G oog le Buell 1125R Forum | Login/out | Topics | Search | Custodians | Register | Edit Profile


Buell Forum » 1125R Superbike Board » Archive through January 20, 2012 » Writers want electronics « Previous Next »

  Thread Last Poster Posts Pages Last Post
Archive through December 28, 2011Kenm123t30 12-28-11  11:31 pm
         

Author Message
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Timebandit
Posted on Thursday, December 29, 2011 - 02:39 am:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Custodian/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Custodian/Admin only)

> The old BMW ABS systems were garbage.

20 years from now someone will probably be saying the same thing about today's Bosch ABS-9. Such a statement would be as inaccurate then as it is now.

The truth is that the old BMW ABS systems were not 'garbage'. They were cutting edge technology when they came out, and technology changes. 20+ years ago, all of the magazine writers and riders alike were falling all over themselves to praise the first BMW ABS systems, just as the magazine writers and riders are falling all over themselves to praise the latest implementations of ABS and Traction Control.

When the first ABS system came out, EVERYONE sung it's praises. When ABS-2 came out, it was better and the praise went on and on. Every time the electronics became more refined, the cheering became louder and louder... to the point that today it is getting hard to find top-end bikes that don't come with these systems as an option. Some manufacturers won't even offer them as options next year. Next year BMW will make ABS standard equipment on all it's bikes.

Now that we have Bosch ABS-9 to use as a reference standard, anyone can look backward through the retrospectoscope and puff about Bosch ABS-1 or ABS-2 being inferior. Yes, the current systems offer significant improvements over the older systems. The software and hardware keeps improving. But to say that earlier versions were garbage? That's either hyperbole or sophistry.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Timebandit
Posted on Thursday, December 29, 2011 - 02:51 am:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Custodian/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Custodian/Admin only)

I still don't understand the argument for TC being beneficial on loose gravel.

It won't help after the front has broken loose, and it won't help after the back has broken loose either. The last thing that I'd want to happen mid-turn, when the bike has started slipping on loose gravel, would be to have a computer that's oh-so-smart decide to intervene by retarding rear wheel speed!

In that situation I do the exact opposite -- add throttle to try to push the loose gravel out of the way and put a fresh contact patch down on pavement. By retarding the rear wheel speed, TC makes it pretty hard for you to back it in. Loose gravel in a turn seems to be one of those situations where TC fails in it's perceived role as the "universal safety net."

Electronic aids are great if they can correctly diagnose a problem and implement the proper corrective measures before the rider makes the same decision. But in the case where they correctly diagnose a problem and implement the opposite measures of what a skilled rider wants to do, then electronics fail in their role as a "safety net." Sometimes they get in the way of a skilled rider. When they do the opposite of what a skilled rider wants to do, then they are worse than being in the way -- then they become the cause of a problem.

Everything electronic needs to have an On/Off switch.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

1324
Posted on Thursday, December 29, 2011 - 10:00 am:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Custodian/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Custodian/Admin only)


quote:

So, you've never, ever gone around a corner and spun up the rear because you were getting on the throttle?

And you've never met anyone who has crashed because of doing the same? I just ran into a guy the other day who crashed and couldn't figure out why. After recovering himself, he realized there was gravel in the corner from construction further down the road. It couldn't be see unless you were standing right next to it.

Have you tried the CBR1000RR? The ABS on that is really impressive. However, any good system should only engaged when you are on the very edge of losing traction. if your normal riding is getting you to that point, you might want to look into life insurance.

The old BMW ABS systems were garbage.




No, I've never spun the rear exiting a turn on the street...that I know of. Come to think of it, it hasn't happened on the track, either. Rest assured though, I don't consider myself a fast rider whatsoever. However, I also suspect that if I'm wagging the tail exiting turns on the street I need to be arrested.

But I have slid my tires on gravel while turning. I still don't believe traction control would have made those moments any better. I do occasionally spin the rear on purpose when I'm going (mostly) straight through a patch of gravel. If that weren't my intended behavior, I could see TC helping keep things sane.

I've not ridden the new CBR yet. I'd like to, though.

It's interesting you mention the sophistication as a factor in how effective a system is considered. My current car, a 2011 Forester, has VSC (as mandated by the fed, of course). I have no doubt in the world this would help avoid accidents in the right circumstances. However, it gets turned off whenever I hit snow or dirt. Without the intervention, I can steer the car without worrying I'm going to understeer off the road on a tangent.

Same goes for the ABS. If I could switch it off, there are times I would consider it. Not because it's bad, but because it's crude. My 05 STi, by comparison, had great ABS. When those Brembos clamped down, your eyes would bulge in their sockets. It really felt like you were slowing the rotation of the earth. That is one car I've never actuated the ABS. I can draw other automotive parallels, so I can only assume the same applies to motorcycles. Still, the only experience I have with ABS on a bike was the Speed Triple. I liked it.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Sprintst
Posted on Thursday, December 29, 2011 - 11:02 am:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Custodian/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Custodian/Admin only)

I had a Furd Crown Victoria who's TC was so very slow it would spin 1 tire, you could count to 3, then it would spin the other

It was so slow, it crippled the car in the snow. Would have been better to just have an open diff and no TC
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

1324
Posted on Thursday, December 29, 2011 - 11:39 am:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Custodian/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Custodian/Admin only)

I feel your pain. The VSC cripples my AWD car with snow tires. That says a LOT.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Jdugger
Posted on Thursday, December 29, 2011 - 11:59 am:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Custodian/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Custodian/Admin only)

> It won't help after the front has broken loose, and it won't help after the back has broken loose either.

I disagree. The standard solution to a pushing front is "just a hint more gas in an ultra smooth roll-on." If you load the front more, you are toast. But, if you unload it a touch, it has a chance to regain traction. That's hard to do when the rear is coming out from under you.

To the extent that TC + Rider stay committed to that solution, it's your best chance for staying upright when the unexpected happens.

Dialing this stuff just right isn't easy, either. My 600 has Bazaaz on it, and the other day I had a whompin' rear end spin up. I called the tech that helped me set it up and asked how I find the right settings.

"Oh, just dial it up a touch if you slide the rear until your lap times slow because of the TC, then back off one."

Yikes. I guess learning how to ride is going to have to still be primary solution for me.

(Message edited by jdugger on December 29, 2011)
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

1324
Posted on Thursday, December 29, 2011 - 12:05 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Custodian/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Custodian/Admin only)

^^^It would be important for me to clarify what I originally typed.


quote:

It won't help after the front has broken loose, and it won't help after the back has broken loose either.



...was in reference to gravel. Removing gravel from the equation and all other things being equal, I agree with your premise....primarily when riding HARD.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Timebandit
Posted on Thursday, December 29, 2011 - 12:35 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Custodian/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Custodian/Admin only)

My comments were also in reference to loose gravel.

I agree that TC + rider need to be committed to the same solution. It's when TC + rider aren't committed to the same solution that you can run into serious problems. The systems aren't perfect yet, and there will be times when an experienced rider will notice that the systems don't quite work the way he wants them to. If the divergence is too great, it can cause problems. That's why an on/off control, or better yet mode selection or adjustability, is so important.

Consumers tend to put a lot of blind faith put in TC and ABS. The motorcycle press is actively engaged in a hard-sell of this technology to benefit their advertisers. End users need to bear in mind that the motorcycle press is acting to pimp TC and ABS for the manufacturers, and to take the "universal safety net" sales pitch with a grain of salt. There are deficiencies in some of these systems, and if you ride hard you will find them.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Zac4mac
Posted on Thursday, December 29, 2011 - 08:32 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Custodian/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Custodian/Admin only)

I just went out for a short run into town on Loretta.
BTW, the checker at Safeway was Loretta also...
Wind blew like Cheyenne today so I could finally get to the highway as the snow really melted.

Traction control is something I am absolutely in no desire of.
Nothing exciting today, no wheelies, no spin-outs, no smoke, but I rode finally!

I was pretty conservative, I've seen her rear tire a few times.

Once, after going thru some Mag-Chloride I saw it on the left, then the right.
I was looking for a place to land when I finished my Superman flight and she straightened out...

I love this bike.
As she is, with ANY flaws or electronic intrusion...

Z
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Ratsmc
Posted on Monday, January 02, 2012 - 04:53 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Custodian/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Custodian/Admin only)


quote:

It won't help after the front has broken loose, and it won't help after the back has broken loose either. The last thing that I'd want to happen mid-turn, when the bike has started slipping on loose gravel, would be to have a computer that's oh-so-smart decide to intervene by retarding rear wheel speed!




TC is of very little use in saving the front when it is sliding. No one has made a claim that it is meant for that purpose, not the manufacturers nor the journalists.

The situation where is is useful - and its intended purpose - is when the rear spins up under power. I cannot imagine that anyone who has any considerable number of miles on a modern bike hasn't had this happen at least once.

It should be noted that all current TC solutions are adjustable and can be turned off.

Like I said, lack of understanding of these systems that is being used to form opinions is astonishing.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Jdugger
Posted on Monday, January 02, 2012 - 05:55 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Custodian/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Custodian/Admin only)

> Consumers tend to put a lot of blind faith put in TC and ABS

To the extent it helps the average rider trust the bike to get them out of a situation they might otherwise give up on, that's probably a good thing.

Most bikes, even the cruiser types, are way more capable than their riders, TC + ABS or not...
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Timebandit
Posted on Monday, January 02, 2012 - 06:05 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Custodian/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Custodian/Admin only)

The false belief that TC does something for a sliding front end is pervasive. I pointed out that it won't help in that situation, so I'm sort of astonished that you're astonished. : )

I guess there are a lot of people who feel a need to have TC based upon their riding style and skill set, and these people project their perceived needs upon other people.

TC is not something that belongs on every bike. Whether or not it's useful to someone depends upon their skill as a rider and what they want out of their bike. It's an individual's decision, and TC shouldn't be forced on everyone.

I don't claim to be Shawn Higbee, but I have reasonable throttle control. I purposefully slip the back end now and then and I've never been down because of it. I just don't feel the need for TC on my bike, so I want the freedom of choosing not to have it and I am willing to accept the ramifications that come with that decision. I don't want it on my bike. I won't use it and I'd rather not pay for something that I won't ever use. Most of all, I don't want to have to spend my time continually de-activating TC if it's turned-on by default when the computer boots-up. I don't want to have to jump through hoops every time that I get on the bike to disable it.

Yes, TC can be disabled. We all know that. Some of us just don't want it or feel the need to have it.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Sprintst
Posted on Monday, January 02, 2012 - 07:08 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Custodian/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Custodian/Admin only)

Need, not need, want, not want, mandated, not mandated - to be competitive, electronics are the future.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Ratsmc
Posted on Monday, January 02, 2012 - 08:10 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Custodian/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Custodian/Admin only)


quote:

I guess there are a lot of people who feel a need to have TC based upon their riding style and skill set, and these people project their perceived needs upon other people.

TC is not something that belongs on every bike. Whether or not it's useful to someone depends upon their skill as a rider and what they want out of their bike. It's an individual's decision, and TC shouldn't be forced on everyone.




It is not a skills argument, insisting that anyone who might want or need TC because they are somehow unskilled is an ego argument. So many people say they don't want it because they are just too damn good with the throttle to need it. The argument is based on a lack of understanding about how TC works.

TC, like ABS, doesn't just cut in and interfere when you are doing something that is manageable, it comes on when you've reached the threshold of losing control. TC also doesn't just kill the motor such that there is a sudden loss of power. TC cuts some percentage of spark to soften power delivers for a fraction of a second. The idea is to bring the wheel back from suddenly causing a highside, a sudden loss of power that seems to be the concern, is exactly what would cause a highside and clearly not within the specs of any TC system.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Timebandit
Posted on Monday, January 02, 2012 - 10:15 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Custodian/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Custodian/Admin only)

Your understanding of symbolic logic in language constructs is so poor it's astounding.

> "It is not a skills argument, insisting that anyone who might want or need TC because they are somehow unskilled is an ego argument"

I never accused anyone of being unskilled. I never even said this was an argument. What I said was that whether or not a person finds TC useful will depend upon their skill set AND what they want out of their bike. You are misrepresenting my statements to twist their meaning to suit your arguments. Of course, this comes to me as no surprise. You've done it before. It fits your agenda.


> "The argument is based on a lack of understanding about how TC works."

You've said that 3 or 4 times now. Keep repeating that over and over and over again. If you do it often enough, some dim-witted person might actually believe your propaganda.

To correct the record:

I never even brought up the word "unskilled." You did. YOU created that argument and you were intellectually dishonest when you attempted to put those words into my mouth. This is not the first time you have engaged in such sophistry.

What I actually said was that whether or not TC will be useful to someone will depend on two conditions: A) their skill as a rider, *AND* B) what they want out of their bike.

What they want out of their bike -- You're ignoring that very important criterion while you huff and puff to make the assertion that someone else's level of comprehension of how TC works doesn't satisfy you.

You're puffing a lot about Clause A while failing to recognize Clause B. Such an argument is based on a lack of understanding about how symbolic logic works in sentence constructs. There is a significant difference between (A AND B) and (A NOT B).

We all know that I never made a comment accusing people wanting TC as being "unskilled." You made that up. You tried to put those words into my mouth. Your misrepresentation to that effect demonstrates your intellectual dishonesty. Either that is true, or it's time to freshen up on 5th grade sentence diagramming, as your post that alleged ego satisfaction on my part was based on a lack of understanding of how the English language works.

What I said:

"TC is not something that belongs on every bike. Whether or not it's useful to someone depends upon their skill as a rider *AND* what they want out of their bike. It's an individual's decision, and TC shouldn't be forced on everyone."

Whether or not people understand traction control doesn't matter.

Whether or not people can satisfy you that they have an understanding of how TC works doesn't matter.

You don't matter. You aren't part of the equation. You, and whether or not you are astonished, are irrelevant.

What matters is the rider's skill level and whether they what they want TC on their bike.

Nothing else matters.


(Message edited by timebandit on January 02, 2012)
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Ratsmc
Posted on Tuesday, January 03, 2012 - 01:36 am:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Custodian/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Custodian/Admin only)

It's interesting that you use intellectual dishonesty as an accusation to discredit what I've said while intentionally ignoring the central argument (please take a moment to make sure you understand the meaning of that word and how I've used it, it seems you've misunderstood.) as well as not completely comprehending the statements I've made.

Notice I didn't actually accuse you of anything but rather used the phrase "so many people". If you look through this topic objectively, you'll see a whole lot of ego driven posturing regarding the skill of riders who say they have no use for TC. You yourself use your highly developed throttle hand as evidence of the fact that you have no need for TC. So, to say that I am disingenuous is, well, disingenuous.

You've admitted to a lack of understanding of TC so my point regarding that isn't really in question. Additionally, the comments you've made have shown a general lack of understanding of the details of how these systems work and certainly a lack of first hand experience with them.

Whether or not people understand TC is central to this discussion. As per my first point, clearly, many people here do not understand how these systems work and clearly have not had experience with them. As long as that is the case, we will continue to have riders proclaiming that they have no use for TC when it is a tremendously useful tool.

You could take these same arguments made against TC and replace them with ABS and you would have a carbon copy of the discussion from 10 years ago (or even as recently as yesterday).

Just so you understand, I am a rider that enjoys getting the rear end loose and those sudden surprises don't scare me. Having grown up on crappy bikes with crappier tires in the dirt, I learned to use the throttle to manage the bike. I've never gone down on the street as a result of spinning up the rear but a few of the times it has happened, I would have been happier to have a larger margin of error.

So, put away your posturing and defensiveness.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Timebandit
Posted on Tuesday, January 03, 2012 - 03:13 am:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Custodian/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Custodian/Admin only)

Your statements were not ambiguous. Thinly veiled attempts to maintain plausible deniability don't fool anyone.

It's not that I lack comprehension, that I misunderstand what you're saying, or that I am not experienced with these systems. Simply put, I just don't agree with you that these systems are the universal solution that you and the techno-pimp writers represent them to be. Feel free to mix-up all the Kool-Aid that you want, but I'm not drinking it.

For racing, these systems may be a "tremendously useful tool." They are undeniably the wave of the future. For the street, whether or not the gadgets are good for any individual rider is not guaranteed, nor is it's usefulness to an independent third party something for you or me to decide.

I have always maintained that it is the rider's individual decision to decide what's useful to him and what isn't. Nobody really cares to hear us pontificate any further on the subject. By now everyone is familiar with your belief that you understand Traction Control and nobody else does. Do we need to hear that again?

Nobody wants to hear us rehash these the same arguments yet another time. This is becoming a farce, so I'll do the world a favor by telling you that I disagree with you, and then shut up. I'm sure everyone here would appreciate it if you would do the same.
« Previous Next »

Add Your Message Here
Post:
Bold text Italics Underline Create a hyperlink Insert a clipart image

Username: Posting Information:
This is a public posting area. Enter your username and password if you have an account. Otherwise, enter your full name as your username and leave the password blank. Your e-mail address is optional.
Password:
E-mail:
Options: Post as "Anonymous" (Valid reason required. Abusers will be exposed. If unsure, ask.)
Enable HTML code in message
Automatically activate URLs in message
Action:

Topics | Last Day | Tree View | Search | User List | Help/Instructions | Rules | Program Credits Administration