| Author | Message | ||
     Ezblast |
I'm no hero on the 1125, on the Blast I can lean the bike over pretty easy, but my comfort level on the CR has not led me to that level of ability - till today. I've been using my 1125 to commute so I could wear out the second stator before warranty end, even though it mostly lives either at idle or above 5000 rpm, and because that is the best way to get familiar with a bike - thinking long term. I decided at least two to three times a week I would take Marsh Creek to Dear Valley to home - total home ride a little over forty miles one way - lol - still that would be about fifteen miles of lane splitting Yngnacio, then copping a right into paradise. I want to get real comfortable on the bike and have gone over the suspension enough to know that it is fine, at least for my speeds so far. There fore it must be me being unfamiliar with how it delivers its speed. Marsh Creek into Dear Valley - serious twisties with decent roads - then a leisurely ride into Antioch to the other side then home. I've been doing this for a while and still was not satisfied with my progress. Today was different! God smiled on me and I was Blessed. In front of me was eight brilliant pieces of German four-wheeled engineering - two Porches, four BMWs, and two Benzs - all of the sporting variety - my goal was just to stay with them. Man they booked, I stopped looking at my speedo when I realized that they had been easily maintaining twenty over and had been pushing thirty to forty over. I saw the rear slide just a tad in a few corners on the Benz - I kept following them muttering, if the damn cars can do it, so can I! Keep up! So I did, reminding myself to counter-steer correctly, keep the opposite shoulder aimed at the mirror in the lean, keep counter balance, etc - it all flowed together - happily so!. So nice - cut my time by almost twenty minutes, enjoyed beautiful scenery, destroyed some strips - lol - and was so happy to finally have a bit of progress - in another year I'll be ready for a track day, if I can get myself to consistently ride like that then I'm going to bug Terry, Jim and Thomas to come with me so I can follow some fast lines. I was so proud of myself, I gassed up at the Shell, and got a swisher and a Starbucks to contemplate the fun I just had. Thanks to American, German, and Austrian engineering. Taking a last puff on the cigar, putting it out I turned to the bike and thought - We're doing that again! And I didn't kill myself! What a beautiful day! EZ (Message edited by ezblast on April 20, 2012) | ||
| Dhays1775 |
that's awesome man! congrats!! i do the same thing, push myself every single ride! by the time i hop off the bike, i have butterflies in my stomach. weather it be braking at the limit (fast stoppies) or power wheelies, clutch wheelies, or making my chicken strips just a little smaller. getting better at balancing on the front or back tire. just trusting myself leaned over going a few miles per hour faster than last time. total trust in the tires. it's a rough thing to get used to at first. congrats!!! | ||
| Ezblast |
Yeah, now more practice to get consistent at that level - gotta love German engineering though! EZ | ||
| Dannybuell |
What were your impressions as you were entering the turns at higher speeds? You can get some of that excitement riding in the rain, total trust. The Michelin 2CT's are great on wet surfaces even at 36psi. What tires and pressures are you using? | ||
| Ezblast |
Stock tires - cold at 32lbs. Happy that the bike's stability allowed it to followed the intended line, adding confidence to the turn itself at speeds consistently faster. EZ | ||
| Duphuckincati |
Re: German engineering, didn't they lose a couple of wars or something? I think to Americans? I dunno. | ||
| Ezblast |
Pretty much - but they did it with quality built equipment - lol - very few have ever put down German engineering - Germans - at one time - but not their engineering - lol EZ | ||
| Hybridmomentspass |
Re: German engineering, didn't they lose a couple of wars or something? I think to Americans? I dunno" Had less to do with engineering, more to do with faulty plans/directions | ||
| Dannybuell |
The venerable AK-47 was a late WWII German design that was appropriated by the russians. German jet engine technologies were appropriated by the Russian's and American's after the war. America's missile and nuclear industries also used German technologies. | ||
| Reepicheep |
I'm no expert, but from what I have read, it had a little bit to do with German engineering... in general, I think the typical German machine was superior in terms of capabilities, but I think they were inferior in terms of maintainability and simplicity. In other words, one German Super Tiger could wipe the floor 1:1 with any Sherman tank. No contest. But the Super Tiger was too heavy for a lot of bridges, and cost as much as 4 Shermans, and took forever to make and repair. It could beat one Sherman, but couldn't beat all 4 of them. They also took too long to develop, and things changed fast during WWII. Two quick generations would get you further than one elaborated but slower redesigns. | ||
| Froggy |
 Give some other tires a try and see if you backup that statement. I assume you are talking about Pilot Power 2CTs, which have the wet traction of an ice cube. I bet if you parked in a puddle the bike would slide off the kickstand. | ||
| 99buellx1 |
No, you are ready NOW, and have been for quite some time. Seriously, you will learn more in a day at the track than a year of riding that road. And you will do it in a MORE SAFE environment. There always seems to be a backwards thinking in regards to track time, that the rider needs to be highly skilled before going there.......completely untrue. Highly skilled is needed for the street! Gain those skills by learning on the track. When the street throws something unexpected at you, you WILL want the skills learned from your track experience. They are the skills that will keep you alive. | ||
| Smoke4ndmears |
Ditto the above statement by 99. | ||
| Dannybuell |
Froggy ~ what tire would you recommend? (Message edited by dannybuell on April 20, 2012) | ||
| Pwillikers |
I applaud the enthusiasm but I have to say that the original post made me nervous. It gives the impression that you're riding at the edge of your capability on the street trying to keep pace. This is a recipe for disaster. Please, do as suggested and find a good track day org with a first timer's school where you can flirt with your edge in the most safe environment. | ||
| Ezblast |
Not my ability, I've gone faster on the Blast, but past my comfort level - yes - the bikes are different and feel different in transition. Thats why the change of which bike for commuting - trying to bring my familiarity of the bike up, by riding it more often. EZ | ||
| Timebandit |
Continuing the Hijack: "I'm no expert, but from what I have read, it had a little bit to do with German engineering... in general, I think the typical German machine was superior in terms of capabilities, but I think they were inferior in terms of maintainability and simplicity." you could make the same examples comparing German vs. American GPMGs (general purpose machine guns) used in WW2. Germany started the War with the MG34 as their standard issue GPMG. The MG34 involved quite a bit of detailed machining and was labor intensive and expensive to produce. It was a great design, with quick change barrels, select fire triggers, and light weight. It could be manned by a 2 man crew. The Americans were using John Browning's 1917A1 and 1919A4 in the GPMG role, and they were much simpler designs; much simpler to build, faster to mass produce, but a lot heavier. You couldn't change barrels quickly, but the heavier guns would run under sustained fire without a barrel change for a long time. It took a crew of 4 to serve the weapon. Germany later replaced the MG34 with the MG42, which was a simpler design that eliminated some features and replaced a lot of machine work with stamped metal parts. Unfortunately, production never reached sufficient levels that they were able to replace the MG34 for most units in the Wehrmacht. Even germany's small arms were so well engineered that they were very time intensive and costly to make. In some respects, the fact that Germany made things too well contributed to their troubles. As far as the light assault weapons go, Germany invented concept of the lightweight, medium cartridge assault rifle late in the war with the StG 44. The AK-47 was designed by Russian Mikhail Kalashnikov in 1947. The Avtomat Kalashnikova of 1947 utilized a similar-sized intermediate round (between a pistol and a service rifle caliber) and followed the same lightweight design concept, but it otherwise had nothing in common with the German assault rifle designs. It's firing mechanism was mechanically different. | ||
| Dannybuell |
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/StG_45(M) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sturmgewehr_44#Post-1 945 Generally accepted as the world's first assault rifle, the StG44's effect on post-war arms design was wide-ranging, as evidenced by Mikhail Kalashnikov's AK-47, and later in the U.S. M16 and its variants. The Soviet Union was quick to adopt the assault rifle concept. The AK-47 used a similar-sized intermediate round and followed the design concept, but was mechanically different. | ||
| Timebandit |
Thanks, that Wikipedia article verifies my comments. If someone were to read that Wikipedia quote without being careful, it would be easy to misinterpret it to say that the M16 and the AK 47 were both derivative works based on the StG 44. That would be a false conclusion. Indeed, after WW2 countries around the world adopted the concept of the assault rifle -- a rifle that was chambered in an intermediate caliber between that of a pistol and a heavy field rifle. What assault rifles like the M-16 and AK-47 *DO* have in common with the German StG44 assault rifle is that they are lightweight, they use intermediate caliber ammunition. Size, weight, intermediate caliber. That's what they have in common. What the M-16 and the AK-47 *DO NOT* have in common with the German assault guns is their method of operation; their mechanical actions operate using different principles. The actions in each of these guns were designed by different people, and work differently. The AK-47 was never a German design. It has always been was a Russian design. If the Russians had appropriated a German design, then the AK-47 action would be similar to the late war German action. But it' isn't. The action of the StG 44 was gas-operated, using a tilting bolt mechanism. The action of the AK-47 was also gas operated, but used a rotating bolt mechanism to drive a long-stroke piston. The action of the M16 is also gas operated, and also works via a rotating bolt mechanism, but in the M16 the gas impingement is directly upon the bolt carrier instead of driving a long-stroke piston. The functional design of each of these actions are quite different. To say that the AK-47 action was a "German design appropriated by the Russians" is erroneous; the German design used a tilting bolt while the Russian design used a rotating bolt with a long-stroke piston. | ||
| Dannybuell |
Design NOT implementation is the subject. Your pedantic discussion on implementation is more than amusing and confirms earlier assertions. | ||
| Iamarchangel |
Re: German engineering, didn't they lose a couple of wars or something? I think to Americans? I dunno. Obviously, you don't know that Germany lost to the Allied Forces. There's a reason it's called a World War, not at all like the World Series, there's many countries involved. So, let's see, WW1, there was a long wait before the US showed, hmmn, pretty well by the end of it all. As for WW2, the US entered, after a lot of hesitation, about 10 years after China and about 2 years after Europe. The US was very helpful, thank you, but, yeah, she didn't do it by herself. | ||
| Iamarchangel |
But, hey, glad you had a great ride and I agree, it does sound like you're ready for the track. | ||
| Timebandit |
Iamarchangel, be careful ... If you focus on being accurate, look what could happen to you. | ||
| Rogue_biker |
Since we've effectively hijacked the thread, let me add my 2 cents.  The US won WW2 due to two reasons: Industrial might and efficiency. Excellent training of its aircrews, sailors, and a disciplined infantry led by well trained officer cadre. The Germans lost WW2 because they were led by an idiot (Hitler), and they simply did not have the industrial capacity to match the US or Russia. The Germans designed some great machinery during the war but so did everyone else. The Germans were highly disciplined and motivated, but so were the British, the Russians, and the Americans. But none of that matches the discipline and dedication of the Japanese soldier. When nations go to Total War, what wins the day is effective leadership, brilliant tactics in the battlefield, and a nation's capacity to produce well trained soldiers and machines of war. That's it. The Germans were not prepared for a total war. They were prepared only for short term campaigns. They didn't have the Logistical capability that the United States possessed throughout the war. Soldier for soldier, weapon for weapon, it was an effective tie. That was then. Today, it's a different thing altogether. At the risk of sounding biased, which I am, the fact is the US has been honing and perfecting warfare for decades now while everyone else have been playing soldier. At this point in history, there is no other military in the world who can wield the kind of military & industrial power that the US and its allies can. Sure, others have great planes, ships, guns, etc. But to combine all that into an effective fighting force with the logistical might to maintain that force at long distances, and project it 24-7 anywhere in the world is something else altogether. Nobody can do it because that's something you don't acquire playing soldier. You learn that from years of bitter experience and weapons and tactics development. The last engagement in Libya proved this out when NATO had to be helped heavily by US assets after only two weeks into the Air Campaign. The Chinese may have millions in its Army, but can they send half a million thousands of miles from home, fight and support that? Nope! | ||
| Timebandit |
cogent analysis. thanks for posting. | ||
| Blake |
Ed, >>> in another year I'll be ready for a track day There is absolutely no good reason for you to put off a track day like that. The sooner the better. You cannot learn much on the street compared to on the track. If you take my advice, you will thank me. I promise. Your reduced tire pressure (32 psi) is likely hurting the bike's handling. Stick to the owner's manual recommendations for cold tire pressure. Tire pressure makes a huge difference. | ||
| Ezblast |
35 cold would be almost 40 hot - I don't think that is safe at all - to hard, less contact patch, and the vendor doesn't recommend above 40 hot - which means their closer to the edge of their ability at 35 cold. I ran 35 cold for over a year, and the tires where always a bit squirrelly, but at 32 cold they stick firmly. There is no bluing, so I know I'm not under inflated - I'm hopping. EZ | ||
| Zac4mac |
Ed After talking to Froggy, I decided to try higher tire pressure. For commuting, I'm sold. Granted, less performance but ... commuting. I've been keeping 50 psi F&R and it nets better gas mileage and tire life. Trips to the mountains, rare lately, I drop to 38F, 36R or something like that. No safety issues yet. <edit> Watch out for tar snakes! Z (Message edited by zac4mac on April 22, 2012) | ||
| Xodot |
EzBlast - add my voice to the choir singing "You are ready for the track man!" Track is the safe place to improve skills for fun and for safety on the road. Get in with a group of riders who are there to improve and help each other. There are some who track for ego. As a middle of the pack rider at best, I avoid those people and have fun with my own kind. Congrats on loosing the strips! XO. | ||
| Boogiman1981 |
track days with good coaching and that's really the important part is the coaching will help you immensely. |
