Sharp Cornering Bike?

On 6 Aug 2005 21:45:59 -0700, "Dirtroadie" wrote:

Of my three road bikes, I know unequivocally which one I would chose if
I had to chose one for the sole task of descending and/or cornering.
And it is not the one I ride most of the time, nor is it the most
exotic/expensive.
There is no question that it "handles" better than the other two, but I
have no idea which of its attributes accounts for the difference. Two
of the three were built by the same frame builder and it is one of
those two that is clearly superior in cornering security. Faster? I
don't know, not having any practical way to measure that. But more
solid feeling? Absolutely! And accordingly, I cannot discount someone's
description of a bike which corners well.

Are the same tires fitted to both? If not, that alone might account
for the difference. (Of course, it may be that the difference has
been percieved through several changes of tire as well, but one
question at a time is the safest way to approach such topics in most
cases.)

--
Typoes are a feature, not a bug.
Some gardening required to reply via email.
Words processed in a facility that contains nuts.

On Sun, 07 Aug 2005 02:31:23 GMT, "Leo Lichtman"
wrote:


"Peter Cole" wrote: (clip) Schwinn Paperboy (clip)
^^^^^^^^^^^^^
I drive a Subaru "Outback." and ride a Dahon "Boardwalk," but I am not
familiar with that particular model of Schwinn.

You're probably not old enough to have seen one in use, and few
survived the tender mercies of their users.

I think part of the discussion on the differences in bicycles' ability to
corner has wandered across into different territory, about differences in
maneuverability. I know, on theoretical grounds, and also from experience,
that differences in fork angle, trail, wheelbase, etc, can have a marked
effect on the way a bike handles. Bikes that are designed for riding fast
on the road are designed differently from enduro or trials bikes. It's like
comparing a limo to a Jeep. It could be said that a Jeep turns faster (is
more nimble) but doesn't corner faster (spins out easier or rolls.) on high
speed turns

I think there are two topics here, and we're not all talking about the same
thing.

Raw cornering speed is mostly a matter of traction, yes. The
hard-to-quantify "feeling" of the steering is a different matter, but
the steering deflection of a bike in cornering is quite small. I
rather suspect that bar width will have as much to do with the user's
impressions in that area as anything else.
--
Typoes are a feature, not a bug.
Some gardening required to reply via email.
Words processed in a facility that contains nuts.

On Sat, 06 Aug 2005 23:29:20 GMT, Ted Bennett
wrote:


Dear Ted,

Er, in your haste to pick your nit, you snipped this:

"And tire inflation is about as close as pavement bicycles
get to suspension."

Drat! Itchy trigger finger.


But I've gotten excited myself before I finished posts, so I
really shouldn't complain.

And I do like your point about the rider's legs acting as
suspension, although a lot of cornering pictures show the
rider pretty much with his outside leg down and stiff--much
of the time, the magic is more potential than actual.

However, the original poster was asking what difference a
particular bike would make in cornering, so he's probably
going to rule your leg-suspension point out, even though I
like it.

Cheers,

Carl Fogel

Nicely put. I would encourage those afflicted with the stiff-leg
syndrome to try to relax more on the bike by putting the pedals fore and
aft. Works in corners well, at least for the ones you coast through.

I agree with "Jim Beam" that various bikes will handle differently, for
many interesting reasons. Whether those differences make any real
difference in the fastest time through the turn (one testable aspect of
handling), is open to question.

Ted

Dear Ted,

If there are indeed real differences in cornering speed due
to the equipment, I suspect that the rider will be mistaken
about which combination is the fastest because we usually
confuse sensation and duration.

It's notorious how often seasoned car and motorcycle racers
are mistaken about the speed effects of equipment changes.
The differences are usually so tiny that the mechanics have
to show them the stopwatches before any intelligent
decisions can be made.

As Lennard Zinn pointed out in his explanation of how
increased tire pressure can paradoxically lead to greater
rolling resistance by increased bouncing, a rougher (or
squirrellier) ride is easily confused with going faster.

Unfortunately, bicycles are extremely sensitive to even
slight wind changes and have dreadfully feeble, variable
engines, so our cornering speeds are likely to remain
unmeasured in any useful way.

If anyone knows of some tests to the contrary, I'd love to
be embarrassed by them. There are raw tire-friction tests,
but I don't know of any link to someone going through the
same twisty pylons (like Consumer Reports) on numerous
different bicycles. Single-track vehicles don't lend
themselves to this sort of thing, the rider being so
variable and so important.

Carl Fogel

Werehatrack wrote:
Are the same tires fitted to both? If not, that alone might account
for the difference. (Of course, it may be that the difference has
been percieved through several changes of tire as well, but one
question at a time is the safest way to approach such topics in most
cases.)

There are a number of minor differences between the two most similar
bikes, mostly dimensions that vary .5 cm or less. Perhaps the most
notable is the lower bottom bracket height on the bike that feels
better in the corners. Is that the difference? That's what I suspect,
but in actuality, I have no idea. And as I described the difference in
feeling is that one is more "solid" in the corners. And that perception
has remained despite changes in forks, tires and wheels on both bikes.
And whether the better "feeling" actually translates to being "faster"
in the corners is a different question entirely, although it may affect
the willingness of the rider to push the pace while cornering.

DR

Leo Lichtman wrote:
"Peter Cole" wrote: (clip) Schwinn Paperboy (clip)
^^^^^^^^^^^^^
I drive a Subaru "Outback." and ride a Dahon "Boardwalk," but I am not
familiar with that particular model of Schwinn.

I think part of the discussion on the differences in bicycles' ability to
corner has wandered across into different territory, about differences in
maneuverability. I know, on theoretical grounds, and also from experience,
that differences in fork angle, trail, wheelbase, etc, can have a marked
effect on the way a bike handles. Bikes that are designed for riding fast
on the road are designed differently from enduro or trials bikes. It's like
comparing a limo to a Jeep. It could be said that a Jeep turns faster (is
more nimble) but doesn't corner faster (spins out easier or rolls.) on high
speed turns

I think there are two topics here, and we're not all talking about the same
thing.




I don't know what you were talking about, I was talking about the
magazine excerpt.

"Michael Press" wrote in message
...
In article
,
"Pete" wrote:

"Werehatrack" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 06 Aug 2005 14:47:00 GMT, C Wright
wrote:

The latest issue of Bicycling Magazine (Sept. 2005) has a review of a
Pinarello F4:13 and, among many other things, they comment that "it's
also
one of the sharpest-cornering bikes we've ever ridden - your could
practically rub your hip on the road and not worry about blowing a
turn."
That got me to wondering if, by design, one bike can really corner
better
than another and, if so, why? If cheap entry level bikes are excluded
and
the comparison is limited to bikes with high quality aluminum, carbon
or
Ti
frames and a reasonably good set of wheels why would one bike be able
to
corner better than another? Or, would the major factor simply be tire
compound?

Tire compound, road surface condition and material, presence of
debris, and rider foolhardiness (aka desperation, sometimes called
bravado or bravery) are the principal factors that determine cornering
speed. The rest is just hype. (Magazines are often driven by hype.)

--

I interpret the OP's question as having more to do with quickness of
steering, rather than the sheer speed with which a corner can be taken. I
know many people make it a point to debunk myths on here, but there are
definitely bikes with quicker handling that can take a corner with
razor-like precision at the slightest nudge. This is not hype.

By the way, I wouldn't relegate steel frames to entry-level bikes as the
OP
did!

Didn't you get the memo? Yes, steel frames are heavy and
old technology. Nobody would attempt a performance frame
out of steel anymore, except some fashionable boutique
outfits like Waterford, and mossbacks such as Eisentraut,
Litton, or Sachs.

--
Michael Press

Don't forget the likes of Dario Pegoretti!

John



----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

aha! this flack is probabbbly a seriuous announcement THAT A DESIGNER
HAS FOUND THE SWEET SPOT
and produced the setup for a mass market.
this is not tube taken lightly! nada.
a designer figured on how to apply the total parameter to maintain
solid tire contact, cornering forces applied at 90 degrees, no side
slip to reduce friction capacities at contact
and hold this mess together thru the wide spectrum gyrations of
rider/journalists at BM!!
why not? big sky dude big skY
now if i can find a custom tourer that holds the line loaded atop a
slippery curved top white paint stripe!

"Werehatrack" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 06 Aug 2005 14:47:00 GMT, C Wright
wrote:

The latest issue of Bicycling Magazine (Sept. 2005) has a review of a
Pinarello F4:13 and, among many other things, they comment that "it's also
one of the sharpest-cornering bikes we've ever ridden - your could
practically rub your hip on the road and not worry about blowing a turn."
That got me to wondering if, by design, one bike can really corner better
than another and, if so, why? If cheap entry level bikes are excluded and
the comparison is limited to bikes with high quality aluminum, carbon or Ti
frames and a reasonably good set of wheels why would one bike be able to
corner better than another? Or, would the major factor simply be tire
compound?

Tire compound, road surface condition and material, presence of
debris, and rider foolhardiness (aka desperation, sometimes called
bravado or bravery) are the principal factors that determine cornering
speed. The rest is just hype. (Magazines are often driven by hype.)
What about headtube angle and wheel base? Take the extremes.
If the head-tube angle was 90 degrees, the thing would handle like a shopping
cart.

--
Typoes are a feature, not a bug.
Some gardening required to reply via email.
Words processed in a facility that contains nuts.

"The Pretzel" wrote:

"Werehatrack" wrote

The latest issue of Bicycling Magazine (Sept. 2005) has a review of a
Pinarello F4:13 and, among many other things, they comment that "it's also
one of the sharpest-cornering bikes we've ever ridden - your could
practically rub your hip on the road and not worry about blowing a turn."
That got me to wondering if, by design, one bike can really corner better
than another and, if so, why? If cheap entry level bikes are excluded and
the comparison is limited to bikes with high quality aluminum, carbon or Ti
frames and a reasonably good set of wheels why would one bike be able to
corner better than another? Or, would the major factor simply be tire
compound?

Tire compound, road surface condition and material, presence of
debris, and rider foolhardiness (aka desperation, sometimes called
bravado or bravery) are the principal factors that determine cornering
speed. The rest is just hype. (Magazines are often driven by hype.)

What about headtube angle and wheel base? Take the extremes.
If the head-tube angle was 90 degrees, the thing would handle like a shopping
cart.

That is not necessarily true. It's the trail that's the important
thing, and a reasonable amount of trail can be generated with any fork
angle, including 90 degrees and even *over* that. I have ridden such a
bike, and it works fine.

The reason that standard bikes have steering heads angled around 72
degrees or so is to provide enough foot clearance while keeping a
reasonable wheelbase. That, and the force of tradition.

--
Ted Bennett

(clip) If the head-tube angle was 90 degrees, the thing would handle like a
shopping cart.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
That is not necessarily true. It's the trail that's the important thing,
(clip)
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Besides, a shopping cart has the handlebar way back BEHIND the rear wheel
axis. :-)