’d agree that it’s possible to transition from a straight travel path to a turn more rapidly. Ride Smart pretty much requires that you get your body appropriately positioned before you start the turn, so as to avoid unsettling the chassis once you’re in the turn. That takes time, so any situation where you need to turn very suddenly/unexpectedly, yeah, Ride Smart is gonna be difficult to apply. But cross-controlling will not allow a rider to achieve the highest possible lateral acceleration; he will run out of contact patch, lean angle (drag hard parts), or suspension compliance/stability before getting there.

 

Go to the 2 minute mark...

http://www.youtube.com/watch_popup?v=mp-ZRiVslbM

 

That rider demonstrates perfectly what I’m talking about in the previous paragraph. He snaps the bike from “straight” to “turn” extremely rapidly. This rapidity would not be possible (or would be very difficult) while applying Ride Smart technique. Notice, though, that he’s not coming anywhere close to the traction/lean limits of his bike.

 

This description applies equally well to the earlier scenario you described:

 

The car ten lengths in front of you runs over a piece of an old truck tire and it end up in your part of the lane. Cars are on both side of you so ya need to get to the right side of the lane. The easiest thing for me to do is keep my head up and and push the right bar forward.

 

In this situation you don’t need to achieve the traction limit of the tires (~1 lateral g), but you do need to achieve some lateral acceleration NOW. Ride Smart not only isn’t needed here, it would be hazardous to take the time to get your body in position before you start turning. Like that Japanese moto-cop in the video, don’t waste time moving your body around, start the swerve (and a second later after you’re at the other side of the lane, terminate the swerve) quickly.

 

Let’s talk about parking lots:

 

You can make sharper turns in parking lots

 

If by “sharper” you mean “smaller turning radius,” yes, under one condition: the handlebars must be moved to full lock. Any other time, I can pretty much position my body anywhere I want, and still find a handlebar angle that gives me the same turning radius as cross-controlling will. Having said that, Ride Smart techniques in a parking lot are kind of pointless, and I don’t think I’ve ever heard anyone advocate their use there: in an environment like that, you shouldn’t be anywhere near traction/lean-angle limits. In any event, once the bars go to full lock, the only way to tighten up the turn is by cross-controlling: you lean to the outside, the bike leans in even tighter, and the front wheel’s contact patch moves from a point off the end of the forks (viewed from right side of bike, it would be near a 6 o’clock position) to a point nearer the front of the bike (closer to 3 o’clock). Taken to the theoretical extreme, if you could somehow cross-control to achieve a 90-degree lean angle (yes, put the bike horizontal) without touching hard parts, you could achieve a turning radius a wee bit longer than the bike’s wheelbase, even with the bars turned only 45 degrees.

 

 

[Whip]

Let’s talk about that. “Sharper” and “more maneuverable” are somewhat ambiguous terms, and I’d like to try for something clearer. Since cross-controlling doesn’t require repositioning your body at all – it pretty much stays vertical, even as the bike leans over hard – I’d agree that it’s possible to transition from a straight travel path to a turn more rapidly. Ride Smart pretty much requires that you get your body appropriately positioned before you start the turn, so as to avoid unsettling the chassis once you’re in the turn. That takes time, so any situation where you need to turn very suddenly/unexpectedly, yeah, Ride Smart is gonna be difficult to apply. But cross-controlling will not allow a rider to achieve the highest possible lateral acceleration; he will run out of contact patch, lean angle (drag hard parts), or suspension compliance/stability before getting there.

 

Very well said and I agree 100%.

 

So when you don't need the highest possible lateral acceleration, you just need to change the path of the bike quickly, learning to cross control the bike is an important skill to have. If you never want to test the highest possible lateral acceleration of your bike by staying within the speed limits you can safely and efficiently control your bike using cross controlling.

 

Back to my main point.

 

In urban motorcycle warfare and commuting where your speed rarely if ever exceeds 60 mph Cross Controlling your bike can save your life. If you only use Ride Smart and don't know how to Cross Control your bike you make not have enough time or room to react to danger.

 

 

 

[Kinsley]

Different applications......bikes, road conditions, weather, rider ability, etc.

 

Knives are a good weapon, but not for a gun fight

[ShovelStrokeEd]

Just a quickie, you need not separate the actions of getting good body position and the steering input. You can start moving your body inside as you initiate the turn and still gain some of the advantage. I do a LOT of urban riding and never have I felt the need to cross control my bike.

[pickersgill1]

What great skill, like to see them do it on a BMW R1150RT with dry clutch, can smell it from here!!

[motorman587]

This my take on learning different techniques from different people or courses. First keep an open mind. It may not work for you. Second, the more techniques you have the better the out come in a situation where you may need that technique. I see new techniques as a tool. I place that tool in my tool box. I may use it or not. I would love to take the RideSmart program. More tools in my tool boxes!!!

[pickersgill1]

BMW R1200RT

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch_popup?v=mp-ZRiVslbM

[Joe Frickin' Friday]

If you never want to test the highest possible lateral acceleration of your bike by staying within the speed limits you can safely and efficiently control your bike using cross controlling.

 

The problem is that in a crisis, you revert to habit. When a turn tightens up more than you expect, or a dead racoon appears in the middle of a bend, a habit of applying Ride Smart techniques will give you the added margin (i.e. ground clearance and stability) you need to turn even tighter and clear the obstacle/stay on the road.

 

OTOH, I know a few riders who had developed a habit of cross-controlling their bike, and ended up levering the wheels off of the pavement in unexpectedly tight turns.

 

In urban motorcycle warfare and commuting where your speed rarely if ever exceeds 60 mph Cross Controlling your bike can save your life. If you only use Ride Smart and don't know how to Cross Control your bike you make not have enough time or room to react to danger.

 

Cross-controlling is indeed useful, but (IMHO) only in very limited circumstances - namely, rapid swerve maneuvers and ultra-tight first-gear turns.

[Whip]

OTOH, I know a few riders who had developed a habit of cross-controlling their bike, and ended up levering the wheels off of the pavement in unexpectedly tight turns.

 

Hey Mitch

 

If you are at or near the speed limit I don't think you have to worry about levering your wheels off the ground.

 

In your picture above I bet that was a marked 15 MPH corner or even 10. If you were doing the speed limit cross controlling would have been fine. If not then it is not properly marked. (If you were going thirty when that picture was taken.)

 

I believe if you stay at or near the speed limit in an urban warfare environment, with red lights, 4 way stops, traffic all around you, dogs and cats darting around, oil slicks and obstacles in the road, learning to cross control your bike instead of using RC you will have better chance of avoiding an accident, because it allows you to have a faster reaction time and if you do hit somethin slick you have a better chance of keeping it upright.

 

If I was on "The Dragon" or just about any highway or Hill Country road I would not consider Cross Controlling the bike. It seems that as soon I reach a certain speed my mind and body automatically go to some form of RS/weight to the inside riding.

 

For the record, I have only touched the pegs one time in my life. Devils Canyon on the FJR while be chased by Richard. That includes track days. Then again the Tuono was kinda hard to touch the pegs ... My Katoom is almost impossible ... the GSA is just as difficult.

 

Thanks for your response.

 

L

 

 

 

 

[steve.foote]

Larry, each technique has it's place. Obviously, cross-controlling is advantageous off road, during slow-speed manuevers and on loose/slippery surfaces. But in most other turning situations, leaning into the turn is much more effective.

 

As a dual-sporting enthusiast, I use both techniques when I ride, and utilize each as the situation warrants. Like others have said here, it's good to have many tools in your toolbox.

[Whip]

Larry, each technique has it's place. Obviously, cross-controlling is advantageous off road, during slow-speed manuevers and on loose/slippery surfaces. But in most other turning situations, leaning into the turn is much more effective.

 

As a dual-sporting enthusiast, I use both techniques when I ride, and utilize each as the situation warrants. Like others have said here, it's good to have many tools in your toolbox.

 

I don't disagree...

 

We just need to define what slow speed means. I think it's relative to the posted speed limit. Not the actual speed you are going in an urban environment.

 

 

 

 

[Woodie]

We just need to define what slow speed means. I think it's relative to the posted speed limit. Not the actual speed you are going in an urban environment.

Can't agree with you there. In this state, most posted speed limits are exceeded routinely by ALL traffic on that road. AFAIK, in this state there is no recourse to force speed limit changes based on engineering, or logic, or reality.

 

I loved seeing the curve warning signs in West Virginia, warning you to slow down to 50. (here, the road would have been marked as a 35 mph the entire road, not just the curves.)

[Whip]

We just need to define what slow speed means. I think it's relative to the posted speed limit. Not the actual speed you are going in an urban environment.

Can't agree with you there. In this state, most posted speed limits are exceeded routinely by ALL traffic on that road. AFAIK, in this state there is no recourse to force speed limit changes based on engineering, or logic, or reality.

 

I loved seeing the curve warning signs in West Virginia, warning you to slow down to 50. (here, the road would have been marked as a 35 mph the entire road, not just the curves.)

 

...again I'm talking about Urban Warfare.

[MotorinLA]

We just need to define what slow speed means. I think it's relative to the posted speed limit. Not the actual speed you are going in an urban environment.

Can't agree with you there. In this state, most posted speed limits are exceeded routinely by ALL traffic on that road. AFAIK, in this state there is no recourse to force speed limit changes based on engineering, or logic, or reality.

 

I loved seeing the curve warning signs in West Virginia, warning you to slow down to 50. (here, the road would have been marked as a 35 mph the entire road, not just the curves.)

 

In CA most speed advisal signs (the yellow ones) are reportedly posted at approximately 1/3 of critical speed for that curve, at optimal conditions.

 

Arguably cross-controlling is advantageous for quick avoidance maneuvers, but I don't see it being an advantage while riding the twisties. Having dragged both pegs and front crash bars on my 1200RT-P, I'd have to say that cross-controlling can leave something to be desired at speeds well below 60 mph.

[motorman587]

We just need to define what slow speed means. I think it's relative to the posted speed limit. Not the actual speed you are going in an urban environment.

Can't agree with you there. In this state, most posted speed limits are exceeded routinely by ALL traffic on that road. AFAIK, in this state there is no recourse to force speed limit changes based on engineering, or logic, or reality.

 

I loved seeing the curve warning signs in West Virginia, warning you to slow down to 50. (here, the road would have been marked as a 35 mph the entire road, not just the curves.)

 

In CA most speed advisal signs (the yellow ones) are reportedly posted at approximately 1/3 of critical speed for that curve, at optimal conditions.

 

Arguably cross-controlling is advantageous for quick avoidance maneuvers, but I don't see it being an advantage while riding the twisties. Having dragged both pegs and front crash bars on my 1200RT-P, I'd have to say that cross-controlling can leave something to be desired at speeds well below 60 mph.

That is why I just sit up in the saddle. No worries about speed, no worries about where to put shoulders, butt, head, eyes, etc................and I may not be the fastest one there, but we will all eventuality arrive at the same place.

[Whip]

We just need to define what slow speed means. I think it's relative to the posted speed limit. Not the actual speed you are going in an urban environment.

Can't agree with you there. In this state, most posted speed limits are exceeded routinely by ALL traffic on that road. AFAIK, in this state there is no recourse to force speed limit changes based on engineering, or logic, or reality.

 

I loved seeing the curve warning signs in West Virginia, warning you to slow down to 50. (here, the road would have been marked as a 35 mph the entire road, not just the curves.)

 

In CA most speed advisal signs (the yellow ones) are reportedly posted at approximately 1/3 of critical speed for that curve, at optimal conditions.

 

Arguably cross-controlling is advantageous for quick avoidance maneuvers, but I don't see it being an advantage while riding the twisties. Having dragged both pegs and front crash bars on my 1200RT-P, I'd have to say that cross-controlling can leave something to be desired at speeds well below 60 mph.

 

Twisties are not Urban Warfare

[dhanson]

I love cross control on the dirt bike but I am standing, hardly ever use on the road bike unless slow or avoidance of road hazards. Course I don't lean in much either unless I am pushing really hard, then it is just kissing the mirror hardly any seat shift inside. I am conservative on the road, have seen several high sides and they were not pretty.

[Matts_12GS]

I think that you're seeing this only in the extremes Larry.

 

I am a learning dual sport rider and a decent on road guy who commutes ~50 miles a day on surface streets. I am also a Ride Smart convert.

 

Ride Smart at the extremes of application, e.g good speed and the rider's head out next to the bar ends, then yes, moving side to side to side for an avoidance move is difficult as Mitch stated.

 

However, in urban commuting on my GS I keep the balls of my feet on the pegs, my hands light on the bars and I can change position in my lane (track to track) nigh on instantly just by tucking one elbow to pull my upper body forward and in the direction I want to go. My helmet will likely never go past the mirrors doing this on the GS compared to my RT, but the bike will turn every bit as quickly.

 

When I went from doing Ride Smart on the RT to doing it on the GS I needed a lot less upper body movement than on the heavier RT. I'm also a big guy with a long torso so that may explain it for me, but I think that shifting weight toward the mirror you want to turn towards works at anything above parking lot speeds, say 10-20MPH. It is just how much you need to move for the maneuver/corner that changes.

[Whip]

I think that you're seeing this only in the extremes Larry.

 

Isn't that what we all try to prepare ourselves for. I'm talking about times when you don't have time to tuck your elbow and move your body. You have less than a second to move or crash. I contend that CC is faster like Mitch said and the (Police)video showed. I also contend that like the video of Ewan, where he was making a relatively slow speed right turn(on dirt) and only dipped his right shoulder slightly he fell to the ground. If you were in oil or spilled diesel and dipped your shoulder like that you would be down so why take the chance. If you would have been CCing you would be fine. The pegs are not issue in any of the cases I'm taking about.

 

 

 

 

[leikam]

It is my contention that if you ride in an urban environment within ten MPH of the speed limit learning to cross control/counter weight your bike quickly and smoothly is a better and more defensive way of riding.

 

Back to my main point. In urban motorcycle warfare and commuting where your speed rarely if ever exceeds 60 mph Cross Controlling your bike can save your life. If you only use Ride Smart and don't know how to Cross Control your bike you make not have enough time or room to react to danger.

 

Those are two very different assertions. You started off saying that CC is the better way to ride in an urban environment to the exclusion of any other method. The second quote says that an exclusive focus on an RS approach to the complete exclusion of CC can be harmful. You've moderated your claim.

 

Anecdotal evidence just proves that both can be useful in some situations. It does not prove your point. It just shows that a rider with quick reflexes, a clear head and the ability to "think with the bike" is going to do better than somebody who dogmatically clings to one approach. But that's a fairly banal conclusion, isn't it?

 

As somebody who has done his share of "urban warfare" riding, I find the RS approach quite useful in just that environment because the road surface is often poor and keeping the bike more upright lets the suspension do a better job. I've gotten better traction through turns this way. And if clearance is never an issue for you at city speeds, you clearly aren't dealing with the asphalt heaves we get out here.

 

What's most useful is not putting yourself in a position where you have to move to avoid a hazard in less than 1 second. Throttle control, lane position, following distance, situational awareness, loud pipes. All of it working together is what gets me home in one piece.

[Couchrocket]

Not being familiar with Ride Smart, I can't comment on that.

 

 

 

Ride Smart technique is appropriate at speeds well below 60 MPH:

 

 

 

Being a mediocre rider at best, all I have to say on this topic is two things:

 

RideSmart improved my riding and safety and enjoyment about 400%..... AND,

 

This is a really cool photo, of a really nice guy, riding really well.....

[Whip]

leikam

 

I was riding with Mrs Whip on the back of the GS not too long ago about 20 car lengths behind a car. I was playin with the ZUMO for some reason and going about 45 mph(stupid). The car in front slowed suddenly and did not have any brake lights. By the time I saw the car we didn't have time to stop. I quickly leaned the bike over to the right on to the shoulder and back on to the road cross controlling both times. (It got me thinking about starting this thread). So a few miles down the road I told Louise I was gonna try it using RS and for her to be prepared. Of course there was no car in front of us and I didn't have to go on to the shoulder to practice. It wasn't close. I could not have made the same maneuver using RS.

 

Try it yourself.

 

Then watch the video of the police training.....any of em anywhere.

 

Then watch the video of Ewan fall.....if you were on some kinda slime the same would happen to you.

 

Your suspension argument only hold up if your going faster than you prolly should be. (I have no problem with that BTW)

 

 

I believe if your first instinct is to use RS in a panic situation, your wasting valuable real estate and risking much more.

 

 

L

 

[rad]

No expert commentary here, just some antidotal comments based on 45 years of riding dirt and street and 10 years of teaching MSF.

 

I’m lucky, I don’t have to wait until I can find some good roads to develop my skills on, I get to ride this 4 ½ mile section of road every day to and from work. It has 100+ changes of direction from medium speed sweepers to 10 mph blind hairpins with steep uphill’s or down hills depending on if I’m coming or going to work.

 

Regarding technique, there is not one, or the other for me, there is only both. My brain picks the technique as I set up for the turn. For switchbacks and blind tight turns I stay up over my bike so I can instantly respond to those not so uncommon mid corner surprises. Higher speed, good visibility turns, I’m using much more body to the inside of the turn as I keep my bike more vertical.

 

No pissing match, they both have their place in our daily riding arsenal. The rub comes, where the two skills overlap in regards to speed and corner conditions. Damn hard to tease the fine line out in words on the internet.

 

I will say, if you’re riding fast enough where only one style works at the mythical overlap of the techniques, you need to slow down and get to a track.

 

[leikam]

Glad you were able to avoid rear-ending the car, Larry.

[Quinn]

No one has mentioned that, besides making quicker direction changes, it's easier to see the total situation when cross controlling instead of leaned over kissing mirrors. Maybe I'm the only old, stiff, and less flexible person here. Think it's especially true in urban settings and at lesser speeds.

 

---

 

 

[Ken H.]

Larry, do you agree with that for a given situation when cross-controlling to handle the situation the bike is leaned over more than if you were not? All else being equal.

 

If you agree with that basic concept then I can’t envision where cross controlling more would be better than cross controlling less.

 

It seems to me most of your arguments are more about reaction time than technique. You seem to say (yes?) that you feel you can react faster to an emerging situation that requires action by cross controlling than you could by ‘ride smarting.’ But another rider (I’d say me include) feels (no, knows actually) I could react faster by leading with myself into the required lean, direction change etc. (Which is at the core of what ride smart is all about.)

 

I don’t think we can say in some conditions cross controlling is inherently a better technique because it always includes a reduction in available traction than if you had not cross controlled. Rather it’s more of a subject of ability to execute either technique when needed.

 

(Of course I’m talking street riding here.)

 

My 1.67¢ Canadian.

 

 

[MotorinLA]

Haven't really thought too much about it consciously, while going through an emergency maneuver, but it seems that I've more often than not used some variant of RS, in as much as I have shifted my weight into the turning movement. Generally I've been using a combination of braking and steering, which leads me to the thought/question of how would cross-controlling hold up under heavy braking? My guess (and I'm sure someone will quickly correct me if I'm jumping to the wrong conclusion) is that RS works better in this situation and that cross-controlling would not be very effective(counter-forces on the bike with braking and cross-controlling?).

 

If this is the case, then there would have to be a qualifier of swerving without braking associated with the argument that cross-controlling is better for quick decision hazard avoidance.

 

Now, if that is in fact true, then I think we have many more issues to ponder than just a simple RS vs. cross-controlling debate.

 

As you pointed out Larry, we are talking about Urban Warfare here... :smile:

[Polo]

OK, my $0.02.

 

Yesterday I was riding in town, which I seldom do, but I had to go several places incurring serious miles, so I decided to ride since the bike is the most fuel efficient vehicle I own.

 

Riding on Mopac at about 70, on the leftmost lane. I see the truck ahead of me applying the brakes and swerving a little w/o changing lanes. Then I see what caused the truck's adjustments: A ladder on the road taking pretty much the entire lane.

 

I check my mirror, take a quick look backwards and dropped the bike from under my butt, keeping my body almost vertical, with most of my weight on left peg. then I brought the bike back under me. I am now on adjacent lane, passing ladder on my left.

 

Elapsed time? Don't know but it was FAST!

 

What do I think happened? I leaned the bike very far, but my vertical weight forced traction on tire by "sweeping" the tire from under me. I'll see if I can come up with some diagram to explain what I visualize.

 

I do kiss my mirrors, but in this situation I really think I would have kissed by butt goodbye if I hadn't done it the way I did.

 

There aren't absolute truths in the universe.

[Ken H.]

What do I think happened? I leaned the bike very far, but my vertical weight forced traction on tire by "sweeping" the tire from under me. I'll see if I can come up with some diagram to explain what I visualize.

We may be just twisted up in semantics here, but your vertical weight (any ‘type’ of weight) cannot “force traction on the tire.” Your weight is what it is and the amount it contributed to the traction of the tire is fixed for your entire ride. The total available traction for the tire(s) is called the “traction budget” and how that budget is used determines whether or not the tire maintains traction. When it’s gone, it’s gone and the tire slips. Factors add to the total traction budget (including your weight) such as tire type and road surface and many more, and factors subtract from the total traction budget, such as direction of forces on the tire to surface contact patch - forward, backward, sideways/lateral and more. Lean increases the lateral force on the contact patch using up some portion of the available traction budget. That is basic physics that cannot be changed.

 

Your move was successful based on how rapidly you executed a change in the line of travel of the bike AND that you did not exceed the traction budget of the contact patches at the moment, based on the lean and increased lateral force you commanded of the tires’ contact patches. You had xx% of the total traction budget remaining. However, and it’s a big however, had you not used the technique you did your total remaining xx% of the traction budget would have been greater. Your traction safety margin would have been greater. Another day in another situation it might not be enough. Safest technique always included a component of managing your traction budget.

 

Your ability to execute your method quicker than another (e.g. – Ride Smart kiss the mirrors) is a result of training/conditioning on what method you are capable of performing quicker. Not which method is fundamentally safer. Leaning the bike more always results in less available remain traction budget (and thus safety margin) than leaning the bike less.

 

Glad to hear you pulled it off regardless though!

 

[Whip]

Ken

 

that all sounds good but if practical application the man is is the emergency room if he had tried to use RS.

 

Why do we use counter weighting off road????

 

It ain't to decrease our traction it is to increase our traction.

 

Counter weighting in some curcunstabces adds traction.

 

Please watch Ewan fall again the watch the nice policeman and what he dies to get around the obsticle. You move as around an pot hole as fast using RS as you with counter weighting. When it warms up go try it.

[Whip]

Ken

 

that all sounds good but if practical application the man is is the emergency room if he had tried to use RS.

 

Why do we use counter weighting off road????

 

It ain't to decrease our traction it is to increase our traction.

 

Counter weighting in some curcunstabces adds traction.

 

Please watch Ewan fall again the watch the nice policeman and what he dies to get around the obsticle. You move as around an pot hole as fast using RS as you with counter weighting. When it warms up go try it.

 

What language is that???????

 

....remind me not to use my IPHONE while I'm riding my GS.

 

 

Sorry Ken....you deserve better.

 

 

[Kinsley]

What language is that???????

 

....remind me not to use my IPHONE while I'm riding my GS.

 

 

Your thumbs must have been cross controlling

[Polo]

What language is that???????

 

....remind me not to use my IPHONE while I'm riding my GS.

 

 

Your thumbs must have been cross controlling

 

 

OK, I will try to explain w/o pics what I meant.

 

For the purpose of this explanation, let us accept that while sitting down on my bike, my body's center of gravity is located right about 2 inches below where I wear my belt; from a sitting position this is a 200 pound/6 inch vector. Let us further accept that the bike's COG is about the line above the upper wheel lip, a 640 pounds at 20 inches. Yet, let us accept that riding along, the overall COG is given by the sum of both COGs and results in the COG at some point about a line maybe 3 inches above the wheel lip. 840 pounds/23-24 inch vector.

 

Given the above:

 

1 - As I see the ladder appear beneath the truck in front of me, I raise my weight from the bike. This puts my weight on the pegs, yet leaving the mass of my body above the bike. The COG moves up perhaps to the height of the top of the tank.

 

2 - As I force the bike to lean to the right, I shift my weight say 80% to the left peg and my body leans maybe 15-20 degrees to the right, the bike is somewhere at 35-45 degrees to the right. This moves the COG to about above the place where the power outlets are probably 2 inches above the height of the seat's left edge. The vector falls on or at the right of the tire's outermost traction edge; the bike is definitely about to fall.

 

3 - My body continues its leftward motion, applying my weight inwardly with my left foot on the peg. This forces the suspension to contract, reducing the length of the vector paralel to the angle of the bike, and increasing the leght of the vector resuting from the angle of my body and the weight vector created by my foot. The COG is moving actually lower and to the left now at about mid tank height and 3 inches to the left of the edge of the seat.

 

4 - I lower my body to an imaginary seat height, applying most of my weight on the left peg; the back of my right knee is applying horizontal pressure towards the left on the seat, I'm sliding the bike leftward. The suspension is being decompressed. The COG vector is moving now towards the center of the tire.

 

5 - I bring the bike back up under my butt and make contact with the seat. The bike's weight vector is now regaining its verticality.

 

I drew some pics of this, and that's how I visualize it. I am not an engineer, so I'm drawing from my high school physics, so if this is too crude for some of you, my apologies.

 

If I tried to take any curve with my weight at steps 1-2, there would certainly be an inevitable loss of friction and the bike would effectively fall, not low-side but fall.

 

The counter weighting is just a transition which lasts a minuscule time.

 

This is my best effort to explain what I believe and felt happening. I didn't think about it before doing it, the body just took over.

 

I have no interest in "converting" any one. This is not a religion, it just happened to save my bacon, and wasn't planned nor intended.

 

If any more explanation is necessary, I'm afraid no amount of explanation will be sufficient.

[Ken H.]

Oh there's no way I'm going to get into the Center of Gravity / Center of Mass debate here again. BTDT.

 

Glad you are okay.

[Polo]

Thanks.

[WrecksDart]

That looks a lot like the mighty Highway 9 to me...I lived in SC for a few years and I've not since had better roads to test my skills/enjoyment. That's one of the most beautiful areas of the country!