C/T vs M/T for stopping power.......thoughts please.

[BF]

Last night on the way to work, and for the second time an the last few months, a woman in a cage (this time it was a large SUV) tired to have me killed by pulling directly out in front of me....and then instead of moving out of the way, freaking out and STOPPING DIRECTLY IN MY LANE OF TRAFFIC. 

The first time this happened, I missed the front bumper of the woman's car literally within an inch.  I pulled over and got off the bike and had to sit down......shaking.  Meanwhile, she fled the scene as fast as she could get away. 

Last night, I missed the rear bumper of this woman's SUV by maybe half a foot.  Too Damn close....pissed me off more than scared me.

In both of these instances, I grabbed both brakes hard....and in both instances, the rear tire broke lose and begun to slide.  In both cases, the road was dry as a bone...no lose dirt or any other known hazard present.  The first time, the rear broke to the right....and last night, it broke and started to slide to the left.  This scared me about as much as the thought of hitting the cage did becuase of high siding and the potential for being flipped off the bike AND being ran over.   

Anyway.....after getting to work and drinking about a whole pot of coffee and thinking about what just happened, I began to wonder if maybe a car tire would have prevented the bike's rear end from losing it's grip. 

I've read on here many posts from c/t owners that say that a c/t has way more stopping power than a m/t does. 

Would a c/t have staying glued to the road and not have broke lose in my two situations.....or do I just need to stick with a m/t and hope like hell that nobody tries to kill me again?  Other than stopping power, I have no issues with my m/t and really like it and the other aspects of how it handles.  btw.......it's an Elite III.

And please, no flaming car tire of death stories please....just sayin'.   

[Willie]

This ought to get real fun...

Daniel Meyer pretty much summed it up for me.

http://lifeisaroad.com/stories/2004/10/27/theDarkSide.html
 
I haven't gone darkside yet, but figure I will when it is time to change the back tire.

Good luck.

Willie
 

[Jess from VA]

Considering the sizable increase in contact patch from a car tire, it will certainly stop better under all conditions..... period.  It would also likely decrease the probability of the rear tire breaking loose under hard rear braking.  It may also use rear brake pads faster that a bike tire.

This is only one of many differences from a bike tire to a car tire.... not all are good..... but as a confirmed car tire user, I believe the positive benefits outweigh the negatives.

I have on two or three occasions done the same as you and really honked on the brakes and had the rear come loose  (sliding around as if to pass the front).... and released it to get back to instant straight before hitting it again to avoid an impact.  Only on bike tires.... I may not have done an emergency brake since running car tires.

With good brakes, I think you could slide a car tire as well, but less likely to happen, and I think less likely to slide as far and as fast as a bike tire, once it is moving.                    

[Tropic traveler]

Tried it, didn't like it but............ the rear stopping power was one of the things I will miss with the CT. I did notice that grip in the rain was mo' better with the CT as well.
To directly answer your question I can say it will help rear braking but that is only a "seat of the pants" observation. Never had a bad panic stop with the CT but have experienced the same kind of reaction from the MT that you had.
I say yes it would help with that one specific aspect.

[BF]

.... and released it to get back to instant straight before hitting it again to avoid an impact.                      

That's EXACTLY what I had to do both times......and darn near came to contact both times.  I missed both of these vehicles only be inches.  I hope to avoid that again. 

[BF]

Tried it, didn't like it but............ the rear stopping power was one of the things I will miss with the CT. 

What was it that you didn't like?

[Moonshot_1]

Yes, a Car Tire will provide better braking than a Motorcycle Tire.
You can still easily lock up a Car Tire but it takes quite a bit more effort than a Motorcyle tire.
It isn't the fail safe that you are looking for (there isn't one) but it does improve the braking.

I made it a point this year to practice my panic stops. Getting used to using the front brake hard and under control without even thinking about it. Bailed me out of a number of jams already this year. (Deer are freakin everywhere!) Constantly practicing emergency stops (and starts) and getting used to using the front brake aggresively while keeping the bike under control is probably better than betting on a car tire to save your butt.

If you can get an opportunity to ride a bike with a C/T on it before you make a decision that would be a good idea. There is more than better braking involved.
Prior to putting the C/T on the bike, I had an experience with getting tagged by a tractor. The M/C tire locked up and the rear end began to slide on me. Way to easy. I let up on the brake and was able to nearly get by the front of him, but he tagged the back end.

Anyway, in my opinion, the braking and control of the rear is greatly enhanced with the C/T on the back. In my opinion, far more stable in emergency stops. But to be fair, that stability comes at the expense of some agility. But with experience you can gain nearly all of that agility back.

And be careful. They will try again.

[csj]

Thought I'd add that my Hercules 205/60/16 has always been better
at braking and MUCH better at wet weather. However, now my tire has been on for 2 yrs., and it's pretty much down to the wear bars.
I've noticed that the rain ride is still acceptable, but the braking
has gotten a little worse. CT has 62K km, or ~38K miles.

[Tropic traveler]

Tried it, didn't like it but............ the rear stopping power was one of the things I will miss with the CT. 

What was it that you didn't like?

Low speed {parking lot} handling is awful. No other way to put it. I could deal with it but didn't want to. Others have no problem with it but it took away some of the enjoyment of riding the Valk for me.
I jump back & forth between all 3 of our Valks so I wanted them all to ride alike. Also didn't want Kim to have to deal with the differences in handling as she doesn't have the years & miles of riding that I do. It does require more effort to "muscle" it around.
Having tried a CT I totally understand why some like it, it has it's good points for sure. Moonshot is spot on with his advice, ride a CT equipped Valk & decide for your self.  

[Hoser]

The fat lady stops very well, as long as you don't lock up one of the wheels, with either rear tire option.  One of the best, according to magazine tests I have read. I have a set of organic brake shoes on presently, nearly impossible to lock them up accidently.    hoser

[Warlock]

Last night on the way to work, and for the second time an the last few months, a woman in a cage (this time it was a large SUV) tired to have me killed by pulling directly out in front of me....and then instead of moving out of the way, freaking out and STOPPING DIRECTLY IN MY LANE OF TRAFFIC. 

The first time this happened, I missed the front bumper of the woman's car literally within an inch.  I pulled over and got off the bike and had to sit down......shaking.  Meanwhile, she fled the scene as fast as she could get away. 

Last night, I missed the rear bumper of this woman's SUV by maybe half a foot.  Too Damn close....pissed me off more than scared me.

In both of these instances, I grabbed both brakes hard....and in both instances, the rear tire broke lose and begun to slide.  In both cases, the road was dry as a bone...no lose dirt or any other known hazard present.  The first time, the rear broke to the right....and last night, it broke and started to slide to the left.  This scared me about as much as the thought of hitting the cage did becuase of high siding and the potential for being flipped off the bike AND being ran over.   

Anyway.....after getting to work and drinking about a whole pot of coffee and thinking about what just happened, I began to wonder if maybe a car tire would have prevented the bike's rear end from losing it's grip. 

I've read on here many posts from c/t owners that say that a c/t has way more stopping power than a m/t does. 

Would a c/t have staying glued to the road and not have broke lose in my two situations.....or do I just need to stick with a m/t and hope like hell that nobody tries to kill me again?  Other than stopping power, I have no issues with my m/t and really like it and the other aspects of how it handles.  btw.......it's an Elite III.

And please, no flaming car tire of death stories please....just sayin'.   

I run car tires and really like them. On the other hand I feel the 200 battleax does very well. Not as good as the C/T but better than the stock. Down side of the battleax is not so good mileage around 7 to 8 thousand for me. Just something to think about if you are not sure of a C/T.
David

[crazydago]

  16,000 miles with mc tires, 750 mi ct.205-55-16 GY TT and METZ up front 42 lbs. front and 38lbs at rear. It handles better now for me at slow speeds , It goes where I  steer, HInt- not just lean. Very easy to get to steer and lean into each driving situation. And traction starting  out as well as stopping are inhanced considersably. It took alot of reading the threads on darkside to make up my mind. If you ever drove a four wheel ATV  same concept steer and lean . The trike I had was bought from a guy that converted it and couldn'T get out of the dealers parking lot. HE never had to steer a motorcycle. It only takes adjusting the air pressure in the rear to get a very stable feel of the road. I wish I would have done it sooner. another PLUS is the RIDEING COMFORT. NUFF SAID it works for me . Take the info with a grain of salt.      CRAZY DAGO

[Fudd]

In my opinion:

It ain't even close.  The car tire is far superior for braking.  It takes a lot more foot on the pedal to lock up the wheel. 

I am well aware that 80 or so percent of braking comes from the front tire, but when the rear is doing a better job, a quick stop can be accomplished without as much weight transfer to the front.

I avoided a wreck on the interstate, where a truck cut me off and then locked up, sliding sideways as to avoid a pile-up in a construction zone.

I put the Michelin car tire to more of a test from 70 mph than I would have elected to do had it not been an emergency.  I do not think my old Dunlop E-3 would have stopped in time.

[MarkT]

I don't think I can add to the tire comments - just repeat others - stops better but there are other costs. 

I'm more into thinking about why these bimbos are pulling in front of you in the first place.  I see you are in Florida, the blue hairs might be reason enough.  Have you increased your visibility with lights on the front?  Spots? Modulator?  If not, that would be my focus.

[sugerbear]

try it yourself.

make a few "emergency" stops on an unused section of road.
put on a car tire and try it again.
only YOU can tell if it's right for you.

or..............maybe an RPG mounted on the front.

as an aside.  if i never go through Ocala  again, it'll be fine with me.

[98valk]

http://www.webbikeworld.com/Motorcycle-Safety/braking-tips.htm

"3. Is the rear wheel likely to skid if you apply the brakes hard?

With most of the weight being on the front wheel, the rear wheel tends to be light under braking and will therefore lock up and skid very easily."

IMO, if the front brake is being used correctly for maximum braking effect a CT will be light also and will skid, maybe more so than a MT, due to a MT having a smaller higher pressure contact patch than a CT.

[sugerbear]

http://www.webbikeworld.com/Motorcycle-Safety/braking-tips.htm

"3. Is the rear wheel likely to skid if you apply the brakes hard?

With most of the weight being on the front wheel, the rear wheel tends to be light under braking and will therefore lock up and skid very easily."

IMO, if the front brake is being used correctly for maximum braking effect a CT will be light also and will skid, maybe more so than a MT, due to a MT having a smaller higher pressure contact patch than a CT.

B.S.

[Paxton]

OK. All the positives have been emphasized and I agree with virtually all of the comments...

I love my car tire and in spite of its "challenges," I am keepin' it. It's way smoother at any speed... limousine like at 25-50 MPH. 
I run my C/T (205/65/16) @ 28 psi; and the front tire @ 42 psi. I love the looks of it, especially now that she's "temporarily" naked.

So, I share some c/t challenges below...

1. If you go on a day ride through a twisty  road and you are not as strong as you used to be, by the time you get home you'll feel like callin' 911.
You'll need to rest and sleep good for a couple of days.

2. If you are not mindful of how you park, she will want to "stand up" and will gracefully lean all the way on her right engine guard.
To prevent this occurrence, one ought to avoid the "worse case scenario," which goes like this... She's parked on an evenly flat surface...;
there is a 2X4 under the kick stand...; and/or the front wheel is turned to the right. 

These are the conditions wherein she would want to "show off" and lay on her side as explained above.

I've seen a couple of threads here where folks have shared similar experiences with the car tire.

NOTE: There are two reasons why my fat lady is more prone to misbehave than most others... ???

A. The rear shocks are 1.5" lower than the OEM.
B.  The 28 psi pressure on the c/t further lowers her rear end.

Both these situations cause her to seat more upright. The first time she leaned on her engine guard, it was set in motion by my
shoving some stuff into the right saddlebag. I could not believe it but she lay down fully dressed... ever so slowly.
Yet, there is no damage or scars; whatever. 

Well, the next day my friend was looking at the "jack adapter" and while on his knees, he placed his hand on the seat...
and there she went again..!  but no damage whatsoever. If there is enough unobstructed space to her right-side,
she will simply lay (not fall) down.

Color me crazy but she looks so gracious while leaning ever so slowly... and she looks even more beautiful when
resting on her side. 

She has leaned on her engine guard at least five times. I no longer try to stop her as it happens inside my garage.
Rather, I've used these opportunities to practice the standing-her-up by-yourself technique.

Oops… It was bound to happen…
I went on a photo-session-ride, then, I made a quick stop for take out food. suddenly she stood up and started her routine.
I ran to "save" her only to get my leg caught in between the saddlebag and the curve... the hot pipe resting against my
lower leg... ouch!

Needless to emphasize, the right saddlebag was no match for her weight and it cracked off the rails... 
In the process it took a nice slice of my skin with it!

These photos tell the story: ???
https://picasaweb.google.com/103917731019176896112/ItStartedAsABeautifulDay?authkey=Gv1sRgCJ6Lm7yPqN-UVg
 

[Thunderbolt]

I have one on the Valkyrie and the Rocket.  Rocket III has a 225/60/16, next time probably go with the 205.  But here is my story.  I was second in line leaving a friends house and a deer ran from left to right in front of the first rider toward the fence on the right.  It decided that it couldn't get over as it was in a low area and turned around and came back right to left at me.  I nailed all the brakes hard and the guy behind me said that I put up a ton of blue smoke from the rear tire, and left a wide black streak on the road.  The deer did pass in front of me thankfully.  So I think if you have time to apply the brakes and keep it straight it helps.  Rocket has much better brakes than the Valkyrie and is subject to rear brake lockup, ask those who have ridden one.

[BF]

I don't think I can add to the tire comments - just repeat others - stops better but there are other costs.  

I'm more into thinking about why these bimbos are pulling in front of you in the first place.  I see you are in Florida, the blue hairs might be reason enough.  Have you increased your visibility with lights on the front?  Spots? Modulator?  If not, that would be my focus.

I've got FIVE bright lights on the front.  Plus I work on an Air Force Base so I have to wear all of the highly reflective safety gear when going to work.  Five lights on a red and white bike with a 6'2" big old and fat white guy in the saddle wearing a bright day-glo orange vest with 2" reflective stipes on it.  Nope......being visible ain't a problem with me.  

Granted.....the latest incident was last night....at night.  The other incident was during broad daylight, but still....five lights (the head light is ALWAYS on bright during the day) and I was wearing that day-glo safety vest.  Either way, I'm hard to miss.  You simply ain't lookin' if you don't see me coming. 

And it ain't blue hairs either......it's younger women (under 40....ish) with wild hand jestures talking to their BFF or on the cell phone crossing six lanes of traffic and paying more attention to the lanes on the far side of the road that they want to go to instead of the oncoming traffic about to t-bone them in their driver's side door.  It's happened to me twice in the last couple months.  I saw the exact same thing a couple weeks ago with a lady that pulled out from the bank at turtle speed trying to see the traffic coming six lanes over that she wanted to go into and didn't pay the least bit attention to the car coming straight at her with the brakes locked up and all four tires smokin'.  

It happens here all the time.  And killing bikers seems to be a sport.  

[BF]

The rear tire braking lose has me kinda worried.  It's done it twice in a panic stop (and yes, I've actually practiced panic stopping before).  The brake rotors are in good shape, I've replaced the front and rear pads (at the same time.....OEM pads) about a year ago.....so they're in good shape.  Brakes ain't a problem.  

I know I need new fork springs.  The front is definitely soft.  My current rear tire is in good condition with plenty of tread/life left in it.  The tire, I don't think, by itself, is a problem.  

I'm not sold on a car tire, mostly because of the mixed reviews of how it handles....I just don't think it's really for me.  It might be great for some, but from everything I've read about how they handle, I'm thinkin' it ain't for me.  

Soooooo.  What to do?  I'm thinking that with the softer/weak fork springs, when I'm grabbing all of that front brake, the bike does nose dive somewhat.....not horrible, but enough to reduce the rear weight on the rear tire enough to compound the rear tire's lack of grip.  

I'm thinking I really need to get some Progressives put in the front and perhaps go to a 200 tire when this Elite III wears out to increase the contact patch.  

Am I on the right track here?  Would new fork springs actually help the rear tire grip more in a panic stop situation?

[John Schmidt]

I'll simply add to those positive notes by saying "yes" your braking will most definitely improve. Here in the Orlando area, especially on the east side of town, we have these little darlins' attending UCF. The road leading west from the campus is a six lane kamikaze strip and lane changing is an Olympic sport to them. I've had three instances where I've had to lock up because some clown exercised his/her right to prove their SAT(among others) scores weren't wrong. In all three cases, the bike just sorta squatted and skidded straight ahead. The flat surface of the tread in a c/t will help hold it upright, add to that the wider contact patch and you have about as good a braking ability on a Valk as possible.

As for slow speed handling, I don't find it a problem. Granted, it's not like a bike tire but I didn't expect it to be. But there are a number of riders that have used a c/t with a squared off shoulder and the handling turned them off. Get one with a fairly rounded shoulder and it's noticeably better. A good friend started with the Goodyear Triple Tread which has a fairly square shoulder and constantly complained about handling, especially at slow speeds. Said it always felt like it was trying to stand him up. After wearing it out he went to a Bridgestone with a more rounded profile and it was like night and day. Keep that in mind when shopping for a c/t.

[Mildew]

Car tire  much better for stopping. Expecially wet roads.

[98valk]

http://www.webbikeworld.com/Motorcycle-Safety/braking-tips.htm

"3. Is the rear wheel likely to skid if you apply the brakes hard?

With most of the weight being on the front wheel, the rear wheel tends to be light under braking and will therefore lock up and skid very easily."

IMO, if the front brake is being used correctly for maximum braking effect a CT will be light also and will skid, maybe more so than a MT, due to a MT having a smaller higher pressure contact patch than a CT.

B.S.

A B.old S.tatement  by me or webbike world?

or
are u using B.S. like others who do not have an intelligent input/other point of view for discussion of the subject.  did u even go to the link and read any of it??

[98valk]

  Rocket has much better brakes than the Valkyrie and is subject to rear brake lockup, ask those who have ridden one.

the valkyrie was rated in the top 3-5 spot depending on the yr for the shortest stopping distance by all of the magazine tests. rocket was not better.

[Thunderbolt]

I suppose opinions are like noses, everyone has one.  I own both bikes and was just giving mine.  Brakes are much better on the Rocket III.  Period.   

[Gear Jammer]

Tried it, didn't like it but............ the rear stopping power was one of the things I will miss with the CT. 

What was it that you didn't like?

Low speed {parking lot} handling is awful. No other way to put it. I could deal with it but didn't want to. Others have no problem with it but it took away some of the enjoyment of riding the Valk for me.
I jump back & forth between all 3 of our Valks so I wanted them all to ride alike. Also didn't want Kim to have to deal with the differences in handling as she doesn't have the years & miles of riding that I do. It does require more effort to "muscle" it around.
Having tried a CT I totally understand why some like it, it has it's good points for sure. Moonshot is spot on with his advice, ride a CT equipped Valk & decide for your self.  

Last April, HayHauler and I (with CT on bike) took and passed the "Ride Like a Pro" class here in Houston.  Check out the class, and see what maneuvers we were required to make     ,,, and all with a CT on the bike.  I won't claim we rode like the pros did after only an 8 hour class, but we passed !  The CT's  don't handle the same as a MT, but I don't think they're unmaneuverable at all in slow speed (parking lot) situations. Just my .02 based on my very limited experience. 

[98valk]

I suppose opinions are like noses, everyone has one.  I own both bikes and was just giving mine.  Brakes are much better on the Rocket III.  Period.   

that's why I didn't give an opinion and stated about the documented testing done by professional riders and moto journalists.
The 1/11 issue of motorcycle consumer news list the '04 rocket III, 60-0 mph, 129.1 feet,

the '97 valkyrie, 60-0 mph, 107.4 feet, '99 Valkyrie I/S, 60-0 mph, 116.4 feet.
the '97 valkyrie is listed #4 for best stopping of all bikes. the '08 bmw mega moto is 106.4 feet and '06 triumph speed triple is #1 at 104.8 feet.
facts are facts. 
the rocket is not even close, your opinion/feeling doesn't make it stop shorter. 

[BF]

I think that John Schmidt might have a good point here.  A more rounded edge c/t might not be too bad and perhaps will handle more like a m/t without all of the squirreliness (for lack of a better term) of a c/t.......and might be a better transition from a m/t to a c/t for a newbie like me.  

I don't know what the more rounded c/t's are, but even though this is is pretty spendy, I think I like it (alot).  

http://www.tirerack.com/tires/tires.jsp?tireMake=Yokohama&tireModel=ADVAN+A048&partnum=055WR6048M

Rude-dog seems to like his.....





Can anyone point me to more "rounded" c/t's?

[Gryphon Rider]

IMO, if the front brake is being used correctly for maximum braking effect a CT will be light also and will skid, maybe more so than a MT, due to a MT having a smaller higher pressure contact patch than a CT.

When you are talking simple friction, two objects of equal weight and coefficient of friction, but with different-sized sliding surfaces (picture a 6" x 8" x 2" thick book vs. an 8" x 12" x 1" thick book) will require equal forces to overcome friction.  This fact inspired my high school physics teacher to declare that is was stupid for drag racers to waste money on extra-wide tires when narrow tires will provide equal friction.  What he failed to realize is that a tire's traction has more to do with shear resistance than simple friction; the more rubber that is embedded into the road surface, the more rubber area has to shear in order to break traction.  This is a function of the contact patch surface area, the pliability of the rubber, and the shear resistance of the rubber.  A car tire definitely has a larger contact patch, and a high-performance car tire probably has "grippier" rubber  than the rubber in the centre of a motorcycle tire, thus it will provide more straight-line traction than a motorcycle tire.

I'm thinking that with the softer/weak fork springs, when I'm grabbing all of that front brake, the bike does nose dive somewhat.....not horrible, but enough to reduce the rear weight on the rear tire enough to compound the rear tire's lack of grip.  

I'm thinking I really need to get some Progressives put in the front and perhaps go to a 200 tire when this Elite III wears out to increase the contact patch.  

Am I on the right track here?  Would new fork springs actually help the rear tire grip more in a panic stop situation?

Changes to the front suspension that prevent it from collapsing on hard braking, allowing it to absorb bumps while braking, can only improve the feel, and thus controllability, of the front brakes.  This will affect weight transfer and thus rear tire traction only inasmuch as weight transfer is more linear with respect to time, making rear-tire lockup easier to control.

[Gryphon Rider]

I think that John Schmidt might have a good point here.  A more rounded edge c/t might not be too bad and perhaps will handle more like a m/t without all of the squirreliness (for lack of a better term) of a c/t.......and might be a better transition from a m/t to a c/t for a newbie like me.  

My General Altimax HP seems to have fairly rounded corners (see photo) and thus handles a little better than my Falken did.  Because the roundedness of the corners is significantly due to the tread tapering shallower closer to the edge, I suspect it will not handle as well when it is close to being worn out.

[Moonshot_1]

 I suspect it will not handle as well when it is close to being worn out.


This is true. I am close to being worn out and I'm told I am difficult to handle at times.

[98valk]

IMO, if the front brake is being used correctly for maximum braking effect a CT will be light also and will skid, maybe more so than a MT, due to a MT having a smaller higher pressure contact patch than a CT.

When you are talking simple friction, two objects of equal weight and coefficient of friction, but with different-sized sliding surfaces (picture a 6" x 8" x 2" thick book vs. an 8" x 12" x 1" thick book) will require equal forces to overcome friction.  This fact inspired my high school physics teacher to declare that is was stupid for drag racers to waste money on extra-wide tires when narrow tires will provide equal friction.  What he failed to realize is that a tire's traction has more to do with shear resistance than simple friction; the more rubber that is embedded into the road surface, the more rubber area has to shear in order to break traction.  This is a function of the contact patch surface area, the pliability of the rubber, and the shear resistance of the rubber.  A car tire definitely has a larger contact patch, and a high-performance car tire probably has "grippier" rubber  than the rubber in the centre of a motorcycle tire, thus it will provide more straight-line traction than a motorcycle tire.

http://media.wiley.com/product_data/excerpt/19/04713546/0471354619.pdf
"Figure 1.21 shows the effect of normal load on the braking performance of a biasply
truck tire on a dry asphalt surface [1.18]. It is noted that the value of the
longitudinal stiffness Cs increases noticeably with an increase of the normal
load. This is because the tire contact length increases with the normal load
for a given inflation pressure. According to Eq. 1.21, to develop a given
longitudinal force, the longer tire contact length results in lower longitudinal
slip (or skid)."

http://www.physicsforums.com/archive/index.php/t-330790.html
"People who say wider tires make more grip because ;''there is more rubber on the road' are wrong. They are both wrong that it makes mroe grip and that there is more rubber on the road.

When you make a tire wider, you alter the contact patch to be wider , but it reduces in length. So depending on sidewall stiffness, a wider tire can actually give less rubber on the road.

The main reason for tires being the size they are is actually heat management. Wider, low sidewall tires will cool better than narrow tall tires. If you can;'t get a tire up to temperatie it will give no grip, if you get it too high you will cook the rubber and ruin the set of tires.

Back to contact patch, you can safely assume that contact patch stays roughly the same area with wide or narrow tires (as long as the load stsys the same). Narroe will have longer contact patches and wide tires will have shorter."

your physics teacher is correct  
"Drag racing is a funny business though, beause Like I said above for linear acceleration narrower longer contact patches are acutally better. It's just practical reasons they have to be mega wide."

[Gryphon Rider]

http://media.wiley.com/product_data/excerpt/19/04713546/0471354619.pdf
"Figure 1.21 shows the effect of normal load on the braking performance of a biasply
truck tire on a dry asphalt surface [1.18]. It is noted that the value of the
longitudinal stiffness Cs increases noticeably with an increase of the normal
load. This is because the tire contact length increases with the normal load
for a given inflation pressure. According to Eq. 1.21, to develop a given
longitudinal force, the longer tire contact length results in lower longitudinal
slip (or skid)."

Among other things, the figure 1.21 graph shows that when you put more vertical load on a tire, that tire can generate more braking force, but when you compare vertical load to maximum braking force (corresponding on this graph to 20-25% skid, depending on the vertical load), the relationship IS NOT linear.  With the tire loaded with 2126 lbs., it generates approx. 2300 lbs. braking force, yielding a coefficient of friction (cof) of 1.08.  When the same tire is loaded to 9195 lbs., it generates approx. 7200 lbs of braking force, yielding a cof of 0.79, 27% LESS.  When you compare figures at 100% skid, the tire loaded at 2126 lbs. has a cof of 0.71, compared to the tire loaded at 9195 lbs., with a cof of 0.49, 31% LESS.  If the friction formula applied to rubber tires, the cof should remain the same regardless of loading.

http://www.physicsforums.com/archive/index.php/t-330790.html
"People who say wider tires make more grip because ;''there is more rubber on the road' are wrong. They are both wrong that it makes mroe grip and that there is more rubber on the road.

When you make a tire wider, you alter the contact patch to be wider , but it reduces in length. So depending on sidewall stiffness, a wider tire can actually give less rubber on the road.

The main reason for tires being the size they are is actually heat management. Wider, low sidewall tires will cool better than narrow tall tires. If you can;'t get a tire up to temperatie it will give no grip, if you get it too high you will cook the rubber and ruin the set of tires.

Back to contact patch, you can safely assume that contact patch stays roughly the same area with wide or narrow tires (as long as the load stsys the same). Narroe will have longer contact patches and wide tires will have shorter."

your physics teacher is correct  
"Drag racing is a funny business though, beause Like I said above for linear acceleration narrower longer contact patches are acutally better. It's just practical reasons they have to be mega wide."

The person you quoted from the physics forum is another amateur spouting theory, just like you and me, and has no data to back himself up.  He also assumes that people running wider tires make no downward adjustment in tire pressure to give them a larger contact patch with the wider tire.  His arguments haven't convinced me, and I still trust my understanding more than my physics teacher's.  See this link from another amateur who took a more analytical approach: http://performancesimulations.com/fact-or-fiction-tires-1.htm  His conclusion: "Wide tires have a greater contact area?  From this data it appears very likely.  Which would mean the 'wide tires are softer and therefore give more grip' argument is bunk."  I would be interested to see a comparison of contact patch size between Valks with car and motorcycle tires at normal (for that configuration) tire pressures.  We should also do some rear-brake-only stopping distance testing to prove or disprove the "butt-dyno" type evidence that car tire users have submitted.

[FryeVRCCDS0067]

I started with the OEM tires, then went to Avon Venoms which were a great improvement. Then I went to the GY TT, was very impressed with the traction, both wet and dry and wore out two of them. I got roughly 20,000 miles out of each. During this time I went from Venoms to Cobras in the front.

Then, due to tire damage I had to replace a TT with a Cobra rear just before a trip. When the Cobra was half burned down I replaced it with a General altimax which I really like.

My view of the road holding ability of CT verses MT tire is this.

The cobras are great tires but the TTs had better traction while cornering and way better braking traction. For example, when turning right at a stop sign on my way home from work I would frequently break the bike tire loose as I accelerated and let it drift out slightly. When I first went with a TT the same input would pull up the front tire slightly without breaking loose the back.

The first few years I had my Valk I practiced panic stops pretty often when riding deserted roads. There was no doubt that I could stop faster and usually straighter even if the rear locked with the car tire. As the weight shifts forward during a panic stop our valks don't stoppie (at least mine doesn't) but there is still a substantial weight transfer to the front which lowers the rear tires braking ability but the car tire still had more. I suspect the TTs actually had a softer, sticker compound than the Avons but still lasted longer because of the wider contact patch and thicker tread.

Funny thing about the car tires, the two types I've tried both squall loudly as they start to lose traction. This alerts both the rider and the cages around you that you're at the limit of your traction.

When I went back to a MC tire for a while last year I was having problems with unintentionally breaking traction with it when entering and exiting corners. It seemed to me this had to be the result of being used to having more traction available. When I went back to a CT the problem went away.

I don't think the General tire is as sticky as the TTs were but it is less square shouldered, flexes easier and seems to push me around less when riding over rough roads or even though my field.

My opinion concerning emergency motorcycle braking differs from some sources but I'll give it anyway. Apply braking pressure progressively concentrating on bringing the front tire right to the edge of it's traction limit. If you apply too hard too soon it will break loose before the weight can transfer and you'll have to let up and start over. Do the same with the back, but, the back tire will start out with more braking power that will rapidly get less as the weight transfers to the front. At this point put 90% of your mental focus on the front tire, it's ok to make it shrek a little but don't let it stop rolling.

The back tire may stop rolling at this point but if it's going straight I let it and concentrate on the front. If it gets out of line with the front then I let up some on the back. Personally, I think the more I can keep my focus on the front tire's traction the better off I am.

[sugerbear]

http://www.webbikeworld.com/Motorcycle-Safety/braking-tips.htm

"3. Is the rear wheel likely to skid if you apply the brakes hard?

With most of the weight being on the front wheel, the rear wheel tends to be light under braking and will therefore lock up and skid very easily."

IMO, if the front brake is being used correctly for maximum braking effect a CT will be light also and will skid, maybe more so than a MT, due to a MT having a smaller higher pressure contact patch than a CT.

B.S.

A B.old S.tatement  by me or webbike world?

or
are u using B.S. like others who do not have an intelligent input/other point of view for discussion of the subject.  did u even go to the link and read any of it??

no, i didn't go there to read the article.
but then i'm not trying to sell magazines either.
i know from my OWN experience that the car tire stops shorter.
if you would get off the computer, get on the bike and TRY things for yourself, instead of Regurgitating stuff from the internet, you might have facts of your own.
it's no use discussing anything with you. your closed minded and refuse to look at any other point of view because it doesn't say so on the internet. i'm done with you. you going on MY ignore list.

[Tropic traveler]

I suppose opinions are like noses, everyone has one.  I own both bikes and was just giving mine.  Brakes are much better on the Rocket III.  Period.   

Having actually owned & actually ridden both bikes in question here, I must agree with Terry. While both bikes have very good brakes, the brakes are noticeably better on the Rocket 3. Period again.
No amount of clinical charts, graphs, & paper theories will change that.
Just like the theories on why or why not a CT is better for you, you just have to ACTUALLY RIDE & EXPERIENCE the difference for yourself. If you have not done so your opinion will be lacking in weight.