Front discs weight

[kiwikrasher]

Are we really getting down to a discussion of the molecular density of various gases???

You can tell it's winter

Not here it's not, bloody 37 deg C today.

I'm just argumentative

[Monty]

Cav was talking about molecule size not weight. Nitrogen has two molecules of Nitrogen bonded together, helium has one and smaller molecules. Hence you lose less gas.

The way I read it the convo went

Use light air
Better still use helium
It'd all fall out if you did
"That's why they use Nitrogen"

I was pointing out why they use nitrogen which isn't because the lighter smaller molecule helium escapes.

The helium was a joke

[D41]

When's the punchline.....?

[Monty]

[D41]

Clever.

[Blade]

The other option is to put less air in to save even more weight

[Monty]

Vacuum?

[duke63]

I could do away with the discs altogether. Think how much weight that would save and how light the steering would be. I can then junk the calipers too as they would be useless.

Keep the blue sky thinking coming.

[D6Nutz]

I could do away with the discs altogether. Think how much weight that would save and how light the steering would be. I can then junk the calipers too as they would be useless.

Keep the blue sky thinking coming.

Drop the front wheel altogether and get some lessons from Frankie.. Lol.

[StMarks]

I could do away with the discs altogether. Think how much weight that would save and how light the steering would be. I can then junk the calipers too as they would be useless.

Keep the blue sky thinking coming.

You may well jest, but there was a thread on another forum not long ago promoting the benefits of ditching the rear brake assemblies on track bikes....

[duke63]

Well at least you couldn't use it to slow your bike.

[Blade]

I could do away with the discs altogether. Think how much weight that would save and how light the steering would be. I can then junk the calipers too as they would be useless.

Keep the blue sky thinking coming.

You may well jest, but there was a thread on another forum not long ago promoting the benefits of ditching the rear brake assemblies on track bikes....

Whilst I haven't got the experience or talent to offer definitive advise on this, to me the theory would seem to have some logic.

Obviously if your braking hard on the front the back is either unload and easy to lock up or dangling in the air and any braking effect would actually be negative as the spinning rear wheel would offer gyro effect to aid stability.

I guess talent track riders only really use the rear brake to reduce wheelie effect but on bikes with anti wheelie even that role now could be obsolete.

Stuff it Duke rip the rear brake off and let us know how you get on

[duke63]

I am Caesy Stoner and I use my rear brake.

[Cav]

I haven't used my rear brake on track other than when I've left the circuit and I'm balls deep in gravel

[Monty]

I used to use the back brake on the Daytona all the time but stopped using it completely on the ZX6. No idea why, wasn't a conscious decision.

[Cav]

I used to use the back brake on the Daytona all the time but stopped using it completely on the ZX6. No idea why, wasn't a conscious decision.

Maybe because it's sh!t.. also maybe because the rear wheel is never on the ground when braking?

[kiwikrasher]

I was a 'never use it' type on the track with the Daytona, and rarely on the road apart from slow speed roundabouts or intersections to smooth the power delivery. But once on the ZX10R I was using it a bit more just to trim speed off mid corner if I went in a bit hot and to stabilise the bike if it got the wobbles in the long fast turn one.

Two up on the Multi I find myself going for it a lot but it needs adjusting as I'm barely getting anything from it.

[D41]

Yep....good for the gravel....and for tightening a line.