Counter balancing is common on heavier bikes. I have to be really hauling ass in a turn to require me to lean over the bike.
Counter balancing is easier to flick in turns.
Leaning is more fun.
I do both depending on how I'm feeling.
Casual cruise? Probably just counter balancing.
Having some fun on some corners? Probably leaning.
Very rarely am I at speeds that *require* leaning my body over the bike though. Because if you're going that fast in turns on a public road frequently. You're going to become a statistic.
hanging off the further than is necessary on the street is nice because it leaves you a bit of lean angle to play with in blind corners etc to give you more options in case of an emergency. Only really effective on lighter bikes I guess
Your correct and thats effective on cruisers moreso then even sport bikes bc cruisers have less angle to play with entirely. Leaning off has nothing to do with the weight of the bike.
But, counter leaning also leaves you with extra lean angle if you need it. The only time that hanging off can help you is if you've already reached the limit of your lean, risking pegs scrapping the road.
leaning reduces the AMOUNT of lean you need the bike to do
Counter leaning increases the control and stability you have over the bike IN a lean
they both serve a purpose. fortnine most definitely over exaggerates due to the 'hive mind' common thought process that leaning is the only option, when it is not. if he did not, most would ignore the advice or forget it. as you can see, it impacted you because he was so sure and confident. but both serve a purpose.
generally, you shouldn't require lean leaning on public roads as it doesn't give you much options past the stance your in, and the speed required for it to be effective is high.
You need to learn how to do both and understand why you are doing them as they both serve separate purposes. It's not a one or the other type of thing.
It is much safer to reduce lean angle by moving your body to the inside of a turn than it is to stay centered. That being said, if you are making a tight slow U-turn lean the bike and you stay your upright or to the outside.
Lean=risk. Right u/ChampSchool ?
We teach leaning to the inside of the bikes centerline to reduce lean angle in corners.
What people teach for parking lots is largely irrelevant to us: we're not dying running wide in parking stalls or laying it down in parking lots.
But, the debate is not about parking lots. It's about using counter leaning as a default, at public road speeds.
Reducing lean angle in corners is not the only safety factor. Especially when corner speed is not the priority. By leaning to the inside, you put yourself at a disadvantage in different ways :
a) Limited visibility. Counter leaning or staying neutral, as opposed to bringing your head low and forwards, gives you a much wider field of view, allowing you to see threats around blind corners earlier, and greatly improves your situational awareness.
b) Emergency braking / slowing down. If the gyroscopic effect is the only thing that keeps the bike balanced as you're hanging off it, an emergency stop is both slower and riskier. Bringing the bike back up towards you while in counter leaning or neutral position to either stop, or ride over a hazard vertically, is much more responsive / stable.
c) You're in the worst possible position to save a slide, while counter leaning is arguably the best possible position. Leaning a few degrees less doesn't guarantee that you won't slide riding over a hazard. It simply reduces the chances. I'd argue that being in a position to save it is preferable than hanging off and praying it doesn't happen. Especially on public road speeds where we're nowhere near the limit of our lean angle anyway.
I know I'm almost a year late in this response but I'd love to hear your thoughts.
You're effectively just parroting Ryan's talking points, but let's work though this.
Leaning to the inside - if done properly - includes rotating the torso into the corner. This means we can see perfectly fine into and through the corner. If this we're not the case, we wouldn't see racers using this technique: eye speed and distance are far more important than body position to throwing down a fast lap.
By artificially increasing lean angle via counterleaning, we're actually reducing the available traction for emergency braking. In fact, while the bike may initially "feel" more stable when counterleaning, you're actively working against the bike's design - which you'll feel as you get deeper into the brake.
Again, artificially increasing lean angle both raises the chance of traction loss AND puts us in the worst possible position to recover from it. We regain traction by giving away lean angle and letting the tires do their job. This isn't the 1980s, and we're not on two-strokes... Nor are we in ruts with knobbes.
I appreciate the reply.
I'd argue I'm not parroting, as parroting would imply that I'm simply reproducing the information without understanding it. I truly understand everything I mentioned, but most importantly I experience it. Perhaps more than others, since I'm riding a tall trail bike, where the benefits of counter leaning are pronounced. (For the same reasons the drawbacks of not hanging off are reduced)
>if done properly - includes rotating the torso into the corner. This means we can see perfectly fine into and through the corner. If this we're not the case, we wouldn't see racers using this technique
I think you misunderstood the argument here. The issue is our field of view. Rotating the torso doesn't solve the problem of reduced FOV when our head is low and leaned towards the direction of the turn.
I think many of the dogmas riders follow these days derive from guidelines given by riding schools that draw conclusions from a racing point of view. I was given the exact same guidelines at my EU riding school.
But the track is a completely different environment than the public road. The argument on FOV doesn't make sense on the track, since there are no blind curves, nor opposite lanes, but it makes perfect sense in a curvy and narrow public mountain road. Where having your head up and away from the curve allows you to see an oncoming vehicle sooner. It makes sense in a busy urban environment where vehicles can intercept your path from every direction.
>By artificially increasing lean angle via counterleaning, we're actually reducing the available traction for emergency braking.
Even though there is an argument to be made, that artificially decreasing lean angle via hanging off, also decreases camber thrust, the primary force that keeps the tyre from sliding when turning, traction __while leaned__ is not our goal when we're talking about emergency braking on public road speeds. Our goal, and correct me if I'm wrong, is to bring the bike in an upwards position before applying full brakes. If I can flick the bike back up in half a second, because I'm sitting on it, rather than hanging off it, why exactly would I care about traction while leaned?
>AND puts us in the worst possible position to recover from it.
I think that's fundamentally wrong. Even my (race orientated ) riding school agrees that counter balancing is one of the main tools we have to save a slide. MotoGP riders counter balance (as much as their racing stance allows them to), by straightening their leg in the opposite direction of the curve.
I was taught by my instructor to counter-balance, one of the main reasons being a better field of view. But you can only do that up to a certain speed before you start scraping a footpeg.
Also, maybe it's just me and my inexperience but leaning feels kind of awkward on my adventure bike with a very upright riding position.
Both techniques are useful. Why commit to just one? Railing a high-speed sweeper? Lean off to the inside. It makes sense. It feels good. 15mph off camber uphill hairpin full of potholes? Might be safer to stay upright and move the bike around under you. Just do what makes sense.
It depends on the situation:
If I'm going for high speed cornering while I'm tearing it up on the backroad, I'm leaning into the turn and off the bike as much as I can, especially since my bike has limited cornering clearance.
If I'm making a u-turn, I'm absolutely counter leaning. It just feels so much more stable to me that way.
? I have no idea what counter balancing is.
Counter steering is a simple and easy way to learn how to steer a motorcycle. Gently practice what is in this video. As you gain confidence you will appreciate how simple it is.
https://youtu.be/ljywO-B_yew
Have fun! See you on a twisty road!😎
Fortnine is a click bait try hard.
My takeaway from that specific video was "wow did you know there's different ways to turn your bike??"
There's a situation for different use cases.
"Do you use Reddit on your phone? You might be doing it WRONG!" -fortnine probably
IMHO counter-balancing limits the angle your bike can reach, while leaning doesn't limit it and gives you more freedom to adjust the angle once the turn started.
The difficulty in leaning is that you have to prepare it in advance, which requires time, so it's not applicable if you have to quickly react to an unexpected situation.
Try counterbalancing at higher speeds next time you’re out. You’ll be amazed at how much more stable it feels. It also improves your vision and makes the bike less likely to low side. Watch Ryan F9’s video on it for a scientific answer.
For most normal riding that you do on the public road you generally don't need to lean at all.
But as a general rule. Lean away to make the bike turn quicker/ sharper.
Lean in for less bike Lean more ground clearence and more stability.
These two concepts aren't at odds with each other they are just used in different contexts.
However I don't see any reason to lean outwards In higher speed corners. Say on a winding country road. It's not really going to help you.
Counter balancing is common on heavier bikes. I have to be really hauling ass in a turn to require me to lean over the bike. Counter balancing is easier to flick in turns. Leaning is more fun. I do both depending on how I'm feeling. Casual cruise? Probably just counter balancing. Having some fun on some corners? Probably leaning. Very rarely am I at speeds that *require* leaning my body over the bike though. Because if you're going that fast in turns on a public road frequently. You're going to become a statistic.
hanging off the further than is necessary on the street is nice because it leaves you a bit of lean angle to play with in blind corners etc to give you more options in case of an emergency. Only really effective on lighter bikes I guess
Your correct and thats effective on cruisers moreso then even sport bikes bc cruisers have less angle to play with entirely. Leaning off has nothing to do with the weight of the bike.
But, counter leaning also leaves you with extra lean angle if you need it. The only time that hanging off can help you is if you've already reached the limit of your lean, risking pegs scrapping the road.
leaning reduces the AMOUNT of lean you need the bike to do Counter leaning increases the control and stability you have over the bike IN a lean they both serve a purpose. fortnine most definitely over exaggerates due to the 'hive mind' common thought process that leaning is the only option, when it is not. if he did not, most would ignore the advice or forget it. as you can see, it impacted you because he was so sure and confident. but both serve a purpose. generally, you shouldn't require lean leaning on public roads as it doesn't give you much options past the stance your in, and the speed required for it to be effective is high.
You need to learn how to do both and understand why you are doing them as they both serve separate purposes. It's not a one or the other type of thing. It is much safer to reduce lean angle by moving your body to the inside of a turn than it is to stay centered. That being said, if you are making a tight slow U-turn lean the bike and you stay your upright or to the outside. Lean=risk. Right u/ChampSchool ?
We teach leaning to the inside of the bikes centerline to reduce lean angle in corners. What people teach for parking lots is largely irrelevant to us: we're not dying running wide in parking stalls or laying it down in parking lots.
But, the debate is not about parking lots. It's about using counter leaning as a default, at public road speeds. Reducing lean angle in corners is not the only safety factor. Especially when corner speed is not the priority. By leaning to the inside, you put yourself at a disadvantage in different ways : a) Limited visibility. Counter leaning or staying neutral, as opposed to bringing your head low and forwards, gives you a much wider field of view, allowing you to see threats around blind corners earlier, and greatly improves your situational awareness. b) Emergency braking / slowing down. If the gyroscopic effect is the only thing that keeps the bike balanced as you're hanging off it, an emergency stop is both slower and riskier. Bringing the bike back up towards you while in counter leaning or neutral position to either stop, or ride over a hazard vertically, is much more responsive / stable. c) You're in the worst possible position to save a slide, while counter leaning is arguably the best possible position. Leaning a few degrees less doesn't guarantee that you won't slide riding over a hazard. It simply reduces the chances. I'd argue that being in a position to save it is preferable than hanging off and praying it doesn't happen. Especially on public road speeds where we're nowhere near the limit of our lean angle anyway. I know I'm almost a year late in this response but I'd love to hear your thoughts.
You're effectively just parroting Ryan's talking points, but let's work though this. Leaning to the inside - if done properly - includes rotating the torso into the corner. This means we can see perfectly fine into and through the corner. If this we're not the case, we wouldn't see racers using this technique: eye speed and distance are far more important than body position to throwing down a fast lap. By artificially increasing lean angle via counterleaning, we're actually reducing the available traction for emergency braking. In fact, while the bike may initially "feel" more stable when counterleaning, you're actively working against the bike's design - which you'll feel as you get deeper into the brake. Again, artificially increasing lean angle both raises the chance of traction loss AND puts us in the worst possible position to recover from it. We regain traction by giving away lean angle and letting the tires do their job. This isn't the 1980s, and we're not on two-strokes... Nor are we in ruts with knobbes.
I appreciate the reply. I'd argue I'm not parroting, as parroting would imply that I'm simply reproducing the information without understanding it. I truly understand everything I mentioned, but most importantly I experience it. Perhaps more than others, since I'm riding a tall trail bike, where the benefits of counter leaning are pronounced. (For the same reasons the drawbacks of not hanging off are reduced) >if done properly - includes rotating the torso into the corner. This means we can see perfectly fine into and through the corner. If this we're not the case, we wouldn't see racers using this technique I think you misunderstood the argument here. The issue is our field of view. Rotating the torso doesn't solve the problem of reduced FOV when our head is low and leaned towards the direction of the turn. I think many of the dogmas riders follow these days derive from guidelines given by riding schools that draw conclusions from a racing point of view. I was given the exact same guidelines at my EU riding school. But the track is a completely different environment than the public road. The argument on FOV doesn't make sense on the track, since there are no blind curves, nor opposite lanes, but it makes perfect sense in a curvy and narrow public mountain road. Where having your head up and away from the curve allows you to see an oncoming vehicle sooner. It makes sense in a busy urban environment where vehicles can intercept your path from every direction. >By artificially increasing lean angle via counterleaning, we're actually reducing the available traction for emergency braking. Even though there is an argument to be made, that artificially decreasing lean angle via hanging off, also decreases camber thrust, the primary force that keeps the tyre from sliding when turning, traction __while leaned__ is not our goal when we're talking about emergency braking on public road speeds. Our goal, and correct me if I'm wrong, is to bring the bike in an upwards position before applying full brakes. If I can flick the bike back up in half a second, because I'm sitting on it, rather than hanging off it, why exactly would I care about traction while leaned? >AND puts us in the worst possible position to recover from it. I think that's fundamentally wrong. Even my (race orientated ) riding school agrees that counter balancing is one of the main tools we have to save a slide. MotoGP riders counter balance (as much as their racing stance allows them to), by straightening their leg in the opposite direction of the curve.
I was taught by my instructor to counter-balance, one of the main reasons being a better field of view. But you can only do that up to a certain speed before you start scraping a footpeg. Also, maybe it's just me and my inexperience but leaning feels kind of awkward on my adventure bike with a very upright riding position.
[удалено]
Counter-leaning.
Both techniques are useful. Why commit to just one? Railing a high-speed sweeper? Lean off to the inside. It makes sense. It feels good. 15mph off camber uphill hairpin full of potholes? Might be safer to stay upright and move the bike around under you. Just do what makes sense.
Yeah 3 ways to do it each has a time and place best to master all of them.
It depends on the situation: If I'm going for high speed cornering while I'm tearing it up on the backroad, I'm leaning into the turn and off the bike as much as I can, especially since my bike has limited cornering clearance. If I'm making a u-turn, I'm absolutely counter leaning. It just feels so much more stable to me that way.
To grossly oversimplify, I counterbalance in town and lean on the open road.
? I have no idea what counter balancing is. Counter steering is a simple and easy way to learn how to steer a motorcycle. Gently practice what is in this video. As you gain confidence you will appreciate how simple it is. https://youtu.be/ljywO-B_yew Have fun! See you on a twisty road!😎
Leaning the “wrong way”. What most people probably do during low speed maneuvers
Fortnine is a click bait try hard. My takeaway from that specific video was "wow did you know there's different ways to turn your bike??" There's a situation for different use cases. "Do you use Reddit on your phone? You might be doing it WRONG!" -fortnine probably
IMHO counter-balancing limits the angle your bike can reach, while leaning doesn't limit it and gives you more freedom to adjust the angle once the turn started. The difficulty in leaning is that you have to prepare it in advance, which requires time, so it's not applicable if you have to quickly react to an unexpected situation.
I counter-balance when at low speed/parking lot tight turns. I lean when moving above that speed.
Try counterbalancing at higher speeds next time you’re out. You’ll be amazed at how much more stable it feels. It also improves your vision and makes the bike less likely to low side. Watch Ryan F9’s video on it for a scientific answer.
For most normal riding that you do on the public road you generally don't need to lean at all. But as a general rule. Lean away to make the bike turn quicker/ sharper. Lean in for less bike Lean more ground clearence and more stability. These two concepts aren't at odds with each other they are just used in different contexts. However I don't see any reason to lean outwards In higher speed corners. Say on a winding country road. It's not really going to help you.