Ducati Monster Forum

Tired old argument I know I am a noob to motorcycle riding and just wanted others thoughts on engine breaking, when its good to use if at all and the old argument of transmission vs brake pads etc.

Any advice on engine breaking, blipping etc would be much appreciated

Engine breaking is bad, engine braking not so bad. 

well their both spelled the same way for starters.
braking.

if you are a noob, hope you have a semi-slipper.

but practice first in a straight line in a parking lot, don't panic if you get chatter, just pull the clutch in more. 

you'll need to find the right RPM for each gear to make it smooth, and first starting slip your clutch more than usual to let it grab smoothly.

as you advance you'll be able to do it clutchless.

So, this is actually a more complicated topic than you might think.

Engine braking does slow you down, but also changes the chassis dynamics a good bit.

Under power, your chain is tight at the top. The puts some tension into the suspension. The effects of this very from bike to bike - rise up some, anti-squat, but most will skin down, squat. The pivot point of the rear swing arm as the points where the forces work around. The chain is running above the swing arm pivot point. When the chain it is pulling, it tries to squat the rear suspension more.

If you come off the throttle, to engine brake that tension on the top of the chain is eliminated or even transferred to the bottom side of the chain as the wheel is pulling on the counter sprocket. As you might expect, this has the opposite effect on the shock and leads to a reduction in the load on it. Generally, that's not an issue as the shock should be within its operating range. But it does change the geometry and where the engine forces are being applied.

If you're racing, for example, engine braking if held too late reduces the time that you can be at neutral/maintenance or positive throttle - which for the super humans means slower laps.

For us mortals, it more about the chassis dynamics and not upsetting them if you're transitioning from an engine braking situation to a positive throttle in a turn.

As noted, it's a skill on a bike, it's part of the throttle control wheelhouse. Not just something you should do without some thought (most of the time)

The brakes are for slowing down.

The engine is for going faster.

IMO engine braking is a bad habit almost all the time. On the street it means the people behind you don't know you're slowing because your brake lights aren't on. I do it sometimes, but always in conjunction with the brakes, and only when I'm coming up to a stoplight or something and am just being lazy. It has no place as a real tool for stopping/slowing IMO. [I also used to purposely dump the clutch when I didn't have a slipper to lock the rear coming to a stoplight...but that was a different issue, as I was just goofing off  [evil]]
 
On the track engine braking has no place. It just makes you slower. The end.

Throttle blipping is a different issue. That is just rev matching so you don't lock up your rear wheel on a downshift. Different opinions on its use, but if you have a slipper then I personally don't think it is necessary. You can also just let the clutch out a little slower instead of blipping.

+100 on the last 2 responses  ;D
faster is better :D

agreed!

I engine brake for the fun of it sometimes.  love hearing the engine rev a bit coming to a stop, but that's mostly because my exhaust is kind of stupid loud  [evil]...

Usually on the street when coming to a stop light i just down shift while braking, and braking with both brakes (primarily the front) if I'm slowing down slowly. If I want/need to stop quicker I almost exclusively use the front.

Watch some MotoGP clips (or opening day tomorrow in Qatar  ;D) and you'll see them, it seems like always, only using the front while their rear wheel just skims the track.

Those dudes are immortal, as mentioned above

Which is kinda dumb, seeing as how you stop sooner when you use both brakes.

Contrary to popular belief, the rear brake actually does something. It's not just decorative. Especially on Monsters, which have a relatively low CoG compared to other sport bikes.

As far as the OP is concerned, +11tyB to Raux and Slide Panda.

yyeeeaaa... I'm sure you're right. For whatever reason I'm more comfortable being harder on the brake when not using the rear.. I'm sure that'll change the longer I ride. Only have a little over 10k under my belt so far.

use both.

if you come from a dirt background the rear comes second nature and even forcing slides with it.

but gentle use of the rear in conjunction with the front will be the safest, fastest stopping.


have you taken the MSF course?

When the front brakes are properly applied under extreme braking the rear wheel leaves or nearly leaves the road surface.  The rear brake has a place at a high pace, but maximum braking ain't it.  When transitioning from off throttle to neutral throttle at tip-in a quick brush of the rear brake settles the suspension nicely.  It's also handy to tighten your line a bit after the apex.  Other than that, it can go make the beast with two backs itself.

I'm not immortal, but I have roadraced for twenty five years....if that's worth anything.

BUT unless you are at roadrace pace, the rear is a normal part or normal riding.

I'm with Cloner.

The rear brake has never done anything but gotten me in trouble.

I stay right away from it...street and track.

+11tyb. The only time I ever use the rear is When I'm in the grass at the track. :P

Yup I've taken the MSF course and I come from a dirt background. Getting used to using the front was odd bc I rarely used it on the dirt, but now, like I said, I almost exclusively use the front.

yesterday using the front AND rear brakes saved me from crashing into the back of granny who decided it was a good idea to pull out in front of me when I was ~20 feet away. I know the rear brakes helped because I started to fish tail (controllably) I too come from a dirt background

There is a rear brake?

Ducati 1199 Panigale Sandia Crest Road October 2012 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XqFoTy8sz6I#)

This is a slow day for me.  Nuff said?

its that funny little lever that looks like your gear shifter. it took me a few rides to realize it doesn't shift too well :p

http://www.ducatimonsterforum.org/index.php?topic=117.0 (http://www.ducatimonsterforum.org/index.php?topic=117.0)

While I'm a big advocate of riding the pace, you have to be a little wary of it depending on our goals. It took a long time and was damn hard for me to let go of the pace habits I formed when I started riding at the track.

Which might be why you're still with us. ;)

If you use your engine to brake, it will break.

If this were true, all my vehicles would be broken... even the one automatic.

Duc shifter forks are pretty bad about bending. Especially under track/ race situations.

I use engine braking all the time, also in the car, but I read an interesting remark some time ago.

After a while you start to rely on it and then imagine you hit a false neutral on track when you approach a corner at the end of a long straight.

I'm really trying not to do it anymore at the track.

And he gets lots of posts telling him how to be faster and how not to break stuff at the track...

Fixed it for ya!  [thumbsup] 

In a track situation (or even a street situation), one should probably not rely on the engine to slow you down.  I've found that under hard braking for a turn, if I don't use any engine braking the bike won't shift down properly (same thing with multiple upshifts, like when you whale on it in first to the "speed limit" and then bang up two or three gears to cruise)... and I like to be in the right gear to exit right before tip in.  I know I'm in the right gear if I have used the engine during the slow-down process... although I've never been on a track on a moto.  I do not doubt that it changes the suspension dynamic.  It certainly does in a car... but what racecar driver disengages the clutch when braking for a turn?  For that matter, the reason the pro guys wiggle during decel is because of engine braking as they bang down through the gears.  They aren't only relying on engine braking, but they aren't not doing it either.

I'm even willing to bet that Cloner is doing it if you listen closely.  He's just not relying on it to slow him down and set cornering speed.

While I certainly agree the fastest way to slow is using engine braking in combination with braking. The pro racers generally don't care because they have unlimited support and it will get fixed when they bend a shifter fork/ drum burn through a clutch as well as the extra wear on tires from the ass end getting squirmy under engine/ trans braking.

The rear brake accounts for 30% of your stopping power.  Although some find the rear brake is ultra sensitive, it all boils down to how well you know your bike.  I admit for a while i had a problem with my rear brake as well.  I found it to be extremely sensitive, and in a quick stop situation it locked up more often than not.  Now that the riding season is here go to a safe location and practice prior to hitting the busy roads!  Practice your quick stops, PROPER swerving skills, and stopping in a turn.  It will make your season much more pleasing. 

Now as for the engine braking, I'm not going to say if its bad for the bike or not as i have NEVER had any issues doing so.  AS A TIP, if you do prefer engine braking, lightly apply one of your brake levers to activate the rear light!  My bike engine brakes very well and i do so ALL the time.  But you can bet your ass i make sure that light comes on whilst doing so.  I find that on great riding roads, ie Johanneskreuz here for us DE riders, engine braking helps you judge the speed necessary for safe cornering.  If you come flying up to a corner that has potentially high traffic and possibly an unknown corner to you, what good does it do to go hard on the brakes last second?  Yes it might be faster, but is it exactly more safe?  I am by no means trying to tell you how to ride or what to do, simply giving you something to think about!  [thumbsup]

What he said.  The video was shot from a Panigale with EBC is turned up to maximum to make it as much like a two-stroke (little or no engine braking on a two-stroke!) as possible.  That said, it still engine brakes, and there's nothing you can do about it unless you want to pull the clutch in....and you don't want to pull the clutch in.


I challenge you to get more than 0% of your stopping power from the rear brake with the rear wheel off or nearly off the ground.  You've never seen an MSF coach as wide-eyed as the one to whom I proved this after he told me I had to use the rear brake in stopping drills.....as I nearly hit him in the face with the rear wheel....kinda like my avatar, only a bit higher and twisted to the right a bit.   :o

If you're riding a bike that doesn't have enough brakes to lift the rear then you might be right about that 30%.

It's easy to tell which type of bike you're riding.  Run up your speed a bit and pull the front brake as hard as you're willing.  If the front slides you can benefit from using the rear brake.  If the rear lifts concentrate on learning how to properly modulate the front brake without the rear.  If the front doesn't slide AND the rear doesn't lift, pull harder on the lever until one of 'em happens.  On ANY modern sport bike you CAN lift the rear and you're better off concentrating on proper modulation of the front during emergency stopping.

Being an MSF coach, I do not condone such an action of lifting the rear wheel.  Last time I checked its not a safe way to come to a stop no matter how "good" you are at doing so.  Obviously when the rear tire is off the ground you dont have stopping power from it.  Common sense.  Dont get me wrong, I enjoyed doing so on my supermoto when I had it.  But look at it this way, how many pro riders believe its the best way to stop??? hint.... (none)  In the MSF course, it is required to utilize BOTH brakes otherwise you are docked points on your ridden exam.  Also is an individual is lifting the rear over and over without attempting to correct the action, some coaches might consider it as an intentional unsafe act.  Getting "coached out" for something like that is no bueno.  

Yes my 796 has more than enough brake to pull the rear up.  So what happens when that rear end is up in the air, and your front hits a patch of not so ideal road?  Bad stuff.....  Id much rather be stopping with my ass planted.....

Also what the heck is that supposed to mean?? lol. 

In my opinion there are two types of bikes.  Those that benefit from the rear brake under maximum braking and those that don't.  If the front slides the bike will benefit.  If the rear lifts it won't.  I'm not advocating demonstrably lifting the rear under maximum braking as a matter of course, but the simple fact (in my mind) is that most modern sportbikes will stop at least as quickly and definitely more safely via proper modulation of the front brake than by a combination of both front and rear brakes.  It's simple mathematics. 

F=(mu)N  F is friction force between two surfaces, in this case the tire and the road surface.  Mu (I've denoted it thus because I don't know how to conjure the actual Greek character on this forum) is a Greek letter designating friction coefficient of two surfaces in relation to each other....in this case rubber and asphalt.  N is the normal force (the force perpindicular to the interface) between two surfaces.  If the combined weight of the bike and rider are transfered to the front wheel (and it is on moden sportbikes), then N at the interface between the front wheel and the road surface is equal to the combined weight of the bike and rider, and the normal force between the rear wheel and the road surface is zero.

Further....the combined effort of both brakes can NEVER be more than this, as the normal force on both wheels can never be more than the combined weight of the bike and rider. 

The reason I say it's safer (for most riders) to use only the front brake under maximum braking with modern sportbikes is that as the weight transfers forward and the possible braking effort at the rear decreases, it becomes VERY easy to break traction at the rear.  This generally results in yaw, and most riders don't react well to yaw ("backing it in").  Many will simply increase effort, increasing yaw and resulting in a visit to the immediate weight loss clinic via extreme abrasion.

I use the rear brake on my sportbike.  I use it to tighten my line in turns.  I use it to settle suspension on corner entry.  In my book that's all it's good for.

MSF is a course designed to teach the multitude of riders safe riding habits.  I love MSF, and every time I ride (especially on the street...love those traffic coping skills!) I use many of the skills I learned over the course of several visits to MSF led classes.  I have several friends who are MSF coaches.  I have a few friends who are MSF coaches and racers.  MSF teaches use of the rear brake because for 90% (or more) of riders it's absolutely the right thing to do.  If I rode a Hardley (I do race one....and I use the rear brake on it 'cause it won't lift the rear), or a Goldwing, or a fat Bimmer, or a '70s anything, or virtually any bike that's not a sportbike produced since the late '80s, I'd use the rear brake early and often.  I don't ride those bikes (except for the aforementioned Harley...which is actually an Aermacchi....but don't tell anyone), and I realized several decades ago that what I was taught wasn't appropriate to my riding habits in the case of "emergency" braking (or maximum braking on the track).  I adapted.  The MSF coaches with whom I race have likewise adapted their habits when riding at a pace, and are happy to tell their friends in private that the lessons taught by MSF are not always appropriate.

As to your assertion that no "pros riders" believe front modulation only is the best way to stop, I'd refer you to nearly any racer you've ever known or heard of.  If he's stopping, he'll use the front.  If he's slowing to turn, he may use the rear to intentionally induce yaw.  I've never developed that habit, but I'm a crappy racer by comparison. 

Ever watch a race and notice that nearly everyone's rear wheel only lightly skims the track in the braking zones?  N=0!

one thing that goes against what you are saying is the new MV ABS with anti-rear lift.

Exactly. You rely on the brakes.

It's pretty much impossible not to have some engine brake effect when downshifting going into a corner though, especially if you don't have a slipper. The key is to ignore it.

Here is an article on the subject by Keith Code

http://forums.superbikeschool.com/index.php?showtopic=310

Also:
- riding with a passenger
- uphill starts
- if you end up in the dirt
- drag during slow tight turns

Nice article, betarace.  I spend the bulk of my time on street rides doing exactly this....riding at a "no brakes" pace.  It makes riding with the people I ride with more fun and sharpens turning skills at the same time.

You can also read the article entitled "The Pace", which advocates the same principles.

So every other session?  ;)

-.-
*grumble grumble grumble*

You can throw math and numbers at anything that doesnt mean it makes it more safe.  I would love to elaborate on this but the threadjacking has gone on long enough.  It really boils down to everyone is different and what works for them works for them. 

Been there.. done that  ;D

i am betting anchorism has an RC number?

For new riders I always suggest working on their engine breaking.. but for an entirely different reason.  First let me frame this.  Im talking about the average daily on road rider.
I believe that engine breaking inherently cause the rider to be "in gear" at all time.  For example, some rider may.. when slowing down, pull in the clutch .. and down shift, skipping several gear. Ie: from 5 to 3.  However, unlikely.. in that split moment when the clutch is disengaged.. and the rider is essentially coasting, if a hazard appears, this forces the rider to make a panic decision.
Where was I?  Should I re-engage the clucth now?  do i upshift? do i down shift? do i blip the throttle?
WHO KNOWS?  and that decision may have to be made in fractions of a second.  If the wrong decision is made, potential loss of traction ensues, loss of control. Hazard wins.
However, if the same rider.. give the same situation, engine brakes AS he is slowing.. he remains in gear and is ready to respond immediately to the hazard with 100 attention.  Just my 2 cents.

And what might not have been obvious from some of the posts... fastest on the track is not necessarily safest on the street (there are exceptions to every rule).  Cloner makes good points about riding fast, and Anchorism makes good points about riding safe... neither one is mutually exclusive.  In the end, if a rider wants to go fast, he/she can squid it up on a 'Busa or try to learn Duc speed... I'll bet money on which is the "better" rider.

Who was it that said they used only their rear brakes when dirt riding? Probably not motocross!! In motocross even at novice speed, all brakes are used, the rear has lots of "other" uses, but the front is used LOTS!!

I use my rear brakes during u turns and slow moving traffics

There's more than one force at play here. There is N UP from the force of gravity pushing you down, and there is N opposite to the direction you are travelling from the force of your motorcycle moving. Therefore, the total N is always more than the weight of the bike and rider.  μ is increased by using both brakes, increasing brake-wheel friction which increases tire-road friction which increases  μ.

I think  [laugh].

http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/crstp.html (http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/crstp.html)

This is of course assuming that you are not on an 1199R travelling at near light speed with the headlight on.

Friction (u) is a constant value, dependent on materials. It doesn't change due to braking. The normal force (N) is what changes. The total force is defined as N x u.

I agree that N is higher than just the static weight of the rider and bike, due to the momentum of the bike.