Racing tricks

[tgold]

Originally Posted by cbinker

anytime you are wide open throttle on a 250 aero is important. Im over 6 feet tall and am always getting passed on the straights by shorter riders.

I'm 5'11". Left hand off the bar and tucked in behind my back every time I get onto a straight. I'm starting to think that I can do it all the way through the kink at Nelson Ledges. Talk about tricks. that one will mess with your competitor's mind when they see you riding through a place like that with one hand. It's not something that I would do on other bikes, but riding a 250 Ninja through there is such a benign event that I think it just might be doable.

[tgold]

Originally Posted by AwDang

rider skill > $$$$ spent

How much does a good riding school cost?





(Not that I think that it won't be a valuable experience )

[AwDang]

Originally Posted by tgold

You are equating money spent directly with good bike preparation and that is not necessarily true. And you are also treating bike preparation as if it isn't a skill that matter. At least not one that you think will make a difference in winning.


So you have the bike that won the GNF. Do you really think that there's no way to significantly improve it in such a way that it could make it easier to go even faster?

If I win with a well-prepared bike is that any less of an accomplishment than winning on a crappy bike? Depends on who you ask. But if I'm standing on the top step of the podium, I don't really care that much about that person's opinion.

you are way too SRSBZNS for 250 racing around here. Congrats on your wins.

[Motofool]

Originally Posted by tgold

Aerodynamics absolutely affect acceleration........... It's a matter of physics, it's not a matter of opinion.

Yes, it does.

Originally Posted by tgold

Aerodynamics matter more (than weight reduction).

But how much?

[HoneyBadgerRy]

Originally Posted by Motofool

Yes, it does.



But how much?

Race, record time, take fairings off, race, record times, compare.

[tgold]

Originally Posted by AwDang

you are way too SRSBZNS for 250 racing around here. Congrats on your wins.

Oh, I'm having fun with racing. I enjoy being at the racetrack with my friends and getting out on a racetrack more than just about any other fun thing that I do. But when I get asked a question about racing, I give as straightforward an answer as I can because I believe I understand fairly well what it takes to win.


Floki,
In light of your limited track time for the upcoming season, I'd advise (if at all possible) making sure that your suspension is set up as good as you can afford it to be before you get on track. That will maximize your confidence and make it much easier to get the most out of your track time in terms of making progress.

[jkv45]

Originally Posted by tgold

Aerodynamics matter more.

We've been down this road before...

It depends.

To say flatly that aerodynamics matter more than weight is not true.

It depends.

Weight has more effect on acceleration...up to a point. Aerodynamics have more effect in certain circumstances.

Less weight gives you more consistent benefits in acceleration and braking.

Better aerodynamics gives you benefits as speeds increase, but only if you are in a full tuck (no knee out) and at WOT - and speeds are consistently high.

Significant streamlining of the rear of a cycle will give more benefit than reducing frontal area, but that's not very practical (or legal) in road racing. A cycle is an aerodynamic mess compared to most vehicles, especially behind the rider. There may be gains to be had in reducing frontal area, but unless you are racing at Road America, weight reduction and increased usable power would show more improvements in laptimes. If you are talking no fairings at all compared to full fairings, the difference would be more significant, but going from one design to a similar but sleeker design won't show the same improvements.

My argument is basically that weight reduction and more power have a positive effect for more time per lap than aerodynamic improvements.

[tgold]

Originally Posted by jkv45

We've been down this road before...

It depends.

To say flatly that aerodynamics matter more than weight is not true.

It depends.

Weight has more effect on acceleration...up to a point. Aerodynamics have more effect in certain circumstances.

Less weight gives you more consistent benefits in acceleration and braking.

Better aerodynamics gives you benefits as speeds increase, but only if you are in a full tuck (no knee out) and at WOT - and speeds are consistently high.

Significant streamlining of the rear of a cycle will give more benefit than reducing frontal area, but that's not very practical (or legal) in road racing. A cycle is an aerodynamic mess compared to most vehicles, especially behind the rider. There may be gains to be had in reducing frontal area, but unless you are racing at Road America, weight reduction and increased usable power would show more improvements in laptimes. If you are talking no fairings at all compared to full fairings, the difference would be more significant, but going from one design to a similar but sleeker design won't show the same improvements.

My argument is basically that weight reduction and more power have a positive effect for more time per lap than aerodynamic improvements.

And being more aerodynamically efficient means more power for acceleration. No matter what the speed.

I'm not saying that weight doesn't matter. In the case of the 250 supersport class, there is a limit to how much weight you can take off the bike because the rules are strict. So if everybody else is easily able to exploit the rules to the same level, there isn't going to be much difference between bikes as far as weight is concerned. So where do you turn for an advantage? Aerodynamics in this case matter more because the potential for substantial weight reduction when compared to the next guy is restricted. However, the potential for aerodynamic development is wide open.

[AwDang]

and then some 80# 12yo kid goes blowing by you on a stock bike.....

seriously, unless you want to take 250 racing to a level "most" club racers don't want to go to.

[Motofool]

Originally Posted by HoneyBadgerRy

Race, record time, take fairings off, race, record times, compare.

Same with weight?

[HoneyBadgerRy]

Originally Posted by Motofool

Same with weight?

I guess...

[CC Cowboy]

I can't believe no one mentioned the ultimate racing trick! I saw this last season in the big league. When someone comes up next to you, stick out your foot and make contact with their bike (as you run wide). I realize this is a "black diamond" move for only the most experienced racer but it seemed to work well.

P.S. Don't use this trick if there are cameras.

[JohnnyBravo]

Originally Posted by subxero

using the correct treatment on your gloves... don't knock it until you try it

Trying to give folks pissy hands again???

[Floki]

@CC Cowboy you're killing me, I already have my aunt making a "no passing" decal for my bike

[cbinker]

Anyone ever consider the effects of where the weight is removed? Lighter wheels, chain, sprockets and rotors would be the most beneficial. that is all rotating mass.

[Somchai]

Originally Posted by cbinker

anytime you are wide open throttle on a 250 aero is important. Im over 6 feet tall and am always getting passed on the straights by shorter riders.

- and now you ask this question: "Anyone ever consider the effects of where the weight is removed? Lighter wheels, chain, sprockets and rotors would be the most beneficial. that is all rotating mass."

[Somchai]

Originally Posted by tgold

Aerodynamics absolutely affect acceleration.

Ever race bicycles in a pack and then try to break away? That'll tell you a lot about how aerodynamics apply at low speeds as well. Sure, a 250 Ninja has a lot more power than a bicycle racer, but air resistance affects acceleration regardless. It's a matter of physics, it's not a matter of opinion.

- be careful not to contradict yourself when you talk like this: "It's lighter. A small advantage to be sure, but the cumulative effect of reducing weight in a bunch of small places is where it becomes noticeable. In the supersport class, it's tougher to to get an advantage in that department, so that means that you have to pay closer attention to do everything that you can within the rules to remove excess weight. Many people think that a certain little thing won't make a difference, but those little things add up."

[tgold]

Originally Posted by Somchai

- be careful not to contradict yourself when you talk like this: "It's lighter. A small advantage to be sure, but the cumulative effect of reducing weight in a bunch of small places is where it becomes noticeable. In the supersport class, it's tougher to to get an advantage in that department, so that means that you have to pay closer attention to do everything that you can within the rules to remove excess weight. Many people think that a certain little thing won't make a difference, but those little things add up."

And where's the contradiction? You do everything that you can within the rules to reduce weight while improving aerodynamic s as well. I just said that in WERA 250 supersport, the weight reduction isn't going to matter as much as aero because of the rules.

I'm not going to discuss the point any further.

[tgold]

Floki,

Have you removed the radiator fan? It really has no effect on cooling while at race speeds. You just need to pay a little more attention to not letting the bike sit and idle too long. 1.3 pound weight loss and allowable in WERA supersport.

[HoneyBadgerRy]

Originally Posted by cbinker

Anyone ever consider the effects of where the weight is removed? Lighter wheels, chain, sprockets and rotors would be the most beneficial. that is all rotating mass.

Rotating mass and unsprung mass is the best place to remove weight, but all weight saving is important.

[cbinker]

Originally Posted by Somchai

- and now you ask this question: "Anyone ever consider the effects of where the weight is removed? Lighter wheels, chain, sprockets and rotors would be the most beneficial. that is all rotating mass."

you obviously didn't grasp the point of the question.

[HoneyBadgerRy]

[bruce71198]

Sub 300# and aerodynamic.

[HoneyBadgerRy]

Nice looking bike, but it would look better and probably be a little more aerodynamic if you should tucked that silencer into the fairing.

[tgold]

Originally Posted by bruce71198

Sub 300# and aerodynamic.

Nice!

[AwDang]

Originally Posted by bruce71198

Sub 300# and aerodynamic.

that thermostat housing is costing you 7oz

[bruce71198]

I whittle away at it every chance I get. There isn't any one thing that reduced the weight, it's all the small stuff. Every ounce counts.

[tgold]

Originally Posted by bruce71198

I whittle away at it every chance I get. There isn't any one thing that reduced the weight, it's all the small stuff. Every ounce counts.

That's the same way I got my SV650 down below 325lb (and I still had the steel tank)

[HoneyBadgerRy]

I try to save as much weight as possible, but the ninjette needs the thermostat, it takes forever to warm up.

[Floki]

I forget who does it but someone drills out the stock rear rotor, sending it to him when I get the chance. Also it looks like I'm removing the fan when I get a chance as well.

[Floki]

In WERA Superstock I believe aftermarket wheels have to weigh the same or more than stock wheels, so that's not something I can do.

[HoneyBadgerRy]

Originally Posted by Floki

In WERA Superstock I believe aftermarket wheels have to weigh the same or more than stock wheels, so that's not something I can do.

The tire is the most important part of the wheel weight because its the farthest outside. Some tires can weight alot less than others of the same size.

[tgold]

Originally Posted by Floki

In WERA Superstock I believe aftermarket wheels have to weigh the same or more than stock wheels, so that's not something I can do.

That rule was meant for racers who own a pregen to be able to put the newgen OEM wheels on their bikes. The rule itself leaves things pretty open though. The key would be to find wheels that weigh the same, but have a lower moment of inertia (less weight concentrated out towards the rim) That will give you better acceleration. Definitely wouldn't be easy to find the wheel with the best MOI though.

[tgold]

Originally Posted by HoneyBadgerRy

I try to save as much weight as possible, but the ninjette needs the thermostat, it takes forever to warm up.

The two stroke GP bikes don't come with thermostats. Racers just put strips of tape over the radiator to control the temperature. There are a lot of racers that do install thermostats on them though.

[Misti]

Originally Posted by tgold

As much as I agree that improving our skills is important. It is not a trick. It takes lots of practice and thought.

However, I believe Floki's question was about what to do to the bike in the context of doing what it takes to win. Both rider improvement and bike preparation are important.

Making a bike better at doing it's job makes it easier for the rider to do his or her job. The less mentally taxing a bike is to ride, the easier a rider can sustain a high level of concentration. It's that very basic principle that I've kept with me ever since I first read Twist of the Wrist: That I only have so much concentration that I can spend racing a motorcycle. So why would I want to spend some of that precious concentration on overcoming a lower level of bike competitiveness?


The best racing season that I've ever had was one where our team not only rode our butts off, but prepared our butts off with the bike and our racing strategy. We went from pouring gas in with a regular can, to a pseudo quick-fill, to a full dry-break setup and we would rehearse everyone's role for each pit stop. Even our rival teams commented on how much they could see thatour pit stops improved over the season.

Agree. What I find though is that people are much more willing to spend $$ on trying to make the BIKE fast without putting any effort into making sure that the rider is fast, FIRST.

I think it is much better to invest in proper rider training and ride the hell out of a stock bike first to gain experience and understanding of how the bike feels and reacts, then to pour money into getting the best bike possible but then having no idea how to ride it correctly.

Once you are confident that YOUR riding is not causing handling problems then you can concentrate on making your bike work the best possible way and go the fastest. It makes no sense to change parts and components on the bike because you think that the suspension sucks if you have crappy throttle control that is causing the suspension to feel like it sucks.

Of course the winningest combo is a great rider and a great bike, I just think that in general people go about achieving that combo backwards. Get good at riding first

Originally Posted by tgold

How much does a good riding school cost?
(Not that I think that it won't be a valuable experience )

California Superbike School (where I've been a coach for the past 12 years, and THE reason I was able to take my racing to AMA level) starts at about $390 per day if you ride your own bike and $675/day if you use one of our 2016 BMW S1000's. You get a 3:1 student/coach ratio, plenty of on track riding WITH your coach and several seminar sessions. Prices go up if you visit certain tracks, like COTA this year!! and/or if you take our 2 day camp which provides better student/coach ratio, more track time, less students overall and other extras.

In my opinion it's a great investment and you'll most likely gain more speed and confidence by taking the school then doing expensive modifications to your bike

Let me know if you have any questions about the school

[tgold]

Originally Posted by Misti

Agree. What I find though is that people are much more willing to spend $$ on trying to make the BIKE fast without putting any effort into making sure that the rider is fast, FIRST.

I think it is much better to invest in proper rider training and ride the hell out of a stock bike first to gain experience and understanding of how the bike feels and reacts, then to pour money into getting the best bike possible but then having no idea how to ride it correctly.

Once you are confident that YOUR riding is not causing handling problems then you can concentrate on making your bike work the best possible way and go the fastest. It makes no sense to change parts and components on the bike because you think that the suspension sucks if you have crappy throttle control that is causing the suspension to feel like it sucks.

Of course the winningest combo is a great rider and a great bike, I just think that in general people go about achieving that combo backwards. Get good at riding first



California Superbike School (where I've been a coach for the past 12 years, and THE reason I was able to take my racing to AMA level) starts at about $390 per day if you ride your own bike and $675/day if you use one of our 2016 BMW S1000's. You get a 3:1 student/coach ratio, plenty of on track riding WITH your coach and several seminar sessions. Prices go up if you visit certain tracks, like COTA this year!! and/or if you take our 2 day camp which provides better student/coach ratio, more track time, less students overall and other extras.

In my opinion it's a great investment and you'll most likely gain more speed and confidence by taking the school then doing expensive modifications to your bike

Let me know if you have any questions about the school

I believe we're not really that far apart in our thinking except for maybe this: Starting out with a bike that has properly set up suspension almost always increases a new rider's confidence and makes the process of learning to go faster much more enjoyable. I remember riding many crappy handling racebikes before I hopped on a Honda RS125. Incredible feel and instant confidence boost. It made cornering faster a mush less stressful task.

BTW, I went to CSS at Road America in 1985

[Motofool]

Originally Posted by cbinker

Anyone ever consider the effects of where the weight is removed? Lighter wheels, chain, sprockets and rotors would be the most beneficial. that is all rotating mass.

That is a very important point.
During acceleration, energy is consumed for linear and for rotational acceleration at the same time.
Acceleration is the rate at which the bike is able to increase or decrease its speed.

Forward acceleration = Linear acceleration + Rotational acceleration = [Forward force / Mass bike+rider] + [Torque / Moment of inertia of rotating parts]

Notice that the weight of the rotating parts has double influence, as it is included in both terms of the equation.
Nevertheless, the more important factor within this is the distance between the axis of rotation and the concentrated mass.
The reason is that the moment of inertia grows with the square of that distance.

The mass of the rims of the wheels and the tires are very influential in acceleration and braking.

For more, see:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moment_of_inertia

[cbinker]

Originally Posted by Floki

In WERA Superstock I believe aftermarket wheels have to weigh the same or more than stock wheels, so that's not something I can do.

you can do a 520 chain with aluminum sprockets, also check this out and see if you can get some rider support, I have it, but haven't used it yet. would be very beneficial to more HP bikes when it comes to sprockets.

https://www.vortexracing.com/index.p...d=19&Itemid=27

[cbinker]

Originally Posted by Floki

I forget who does it but someone drills out the stock rear rotor, sending it to him when I get the chance. Also it looks like I'm removing the fan when I get a chance as well.

you can take it to a machine shop and they can trim it down for you.

[Somchai]

Originally Posted by cbinker

you obviously didn't grasp the point of the question.

You for sure must not worry about my level of IQ, also not with giving me a dislike to my post.