RE: I dropped the RS yesterday - 2

Zitat von tony.parker im Beitrag #15

---

A Boxer, or any twin, is more susceptible to stalling at a given RPM than a triple or four.


I have stalled mine a number of times applying load at idle.

---

Zitat von sunshine247 im Beitrag #14

---

Thanks for telling us - it does help to remind us that this happens.

Now, it causes me to rethink my approach to the procedure for tight, slow turns. Personally, I know to keep the revs up to around 2,000, slip the clutch and control the speed of turn with a foot on the rear brake, and use the clutch+throttle to keep the revs at the same place. But, I know it is all to easy to just do a "quick and easy slow turn' by leaving the revs at near tickover, and then the engine stalls and down you go. Yes, so thanks for the reminder.

Question is, is my described approach still the taught one for IAM or police? Comments of any form welcome.

---

Just a thought about keeping the engine spinning above idle RPM when doing a slow turn.
It seems to me that the physics involved would be different for a boxer engine (fore and aft crankshaft), than an across the frame inline engine.
The fast rotating mass of an across the frame crank would oppose falling to either side.
Not so a boxer engine.
Keeping the revs up with either engine type would decrease the likelihood of an engine splutter/stall though.
Any scientists out there?

Zitat von Steady Eddie im Beitrag #18

---

Just a thought about keeping the engine spinning above idle RPM when doing a slow turn.
It seems to me that the physics involved would be different for a boxer engine (fore and aft crankshaft), than an across the frame inline engine.
The fast rotating mass of an across the frame crank would oppose falling to either side.
Not so a boxer engine.
Keeping the revs up with either engine type would decrease the likelihood of an engine splutter/stall though.
Any scientists out there?

---

Zitat von Mr. 36654 im Beitrag #19

---

Zitat von Steady Eddie im Beitrag #18

---

Just a thought about keeping the engine spinning above idle RPM when doing a slow turn.
It seems to me that the physics involved would be different for a boxer engine (fore and aft crankshaft), than an across the frame inline engine.
The fast rotating mass of an across the frame crank would oppose falling to either side.
Not so a boxer engine.
Keeping the revs up with either engine type would decrease the likelihood of an engine splutter/stall though.
Any scientists out there?

---

With the older Oilhead and Airhead Boxers, there was some torque roll with RPM change. In my opinion, with these new LC engines, it's pretty minimal. Recall, the single-plate dry clutch has be replaced with a wet-plate unit.

---

Zitat von Steady Eddie im Beitrag #20

---

Zitat von Mr. 36654 im Beitrag #19

---

Zitat von Steady Eddie im Beitrag #18

---

Just a thought about keeping the engine spinning above idle RPM when doing a slow turn.
It seems to me that the physics involved would be different for a boxer engine (fore and aft crankshaft), than an across the frame inline engine.
The fast rotating mass of an across the frame crank would oppose falling to either side.
Not so a boxer engine.
Keeping the revs up with either engine type would decrease the likelihood of an engine splutter/stall though.
Any scientists out there?

---

With the older Oilhead and Airhead Boxers, there was some torque roll with RPM change. In my opinion, with these new LC engines, it's pretty minimal. Recall, the single-plate dry clutch has be replaced with a wet-plate unit.

---

Agreed that the torque roll on the LC engines is minimal, but that’s not what I was getting at.
I was referring to the stabilizing gyroscopic effect of an across the frame inline engine as opposed to a boxer which would have the gyroscopic effect in a different plane.
I don’t see that keeping the revs up in a turn with a boxer would have any benefit in terms of gyroscopic stability. It would only prevent a possible engine quit.
Any takers?

---

Zitat von Mr. 36654 im Beitrag #21

---

Let's consider your hypothesis and countersteering. If your gyroscopic effect was significant, countersteering our boxers would be significantly different (I assume easier) than an in-line 4 or even a Ducati.......

---

Zitat von Paul911 im Beitrag #22

---

Zitat von Mr. 36654 im Beitrag #21

---

Let's consider your hypothesis and countersteering. If your gyroscopic effect was significant, countersteering our boxers would be significantly different (I assume easier) than an in-line 4 or even a Ducati.......

---

Theoretically, he's likely correct. Practically, I doubt it makes a difference and you'd also have to factor the big jugs hanging out and the effect they have...

---

Zitat von Mr. 36654 im Beitrag #21

---

Zitat von Steady Eddie im Beitrag #20

---

Zitat von Mr. 36654 im Beitrag #19

---

Zitat von Steady Eddie im Beitrag #18

---

Just a thought about keeping the engine spinning above idle RPM when doing a slow turn.
It seems to me that the physics involved would be different for a boxer engine (fore and aft crankshaft), than an across the frame inline engine.
The fast rotating mass of an across the frame crank would oppose falling to either side.
Not so a boxer engine.
Keeping the revs up with either engine type would decrease the likelihood of an engine splutter/stall though.
Any scientists out there?

---

With the older Oilhead and Airhead Boxers, there was some torque roll with RPM change. In my opinion, with these new LC engines, it's pretty minimal. Recall, the single-plate dry clutch has be replaced with a wet-plate unit.

---

Agreed that the torque roll on the LC engines is minimal, but that’s not what I was getting at.
I was referring to the stabilizing gyroscopic effect of an across the frame inline engine as opposed to a boxer which would have the gyroscopic effect in a different plane.
I don’t see that keeping the revs up in a turn with a boxer would have any benefit in terms of gyroscopic stability. It would only prevent a possible engine quit.
Any takers?

---

Let's consider your hypothesis and countersteering. If your gyroscopic effect was significant, countersteering our boxers would be significantly different (I assume easier) than an in-line 4 or even a Ducati.......

---

Zitat von Paul911 im Beitrag #22

---

Zitat von Mr. 36654 im Beitrag #21

---

Let's consider your hypothesis and countersteering. If your gyroscopic effect was significant, countersteering our boxers would be significantly different (I assume easier) than an in-line 4 or even a Ducati.......

---

Theoretically, he's likely correct. Practically, I doubt it makes a difference and you'd also have to factor the big jugs hanging out and the effect they have...

---

Zitat von sunshine247 im Beitrag #14

---

Thanks for telling us - it does help to remind us that this happens.

Now, it causes me to rethink my approach to the procedure for tight, slow turns. Personally, I know to keep the revs up to around 2,000, slip the clutch and control the speed of turn with a foot on the rear brake, and use the clutch+throttle to keep the revs at the same place. But, I know it is all to easy to just do a "quick and easy slow turn' by leaving the revs at near tickover, and then the engine stalls and down you go. Yes, so thanks for the reminder.

Question is, is my described approach still the taught one for IAM or police? Comments of any form welcome.

---

Zitat von Mr. 36654 im Beitrag #17

---

Zitat von sunshine247 im Beitrag #14

---

Thanks for telling us - it does help to remind us that this happens.

Now, it causes me to rethink my approach to the procedure for tight, slow turns. Personally, I know to keep the revs up to around 2,000, slip the clutch and control the speed of turn with a foot on the rear brake, and use the clutch+throttle to keep the revs at the same place. But, I know it is all to easy to just do a "quick and easy slow turn' by leaving the revs at near tickover, and then the engine stalls and down you go. Yes, so thanks for the reminder.

Question is, is my described approach still the taught one for IAM or police? Comments of any form welcome.

---

Drag braking on the rear while counterbalancing the bike for a slow right-hand turn is a bit awkward......Contorted Monkey comes to mind

---

Zitat von Steady Eddie im Beitrag #25

---

Zitat von Paul911 im Beitrag #22

---

Zitat von Mr. 36654 im Beitrag #21

---

Let's consider your hypothesis and countersteering. If your gyroscopic effect was significant, countersteering our boxers would be significantly different (I assume easier) than an in-line 4 or even a Ducati.......

---

Theoretically, he's likely correct. Practically, I doubt it makes a difference and you'd also have to factor the big jugs hanging out and the effect they have...

---

I think big jugs hanging out are fantastic.
Seriously though, those big boxer jugs and low centre of gravity may well negate any lack of gyroscopic effect. The tightrope walker’s pole comes to mind.

---

Zitat von Mr. 36654 im Beitrag #23

---

Zitat von Paul911 im Beitrag #22

---

Zitat von Mr. 36654 im Beitrag #21

---

Let's consider your hypothesis and countersteering. If your gyroscopic effect was significant, countersteering our boxers would be significantly different (I assume easier) than an in-line 4 or even a Ducati.......

---

Theoretically, he's likely correct. Practically, I doubt it makes a difference and you'd also have to factor the big jugs hanging out and the effect they have...

---

The students at Cornell U built a bicycle with a counterrotating disk assembly mounted to the front wheel. The rotational inertia of the disk assembly matched that of the front wheel........negating the gyroscopic effect. They measured the stability characteristics of the bicycle with and without the disk assembly. Based on their measurements, the gyroscopic forces had minimal impact on the bicycle's stability.

---

Zitat von Sanemancured im Beitrag #27

---

Zitat von Mr. 36654 im Beitrag #17

---

Zitat von sunshine247 im Beitrag #14

---

Thanks for telling us - it does help to remind us that this happens.

Now, it causes me to rethink my approach to the procedure for tight, slow turns. Personally, I know to keep the revs up to around 2,000, slip the clutch and control the speed of turn with a foot on the rear brake, and use the clutch+throttle to keep the revs at the same place. But, I know it is all to easy to just do a "quick and easy slow turn' by leaving the revs at near tickover, and then the engine stalls and down you go. Yes, so thanks for the reminder.

Question is, is my described approach still the taught one for IAM or police? Comments of any form welcome.

---

Drag braking on the rear while counterbalancing the bike for a slow right-hand turn is a bit awkward......Contorted Monkey comes to mind

---

I don't understand why it should be awkward??

---