Hey guys. I did a search and didn't find a past thread on this topic.
I'm wondering how many of you:
a) use your rear brake at all (and if so, in which situations?)
b) use your rear brake in emergency braking as taught in the MSF course

I know on our bikes, the back-end of the bike is so lightweight and the rear brakes give so little assistance to the total stopping power of the bike, I've been staying away from my rear brake except in parking-lot types of situations. The fear of a high side b/c of a skidding rear tire is pretty strong, especially when thinking of accidentally using too much rear brake in an emergency stop. {{Shudder}} Just wondering if/when you guys use your rear brake.

Thanks! Allyson :)

I use my rear brake (in addition to the front brake), when I want to slow down and/or stop. :)

I use my rear brake (in addition to the front brake), when I want to slow down and/or stop. :)

+1, same here. Usually every stop.

I use my front and rear brakes together when slowing to a stop light/sign!
WHen stopped at a light, looking in my mirrors behind me, i keep my Rear Brake down, to keep my rear brake light on or flickering for cagers behind me to stop. Also im able to Rest my throddle hand at those lights. I Only use my rear brake when stopped at a light, on a Uphill to keep from rolling back. Sometimes when im in a rolling stop at a stopsign, i creep foward with my rear brake being dragged (like MSF teaches you). Afew times other bikers behind me have had too put down a foot or 2 waiting for me. Cuz im pretty good with that techneic! :thumbup:

While in a slight lean... heading into a corner at a low speed... i lay off the Front brake 100%, while keeping a slight foot down on my Rear brake, until i slow enuff, to feel safe to complete the turn (in gravel or dusty areas that cover most of the corner, and i Dont have anywhere else to use - Cager taking up most of the room)

I use my rear brake alot, but i will only use the front if i am just trying to scrub a bit of speed, mostly because i will already have set my body into position and would rather not upset the bike unecessarily. normal stopping 75-85% front with the balance for the rear.

I do alot of engine braking though

I only use my rear brake when coming to a slow stop.. and then only at like 15mph down or so... the front gets the most workout.

Nope

Never.

i use it with my front most of the time for stopping or slowing.

We had a fun thread on this a short while back. I'm on a tiny cell screen right now so I won't be able to link it, but will once I get home if nobody else has already. But basically, for soft to moderate stops, or if the surface is questionable, I'll use primarily front but will include some rear brake. On track, or if trying to shed a whole lot of speed quickly in an emergency type stop on dry pavement, I'll use 100% front, with the rear barely skimming the ground.
Posted via Mobile Device

I usually use it along with the front brake, when coming to quick stops, or during slow maneuvers.
I've locked the rear up so many times coming to a stop that I'm getting used to the rear pulling out a little. :o

Every time I stop. I did a little trial with both brakes. Used front alone, used rear alone, and both. I stop faster using both, esp panic stops. I used to ride a bicycle alot and I always used both brakes then. But I do use the front harder because I, like everyone else on here, know that when braking, your weight and the weight of the bike shifts forward and the front brake is more effective. But, for me , I have found that using both stops the the bike quicker and in less distance.

nb

:whathesaid: for the same reasons.

I'm the most comfortable using both brakes. It is the most efficient. I've had to learn to stay off the front brake at times. I too ride a bicycle and use the front brake a lot. But the Ninja has much better front braking and I got a shock (quite literally in the groin) the first few days I was re-learning to ride and was too exuberant with the front brakes. Ah Well. Live and learn.

I use both. You get to know exactly what touch is needed in combining the rear brake with the front. I rely on the front brake to bring the bike to a complete solid stop... but feather in the rear as well to avoid the "rear brake" locking up..... its all in the touch. I never hardly ever use the rear on its own, always in combo with the front. I find if you don't integrate it with the using the front as the primary... you are most likely to lock up when the rear is really needed because of the lack of use with all riding situations. I find using the front on its own can sometimes put you into a highside situation on going a little hot into corners.

OK, back in front of a real computer now. Here's that link (http://www.ninjette.org/forums/showthread.php?p=67534&postcount=21) to a related discussion on braking technique.

I used to use both...as was taught in my intro MSF course. Yet since taking a minor spill 2 weeks ago and reading the above posted thread I now only use my rear brake when coming to a complete stop at a light or stop sign. Ive been practicing using my front brake only when shedding speed quickly(on a straight away before a turn).

Not only has this forum entertained me and led me to have the ability to do my own maintenance and mods but its also taught me more advanced riding techniques. :)

Sometimes I tap the rear brake to shift weight to the front when braking.

When doing slow speed manuevers, I use the rear brake to get into the friction zone.

Rarely do I use the rear brake in a turn (never use front brake).

Sometimes I tap the rear brake to shift weight to the front when braking.

Purspeed - can you expand upon that a little? Applying the rear brake, sometimes a fraction of a second before applying the front, is used to settle the rear suspension and bring it down slightly so in fact less weight shifts to the front. That technique can in fact keep the bike a little more balanced in non-emergency stops. But that seems to be slightly at odds with what you're saying...

I use it when I'm not downshifting. The engine braking on the 250R is plenty. But around town I don't engine brake much, I just pull in the clutch lever, coast to a stop and use both brakes. In the twisties and going faster I'm teaching myself not to use the rear brake at all. It just makes things easier

I just finished my MSF course at the end of May...The last day when we were being tested, on the quick stops/emergency stop, I witnessed a 200+ pound woman thrown over the front of a little 200cc bike (high side crash) cuz she grabbed nothing but front brake, she only had a 3/4 helmet on so she busted her chin open too.....needless 2 say I always use both brakes now

She didn't crash because she only used the front brake. She crashed because she clamped on to the front brake and either went end over end or locked the front and crashed in that manner. Both brakes wouldn't have saved her, and someone with that level of skill (or lack of) is as liable to lock the rear as well, causing similar issues with the chin/pavement interface. And sure, if your only choices are not being able to prevent the front from locking up, and not being able to prevent the rear from locking up, I guess I'd choose the rear lockup as well. But wouldn't it be even better to have the skills to bring both right up to the point of lockup without going over? Once you can do that repeatedly, it becomes clear that the rear isn't doing nearly as much as you might think in actually shortening the braking distance.

There's also a world of difference between a 25 mph --> 0 mph stop in a parking lot, and a 70 mph --> 0 mph emergency stop on a freeway, or even a 70 mph --> 40 mph deceleration while setting up for a corner. What seems an accurate observation in one may not remain as accurate in one of the other scenarios.

definitely the front provides much more stopping power than the rear, I think the rear is only like 25% of the stopping power...but that 25% used with the front 75% could prevent u from completely having to clamp down on that front brake..I try to avoid riding in a manner that puts me in emergency stopping situations....But anything can happen out there....

I never use my rear brakes when stopping, too easy to skid, I use it sometimes when stopped on a hill.

I use the front and the rear combined almost always, except when braking in turns or low speed maneuvers, or loose dirt or gravel, in which case I use the rear only. Im surprised so many people are scared of the rear brake, Im pretty heavy on the rear brake, and I have yet to lock it up. I have locked the front twice and both times were a non-event.

definitely the front provides much more stopping power than the rear, I think the rear is only like 25% of the stopping power...

These percentages (80/20, 75/25, 90/10, whatever) are all just a rough estimate, and it's not like people's hands and feet are so calibrated that they'd actually be able to feel "yup, that's exactly 25% on the rear". But what can be repeated are tests just like the ones linked in that other thread. Controlled conditions, skilled rider, emergency stops from 60 mph. Front brake only = 151 feet. Rear brake only = 270+ feet. Front + rear brake = 146 feet. In other words, adding the perfect amount of rear braking force to the already perfect amount of front braking force shortened the distance by 3.4%. Not even 5%. And certainly not 25%. That means if you're going 60 mph at the goal line, with perfectly balanced braking, bringing both wheels to the point of lockup, you can expect to bring the bike to a stop 1 foot before the 49 yard line. And if you ignore the rear completely and only get the front right, you can expect to bring the bike to a stop 1 foot past the 50 yard line. It's not significant.

While some might say, correctly in fact, that that < 2 yard difference might make all the difference in the world. And it might! But my point is only that if the front brake isn't being used right up to its maximum capabilities, we lose a heck of a lot more than those 5 feet, and will never recover it no matter what we're doing with the rear.

I use the front and the rear combined almost always, except when braking in turns or low speed maneuvers, or loose dirt or gravel, in which case I use the rear only. Im surprised so many people are scared of the rear brake, Im pretty heavy on the rear brake, and I have yet to lock it up. I have locked the front twice and both times were a non-event.



I'm not scared of it. It's just not how I ride.

Use a combination of both all the time on both bikes. Not sure why everyone is so afraid either...have lead foots?

So, Kuro, did you remove the rear brake? :p

I use a lot of rear braking, but never when I'm trying to kill a lot of speed in a short amount of time. It's usually used to modulate speed in a parking lot where my right hand is more concerned with delicate throttle, or bringing it down a notch if I find I've brought my cruising speed higher than I want--generally I find it lazier to apply rear brake instead of stretching my fingers for the front, so if the situation only calls for a bit of scrubbing I'll go for the rear. If I want to stop quickly, like for a stop light, entering a corner fast or to avoid some yay-hoo that pulls in my way, it's almost 100% front brake with a hint of rear.

So, Kuro, did you remove the rear brake? :p

It's good to use when I'm lazy and want to hold the bike still on an incline.

So maybe never was the wrong answer.


Never while moving.

That's better.:thumbup:

Purspeed - can you expand upon that a little? Applying the rear brake, sometimes a fraction of a second before applying the front, is used to settle the rear suspension and bring it down slightly so in fact less weight shifts to the front. That technique can in fact keep the bike a little more balanced in non-emergency stops. But that seems to be slightly at odds with what you're saying...

Most modern bikes get 100% braking from the front. Think stoppies. The friction of the tires to the road is the biggest factor in reducing braking distance. So, tire technology is key for improvement in braking (other than thermal conductivity in transforming mechanical energy into heat within the brake pads, calipers, floating rotors, etc.).

When you begin to brake (by either squeezing the front or rear brake lever on a motorcycle) weight shifts to the front of the bike. This prevents one from locking the brake.

This is why using the rear brake as a standalone brake is not suggested. It locks far too easy because the weight will transfer to the front of the bike rapidly causing the rear to lock.

So, if you first apply the rear brake, you shift weight to the front (in race applications, you are either accelerating, braking or turning 100%...or a combo thereof), and then apply the front brake now that the weight is shifted.

Some experts argue that you do not need to use any brakes at all (think Valentino Rossi & Keith Code) when corner carving or that braking doesn't give you a net lower lap time. But, for those of us mere mortals, tapping the front or rear brake (I like rear because that is weighted before I begin the braking process) transfers weight to the front and then you can firmly squeeze the front brake for maximum braking potential (engine braking not included).

Any input in the bike can potentially be a destabilizing force (things in motion tend to like being in motion...newton, et all), so being smooth with your inputs is key.

If you are coming out of a turn, the oscilllaitons from the "third" spring (the frame) depending on the material, structure and inherent dampening abilities of said stuff may unsettle the rear (you see this in racing quite a bit...not so much with 250GP though), but this would not relate to braking too much.

The rear is unsettled by friction loss (fore aft) and the tire searching for friction with lateral movements. This happens in both acceleration and braking.

When forcefully braking, using the rear brake can settle things a bit, as well.

Most MotoGP racers do not use their rear brakes, however...69 Hayden does though (and considered a bit strange by that virtue) but that has a lot to do with his roots in dirtbike riding...KEntucky.

I get what you are saying, right up until the point about using the rear brake to shift weight to the front so you can then apply the front brake. Shifting weight to the front happens much quicker if you just use the front brake to do the same thing. Adding rear brake prior will not move as much weight forward as quickly, and in fact lessens that weight transfer compared to using the front brake alone. In some cases that behavior is desired when going for smoother stops with less weight transfer. But as I think you're referring to what you'd do for maximum braking in race applications, I'm not sure I've ever heard of anybody using the technique you describe on track...

Most MotoGP racers do not use their rear brakes, however...69 Hayden does though (and considered a bit strange by that virtue) but that has a lot to do with his roots in dirtbike riding...KEntucky.

You're absolutely right, most don't use much rear brake. But even those that do aren't using the rear brake to scrub speed at all, they are using it to help settle the rear of the bike and to help control the arc through the turn when both front and rear are at the very edges of traction. Nicky used to use even more of the rear brake to help control wheelies when accelerating hard, but that's become less and less necessary with better electronics now taking care of that automatically.

very interesting discussion..many different answers and explanations...diverse like our member pool...ANYWAY..
i use a combination of front and rear brake the majority of the time. for slow manuvering, like transitioning forward from a complete stop, i'm on the rear brake. someone said previously its all in the feel, and i completely agree.
when i rode my 700 interceptor, a buddy and i went to an empty stadium parking lot and did some braking manuvers to aquaint ourselves better with the characteristics and stopping power of front, rear and both. this really helped understand limits and how the cycle reacted to each.
we also understood that to keep pressure applied when performing these runs would end in disaster! that lady who did the tripple gainer off the 200cc platform at the msf course is a fine example of that.

I do use both at once. When coming to a complete stop I first let go of the front at the last moment and allow the back break complete the stop as I put my foot down... keeps my hand on the throttle ready to go if the light turns green quickly, and my break on for visual purposes and to keep from rolling.

One thing I don't think anyone has brought up is that rear brake, if you must, in a corner is the way to go... It definitely has helped when hitting some of my favorite 25mph turning sections (I love 25mph turns, especially when you get 5 in a row)

I've locked the rear a few times, doesn't really scare me as long as I'm not of a bad surface... I used to lock my rear on my mtb right after a downhill going maybe 25-30 all time, I found it fun.

Edit; rear break is also used for u-turns (in 2nd gear too), parking lots, and controlling my mad wheelies

I get what you are saying, right up until the point about using the rear brake to shift weight to the front so you can then apply the front brake. Shifting weight to the front happens much quicker if you just use the front brake to do the same thing. Adding rear brake prior will not move as much weight forward as quickly, and in fact lessens that weight transfer compared to using the front brake alone. In some cases that behavior is desired when going for smoother stops with less weight transfer. But as I think you're referring to what you'd do for maximum braking in race applications, I'm not sure I've ever heard of anybody using the technique you describe on track...



You're absolutely right, most don't use much rear brake. But even those that do aren't using the rear brake to scrub speed at all, they are using it to help settle the rear of the bike and to help control the arc through the turn when both front and rear are at the very edges of traction. Nicky used to use even more of the rear brake to help control wheelies when accelerating hard, but that's become less and less necessary with better electronics now taking care of that automatically.

You're correct in that using the front brake will shift weight faster (for several reasons), but most folks do not have the proper skills to do this. Sometimes I get lazy and just use the rear brake to shift weight, that's all.

The oscillations while in the turn including the friction gains/losses to the rear front while maximizing speed, avoiding collision and keeping the guy behind you behind you and avoiding a low side from front or rear slide or highside makes this high speed ballet an interesting one for the bike's chassis.

The chassis design element is the one most complex and misunderstood, even for the world's experts. Since the chassis has no dampening abilities (other than the max loads of the inherent material or design), the tires have to deal with this chaotic load coming out of a turn (in most cases). Braking may help or cause a highside. Some rudimentary traction control devices are being developed to help prevent this.

Nicky is crashing and losing in part because of the electronics. He's fighting them and is not comfortable with them at this time. I hope he sorts this out by next year.

Under normal braking conditions I use both some times at very low speed just the rear, starting on a hill which I do often I hold it on the rear and release gradually as I pull away. Modern brakes are so good that yes you can brake with only the front but don’t try it with a single sided single leading shoe cable operated drum brake.

Steve

I get what you are saying, right up until the point about using the rear brake to shift weight to the front so you can then apply the front brake. Shifting weight to the front happens much quicker if you just use the front brake to do the same thing. I was taught to apply the rear brake slightly before applying the front, in order to aid with (and forgive me if this is the wrong term) setting the load on the front to shape the tire properly before fully applying the front brakes. I think this fits in with what Purspeed is saying.

Wow, what great information here! So it sounds like everyone does it differently. I've practiced quick stops and various other maneuvers in a parking lot, but it is so tough to get real world (ie: 60MPH) experience in controlled conditions. That's what makes me nervous. Sure, in a parking lot at 25 MPH, I know I could master using the dreaded rear brake along with the front, however, in an emergency stop, I wonder if I would react differently and use too much of the rear brake. I'm only 120 pounds, and as you guys know, the back of our bike with no passenger is feather light. The fear of losing control of that back wheel is quite a mental block for me. I've been riding since March, and I've never used the rear brake, however, I try to look far enough ahead in situations so as to avoid emergency stops, so I've never really needed maximum stopping power on my bike....yet. I want to make sure I get the maximum stopping power as safely as possible. I think I'll take the bike out and do some practicing. Thanks again for everyone's reply! It is so interesting how different we all are as riders!

I use my rear brake in town when stuck in slow traffic..way easier to control the bike than havin it nose dive everytime I use the front brake.

I use the rear brake in conjunction with the front and have learned how much pressure to apply to the rear to avoid locking it up. If the rear wheel does lock up you simply release pressure on the rear brake and gradualy reaply for maximum stopping power.

I use it when I'm not downshifting. The engine braking on the 250R is plenty. But around town I don't engine brake much, I just pull in the clutch lever, coast to a stop and use both brakes. In the twisties and going faster I'm teaching myself not to use the rear brake at all. It just makes things easier

I use a lot of rear braking, but never when I'm trying to kill a lot of speed in a short amount of time. It's usually used to modulate speed in a parking lot where my right hand is more concerned with delicate throttle, or bringing it down a notch if I find I've brought my cruising speed higher than I want--generally I find it lazier to apply rear brake instead of stretching my fingers for the front, so if the situation only calls for a bit of scrubbing I'll go for the rear. If I want to stop quickly, like for a stop light, entering a corner fast or to avoid some yay-hoo that pulls in my way, it's almost 100% front brake with a hint of rear.

Most modern bikes get 100% braking from the front. Think stoppies. The friction of the tires to the road is the biggest factor in reducing braking distance. So, tire technology is key for improvement in braking (other than thermal conductivity in transforming mechanical energy into heat within the brake pads, calipers, floating rotors, etc.).

When you begin to brake (by either squeezing the front or rear brake lever on a motorcycle) weight shifts to the front of the bike. This prevents one from locking the brake.

This is why using the rear brake as a standalone brake is not suggested. It locks far too easy because the weight will transfer to the front of the bike rapidly causing the rear to lock.

So, if you first apply the rear brake, you shift weight to the front (in race applications, you are either accelerating, braking or turning 100%...or a combo thereof), and then apply the front brake now that the weight is shifted.

Some experts argue that you do not need to use any brakes at all (think Valentino Rossi & Keith Code) when corner carving or that braking doesn't give you a net lower lap time. But, for those of us mere mortals, tapping the front or rear brake (I like rear because that is weighted before I begin the braking process) transfers weight to the front and then you can firmly squeeze the front brake for maximum braking potential (engine braking not included).

Any input in the bike can potentially be a destabilizing force (things in motion tend to like being in motion...newton, et all), so being smooth with your inputs is key.

If you are coming out of a turn, the oscilllaitons from the "third" spring (the frame) depending on the material, structure and inherent dampening abilities of said stuff may unsettle the rear (you see this in racing quite a bit...not so much with 250GP though), but this would not relate to braking too much.

The rear is unsettled by friction loss (fore aft) and the tire searching for friction with lateral movements. This happens in both acceleration and braking.

When forcefully braking, using the rear brake can settle things a bit, as well.

Most MotoGP racers do not use their rear brakes, however...69 Hayden does though (and considered a bit strange by that virtue) but that has a lot to do with his roots in dirtbike riding...KEntucky.

You're correct in that using the front brake will shift weight faster (for several reasons), but most folks do not have the proper skills to do this. Sometimes I get lazy and just use the rear brake to shift weight, that's all.

The oscillations while in the turn including the friction gains/losses to the rear front while maximizing speed, avoiding collision and keeping the guy behind you behind you and avoiding a low side from front or rear slide or highside makes this high speed ballet an interesting one for the bike's chassis.

The chassis design element is the one most complex and misunderstood, even for the world's experts. Since the chassis has no dampening abilities (other than the max loads of the inherent material or design), the tires have to deal with this chaotic load coming out of a turn (in most cases). Braking may help or cause a highside. Some rudimentary traction control devices are being developed to help prevent this.

Nicky is crashing and losing in part because of the electronics. He's fighting them and is not comfortable with them at this time. I hope he sorts this out by next year.

I was taught to apply the rear brake slightly before applying the front, in order to aid with (and forgive me if this is the wrong term) setting the load on the front to shape the tire properly before fully applying the front brakes. I think this fits in with what Purspeed is saying.

Now I know why so many people are crashing!

I use the front and the rear combined almost always, except when braking in turns or low speed maneuvers, or loose dirt or gravel, in which case I use the rear only. Im surprised so many people are scared of the rear brake, Im pretty heavy on the rear brake, and I have yet to lock it up. I have locked the front twice and both times were a non-event.

Good luck with that!

Hey Snake. In the MSF course, they taught us if the rear brake locks up to keep the pressure on it, not to release and reapply. We were told to only release and reapply if we lock up the front brake. By releasing the back brake if it's skidding, the bike tries to "fix" itself and the front and back wheels are usually pointed in different directions so it could result in a high side, right? I'm learning here, so forgive me if I've said something incorrectly. That was just how I understood it.
On another note all, I just got back from my practice session. I learned that I enjoy the feel of using the rear brake in normal stops b/c the front end doesn't dive so much. At 30 MPH on my bike, I shaved off a distance equal to 1/2 of a parking spot when using both brakes as opposed to just the front brake. It was a great (albeit HOT) practice session today. :) Thanks for everyone's advice!

Hey Snake. In the MSF course, they taught us if the rear brake locks up to keep the pressure on it, not to release and reapply. We were told to only release and reapply if we lock up the front brake. By releasing the back brake if it's skidding, the bike tries to "fix" itself and the front and back wheels are usually pointed in different directions so it could result in a high side, right? I'm learning here, so forgive me if I've said something incorrectly. That was just how I understood it.
On another note all, I just got back from my practice session. I learned that I enjoy the feel of using the rear brake in normal stops b/c the front end doesn't dive so much. At 30 MPH on my bike, I shaved off a distance equal to 1/2 of a parking spot when using both brakes as opposed to just the front brake. It was a great (albeit HOT) practice session today. :) Thanks for everyone's advice!

Please do not take my advice as gospel. This is how I feel comfortable and have laerned to ride thru the years. It may not be the right way. Most all of us are giving you our opinions on how we have experienced things.
The best advice I can give you is to listen to the experts at the class. After the class is over you will start to feel more and nore comfortable with the teqniques you have learned.

Thanks Snake! I really do appreciate everyone's opinions. It's so funny how there's obviously not just ONE right way to do things. Thanks so much!

Thanks Snake! I really do appreciate everyone's opinions. It's so funny how there's obviously not just ONE right way to do things. Thanks so much!

Also don't forget to listen to the advice of your husband because he above all people has your best interests in mind.
Probably the best advice I can give is not to ride above your confidence level. If you don't feel you are ready for a particular twistie than don't try it or take it at a much slower speed than the others in your group and they will understand and wait up for you. Safe riding to ya. :thumbup:

In the MSF course, they taught us if the rear brake locks up to keep the pressure on it, not to release and reapply. We were told to only release and reapply if we lock up the front brake. By releasing the back brake if it's skidding, the bike tries to "fix" itself and the front and back wheels are usually pointed in different directions so it could result in a high side, right? I'm learning here, so forgive me if I've said something incorrectly. That was just how I understood it.

That's exactly what they taught you, and you understood it correctly. The fear is that if the rear wheel is no longer inline with the front when it is locked and sliding along, letting off the rear brake pressure will allow it to start to roll once again, pick up traction, and if the bike is already sliding a little bit sideways that traction may cause the bike to snap sideways and highside. By holding the brake locked until the bike slows completely, it keeps the traction on the rear constant and makes it easier to control the bike, as they probably had you demonstrate in the course.

There's not a thing wrong with any of that advice in a parking lot, but it may not be as applicable on the road depending what traffic is doing behind you. There may be cases where we can slow to a complete stop if we lock the rear. But if we're on a public road with traffic nearby, coming to complete stop may not always be a good idea (or even be possible, without getting clobbered by nearby traffic). I don't know of any experienced motorcyclist who would argue that holding the rear brake locked all the way to a stop is part of their skill set anymore, they've all learned that it is in fact quite possible to let it off, but when doing so you need to be very aware of how far the bike is slewing back and forth, and very gingerly release pressure so that a snap highside is less likely.

MSF is trying to keep people with extremely limited experience from hurting themselves, and that's valid, but just understand that as folks gain experience, each and every piece of advice that may have been applicable at low speeds for a newbie may become less relevant over time. Not because it was wrong, but because as people gain skills they can start to worry about more than the basics, and techniques to control the bike in even wider areas of performance.

Most modern bikes get 100% braking from the front. Think stoppies. The friction of the tires to the road is the biggest factor in reducing braking distance. So, tire technology is key for improvement in braking (other than thermal conductivity in transforming mechanical energy into heat within the brake pads, calipers, floating rotors, etc.).

When you begin to brake (by either squeezing the front or rear brake lever on a motorcycle) weight shifts to the front of the bike. This prevents one from locking the brake.

This is why using the rear brake as a standalone brake is not suggested. It locks far too easy because the weight will transfer to the front of the bike rapidly causing the rear to lock.

So, if you first apply the rear brake, you shift weight to the front (in race applications, you are either accelerating, braking or turning 100%...or a combo thereof), and then apply the front brake now that the weight is shifted.

Some experts argue that you do not need to use any brakes at all (think Valentino Rossi & Keith Code) when corner carving or that braking doesn't give you a net lower lap time. But, for those of us mere mortals, tapping the front or rear brake (I like rear because that is weighted before I begin the braking process) transfers weight to the front and then you can firmly squeeze the front brake for maximum braking potential (engine braking not included).

Any input in the bike can potentially be a destabilizing force (things in motion tend to like being in motion...newton, et all), so being smooth with your inputs is key.

If you are coming out of a turn, the oscilllaitons from the "third" spring (the frame) depending on the material, structure and inherent dampening abilities of said stuff may unsettle the rear (you see this in racing quite a bit...not so much with 250GP though), but this would not relate to braking too much.

The rear is unsettled by friction loss (fore aft) and the tire searching for friction with lateral movements. This happens in both acceleration and braking.

When forcefully braking, using the rear brake can settle things a bit, as well.

Most MotoGP racers do not use their rear brakes, however...69 Hayden does though (and considered a bit strange by that virtue) but that has a lot to do with his roots in dirtbike riding...KEntucky.

Wouldn't it make more sense to just apply initial pressure with the front brake, then increase the pressure?

Obviously being hamfisted on the brake will result in locking it quick or going over the handlebars but I don't understand why you would need to complicate the braking process by using the rear to shift weight, then use the front when you can just apply initial pressure on the front to shift weight, then gradually apply more pressure.

Actually, I'm pretty sure that's how the front is supposed to be used anyway.

I'm not understanding the reasoning of using the rear to shfit weight in this application unless it's just preference in riding style which is totally fine.

I use my rear brake to hold the bike when I'm stopped on a hill and want take my hands off the bike. I used to use the rear brake entering turn 1 at robling road to keep my ass-end aligned and when accelerating over that little hill, entering the back straight at rd atlanta... to keep my front wheel from getting air.

I messed around with trying to steer the rear of the bike into corners with the real brake (like mentioned above with the moto gp riders) but I wasn't comfortable with it. It kinda surprises me that msf would say to stay on the brake after the rear wheel is locked up. Try to steer your bike with a skidding rear wheel... its not easy! Wait.. don't try it on the streets... use an empty lot!

I was taught to apply the rear brake slightly before applying the front, in order to aid with (and forgive me if this is the wrong term) setting the load on the front to shape the tire properly before fully applying the front brakes. I think this fits in with what Purspeed is saying.

I don't believe this to be accurate. Every foot that goes by that you're not increasing pressure on the front brake is a foot that you're not going to get back at the end of the stop. There's nothing that the rear brake can do to help "prepare" the front to begin braking better, that the front can't do on its own even more quickly. What the rear can do is help bring the rear of the bike down a bit to keep the front end from diving quite as much as it would otherwise, but that's only relevant in less than emergency stops when trying to be smooth; not as relevant when we're trying to stop the bike in the absolute shortest distance from high speeds.

Wouldn't it make more sense to just apply initial pressure with the front brake, then increase the pressure?

...snip...

I'm not understanding the reasoning of using the rear to shfit weight in this application unless it's just preference in riding style which is totally fine.

Yup.

Try to steer your bike with a skidding rear wheel... its not easy! Wait.. don't try it on the streets... use an empty lot!

It's actually not that hard, and it does turn out to be easier to control the rear if it remains locked (compared to having it locked then letting off to be unlocked while still moving at good speed; not compared to never locking it in the first place).

Both Always

If you are skilled enough, and alert enough, to use both to their maximum.

I'm no noob, and I'm not sure I'm good enough, even when I'm fully alert...to use both to max effectiveness. I use the front brake only in probably 85% of braking events.

I think this all depends on the rider.

I ride with the front brake 'covered' with two fingers about 95% of the time. Some will say that's a bad habit 'cause I won't get maximum braking without using all four fingers.

FOR ME, I am willing to trade max braking for quicker braking...but I don't really ride in traffic, and rarely over 55. My main concerns are animals, and road debris around blind corners.

I BELIEVE braking sooner is more important FOR ME than max braking power. Additionally, I don't 'cover' the rear brake, so most braking events are over before I get around to touching it.

There are two areas where I do think using both brake is the better option--
Loose wet, or otherwise slippery surfaces
Downhill braking

In my very limited dirt-riding experience, I learned quickly the dangers of using the front brake on loose surfaces. If one wheel is gonna slip--you want it to be the back. On dirt (and tell me if I'm wrong) my braking is done hard on the back and modulated on the front.

Hard downhill braking is something at which I have tons of experience: I ride down a 6000foor/25 mile grade 4-5 times a week. I wear out front tires faster than rear tires!! (and average about 5000 miles on a front Kenda)

I have found that using both brakes in these situations is critical to maintaining both wheels planted. Additionally, going downhill into a hair pin with only the front brake on can get that back tire 'skimming' which is not good.

To summarize my view on this,
I think it is best to focus on using both brakes all the time, so that when the time comes to do some serious slowing down, you are able to get the most out of both brakes.

If the rear wheel does lock up you simply release pressure on the rear brake and gradualy reaply for maximum stopping power.

That's not what they teach at the MSF course.

if you lock up the rear wheel at a high rate of speed, keep it locked to better retain control of the bike. By releasing it, you stand a good chance of a high side if the rear is not perfectly aligned with the direction of travel.

For maximum braking during a high speed stop, be very light on the rear brake or don't use it at all. As others have mentioned weight transfer during hard stops can place 100% braking action on the front wheel and can be 0% on the rear. Under normal street riding, maximum braking is never needed except in emergency stops.

Now I know why so many people are crashing!
Are you suggesting not to use the rear at all? For the same reasons as Alex?

Are you suggesting not to use the rear at all? For the same reasons as Alex?


I would suggest that people do a LOT of practice with the rear or leave it alone completely.

The rear brake is not something to be taken lightly. (no pun intended lol)



If I remember correctly, the crash statistics for bikes showed a big percentage caused by misuse of the rear brake.


I think in an emergency, the rear is more trouble than it's worth for a majority of riders. This is why I don't touch it at all. I don't want the muscle memory to build up to jam on the rear in a panic stop.


Also, as Alex pointed out, before worrying about how many feet the rear can save you in a emergency threshold braking situation, it shouldn't be forgotten that there's a good possibility the front brake (which is a lot more powerful and effective) may not be near it's threshold yet either. You can squeeze the front on this bike pretty dang hard given you are light on the initial squeeze and gradually add more pressure. At the track, on this bike, I've had the front lever damn near back to the bar without lock up.


The rear brake has its uses for sure but hard braking isn't one of them (for me). Others are different but that's just how I ride.


Eitherway, I would suggest people get to a controlled environment and see just how powerful the brakes are on this bike. It may only be a single rotor, single caliper front but it's got some good bite in it.

I always use both, but as always I use both progressively. The rear can be especially twitchy if you over use it, but so far the only time I locked up the rear was while i was abusing the rear brake while botching a downshift.

I'm not sure how my habit of using the rear brake will translate onto a supersport (if and when I get one), but so far I find that using the rear brake lightly helps keep the suspension of my 250 from getting too disturbed under hard braking.

Typically, the harder I squeeze the front brake, the more I let up on the rear to allow the front end to dive forward gently. I'm nowhere near skilled enough to be called awesome, but the use of the rear brake is a skill that I think is worth mastering.

It depends on what I'm doing. Certain situations required a different braking method. If I'm coming into a turn and I want to scrub off some speed, I may use the front, or I may use the back. It just depends.

Normal situations, like every day stop and go riding, I use both, even if I am downshifting. It teaches me to practice how I apply the rear brake. It will come in handy when I hit up the track. I like testing myself in different situations...it keeps me on my toes and keeps my brain constantly on its game when I'm riding.

One thing I don't think anyone has brought up is that rear brake, if you must, in a corner is the way to go...

This is terrifying. If it hasn't put you on the ground already, I fear it's only a matter of time. If you are already leaned over in a corner and for whatever reason feel it's necessary to begin braking (even though 99% of the time, adding any brake at all at that point is unnecessary and counterproductive), the absolute last thing one would want to do is add any significant pressure to the rear brake alone. It's exactly what you'd want to do if you are in fact trying to lose traction on the rear of the bike and slide it around as a technique or for fun. Fun at very slow speeds on loose surfaces. Useful at very high speeds on racetracks by highly skilled racers making their bike as wide as possible to counter passing attempts. But other than that, it's just not a good idea at all.

if im mid corner and need to scrub off a little speed ill use the rear only, otherwise both

This is terrifying. If it hasn't put you on the ground already, I fear it's only a matter of time. If you are already leaned over in a corner and for whatever reason feel it's necessary to begin braking (even though 99% of the time, adding any brake at all at that point is unnecessary and counterproductive), the absolute last thing one would want to do is add any significant pressure to the rear brake alone. It's exactly what you'd want to do if you are in fact trying to lose traction on the rear of the bike and slide it around as a technique or for fun. Fun at very slow speeds on loose surfaces. Useful at very high speeds on racetracks by highly skilled racers making their bike as wide as possible to counter passing attempts. But other than that, it's just not a good idea at all.
I've done that on the 250, slide the back going into a turn. Did it at the track during a parade lap. It was either that or run off the track. I took my chances and pulled it off. :) Of course I was going INTO a turn, and not in the middle of one. Once you have that bike leaned over, you should actually be rolling on the throttle, not slowing down. You want to maintain that 40/60 (front/back) weight distribution in the corner, or your suspension goes to crap in a heartbeat.

Both breaks every stop, more so the front than the back. If I have a little extra speed I want to bleed off while turning in to a parking lot, or my dirt road, I'll use the rear to control speed I guess.

Without thinking, I was on my front brake the first time turning in to my loose gravel dirt road, that could've ended badly, only slid a little and let go of the brake. Nothing bad happened. So rear break, and slow, the only hard part is slowing down enough for that gravel, and hoping noone is still doing 45mph behind me.

Are you suggesting not to use the rear at all? For the same reasons as Alex?

Yes

I would suggest that people do a LOT of practice with the rear or leave it alone completely. The rear brake is not something to be taken lightly. (no pun intended lol)



If I remember correctly, the crash statistics for bikes showed a big percentage caused by misuse of the rear brake.


I think in an emergency, the rear is more trouble than it's worth for a majority of riders. This is why I don't touch it at all. I don't want the muscle memory to build up to jam on the rear in a panic stop.


Also, as Alex pointed out, before worrying about how many feet the rear can save you in a emergency threshold braking situation, it shouldn't be forgotten that there's a good possibility the front brake (which is a lot more powerful and effective) may not be near it's threshold yet either. You can squeeze the front on this bike pretty dang hard given you are light on the initial squeeze and gradually add more pressure. At the track, on this bike, I've had the front lever damn near back to the bar without lock up.


The rear brake has its uses for sure but hard braking isn't one of them (for me). Others are different but that's just how I ride.


Eitherway, I would suggest people get to a controlled environment and see just how powerful the brakes are on this bike. It may only be a single rotor, single caliper front but it's got some good bite in it.

Amen

I use the rear all the time - there's never a time when I only use the front to reduce speed (although the front does most of the work). I only use it lightly to settle the bike a bit at low speeds, to do very light braking in corners when I'm a bit too fast, and to come to a smooth stop when I want to stop.

I always use my rear brake with my front brake.

Once you have that bike leaned over, you should actually be rolling on the throttle, not slowing down. You want to maintain that 40/60 (front/back) weight distribution in the corner, or your suspension goes to crap in a heartbeat.

Well, sort of. It's been the mantra for years across all types of bikes, and it's what Hough and others recommend for safe street riding. And it's not a bad idea. It basically means that you have your entry speed set well before you even enter a corner, and are all the way off of the brakes before you even initiate the turn. But with the tires, suspension, and brakes that modern sportbikes have at their disposal, it's no longer always the fastest or even safest way around a corner on the track, and it can apply to street riding from time to time as well. Trailbraking can be done up until and sometimes even after the bike is all the way leaned over in a turn, and sometimes you're not back on the gas until well after the apex. Sometimes you need to be on the gas well before the apex. Depends on a number of things, including the particular turn (decreasing radius, increasing radius, double-apex, etc) and the particular bike (what happens to its suspension geometry when more or less brake is applied while leaned over at x degrees, is the bike better off maximizing corner speed or getting an early exit etc). Perhaps this portion of the discussion should be split off into a different thread if people are interested in talking about trailbraking...

Normal situations, like every day stop and go riding, I use both, even if I am downshifting. It teaches me to practice how I apply the rear brake. It will come in handy when I hit up the track. I like testing myself in different situations...it keeps me on my toes and keeps my brain constantly on its game when I'm riding.

No, it wont come in handy at the track.

perhaps a better split for his thread would be for street and track braking techniques?

It's good to use when I'm lazy and want to hold the bike still on an incline.

So maybe never was the wrong answer.


Never while moving.

That's better.:thumbup:

lol, I was just bringing up that ridiculous thread on Kawiforums from a while back. That was highly amusing, and it looked it had given you a headache...

I don't think braking is all that important (as in over-thinking) if you are a responsible driver, as long as you know the front brake do most of the work, one would realise how it all works out.

Everybody say it's bad to brake in a corner, yes, but on the street at moderate speed when the tires has alot of potential grip un-harvested, a little bit of rear brake won't send you of course and won't slide you out. I do that everyday and I have yet to die front it. We're not all on track and draggin knees everywhere.

I guess I'm just a little pissed that everybody puts too much emphasis on that topic and get on their high-horse "race-track" techniques, when obviously alot of people here are just riding along town. As long as you do everything smoothly, thottle, brakes, turns anyone should feel the limit of the bike.

Every time my right hand touches the front brake my right foot is on the rear as well.

Plus If I am in super slow conditions, I will ride the rear break and let the clutch out to friction point and just creep along.

I guess I'm just a little pissed that everybody puts too much emphasis on that topic and get on their high-horse "race-track" techniques, when obviously alot of people here are just riding along town. As long as you do everything smoothly, thottle, brakes, turns anyone should feel the limit of the bike.

I don't think that's it at all, Remy. It's not about high-horse racetrack techniques, it's about using the controls on the bike properly. Your point about smoothness is a very good one, and it's exactly on point.
Everybody say it's bad to brake in a corner, yes, but on the street at moderate speed when the tires has alot of potential grip un-harvested, a little bit of rear brake won't send you of course and won't slide you out.

I also see what you are saying here. If there is plenty of grip left, using a little more of that grip will not cause a problem, up to the point of getting to the limit of that grip. That does not mean that choosing to use that grip (adding new braking force in a turn, whether front or rear) is a correct or even relatively safe technique. It just means that it's not a guaranteed crash either, right?

The problem as I see it is that crash after crash with newer riders comes down to poor braking technique. In this case "poor braking technique" means nothing more than when they tried to slow the bike to avoid an obstacle, they were unsuccessful and either crashed right into what they were trying to avoid, or crashed anyway and perhaps didn't hit exactly what they would have otherwise. With better technique, they may very well have been able to stop or slow in plenty of time. As I see it, the two most common reasons for the poor braking performance are:

a. Simply not braking hard enough. Not realizing how much force you can put into that front tire to slow the bike. New riders are too timid with the front brake, and just don't have a feel for how well it can be used to slow the bike.
b. Locking up a wheel, most often the rear wheel, and losing directional control and sliding directly into whatever they were trying to avoid. In many cases the slide is much, much longer than it ever would have been if they had applied better technique before locking up the brakes.

If someone can ride for years and years without ever approaching the traction limits of the tires, either front or rear, then however they choose to use that traction right up to those limits will likely not be a problem, just as you stated (and I agree with you). But I do think that that's a rarity, rather than a certainty, or even a likelihood.

Now I know why so many people are crashing!

What's wrong with NOT using it while downshifting? By downshifting I meant when I'm coming to a stop, I'll use my front brake and downshift to slow the bike down. Is that wrong?

I normally use the rear brake to keep the bike from moving when it's not in gear. Occasionally, I'll use it in some sort of weird experimental fashion... like "oh ****, the front brakes are out I can only use the back brake!" But that's because I get easily bored.

Normal situations, like every day stop and go riding, I use both, even if I am downshifting. It teaches me to practice how I apply the rear brake. It will come in handy when I hit up the track. I like testing myself in different situations...it keeps me on my toes and keeps my brain constantly on its game when I'm riding.

For track riding, I would say leave the rear alone for sure.

Even if you like to use it on the street.

For track riding, I would say leave the rear alone for sure.

Even if you like to use it on the street.
EDIT:
I thought about this wrong. You are correct in that statement.

The front does such a good job, when used right, can handle much of the load, if not all. Enough front braking results in getting the back airborne, and if rear brake is applied, it locks up. Yet there are situations where the rear can help...like parking the bike in the pit. :D

I started to really think about how I did my laps at the track, and a few high speed runs on back roads. I found that I did seldom use the rear brake. I actually only grabbed the front, and sometimes trail-braked into a turn using it. I guess it was because I found I upset the dinky 250 when I moved my foot off the pedal and positioned it on the peg. So yes, I was in left field when I made that statement. lol ;) I instinctively only used the front when riding fast, because I was able to be smoother coming in and going out of the turns.

I'm going back to school. All this information is giving me a headache. Everyone uses the rear brake for different reasons or doesn't use the rear at all.

Why doesn't the bike have an emergency brake (you could use it on hills)?

I thought that hitting the rear brake in a turn leaves a cool skid mark and makes you go sideways and look groovey for the girls. Actually you can do this going straight too.

If you aren't supposed to use the rear brake why do they put one on the bike?

The front brake is so little how could it possibly stop you without help from the rear brake?

If Rossi doesn't use any brakes then I'm not either. You learn by imitating others.

I always drag the rear brake so I don't wheelie. I hate wheelies.

The geo-thermal-nuclear frame design calls for extensive use of the rear brake to slow you down from hyper-space.

I was riding the other day and down shifted and used the engine as a brake. Do you know that you can hit redline in every gear just by downshifting?

I think I know everything but just in case I forgot anything please feel free to help me out with knowledgable replies.

I'm going back to school. All this information is giving me a headache. Everyone uses the rear brake for different reasons or doesn't use the rear at all.

Why doesn't the bike have an emergency brake (you could use it on hills)?

I thought that hitting the rear brake in a turn leaves a cool skid mark and makes you go sideways and look groovey for the girls. Actually you can do this going straight too.

If you aren't supposed to use the rear brake why do they put one on the bike?

The front brake is so little how could it possibly stop you without help from the rear brake?

If Rossi doesn't use any brakes then I'm not either. You learn by imitating others.

I always drag the rear brake so I don't wheelie. I hate wheelies.

The geo-thermal-nuclear frame design calls for extensive use of the rear brake to slow you down from hyper-space.

I was riding the other day and down shifted and used the engine as a brake. Do you know that you can hit redline in every gear just by downshifting?

I think I know everything but just in case I forgot anything please feel free to help me out with knowledgable replies.
CC with the ninjette wisdom!
:allhail:

lol, CC, I appreciate your humor, but I was actually looking for an honest answer. I'm well aware that you know how to ride and I respect your opinion. I certainly don't know the half of riding, and I do need to go a riding school. However, my schedule simply doesn't call for it because I have a familial or school event I need to attend whenever there's a class nearby. I've never hit redline downshifting, I'm not racing around the streets. I'm usually at 5k rpm when I downshift, so I never have to rev match higher than 6k rpm or so.
Maybe I should have sent you a pm, but might as well post it by now...

Wouldn't it make more sense to just apply initial pressure with the front brake, then increase the pressure?


Yes. Under most circumstances provided that one truly controls the squeeze of the front brake.

The best was to come to a complete stop is to apply front brake (light to modest pressure), the squeeze within 6% of lock or so, then taper off. Some choose to apply the rear brake, then squeeze the front within 6% or so of locking the front tire, then taper off the front (not including engine braking). Some even apply the rear brake towards the end as weight evens out (front to back).

I, however, have been in situations (being rough), where the situation + my skill level warranted a touch of the rear to a healthy squeeze of the front whilst engine braking almost to the point of rear wheel lock (actually slowdown, but bigtime slowdown) to get that bike stopped.

That doesn't happen often with me, however.

DO NOT RELEASE THE REAR BRAKE ONCE IT IS LOCKED.

ever...

lol, CC, I appreciate your humor, but I was actually looking for an honest answer. I'm well aware that you know how to ride and I respect your opinion. I certainly don't know the half of riding, and I do need to go a riding school. However, my schedule simply doesn't call for it because I have a familial or school event I need to attend whenever there's a class nearby. I've never hit redline downshifting, I'm not racing around the streets. I'm usually at 5k rpm when I downshift, so I never have to rev match higher than 6k rpm or so.
Maybe I should have sent you a pm, but might as well post it by now...

Don't take this so personal. It wasn't directed at you personally.

An honest answer is, it is up to you. With time and experience you will decide whether you want to use both or just the front brake. The only time to use the rear brake by itself is if you are on, or off, the road in dirt or gravel (the front end will wash out if you grab that front brake).

The best thing to do is ride. Ride as much as you can. The more you ride the more you will learn and the easier everything will be. Don't ride over your head but like Keith Code says, if you never push yourself, you will never know what you can do if the situation arises (or something like that).

I love to ride. I'll ride anything, anywhere. I love dirt bikes, street bikes, cruisers, Harleys, Hondas, Suzukis, everything. There is nothing to big or small that I won't ride and enjoy.

I like to do different things to see what they do. I'll lean the wrong way on a turn (dirt bike style on a street bike), I'll sit sideways (not sidesaddle), I'll do things just for fun (see how long you can ride between the two yellow lines (when no one is coming the other way). The more agile you are, the more comfortable you are, the better you'll be able to ride.

If you never freak out, you'll never crash.

No worries CC, I wasn't taking it personally. Looking back at what I wrote I sound a bit more worked up than I really was. I wasn't at all, I was just wondering what your input was in terms of the rear brake. I never use the rear brake alone and I know what you mean about the confidence, if you're certain you can pull out of a sketchy situation, then chances are you will.

I have a question, Ive read that the tires howling(as in just before lockup) in a emergency stop is good, because it means you are stopping as fast as you can.
Anyways when you get to that point, do you let off slightly, or hold steady.
I said earlier that Ive locked up the front twice, well today was the third.

The first time was the first day I had the bike, riding it home from the dealer. A old lady made a left turn in front of me and I ham fisted the front brake and locked it up, did not know you had to let the weight transfer to the front, noob mistake.(I didnt even need to brake in this situation, I just freaked out)

The second time was when I was practicing emergency braking(due to lock up one). I was going about 70 and was doing good until I heard that tire howling, I was thinking ok, hold the break right there, anyways it howled for about 2 sec then locked up, I let go and grabbed it again, slowed down to a stop without incident.

The third time was today, I was going into a blind corner way too fast and the little back road I was on suddenly intersected with a busy hiway. This was the first time I ever felt like I was going to crash. I came out of the turn and braked as if my life depended on it(because it did). I heard that now somewhat familiar howling noise again, same thing happened as the second lock up. Again I let off the brakes and quickly reapplied them, and I stopped about 5 feet short of where I needed to, and about 15 to 20 feet sooner than where I thought I was going to stop.

Anyways I think I have my answer, the next time its about to lock up Im going to let off just a little bit. I just wanted to know if that was the correct way to go about it.
:cbrsmiley:

If I remember correctly from MSF, you did the right thing by letting go and reapplying the front brakes when it locked up.

However, if your rear brakes had locked up in those situations and you did the same thing (gradually release and re-apply) you probably would've high-sided.

I started a discussion on proper ways to trailbrake in cases when you're approaching/coming into a corner a little too hot... looking forward to what the experts say there. Might save my hide someday

DO NOT RELEASE THE REAR BRAKE ONCE IT IS LOCKED.

ever...

+1, unless you're a fan of tasting pavement / high-siding

Sounds about right Chris, but if you have the front tires actually making enough noise that you can hear them, they are right on the edge of lockup if they aren't locked up already. That noise is them losing traction with the pavement and skidding along, even if only slightly, and once they are at that point things are already getting dicey. When using the front brake, even for the hardest of stops, it's important to squeeze it gently then progress to harder and harder over a period of a second or two. If you grab them too quickly, the front wheel may lock up sooner than it would have otherwise, and then you're right, you have no option other than to let off to allow it to start rolling again and regain directional stability.

Thanks for the replys, tomorrow im gonna experiment with bringing the tire close to lockup and see how I can come to a stop as quick as possible without locking it up and reapplying brakes. Im sure thats costing me several feet in a emergency situation.:cool:

Anyways I think I have my answer, the next time its about to lock up Im going to let off just a little bit. I just wanted to know if that was the correct way to go about it.
:cbrsmiley:

I'm pretty sure letting off a little bit if you come to that point is the way to go... as the bike slows from that point the front will lock with the same amount of braking force.

In all honesty I'd love to hear from a mechanical engineer. I'm not sure which of you are, but if you are, please please please share your thoughts!

From what I know after taking a basic dynamics class (i failed, but I plan to take it again), there are of course, a few basic things that happen to a rigid moving body similar to a motorcycle (we actually used a motorcycle as an example to show the concepts behind this). There is a transfer of weight to the front, resulting in more traction in the front tire, and at the same time, the loss of weight in the rear tire, resulting in less traction in the rear. What I'd like to see is some of the basic work comparing the two situations.

From a pure simplistic point of view, traction is more or less, how much work your tires can do. You get more traction when you put more weight on something, which actually increases the normal force acting on your tires, resulting in a higher frictional force (or traction). What I'm almost seeming to understand here is that, no matter what, your rear brakes + your front brakes can only share so much traction between the both of them. Your weight distribution can only go two places. Split up, or in the front. But in both situations, its the same, which would seem to hint that either scenario is going to result in the same amount of available traction anyway.

MY question is, does this rotation of the motorcycle forward, actually incur a larger normal force? Are you rotating INTO the ground which would give you an overall larger braking force than using both? (I would personally think no, but my experience only goes so far)

And thats a good point put up by purspeed as well in the contraction of the frame.. Does the overall stored up energy in frame strain contribute to absorbing some of your forward momentum?

In all honesty I'd love to hear from a mechanical engineer. I'm not sure which of you are, but if you are, please please please share your thoughts!

From what I know after taking a basic dynamics class (i failed, but I plan to take it again), there are of course, a few basic things that happen to a rigid moving body similar to a motorcycle (we actually used a motorcycle as an example to show the concepts behind this). There is a transfer of weight to the front, resulting in more traction in the front tire, and at the same time, the loss of weight in the rear tire, resulting in less traction in the rear. What I'd like to see is some of the basic work comparing the two situations.

From a pure simplistic point of view, traction is more or less, how much work your tires can do. You get more traction when you put more weight on something, which actually increases the normal force acting on your tires, resulting in a higher frictional force (or traction). What I'm almost seeming to understand here is that, no matter what, your rear brakes + your front brakes can only share so much traction between the both of them. Your weight distribution can only go two places. Split up, or in the front. But in both situations, its the same, which would seem to hint that either scenario is going to result in the same amount of available traction anyway.

MY question is, does this rotation of the motorcycle forward, actually incur a larger normal force? Are you rotating INTO the ground which would give you an overall larger braking force than using both? (I would personally think no, but my experience only goes so far)

And thats a good point put up by purspeed as well in the contraction of the frame.. Does the overall stored up energy in frame strain contribute to absorbing some of your forward momentum?

I think you need to re-formulate your question(s)! :D To me it's like your answered your own question in your statement :p

From a pure simplistic point of view, traction is more or less, how much work your tires can do. You get more traction when you put more weight on something, which actually increases the normal force acting on your tires, resulting in a higher frictional force (or traction). What I'm almost seeming to understand here is that, no matter what, your rear brakes + your front brakes can only share so much traction between the both of them. Your weight distribution can only go two places. Split up, or in the front. But in both situations, its the same, which would seem to hint that either scenario is going to result in the same amount of available traction anyway.

MY question is, does this rotation of the motorcycle forward, actually incur a larger normal force? Are you rotating INTO the ground which would give you an overall larger braking force than using both? (I would personally think no, but my experience only goes so far)

Degreed engineer here, but as my wife says it's fake engineering instead of real engineering like her degree. Nevertheless, I think the question you ask can be answered pretty concisely. The bike weighs X, and the weight is relatively equal on front and rear wheels when bike is rolling along at a constant speed. In a max braking situation, the bike is going to be thrown forward. The front suspension compresses, much, almost all, of the weight is now focused on the front tire. I think the question was, if there was a way to keep the weight more balanced, wouldn't the total amount of traction be the same. And as I see it, the answer is no, only because the question assumes parameters that aren't available. The braking itself, whether front or rear, will shift the weight to the front tire, and that weight shift will then allow greater braking with that tire, no matter how much one would try and keep as much weight as possible as far back as possible.

Another interesting point is that the traction available between a tire and the pavement is not necessarily simple and linear either. For example, if 600 lbs on the front tire may not provide only 50% more traction than 400 lbs. Squashing that tire down may turn that into a 60% or even 70% improvement in traction for only a 50% weight difference. But perhaps if the surface is quite slippery (water, or even a little oil), that same amount of increased weight may result in much less of a traction improvement. 50% more weight may result in only 20% more traction. Or even less.

lol, CC, I appreciate your humor, but I was actually looking for an honest answer. I'm well aware that you know how to ride and I respect your opinion. I certainly don't know the half of riding, and I do need to go a riding school. However, my schedule simply doesn't call for it because I have a familial or school event I need to attend whenever there's a class nearby. I've never hit redline downshifting, I'm not racing around the streets. I'm usually at 5k rpm when I downshift, so I never have to rev match higher than 6k rpm or so.
Maybe I should have sent you a pm, but might as well post it by now...

I noticed Tonys TrackDays does Loudon;

http://www.tonystrackdays.com/

Looks affordable.

Just when we were having a great discussion on braking techniques the US Government (who must have been easedropping on this forum) makes the decision for us.

USA to consider compulsory anti-lock brakes
By Visordown News
US study shows a 28% reduction in motorcycle-related deaths for bikes equipped with ABS

AUTHORITIES responsible for traffic safety in the United States of America are taking a serious look at making anti-lock brakes compulsory, following a recent study.
An article in today's Detroit News suggest the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) are concerned about the rising rate of motorcycle deaths in the US.

Part of the article reads:

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) also is considering requiring new safety features on motorcycles, which accounted for a growing percentage of road deaths.

The agency plans to decide by next year whether to require anti-lock brakes on motorcycles.

An insurance institute study showed that the rate of fatal crashes was 28 percent lower for motorcycles equipped with optional anti-lock brakes than for those same motorcycles without them.

Motorcycle deaths have more than doubled since 1997, from 2,116 to 5,154 in 2007. The motorcycle fatality rate has also nearly doubled from 21 per million miles traveled in 1997 to 39 in 2007. Injuries also have doubled.

Should ABS become compulsory if it can contribute to reducing road deaths?



As a authority on evolution and Darwinism I feel that nature takes the weak and leaves the strong. It is the thinning of the herd, natural selection, survival of the fitist. Motorcyclists live by the rule, crashing is only a matter of time (it's the code of the biker). If the government tries to change the life order there will be too many bikers (then what will motorists say?). Although anti-lock brakes, traction control, and various other advances make motorcycles safer I believe we need a commitee to do a study to find more findings to the savings in the death rate and hospitalization costs associated with these technical devices applied on motorcycles.

That's my 3 cents (yes, it cost more to listen to BS these days).

Maybe we should just skip all the hi-tech solutions to "safe motorcycle riding" and go straight to training wheels for everybody.

Yea I know that will give a certain member of our forum a leg up because she already has a three wheeled road vehicle but hey . . .

Degreed engineer here, but as my wife says it's fake engineering instead of real engineering like her degree.

And as I see it, the answer is no, only because the question assumes parameters that aren't available. The braking itself, whether front or rear, will shift the weight to the front tire, and that weight shift will then allow greater braking with that tire, no matter how much one would try and keep as much weight as possible as far back as possible.



Alex,

It has been way too many years and way too many scotch hi-balls before dinner for me to attempt it, but wouldn't a force vector answer the question of how much the application of the rear brake before the front brake would keep weight on the back wheel?

ahhww.. the age old ABS question...:D

I almost feel like the people against ABS are somewhat offended that they got a computer and being told "that is better at braking than you"...because their answer is always related to that!

Seriously..ABS would be worth it cost in an emergency stop, especially with a passenger or in the rain.

Alex,

It has been way too many years and way too many scotch hi-balls before dinner for me to attempt it, but wouldn't a force vector answer the question of how much the application of the rear brake before the front brake would keep weight on the back wheel?

I don't think so. Because even the slightest bit of touch on the rear brake still shifts weight off the back wheel and toward the front wheel. As the bike slows, that weight is going forward no matter what. Initiating it with the back brake may help slow the initial weight transfer as in doing so it is lowering the back end of the bike, but it doesn't stop or prevent that weight transfer. What an application of rear brake will do is in effect try and stretch the wheelbase slightly, which pushes the swingarm up, compresses the rear shock a slight bit, and lowers the back end of the bike slightly. But all of that effect is minor. It can be helpful if you're trying to stop smoothly without having the bike dive forward as much, but in any max braking situation, that small effect won't keep the bike from standing on its nose; those forces are much, much greater.

In all honesty I'd love to hear from a mechanical engineer. I'm not sure which of you are, but if you are, please please please share your thoughts!

Mechanical Engineer here. Putting it simply, you wouldn't be rotating into the ground, as much as you'd be rotating around the front axle. However, this isn't a simple scenario. Breaking it down as you would in your basic dynamics class, you're pretty much taking the front suspension out of the equation and nullifying the whole thought experiment. If you take into account every single facet of information, this scenario gets much more complicated, and begins to creep into the realm of computer modeled finite element analysis (which was my thesis). I'm not gonna get into it....mostly because I still have nightmares about those gotdamn computer models...but essentially using your rear brake helps keep "tension" on the chassis of the bike by allowing more of the weight to stay at the rear of the bike.

With this in mind, theoretically, the friction created by the rear wheel (under rear braking) acts as a counter-force to the friction created by the front wheel (assuming that the centre of gravity of the bike is somewhere between the two wheels). Granted, its not an equal force, but it does reduce the moment created by the increased friction of the front wheel as the weight of the bike is pushed forward and onto the front suspension (Friction = fN, where f is the coefficient of friction and N is the normal force acting downwards at the contact point between tire and pavement).

If you were to do a force balance on this system, using the rear brake would reduce the total amount of moment forces acting around the centre of gravity, thus reducing the tendency of the bike to want to rotate around the front axle, slamming your head into the ground. Of course this all goes out the window if you get grabby with EITHER brake and end up skidding the wheels....when that happens all bets are off.

So ya....be careful :thumbup:. Now if you'll excuse me i'm gonna go find a drink....

It can be helpful if you're trying to stop smoothly without having the bike dive forward as much,

I think that initial "dive" is what unnerved me the most when I was first working in the parking lot with the '01 - not that I'm "fearless" with the front brake at this point. Watching some GP races and seeing how the front end behaves when the are braking for a corner got me to realize that front end squat is part of learning how to ride a bike.

I noticed Tonys TrackDays does Loudon;

http://www.tonystrackdays.com/

Looks affordable.

I've looked at them too :o I get back from my family trip in Czech on August 3rd though. I'm leaving this tuesday, which means I'm gone for all of their trackdays and I'll have serious jet lag along with little sleep for that trackday on August 4th. Along with no time to actually ride over there.
There is hope for me however. Once I'm in New York, in September, I'll be able to attend trackdays on a regular basis in at Toronto Motorsports Park. :thumbup:

throwing my :2cents: into the ABS mandate.... I think it's kind of ridiculous that they're going to sit there and try to and claim that the death rate on those bikes is lower and attribute it only to the ABS. granted I got annoyed and quit reading the article part of the way through, but really, come on... most of the bikes that have ABS are not entry-level bikes, and many of the fatal crashes come down to rider error and wouldn't be influenced by ABS anyway....
sorry, but ridiculous study - apples and oranges

Does the overall stored up energy in frame strain contribute to absorbing some of your forward momentum?

Depends on the path the load is traveling. The modern perimeter motorcycle frame is structurally design to be rigid against some loads and flex upon others.

Oscillations are created only when a force inputs energy into a chassis that flexes within specific degrees of motion faster than the energy can be transformed via internal friction.

The inherent material (steel, aluminum, titanium, chromium-molybdenum, carbon fiber, polymer, etc.) as well as structural design such as twin-spar chassis or, my personal favorite, steel trellis (oh, the name alone gets me excited...) determines how quickly the oscillations get out of the system. You'll see this in motoGP when the bikes come out of a turn and the rear end of the tail wiggles (can also be caused application of plenty of throttle upon corner exit).

By the way, it should be said that motorcycle dynamics are some of the most enigmatic Newtonian physics out there. It is not clearly understood why stuff happens the way it does and it still a bit controversial (think counter-steering and gyroscopic force or precession)...

I use the rear brake on every stop, unless I'm obviously just power walking or crawling in traffic, and for light speed adjustments while turning. I keep a real light touch on it.

Both, unless I'm in stop and go traffic... then I tend to get lazy, but I've found the bike does stop much faster/shorter distance when both brakes are used, I'm learning not to lock up the rear =P

I think it's kind of ridiculous that they're going to sit there and try to and claim that the death rate on those bikes is lower and attribute it only to the ABS. granted I got annoyed and quit reading the article part of the way through, but really, come on... most of the bikes that have ABS are not entry-level bikes, and many of the fatal crashes come down to rider error and wouldn't be influenced by ABS anyway....
sorry, but ridiculous study - apples and oranges

The study compared bikes that were available with or without ABS, and found that those that had the optional ABS (on those identical bikes) were 28% safer. They weren't comparing GSX-R's and Gold Wings and determining that Gold Wings are safer due to ABS; as you mention that would be a little silly. I've had it on my BMW bikes and have become quite a fan; it's pretty compelling to be on an iffy surface yet still know you can brake as hard as you like and the bike is not going to lose directional stability. It's not magic, and if the surface is slippery enough you're still going to take awhile to scrub off the speed; but you will be able to scrub that speed much, much faster than if you were trying to modulate that pressure yourself. In dry and clean conditions, it has much less of an advantage, if any at all.

The study compared bikes that were available with or without ABS, and found that those that had the optional ABS (on those identical bikes) were 28% safer.

Interesting info, but without more data, this stat can be quite misleading. Right off of the bat, those who would opt for ABS are more safety-conscious; ergo, they will ride more carefully than those without. But, again, without more data...

It's like those with more and better quality gear are XX% safer...is that the gear or the mindset?

Yup! Both of those points may affect the results a bit. You can certainly normalize the groups as much as possible by trying to match years of riding experience, type of riding, miles per year, and perhaps a few more variables to try and make a little more sense of the data, but doing all that may still leave some leanings in the data that can be interpreted a few different ways.

Yup! Both of those points may affect the results a bit. You can certainly normalize the groups as much as possible by trying to match years of riding experience, type of riding, miles per year, and perhaps a few more variables to try and make a little more sense of the data, but doing all that may still leave some leanings in the data that can be interpreted a few different ways.

Agreed. Get one of those statsticians to really get the proper variates and pull a good standard deviation to see what conclusions we can really draw.

My (developed) instinct is to always questions statistics. Most stats and science is incorrect. In other words, given more time and new information, the original conclusions of the observed data will be proved false.

Those who buy safety oriented stuff tend to be...uh...safer. So, attribution gets very tricky...:)

Motorcycle ABS discussion kicking off a new thread right here (http://www.ninjette.org/forums/showthread.php?t=23639)...

Hey guys. I did a search and didn't find a past thread on this topic.
I'm wondering how many of you:
a) use your rear brake at all (and if so, in which situations?)


In normal urban riding, I use the rear brake quite a bit. I use the front brake only in hard slowing and stopping - WHEN GOING STRAIGHT. It is not a good idea to use too much front brake in conditions where the front wheel is NOT pointed straight ahead, i.e. in curves or slow-speed parking lot maneuvers. For curves, the braking should be done before the curve, not during, but if braking is needed during a curve, do so in such a way as to avoid losing traction in either wheel; I would depend more on riding through it with counter steering and weigh transfer than on braking to the point of losing traction. But if traction has to be lost, I'd rather lose the rear than the front. So I've learned and usually practice.

I use rear brake the majority of the time. If I need to change my line in a curve, I lightly apply rear brake. I only ever use front brake when I'm coming to a complete stop (and that will be in combination with the rear brake). My small hand cannot deal with both the throttle and the brake lever simultaneously. :P

i use my rear brake, front brake, and downshift almost every time i slow down or stop. i use my rear brake lightly if i come into a corner a little too hot. the rear brake in combination with fanning the clutch makes low speed maneuvers (u-turns, parking lots etc.) a little more stable too.;)

I don't like abs brakes on any of my vehicles. Please don't put them on motorcycles. :o

I need to be able to stop when I brake, otherwise I wouldn't have applied the brakes.

ABS has almost cause me more accidents in cars than it's prevented.

If the front ABS would have kicked in last time I locked my rear bike tire, I'd be dead right now. The front would have cut out on the brake power and I would have rolled right into my target.

When I began riding not so long ago, I used to never touch the rear brake, but recently I've been using it for the same reasons as stated above, slowing down and coming to a stop, entering a corner too fast. Feels good, especially when having to do a quick (emergency) stop, using the rear brake helps stop my body from lunging forward and squishing my family jewels :D:rolleyes::p

Both brakes will ALWAYS stop you faster than using just one. Any argument otherwise is just inexperience or internet myth.

I don't like abs brakes on any of my vehicles. Please don't put them on motorcycles. :o

I need to be able to stop when I brake, otherwise I wouldn't have applied the brakes.

ABS has almost cause me more accidents in cars than it's prevented.

If the front ABS would have kicked in last time I locked my rear bike tire, I'd be dead right now. The front would have cut out on the brake power and I would have rolled right into my target.

I highly doubt that, but believe what you want. :rolleyes:

i use mine quite a lot, i have it down when im at a stop so my brake light in on, also sometimes riding in slow traffic, even if just to put the light on and not actually slow down,

Ever since my MSF course I use the rear brakes all the time. Have found it makes things feel smoother and more comfortable.

Take a read through this.
http://www.sportrider.com/riding_tips/146_1001_using_rear_brake/index.html

Ever since my MSF course I use the rear brakes all the time. Have found it makes things feel smoother and more comfortable.

+1 at my course we were taught to ride the rear brake when maneuvering at slow speeds within the friction zone. I've discovered that even when crawling around in 1st gear (with the clutch fully out) under very minimal load at low rpms (during traffic, for example) riding the rear brake helps eliminate any of that weird "bucking" you get because it forces you to use a little more throttle. That and it makes the bike nice and stable...

I always use them together. When I chirp the rear tire, as I have many times, I get a feel for its braking limit and can stop better when emergency braking.

you can also use your rear brake when on a downhill to keep the bike balanced; if you use your front break on a downhill your weight is shifted to the front of the bike -- either use the rear brake, or be smooth on the gas on a downhill to keep weight balanced

i use it around town just to keep the practice and be familiar with the pressure. in canyons i dont touch it unless i need to brake hard in a straight line. i instinctively use it in emergency stops. when stopped on a hill. on track is like canyons, i'll use it at the end of a straight away for better braking and settling the rear tire, but only after the front brake.

Ditto!

I use my rear brake alot, but i will only use the front if i am just trying to scrub a bit of speed, mostly because i will already have set my body into position and would rather not upset the bike unecessarily. normal stopping 75-85% front with the balance for the rear.

I do alot of engine braking though

I use it to correct the a corner or balance the bike from time to time. Most of the time I ride slow that there is little to correct or balance.

I was tought to use both brakes at all time when slowing/ stopping. (Ohio motorcycle book) Although, now that I have been riding for a few months and learning how to control, turn, and stop the bike. There are times when I only use one of the brakes. When I do come to a complete stop while going staright, I will use the rear brakes along with the front.

I'll be honest....I never use the rear. I used them in class and then promptly stopped doing it. I should, I know......I just never remember. I've yet to have a real emergency-stop situation, but I should practice with both.

Actually, my son recently dropped my bike and lopped off the part of the brake lever that sticks out, so at this point I couldn't use the rear brake if I wanted to. (Yes, I wanted to kill him)
Posted via Mobile Device

I used to use my rear brake almost in every situation. But I went to the track and realized how DANGEROUS it can be and how USELESS it is under heavy braking.

Getting your bike all sideways and chirping the tire as the weight is offloaded.

It's all about a smooth application to the front brake.

Don't ever just "grab" it.. you must let it the brake pads catch, begin to apply more and more pressure while down shifting accordingly using engine compression to scrub off even more speed.

I was taught the 'set-up and squeeze' method of front braking. And then use the rear if I just felt the front just isn't enough (which is not often)

I use the rear mainly for 1st gear maneuvering in parking lots etc... Or to hold the bike in place while I'm sitting on it trying to look cool :cool:

I'll admit to tapping the rear brake while cornering, though it's something I do less and less (I guess I'm setting myself up for corners up a little better than when I started riding).

This thread is really interesting in terms of the physics that is described. To this I have 2 questions:

1. The front tire is smaller than the rear, so the contact patch with the road is less than the rear. I know weight shifts forward while braking, but is the weight shift enough to compensate for the reduced road contact (keeping in mind the front brake is much bigger than the rear?) So if the brake discs were the same size, would the rear brake be just as effective as the front? (This is hypothetical, I can't imagine 'huge rear brakes' being the next cool mod)

2. I've seen a lot of cruiser style bikes with huge rear brakes and little in the way of front brakes. Does the different chassis design reduce the effectiveness of the front brake? It seems they rely solely on the rear to stop them, and their front is the backup.

That second one may be a little off-topic, but I'm very curious as if the front brake is the way to go, then it seems odd that cruisers style bikes would put such emphasis on the rear brake. Being that we're all on two wheels, I would assume the basic characteristics would remain the same. But then again...

you can also use your rear brake when on a downhill to keep the bike balanced; if you use your front break on a downhill your weight is shifted to the front of the bike -- either use the rear brake, or be smooth on the gas on a downhill to keep weight balanced

Actually, both brakes will shift your weight forward as a consequence of momentum. It's why the front brakes are more effective. A downhill slope will enhance this effect and possibly make the rear brake less effective.

rear brake front brake...?

Practice braking hard from 25 or 30 mph, over and over.

If your rear tire slides when going from 30 to 5 mph, then you will probably put your feet down and say "Ugh".

If your rear tire slides when going from 60 to 35 mph then you are probably near a very bad high side type accident, where you wake up in the hospital, or not.

Am I right, that learning to avoid an "Ugh" at 30mph can save your ass when you are going 60mph?

Just last night i went out for a ride. Memorial Day in SOFLO is madness, Squid central. I made sure to stay on the back streets. I was approaching a light maybe 20-25mph, went to shift my feet from the tip toes (on peg) to arch, when I accidentally applied almost full rear brake. Didn't lock up.

I was going straight so I managed to keep it lined up and got off back brake to front to stop. Stopped at light un-puckered and kept going.

lopped off the part of the brake lever that sticks out

Should get that fixed.

I use my back brake always but good slowing down pre corners. I can slow down on slow speeds with both. I guess it depends on the person

I use the rear brake for slow speed maneuvers and for setting up some corners.

I use both brakes as a matter of habit, but use front only to hold at lights and such.

Hey guys. I did a search and didn't find a past thread on this topic.
I'm wondering how many of you:
a) use your rear brake at all (and if so, in which situations?)
b) use your rear brake in emergency braking as taught in the MSF course

I know on our bikes, the back-end of the bike is so lightweight and the rear brakes give so little assistance to the total stopping power of the bike, I've been staying away from my rear brake except in parking-lot types of situations. The fear of a high side b/c of a skidding rear tire is pretty strong, especially when thinking of accidentally using too much rear brake in an emergency stop. {{Shudder}} Just wondering if/when you guys use your rear brake.

Thanks! Allyson :)

I almost always use my back brake along with my front. And in emergency situations its automatic because I almost always use it. The only time I don't is when I am already slow and getting ready to drop my feet to the ground.
The method I use to deploy the back brake is as follows:
I grab the clutch and front brake lever and squeeze them at the same time. Then, as soon as I do that, I downshift with my left foot and apply just enough pressure to engage the rear brake with my right foot then add pressure till it is sufficient to stop. I also squeeze the hand brake in the same fashion... engage it, then squeeze in a controlled consistent fashion. Emergency braking is the same process, just a harder squeeze. Really even, controlled squeeze on the brakes. Squeezing stops the bike MUCH faster than grabbing, ESPECIALLY in emergency situations. I practice emergency braking at least once a week in a parking lot. I spend about 20 mins doing it. As far as the bike being light and the back wheel being prone to locking up, I would say it has more to do with the way you're braking than the weight of the bike. Although the tail of a 250 is light, all bikes have this "problem". Try depressing the brake in a controlled, even fashion, and you will find your stopping time decrease and your braking to be much smoother. You will also notice that you can depress the rear brake MUCH more without the wheel locking. You want to keep a controlled, even, constant pressure on front AND rear brakes. I hope this helped. I'm so tired but I wanted to post this before I forgot. lol Oh, and high-siding due to a locked back brake is not something I would worry about. And the braking power of the back end of the bike is WAY more than you'd think, try an even controlled braking style.... it will impress you how much the back brake helps.

haha update on this! I was riding WAY too fast on a road I should not have been riding that fast on.... and a guy decides to pull out of his driveway to check the mail across the road, completely blocking both lanes. In a blindspot on the road no less. Needless to say I did some emergency braking. AND, I made a HUGE error, should have known better, but did it anyway. I was braking so hard that I did actually lock the back tire. When I got to about 20mph I made a major oops and let off the back brake. The bike was already at an angle pretty good and it fishtailed BAD. lol. I still stopped with enough room between me and the guy to flip him off. (I know I was driving too fast but seriously. who blocks both lanes of a road to check the mail? silly silly man.) So, I had to go around this guy because he was completely clueless. Still sitting there. Traffic was already collecting in the opposite lane. Busy road. dumb driver. Me speeding. Bad combo. Still came out good. I need to slow down on that road though. I always ALWAYS end up just riding along and taking that road too quick.

I always ALWAYS end up just riding along and taking that road too quick.

don't do that! :bash:

Saw a relevant passage in Cycle World's review of the new Speed Triple.

Link to the page itself (http://www.smugmug.com/photos/1210762794_B9YMk-X3.jpg)

The new brakes, along with the very good fork damping control and resistance to bottoming, made brake testing drama free. As is often the case with pure supersport bikes, I achieved my best stopping distance using front brake only, as the rear gets very light and slews out of line with little pedal application.

Don's one of the fast guys at all of the new bike launches, hired to wring bikes out to their limits. Sounds like a fun job, if only I had the skills. :) Here he is lapping Assen:

I30Zk0b6xgg

I save mine for low speed manuevering with the throttle, it's brutal on it so i save it otherwise. I would use it in an emergency stop for sure, stand up and lock that f'er and concentrate on front brake and dropping gears asap while keeping her straight.

Rarely ever use the rear brake. Front brake 99%

front brake almost all of the time unless it just isn't stopping me quick enough then i decide to give some love to the rear

To boil it down to only one rule, mine is to NEVER LET THE FRONT WHEEL LOSE TRACTION AT ANY SPEED. The rest is just personal preference and refinement. As we can see, our members ride with a broad diversity of techniques, and we are all alive.

In smooth traffic, I prefer to not rest my right foot on the brake pedal at all; I find that my right leg can totally relax that way. So, using the rear brake requires an extra effort to place my foot back on to the pedal, thus making it more deliberate. I do not consider this a safety issue since the rear brakes has very little effect in normal riding conditions.

In progressive and foreseeable slowing maneuvers, I just down shift and use engine braking, or else just disengage the clutch and let the bike coast.

In heavy traffic, I do tend to place my foot on the brake pedal, mostly to activate the brake light while applying the required mechanical force in conjunction with the front brakes.

Once I have entered a corner or curve, where the two important factors are power and steering, I hardly touch the brakes at all, all the slowing having been done before hand while still on the straight by downshifting and both brakes. If I find myself having entered a corner faster than intended, I'll just counter-steer and lean the bike some more; to try to slow the bike by braking after entering a mid-high speed curve could cause it to lose lean, go wide or skid.

The time when I find myself using the rear brake predominantly is in slow maneuvers, as in parking lots, U-turns, uncontrolled intersections, steep inclines, or just plain lazy tail-dragging.

AM

Always, except at the track.

I didn't read all the posts here just scanned through them.

I personally use front brake only when riding a sportbike under almost all situations UNLESS I end up off the road or in a big patch of gravel or something and then I use the rear. I sometimes use both brakes at the same time if I'm cruising on the street and casually stopping at a stop sign or light or on the side of the road. Most of the time when riding and slowing for corners or in an emergency braking situation I use front only, the front brake on sportbikes these days are powerful enough to be used for 100% of the stopping power.

At the Suprbike school we teach emergency braking and we coach our students to use the front only (on sportbikes) as it is not as easy to lock up as the rear. Many riders panic in emergency braking situations and hammer on the rear causing it to lock up, skid and fishtale often resulting in a crash.

We coach students to apply the front brake smoothly, progressively and hard enough to be able to come to a quick stop but not hard enough to suddenly lock the front tire. We have a training bike with outriggers that prevent the bike from crashing and we purposely get the students to intentionally lock the front (which takes a lot more force and effort than most riders realize) and then we teach them how to release the pressure enough so that the front unlocks but they still come to a quick stop. From there we get them comfortable with braking just at the verge of locking the front which results in the quickest and safest stops with the least stopping distance. This can be practiced in a parking lot as well without a special training bike just be sure to work up to max braking safely and slowly.

We have also tested riders at our military school where we measure the stopping distance when they use both brakes vs using front brake only and the majority of students (after being coached on how to properly use the front for emergency braking) have a better stopping distance when they use front only because they didn't skid the rear and they weren't distracted by fear of locking up the rear.

Cruisers or bikes with less powerful front brakes will require use of both brakes at the same time in order to bring them to a safe and effective stop.

Misti

In my msf course our instructors told us strictly to use both brakes when stopping, especially when emergency braking. They gave us the stopping power talk of the two brakes, the front providing 70% of braking and the back providing the other 30%. I noticed a rather large difference in braking distance when I used both compared to only using the front brake. I was riding a nighthawk though, so it wasn't a sport bike. I agree with you that, on a sport bike, the front brake provides much more braking power than a cruiser. After experience riding the 250 I still found that using both brakes decreased braking distance but it wasn't a significant difference; maybe 1-2 ft. at 25-30 mph. I still use both brakes when emergency braking because that extra few feet could save my life.

I use both all the time. It was drilled into us at MSF and it just stuck with me. The amount of pressure on the rear is a feel thing and probably different for each rider/bike combination.

Actually, I'm surprised every time I go out how little I use the brakes at all. I've become an engine-braking-blipper-nut and brakes are usually only applied when coming to a complete stop.

One thing I have started doing though is putting a tiny bit of pressure on the rear brake as I blip down for a stop sign or redlight. I do this so the person behind me knows I'm slowing down. It's the only downside I've found to engine braking - the people behind you don't realize you're slowing (quickly) without that tail light to remind them not to run you over.

Engine braking is essentially rear wheel braking, no?

Yes, it's very mild braking on the rear wheel. When off the gas the friction in the drivetrain causes it to slow, and therefore slows the rear wheel more than it would if it were coasting.

Not much but sometimes I use it when I feel like sliding it into driveway, leaving nice skid marks behind. :D

Theres a rear brake??:confused: lol

I use mine on thee 600 on basically every stop I do. There two sets of brakes for a reason, and the numbers confirm (and simple logic) that the applied force of two different sets of brakes will slow down the bike faster than one.

It would extend the brake pad life also since your not forcing the front set to do more work for lack of using the rear brake. Thats a whole diff discussion though.

I use the rear all the time. At 240lbs I find the Ninja dives hard when I use the front brake only. I know I could change the springs but it's my wifes bike. I would say that 75% of the time I use the rear only. I guess I have plenty of weight on the rear. I think that if you put the riders weight into this question you will see a pattern.

Yes, when my front brake is out. As of right now, been using engine brake and rear brake for time being til I get new front brake cup and fluids before I can go bat **** crazy. :D

Yes, when my front brake is out. As of right now, been using engine brake and rear brake for time being til I get new front brake cup and fluids before I can go bat **** crazy. :D
:eek::eek::eek:
I wouldnt ride a bike without a front brake.

Don't ride this one, then. :)

http://www.ironhead-bobbers.com/ironhead_1964/images-hd0301/1964_Harley_Sportster_Chopper_468x370.jpg

Hey guys. It's going on a year since I posted the original post in this thread. I now use the rear brake pretty frequently, but only in 3 specific circumstances. I don't use it in an emergency stop.
1) I do tend to use it at stop signs and stop lights. While learning to ride my Ninja 650 (a taller bike), I had to learn to stop smoothly while only being tall enough to rely on one solid foot down rather than two feet on tip-toes. The rear brake seemed to not only smooth my stops, but it forced me to get used to only using one foot on the ground at stops. Now it's habit.
2) I also use the rear in parking lots. Most of the time, I use ONLY the rear brake in parking lot situations.
3) My favorite time to use it is when making "rolling stop" kinds of turns such as a right turn at a stoplight or a yielding left turn. It makes it so that I can continue slowing as I push the bars for the turn. Applying the front brake while turning the bars can be disastrous! Using the rear in these situations has really smoothed out my rolling stops that used to be awkward for me.
I love my rear brake, but only for certain types of stops. :)

I just finished my MSF course at the end of May...The last day when we were being tested, on the quick stops/emergency stop, I witnessed a 200+ pound woman thrown over the front of a little 200cc bike (high side crash) cuz she grabbed nothing but front brake, she only had a 3/4 helmet on so she busted her chin open too.....needless 2 say I always use both brakes now

A lady at my MSF course did the exact same thing. Too much front brake too quick while doing the emergency braking test. I felt very bad for her as she was older and had a ton of enthusiasm about riding and motorcycles. She still passed the test and bought a Suzuki 250 cruiser to ride around.

Earlier I went to the dmv website and took the practice test for a motorcycle license for the heck of it. One of the question asks "What brake do you use when coming to a stop" and the answers were "front brake", "rear brake" or "both". Just so uninformed people know, the answer is "both" for the test. I just wanted to clarify for any future riders that may be reading this prior to taking the test or msf course.

:eek::eek::eek:
I wouldnt ride a bike without a front brake.

You really can ride it without front brake if you don't ride aggressive. Beside this small town I live in is very mellowed with driving so I have nothing to worry.

Just use common sense and be prepared more, that is all.

A lady at my MSF course did the exact same thing. Too much front brake too quick while doing the emergency braking test. I felt very bad for her as she was older and had a ton of enthusiasm about riding and motorcycles. She still passed the test and bought a Suzuki 250 cruiser to ride around.

There are a few things that will contribute to someone flying over the front handlebars when emergency braking, it is not simply that they used the front brake only. I use my front brake only for emergency stopping on a sportbike, I can stop pretty damn quick, and have never gone over the bars.

Usually if someone goes over the bars (the bike stopies and then flips over) it is because they made a few errors, including;
-being too jabby and too quick with the front brake, this is different than being fast, smooth and applying the front brake hard.

-not letting go or releasing pressure on the front brake. Maximum braking is achieved when the front begins to skid and slide or when the rear begins to lift off the pavement. In both of these situations the rider needs to lessen the pressure on the brake lever to stop sliding or stop the rear from coming up. If you keep holding the front brake with the same pressure while the rear is rising it will continue to do so until the rider flips up and over.

-allowing your weight to slam into the front of the bike. When you get on the brakes hard and aren't squeezing the tank with your knees your body will slam forward into the tank and increase the risk that you will go over the handlebars.

-having tense, stiff and straight arms. If your arms are tense, stiff and straight you will have less control of your bike in the even that it begins to stopie or slide. Riders will often tuck the front when it begins to skid because they are putting too much pressure on one or both of the handlebars. Sometimes they get into a tank slapper because of this reason too or they go over the bars.

Overall, I think proper technique when emergency braking, whether you use front only or front and rear combined is extremely important in preventing crashes, either due to flipping over the handlebars, skidding the front or rear and crashing, or to not stopping quickly enough and hitting that which you were trying to avoid.

Practice is key so that you don't panic when you have to emergency brake.

Misti

I've had my ninja for about 3 weeks now and defintely love it. During my MSF class it was taught to use the front and rear brake when stopping/braking. I had nicely fine tuned this muscle memory until a few days ago when a veteran cruiser rider informed me not to EVER use my rear brake. I tried not using it on the way home and I obviously needed more time to stop and it felt odd not using it however now I am just confused and would like some advice from other sport bike and/or Ninja riders. :confused:

I use it every day. I find it really useful at slow speeds and coming to a stop. Makes it much smoother. I have heard of people not using it at all and have tried myself, but I find I have much more control when using both breaks. I do not use it if I’m just slowing down for a short period of time, like if a car in front of my is turning.

personally I think its personal preference. If you never use your rear brake then the parts that make it work could become stuck and your brake rotor will begin to build up rust. I use my rear brake at low speeds in the parking lot and I always use both rear and front when braking from high speeds as taught in the MSF course. I think the point of using both is to evenly distribute the braking force to each wheel to prevent wheel lockups if I remember correctly. Just my experience.

I've been riding for a couple months shy of a year. I use the rear to compliment the front. Unless i'm in a parking lot, in which case, I use the rear because it's easier to manage the bike at low speeds with the rear brake.

the general rule is (and you'll see it in any of the other riding skills threads. browse through there, and you'll learn some cool stuff) is that the front provides your main stopping power, and the rear.... well, as you've noticed, it helps.

I'm guessing what that dude was afraid of was if you use the rear brake as a primary.... because locking up the rear wheel is not so fun (if you didn't mean to lock it up, lol).

Hi G-Hop - we have a couple of long-running and reasonably informative threads on this very topic. I'm going to merge this one into one of those, which will allow the discussion to continue as well as make it easier for folks to find. These are linked off of the sticky at the top of the riding skills area.

/thread merged

What Sharkry NRK sed:
I use my rear brake alot, but i will only use the front if i am just trying to scrub a bit of speed, mostly because i will already have set my body into position and would rather not upset the bike unecessarily. normal stopping 75-85% front with the balance for the rear.

I do alot of engine braking though.

i use my front/rear at the same time probably 95% of the time i hit the brakes.. very rarely use just the front or rear unless maybe creeping to a stop at slow speeds ill use just the front.

+1, same here. Usually every stop.

+1 I use my rear every time, I haven't locked my back brakes yet. To me it almost seems natural, maybe cause I did some dirt bike riding as a kid (but even then it wasn't that much experience).

It takes just a light push w your toe, using the ball of foot maybe part of the problem.

Before, I only use the front brake and very rarely the rear, but after reading this article about emergency/quick stop, I've learned that using the rear is a must.

MSF is trying to keep people with extremely limited experience from hurting themselves, and that's valid, but just understand that as folks gain experience, each and every piece of advice that may have been applicable at low speeds for a newbie may become less relevant over time. Not because it was wrong, but because as people gain skills they can start to worry about more than the basics, and techniques to control the bike in even wider areas of performance.


Very wise words. It's been over 2 years and 20,000+ miles since I posted this original thread, and now I completely understand what you're saying here. MSF teaches "best practices", but once we grow as riders, we adapt to what is best for our individual bikes and our own skill level. The rear brake is your friend, but only in certain stops. I would never use it at high speeds or in an emergency. Just my :2cents:

i agree completely-when i started riding i used a lot of rear brake,especially coming from a dirt bike background-as i progressed over the years and became more roadrace oriented-front brake only-rear is for u-turns and redlights and when you run off track with a lot of dirt runoff

I'd say I use my rear brake 80-90% of the time. I use it along with my front brake when coming to a stop, when making slow speed turn (ex. turning into a plaza), and when moving around at low speed.

I found using the rear brake in combination with the clutch help stabilize the bike at slow speed. when I first started, I would use the front brake but the bike would launch forward and make it almost impossible to maneuver it around places that require slow speed. since using the rear brake and the clutch while controlling the throttle, I can almost bring the bike to a dead stop without putting my foot down. it's like riding a bicycle all over again. The bike felt so smooth that way...


Tell me... how often or when do you use your rear brake?

not as much as i should.

I also use it pretty much whenever I'm using my front brake.

There are a good number of rear brake threads on this site already. I'm hesitant to have another threadfest discussing the issue from scratch, as it always becomes unnecessarily contentious.

Here is the link to the Riding Skills Threads sticky (http://www.ninjette.org/forums/showthread.php?t=13547).

Some threads on rear braking linked from there: Thread 1 (http://www.ninjette.org/forums/showthread.php?t=23372) Thread 2 (http://www.ninjette.org/forums/showthread.php?p=67534&postcount=21)

Another good thread on topic: Using Rear Brake... (http://www.ninjette.org/forums/showthread.php?t=101797)

We'll see where the poll goes, but I have a hankering to merge this in with one of the others if it goes too far astray.

ur face is unnecessarily contentious.

About 40% of the time I estimate. 100% of the time when doing slow speed maneuvers.

I am working on using it more often.

ur face is unnecessarily contentious.

http://www.lolroflmao.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/i-see-what-you-did-there-also-over-here-cat.jpg

Every time I use the front brakes, as my MSF instructors taught me to.

Learn to use it correctly & you'll really cut your braking distance, when used right you can feel the bike squat down under braking rather than just have the front dive. For non emergency braking you want to go progressively harder on the front & similarly progressive on the rear (don't stomp on it, fine control is required, if that means you have to sit up on the bike & get a feel for the rear brake pedal's travel while stationary go for it)

Bringing the bike to a complete stop from a reasonable pace use the front & some back to get your pace down, at low speed (walking pace or a little faster) ease off the front & bring the bike to a stop with more rear than front.

For slow control don't touch the front, don't even cover the front lever it's all biting point of the clutch & rear brake. The revs should be steady if you're doing slow control drills

I don't normally quote myself but.... I haven't seen anything better regarding this subject.


Plan on developing a long term relationship with your rear brake, because it will take that long to find what works for you as a rider. There is a time and place for it's beneficial usage. It has more to offer than just panic or low speed maneuvers but is different for each rider's preference.

/moiged

will rear brake keep my rear wheel on the ground braking into turn 1

I use both... Usually start with the rear then follow up with smooth front application for normal stops. For emergency stops I've gotten so used to the rear locking up that it isn't a big deal anymore so I'll usually hit the rear brake hard then smoothly but quickly rip that front brake in... If you have to lock one tire up, it better not be your front.

Agreed with many. My first year of riding, all I heard was not to use the rear, so I didn't. Once I learned how to appropriately use it, I have LOVED it! Yes, it smooths out complete and especially rolling stops. I use mine all the time, but I wouldn't in a panic stop. I practice panic stops, but weighing the risk with the benefits, I, personally, don't think the risk of locking it up is worth the benefits I would receive in a real hard braking situation when the rear tire lifts off the ground slightly anyway. The rear brake is ultimately rendered useless, but if applied correctly at the beginning of a panic stop, it can certainly help. It's just a matter of each person weighing his/her comfort and risk level to determine your stance on using the rear brake.

I use both... Usually start with the rear then follow up with smooth front application for normal stops. For emergency stops I've gotten so used to the rear locking up that it isn't a big deal anymore so I'll usually hit the rear brake hard then smoothly but quickly rip that front brake in... If you have to lock one tire up, it better not be your front.

I thought they say you're better off locking the front tire than the rear one?:confused:

I'm pretty sure this was one of my very first posts ever on this site. It's still one of my favorites. :D

Agreed with many. My first year of riding, all I heard was not to use the rear, so I didn't. Once I learned how to appropriately use it, I have LOVED it! Yes, it smooths out complete and especially rolling stops. I use mine all the time, but I wouldn't in a panic stop. I practice panic stops, but weighing the risk with the benefits, I, personally, don't think the risk of locking it up is worth the benefits I would receive in a real hard braking situation when the rear tire lifts off the ground slightly anyway. The rear brake is ultimately rendered useless, but if applied correctly at the beginning of a panic stop, it can certainly help. It's just a matter of each person weighing his/her comfort and risk level to determine your stance on using the rear brake.

me to

I mainly use my front brake and softly apply my rear brake every time.

I'll use the rear just a bit less then the front when stopping in general and if I'm going downhill or want to slow down just a bit i'll drag them. I never stop with them alone.

The poll results are interesting. Almost a 4-way tie!

The poll results are interesting. Almost a 4-way tie!

More pple need to vote..it's their right as citizens of the forum.. ah ah.. (bad joke)

I use both brakes almost every time braking is required. I just use the rear much more delicately. This is on the street of course, unpaved surfaces are a different game. Off pavement I almost exclusively use the rear.

People who are afraid of the rear brake would benefit a great deal from doing some off road riding, where sliding the rear is par for the course, and the front brake will get you in trouble fast. Once comfortable with braking off road, breaking the rear loose on pavement seems much less scary.

I thought they say you're better off locking the front tire than the rear one?:confused:

Well, Maybe 'they' say that... But If all your weight is on the front of your bike (as is in an emergency bike) wouldn't you want the tire bearing all of the weight to have traction?

Well, Maybe 'they' say that... But If all your weight is on the front of your bike (as is in an emergency bike) wouldn't you want the tire bearing all of the weight to have traction?

Yes, it is best not to lock any brake, but if you are on a sport bike and you are given a choice of locking the front or back, LOCK THE FRONT.

High sides hurt way more then low sides.

Slow speed front... Normal to fast both as taught in the MSF, dunno why I don't always use both as taught, but different strokes

With a locked rear you still have a reasonable amount of control over the motorcycle. Lock the front and you have no control over the motorcycle.

This is assuming you are an average to below average rider as most here are.

Avoid locking the front at all cost............ The only exception to this is during racing conditions. On some tracks there are corners that you can slide(not lock but slide) the front end through.

With a locked rear you still have a reasonable amount of control over the motorcycle. Lock the front and you have no control over the motorcycle.

This is assuming you are an average to below average rider as most here are.

Avoid locking the front at all cost............ The only exception to this is during racing conditions. On some tracks there are corners that you can slide(not lock but slide) the front end through.

High sides hurt more but with the locked back you don't even have to crash as you do with the locked front... Just my opinion. Like this guy says ^

I use it every time I expect a complete stop or if I hit a turn too hot. My question is, why wouldn't you?

If I'm still Rollin and goin slow I have always been able to get where I'm goin using only the front... Don't see why I would if I've never had a problem, and that's naturally how I do it

Slow speed front... Normal to fast both as taught in the MSF, dunno why I don't always use both as taught, but different strokes

If I'm still Rollin and goin slow I have always been able to get where I'm goin using only the front... Don't see why I would if I've never had a problem, and that's naturally how I do it

The rear will give a much smoother stop from a slow pace, try it:thumbup:

The rear will give a much smoother stop from a slow pace, try it:thumbup:

Roger wilco

Probably from my motocross experience as a kid. If u lay on your front brakes in the mud, you will wipe out. In the air your likely to case the jump. On dry ground at speed, your likely to endo.
Just makes sense to use it.

I mainly sue my front brake for slowing and stopping while I use both only in emergency situations like panic stops etc. Rear brake is handy when you're at the intersection waiting for the green light lol.

always for city riding,

1) saves my balls from nailing the tank,
2) keeps the gf from booping helmets, sliding into me and again me nailing balls on tank.
3) to come to a much smoother stop than using just the fronts.
4) pulling in the driveway, i park my bike parallel to the garage door, between the door and the gf's car, it allows me to be more precise.

I use my rear brake almost all the time. I feel I have better control, even if I lock the rear slightly.

Last weekend, I was going downhill in the twisties and tried negotiating a right hander…I leaned in and realized the turn was much sharper than I expected and I had too much speed. I scrubbed off speed using only the rear. I locked it up, left a huge skid mark on the road but did not crash…If I had touched the front, I surely would have fallen down off the hillside.

I scrubbed off speed using only the rear. I locked it up, left a huge skid mark on the road but did not crash…If I had touched the front, I surely would have fallen down off the hillside.

No, and no. Sometimes it's better to be lucky.

using the rear to slow down mid corner never made any sense to me... if you need to slow down why not pick it up for a click on the brakes and drop it back down? you can be so aggressive on the brakes up and down... brakes while you're leaned over just sounds like a bad time.

Sometimes on the street you don't have room to stand the bike up before hitting the apex, so you need to trail brake.

And I almost always use both brakes, just seems like common sense to me. :thumbup: I mean what happens when one day you need to use the rear brake and you have no experience using it?

always. Probably only at 20% of it's capacity, but it's always doing something. It's quite effective to gradually shift weight to the front break before going hog wild on that.

I lightly press it while scrubbing speed via engine breaking to activate the rear brake light so cars behind me know I'm actually slowing down, even though I'm not applying the brakes.

i use it as a signal a lot too, since a light tap on it will activate my rear brake strobe and let people know i'm there... sitting at a stoplight, someone approaching, let off brakes, put brake back on to get the strobe.

i find tapping it to activate the rear brake (especially with the strobe I have) is effective at getting tailgaters to back off.

using the rear to slow down mid corner never made any sense to me... if you need to slow down why not pick it up for a click on the brakes and drop it back down? you can be so aggressive on the brakes up and down... brakes while you're leaned over just sounds like a bad time.

Standing up the bike mid turn causes you to go wide. Tapping the rear brake a little mid turn will cause you to scrub a little speed and actually tighten up your line.

When most people think of using the brakes mid corner, they think of how most use them upright: slam the throttle shut, grab a handful of front brake. Do this on the track while leaned over and obviously you'll go down. When I use the rear brake mid corner, I don't let off the gas. There is no massive upsetting weight transfer to the front that unsettles the suspension like slamming the throttle shut and grabbing the front.

I usually use the clutch mid corner instead of the rear brake about 75% of the time though. Depends on which way the corner goes.

When I use the rear brake mid corner, I don't let off the gas. There is no massive upsetting weight transfer to the front that unsettles the suspension like slamming the throttle shut and grabbing the front.

I usually use the clutch mid corner instead of the rear brake about 75% of the time though. Depends on which way the corner goes.

What is the difference between that and coming off the throttle a bit?

Standing up the bike mid turn causes you to go wide. Tapping the rear brake a little mid turn will cause you to scrub a little speed and actually tighten up your line.

When most people think of using the brakes mid corner, they think of how most use them upright: slam the throttle shut, grab a handful of front brake. Do this on the track while leaned over and obviously you'll go down. When I use the rear brake mid corner, I don't let off the gas. There is no massive upsetting weight transfer to the front that unsettles the suspension like slamming the throttle shut and grabbing the front.

I usually use the clutch mid corner instead of the rear brake about 75% of the time though. Depends on which way the corner goes.

why are you using brakes mid corner at all?

A turn ends up being sharper than you thought it was when you began to enter it. If it hasn't happened to you then you are either the greatest rider ever, or just slow.

I use my rear brake (in addition to the front brake), when I want to slow down and/or stop. :)

Yup,this.
I had to emergency brake once and slightly feathered the rear, and should have engine braked which i didn't

A turn ends up being sharper than you thought it was when you began to enter it. If it hasn't happened to you then you are either the greatest rider ever, or just slow.

Please correct me if i am wrong but wouldn't braking with the rear mid turn widen your turn? I thought throttle sharpened your turn while braking widened it. Throttle= more lean, braking = brings you up straight.
AM i wrong?

What is the difference between that and coming off the throttle a bit?

A couple of difference with clutch vs throttle:
You would be able to maintain engine revs with the clutch and closing the throttle would lead to engine braking whereas the clutch would slow you down through friction alone.

I would think closing the throttle would be slightly more abrupt since you have friction in addition to the engine slowing you down.

A couple of difference with clutch vs throttle:
You would be able to maintain engine revs with the clutch and closing the throttle would lead to engine braking whereas the clutch would slow you down through friction alone.

I would think closing the throttle would be slightly more abrupt since you have friction in addition to the engine slowing you down.

i believe "lash" is the word you are looking for.

A couple of difference with clutch vs throttle:
You would be able to maintain engine revs with the clutch and closing the throttle would lead to engine braking whereas the clutch would slow you down through friction alone.

I would think closing the throttle would be slightly more abrupt since you have friction in addition to the engine slowing you down.

I did not say close I said coming off the throttle a bit?
meaning just a little. The throttle has more then two positions.

Please correct me if i am wrong but wouldn't braking with the rear mid turn widen your turn? I thought throttle sharpened your turn while braking widened it. Throttle= more lean, braking = brings you up straight.
AM i wrong?

the radius of your turn is determined by the wheel base of the bike, the speed of the bike, and the angle of the rear wheel. slower speed, smaller radius.

using the brakes compresses the forks which actually decreases the wheel base a bit which makes it easier to turn. however using the brakes compresses the wheels too which stands the bike up. and obviously you cant brake very hard leaned over. on the throttle is interesting because it will pick up the front and make your turn "tighten up". but at the same time adding more speed widens your turn radius. so the best scenario is braking until your turn in at a correct speed, turn in correctly and then gas out.

I did not say close I said
meaning just a little. The throttle has more then two positions.

staying on gas and using rear brake eliminates chain lash. letting throttle off without rear brake loosens the pull on the rear wheel from the chain, which can give slack on the chain for a moment until the bike slows to the engine speed at which point the chain loses its slack and gives a bit of a pull. known as chain lash.

Please correct me if i am wrong but wouldn't braking with the rear mid turn widen your turn? I thought throttle sharpened your turn while braking widened it. Throttle= more lean, braking = brings you up straight.
AM i wrong?

First of all I don't brake mid turn with the rear, only with the front. And yes braking will cause the bike to stand up, but you can counter this by leaning more. Thus allowing you to maintain your line while slowing going into the corner.

First of all I don't brake mid turn with the rear, only with the front. And yes braking will cause the bike to stand up, but you can counter this by leaning more. Thus allowing you to maintain your line while slowing going into the corner.

adding brake and lean angle is asking to lose the front.

You aren't adding lean angle, only maintaining your current lean angle. But since the bike wants to stand up you have to lean a little more to prevent that.

It is a balancing game, but you should never be using all of your traction on the street so you should have a little extra at all times. It's certainly better than going wide and colliding with oncoming traffic.

Edit: I don't do it often, but like I said some times a corner surprises you.

You aren't adding lean angle, only maintaining your current lean angle. But since the bike wants to stand up you have to lean a little more to prevent that.

It is a balancing game, but you should never be using all of your traction on the street so you should have a little extra at all times. It's certainly better than going wide and colliding with oncoming traffic.

Edit: I don't do it often, but like I said some times a corner surprises you.

heres the problem with what you are saying. if you have that extra wiggle room, instead of adding brakes you could simply lean more.

if you don't have the extra wiggle room, what are you going to do? you are going to stand up, hit the brakes, and put the bike back down.

I did not say close I said
meaning just a little. The throttle has more then two positions.

The degree of throttle closing isn't the issue, its the fact that you have an additional force acting to slow you down instead of just friction.

To be more precise, you could (in theory) achieve the same results with the throttle as with the clutch. However, you would need to close the throttle just enough to simulate the initial decrease in power from clutching in and then maintaining that throttle input.

I would suspect that, in practice, this wouldn't be possible due to the additional variables in play with the throttle.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trail_braking

Try it sometime. It's a good technique to add to your riding skills.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trail_braking

Try it sometime. It's a good technique to add to your riding skills.

i don't think you know what trail braking is actually used for...

i believe "lash" is the word you are looking for.

I've always heard of lashing in the context of too much play in the chains from the get go, which is typically rectified by maintaing proper chain tension.

Whereas, the slack you're mentioning is derived from decreasing throttle input and reducing power to the rear. Is chain lash appropriate here as well (I ask out of ignorance)?

Another reason why I didn't think it was appropriate was because engine braking is also present when reducing rpms and you could add chain slack as a side effect of the general act of decreasing power to rear.

I've always heard of lashing in the context of too much play in the chains from the get go, which is typically rectified by maintaing proper chain tension.

Whereas, the slack you're mentioning is derived from decreasing throttle input and reducing power to the rear. Is chain lash appropriate here as well (I ask out of ignorance)?

Another reason why I didn't think it was appropriate was because engine braking is also present when reducing rpms and you could add chain slack as a side effect of the general act of decreasing power to rear.

lash comes from the entire drive train not just the chain. there is play in the transmission, the clutch, the chain, even the rear wheel has a cush drive that has play in it with rubber dampers to try to help soften the lash.

First of all I don't brake mid turn with the rear, only with the front. And yes braking will cause the bike to stand up, but you can counter this by leaning more. Thus allowing you to maintain your line while slowing going into the corner.

This seems wrong... using the front brake at speed should cause the bike to lean more rather than less. The rear brake is the one that will cause the bike to stand up because its use generates a restoring torque.

If you're interested in learning about the physics of motorcycles, I'd highly recommend reading: Motorcycle Dynamics by Vittore Cossalter.

using the front brake at speed should cause the bike to lean more rather than less. The rear brake is the one that will cause the bike to stand up because its use generates a restoring torque.

If you're interested in learning about the physics of motorcycles, I'd highly recommend reading: Motorcycle Dynamics by Vittore Cossalter.

Hmmmm.... K. Code and Vittore C. would have very interesting conversation about what happens when you brake (or roll off) in a corner.

Hmmmm.... K. Code and Vittore C. would have very interesting conversation about what happens when you brake (or roll off) in a corner.

I suppose they would...

I was looking for a book that actually wrote out the equations of kinematics and dynamics and looked at motorcycles from a purely theoretical and physics perspective. I'm currently in grad school and taking classes in quantum mechanics and such, so as you might imagine I quite prefer a detailed physics analysis especially when it's written by a professor of applied mechanics and reads like a textbook :D

Whatever, all I know is that sometimes I brake when going into turns and I haven't wrecked yet.

This seems wrong... using the front brake at speed should cause the bike to lean more rather than less. The rear brake is the one that will cause the bike to stand up because its use generates a restoring torque.

If you're interested in learning about the physics of motorcycles, I'd highly recommend reading: Motorcycle Dynamics by Vittore Cossalter.

Slowing the bike down is what causes it to stand up. Doesn't matter which brake you are using.

Slowing the bike down is what causes it to stand up. Doesn't matter which brake you are using.

compressing the front tire creating a larger contact patch is what picks up the bike.

No, and no. Sometimes it's better to be lucky.
I bet I am very lucky. I think I instinctively used the rear and not the front since I was already in a lean.

Lesson learnt: When riding unknown twisties, its better to go slow and familiarize yourself first. Going 45-50mph when the indicated speed is 20mph is STUPID.

A turn ends up being sharper than you thought it was when you began to enter it. If it hasn't happened to you then you are either the greatest rider ever, or just slow.

This is exactly what happened to me. It was a blind corner and I misjudged my entry speed. Since I was in a lean, standing the bike up would mean running wide and probably off the hillside too.

EDIT: Yes, the bike did stand up using the rear brake and locking it. Although it did not run wide.

Some more information on why a bike wants to stand up in a turn.

http://www.msgroup.org/forums/mtt/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=8752

http://www.msgroup.org/Tip.aspx?Num=255

why are you using brakes mid corner at all?

staying on gas and using rear brake eliminates chain lash. letting throttle off without rear brake loosens the pull on the rear wheel from the chain, which can give slack on the chain for a moment until the bike slows to the engine speed at which point the chain loses its slack and gives a bit of a pull. known as chain lash.

You just answered your own question.

You just answered your own question.

my point was you should not be slowing down in a corner. what tool you use to slow down is pointless.

Here is the real scoop/non scientific dirt on hitting the brakes in a turn.

Once leaned over, any braking (front or rear) or rolling off the gas will send weight to the front of the bike, compressing the forks. The additional weight will also effect the tire as well, spreading the contact patch. The wider contact patch with increased drag will countersteer the bike, sending it wide in the corner.

It is possible for the rider to fight the countersteer by holding the bars steady to keep it from running wide. It's subtle but experienced riders do it all the time and novice riders do it without even knowing it. What are the costs of fighting it? More suspension action, ridged feel to the front, the bike can become unstable/twitchy and most of all, traction is reduced.

I know this because, I have been bitten by the pavement because of not knowing it.

This is a good read for everyone curious about using the rear:

Now for the subtleties. Say you find yourself in a sweeping turn with a bit too much speed, or the corner tightens up slightly. Chopping the throttle and using the front brake will load up the front end, possibly overpowering tire traction and causing a crash. But in this situation, holding the throttle steady and applying a small amount of rear brake can scrub off just enough speed and actually help to tighten your line. The rear brake is much better at modulating your speed than the throttle and/or front brake; with the clutch out and the throttle steady, you'll find that you've got a surprising amount of control with the pedal alone. This is especially effective on a downhill turn, where keeping even slight maintenance throttle will have the bike accelerating. The rear brake will easily keep this in check while letting you stay on the throttle to avoid overloading the front tire.

As an added bonus, the above technique can minimize the effects of an abrupt throttle response or excessive engine braking. If you're not modulating your speed with the throttle, you won't have to worry as much about either characteristic, letting you concentrate more on corner speed or what's coming up around the turn. One thing to mind in all this: rolling on an excessive amount of throttle but keeping the brake on will quickly wear the pads out, and give you a surprise when you do let the brake off and your bike leaps forward.

Read more: http://www.sportrider.com/riding_tips/146_1001_using_rear_brake/viewall.html#ixzz2U3WjRiIs





my point was you should not be slowing down in a corner. what tool you use to slow down is pointless.

If I was superman and never scared the crap out of myself by entering a corner too hot, or never had a rider in front of me chop his throttle right at the apex, then yeah I wouldn't need to slow down in a corner.

There very much is a point to what tool you use. Chopping the throttle or grabbing the front brake while leaned over are very abrupt inputs that will have your line going wider and the bike standing up. Using the rear brake will not have as much of an effect, and can in fact tighten up a line mid corner.

If I was superman and never scared the crap out of myself by entering a corner too hot, or never had a rider in front of me chop his throttle right at the apex, then yeah I wouldn't need to slow down in a corner.

There very much is a point to what tool you use. Chopping the throttle or grabbing the front brake while leaned over are very abrupt inputs that will have your line going wider and the bike standing up. Using the rear brake will not have as much of an effect, and can in fact tighten up a line mid corner.

watch this rider get held up and pick it up to brake. there is no way he would have been able to brake enough without picking it up to do what he did.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=p1BQNP08vvA#t=37s

if you are slowing the bike because of a hazard, picking up and braking will drop the most speed the quickest, afterward you can put the bike back down. keeping the bike down and braking takes your traction into a dangerous zone. doing that in an attempt to avoid a hazard is asking for mistakes.

if you aren't slowing down because of a hazard, but instead because you took the turn incorrectly... this is a mistake. so when i say, you shouldn't be slowing down in a corner, this is what i mean. mistakes happen sure. but if you follow the rest of the riding logic... leave a buffer zone for traction, don't overrun your eye sight; then you should have room to simply add lean angle to complete the turn. if you are going so fast that you are in a turn too deep, at full lean angle, and are heading to the side then you are riding over your limits. on a track, this happens often but the results are that you simply go off track. on the street you hit a tree. so if you are riding over your limits on the street, suddenly encounter a hazard in the middle of the road and you have no buffer on either side, then guess what... using brakes isn't going to help either because its already too late.