captf

Swinging it over the back of the bike - obviously, if you've got a backbox or something, it might be a challenge... But yeah, she keeps her leg straight as it goes over. Possibly not poker straight, but near enough.

A brief conversation with the housemate yesterday had her with an observation about how people swing their leg over their bikes. Her observation is that guys will bend their leg while they swing it over, while women tend to just keep it straight. I haven't been able to disagree yet, but I am interested in if this is a seemingly accurate observation - so, what do you guys and gals do when swinging your leg over the bike?

Ah. Never seen [or heard of] those before. I think I'll need to make a mental note for future purposes... (: Tar

Noobish question - what's the knobby thing for beside the left side? [the rider's left]

If I wasn't out Sheffield way this weekend, I'd have offered - Sorry, Bippo

I'd never heard of the OMO... version of it, although was taught that the observation should be in there anyway - it was always just referenced as the "OMSPSL! Easy to remember!" version. [Or as my instructors in Glasgow continued with, "none of that pitiful mirror signal manoeuver pish."] Going round corners, I personally may slip the clutch slightly, depending how sharp the corner is. And shouting at my housemate who seemed to think that disengaging the clutch is how she should go round, despite my saying it's not wise [mainly because I can't properly explain why. I think it may be because you'll be losing power, which will then cause you to go wide as you slow down]

Yeah, it's not that I wouldn't do it on a 125, just that by the time we get round to doing it, I'll be no longer on one. She's suggested a run up to Glasgow for the end of the month. I'm a pansy, so have said I'll see what the temperature's looking like closer to time (: Did a short run, last year, to Castleton on the 125 with her and another friend. Coming back up a hill... 3rd gear, fully open, struggling to hit 30 (:

And of course, I just get a text now going "Think our 125s could make a Glasgow trip?" The lunatic wants to ride 4-5 hours, along backroads, in this temperature, on a 125. D:

By summer, I hope to have my big boy's bike - I'm just waiting on the right one appearing [got my heart on an XJ6 now...] The housemate should have her full license by then too, and her big girl's bike [she wants an MT-07, but may have insurance problems with that] Depending on when, we may even have her boyfriend coming along, since we've managed to infect him with the biker bug, and he's saving to get his license Our planned route involves finding somewhere to camp too. (:

The housemate and I are actually thinking similar for summer. Heading round the coast mainly, up to about Fort William and cutting up to Inverness and down the east from there And Scotland's not that cold! It can reach a balmy 16C at times

I honestly can't remember if that sort of thing was taught to me on my CBT, or in the first lesson after. I do remember one of the instructors being shocked that we weren't sure of road positioning based on road type, when going to turn. [And then my instructor down here telling me that that was out-dated and pointless.] That one was, in particular to do with left turns. In Glasgow, I was taught you only move to the left when coming from a side road onto a main road - from a main road, you don't move to the left but stay in the centre, because it's safer to remain dominating the lane and not letting someone overtake. Manchester was "move to the left regardless". Conversely, both taught moving over to the right of the lane for right hand turns, regardless of the type of road. However, I do know that my housemate wasn't taught much of blind spots of other road users, or safe following distances. Noisy/Pete - how much of this is classed as CBT required knowledge?

Yeah, but to be fair, at a test, on a 600+cc bike, that shouldn't be an issue. (: But if your bike can't accelerate up to 40mph in a reasonable time, regardless of the gear, there's problems with the bike. Even a 125. Sure, up to 60... that may take a while, but 40? And as said, you can see the speed limit change approaching [if not, you're not paying enough attention], and can downshift if needed as you approach it. I'm more thinking "There's a junction up ahead, keep an eye out, move slightly over in case a car emerges too quickly", "can that guy wanting to turn across me see me? Get ready to brake" or "lights are green, let's go. But quick check for knobber cager trying to beat the lights and failing" That sort of anticipating. And now I think we're moving beyond "idiot's guide to riding"

I think it's why I've managed almost 300 miles on a tank of the YBR before (: My own gear changes have always been dependant on what I'm doing - pulling off from lights in the morning/evening on the way home, I delay the gear changes, to ensure I'm up in front. Not giving a fsck about how fast I'm going? I'll change up a gear early, since I don't need the extra torque. Further talks suggest that the instructor has said no higher than 3rd gear at 30mph. She said his reasoning was for being able to get up to 40mph quickly after a speed limit change. I continue to fail to see the point in remaining in a low gear here, for that circumstance. Speed changes don't occur suddenly; there's plenty warning to drop a gear if you need to. And there's no legal requirement on how quickly you get up to speed... Accelerating out of situations is actually an advanced technique [at least in a car], and one that's a reaction to special circumstances. I'd advocate better to learn to anticipate what the traffic could do, and have your speed and position ready to need the least action. On a bike, I'd guess that having too much torque available is more more dangerous than not enough [until you have the proper control] And advanced techniques should not be something for CBT/test prep.

I figured this seemed like a good thread to extend this, as it would help push the CBT knowledge of Noise It's all very well explaining how to do moves, but someone will always try to have a question that may make you go "um... I'm not sure" To be fair, it's mainly confirming what I thought things should be [and it amuses me I passed my test with these uncertainties - I just rode with what felt right] What worries me more is my housemate is doing the 125cc lessons on her own bike [because she feels comfortable on it]. So if it breaks, she's the one that'll need to front repair costs because she's riding like she was told. But anything I say that doesn't fit with what I've been taught [from 2 different schools] is met with a "you're wrong!" because it's not matching what the instructors of her place are saying. [For the place I passed with, one of the guys at this school says he worked there, and they had bad practices, and another girl going to this school says they tried to con her - I saw neither of these happen]

Part of my desire to stay in a higher gear is the tight-fistedness of me. lower revs = less fuel More than confused me - with the housemate - was that the instructor's reasoning was "you'll be able to accelerate away faster if you need to", and comments that revs as 'low' as mine was dangerous because I didn't have the acceleration if I needed it, and if it was test scenario, being in "too high" a gear could fail her. My main issues with that is 1) at ~9k, there's nowhere to accelerate into! 2) it doesn't take much to drop a gear and gun it, and 3) I don't trust the acceleration of a YBR to ever want to need it - I ride as if there's none. For reference, 9k rpm on a YBR is 30 mph in 2nd gear... I do check speed and revs regularly. As you suggest; a very quick glance down. I know where the needle positions are to not actually read the numbers yet still know what I'm at. Ttask: I've always wondered what 'feathering' means too... I see it in reference to brakes, mainly. To me, it has 2 possible meanings. 1) fluttering it on and off lightly, or 2) applying a "feather's touch", so it's just lightly constantly on. I've never had a context to figure out which was meant.

I don't know about her CBT, but it was explained how a clutch worked for mine. But from what I recall, they didn't really ever use the term 'slipping', instead they stated more plainly; "Bring in the clutch, no further than the biting point. You need to make sure there's still power getting to the wheel" With the rev range, it's whether you should aim to be at a specific point. I've always went for what sounds 'nice' and isn't laboured. This ends up meaning I'm in 5th at 30 on my YBR [4k rpm] when cruising. If I need to accelerate, it's easy enough to drop to 4th. Housemate was told yesterday that she should be at 8-9k rpm as much as possible [on a YBR]. Given that the red line is at 10k, this just seems nuts to me.

Perfect. It's pretty much what I thought it was. Even when I was learning, it was a term that was just dropped into instruction with no obvious context, and you're on heavu information overload so don't realise you don't understand it... Now, I just need to carefully choose my moment to explain it to the housemate - she's frustrated right now, after how much confidence she's lost since her SMIDY, and gets snappy with bike stuff. Hmm, while we're talking technique - what's the 'preferred' rev range of a 125cc, while you're riding? [hope you don't mind a mild usurping of thread, Noise (: ] [this is another case of I do one thing, she's been told another, and what she's been told just seems wrong to me - but I'm not an instructor...]

This came up in conversation with my housemate today... Neither of us know what 'slip the clutch' actually means. [Well, I think I know but don't want to say the wrong thing. Hell, I keep on forgetting which way "disengaging the clutch" means...] She's still in the learning stages, and getting frustrated that she doesn't know terms like this. In her lesson today, she was told "you're not slipping the clutch while going round the corner." And wasn't given a chance to ask for clarification. So, to prevent me from making an arse of a description. Explain it like I'm 5, what does "slipping the clutch" mean? (:

I have just bought myself a Drift Ghost S. Incoming buyer's regret in 3...2... (: Admittedly, it'll be interesting to review my riding after the fact. Seeing what I may have missed, what I did right, and so on.

It's the "official" Rossi variant of Monster. It takes crap. I've also never seen Monster sell for £1.46 in Tesco...

Seen in Tesco, but not by me. The pricing person knows their MotoGP And this happens to also be on page 46...

That first image, sniff, is nightmare fuel O_O And that truly is a generous Scot, drewpy

Admittedly, using classes is divisive. But to me, class is more attitude than money: I know some upper class people who are pretty much skint. Here's Brand's response to the bank worker: http://www.russellbrand.com/2014/12/8164/ In regards to the Amazon part: I've seen the Sun use similar "Oh, he rents from a tax avoiding landlord in an expensive flat!" It's not his fault that he makes use - or has to make use - of those who flaunt loopholes. For instance, not using Amazon to sell his book also affects those that want to buy the book [and yes, it does bring him money...] I remember the fallout from the Sachs thing. I didn't hear it, or listen afterwards, but I did find it very distasteful. And I was very put off by him. But in recent years, he has shown to have matured [from my point of view, at least] and become more caring to others. 6 years is indeed a long time to wait to apologise, and should have come much sooner. Some people take a long time to admit their mistakes - or bring the courage to face them.

She's upper-middle in that she has managed to get money [or at least pretends to have money] She judges people purely on their name, showing more of her snobbery [because appearances are what matter to her] An army commission isn't what makes her upper-middle, and that is something that is open to people of all levels of class [although, easier for those in the higher classes] - my brother was in the army, for instance, and I'm definitely not middle class. If this is the 'squaring up' that I think you mean [middle December?] he did respond, and quite in depth. If it's something else, got an article so I can have a look? He also doesn't want to go for election because he's "scared of becoming one of them." He would rather galvanise others to take action, ones who would have previously sat on their hands. Hopkins may or may not donate to charity - no easy evidence to find [but not discounting anonymous] - but there have been cases where she's stolen the thunder from charity events, just to get more limelight. Terrorism should never be normalised, and nor should people be scared to speak out against any religious beliefs, as people have come to be regarding Islam. It's telling about someone's beliefs if, when challenged or mocked, they get aggressive...

What she says is definitely not politically correct, but it's still bullshit. She represents a deluded upper-middle class, who think those in working classes are sub-human. She is a hypocrite and a fool [children shouldn't be named after geographical locations? What's you daughter's name, Hopkins?] The fat thing? It's a gross simplification. Some people can sneeze and lose weight, others will put it on by just looking at food. Just because she was able to put on weight and lose it easily, does not make it the same for others. As for Brand? I have to say, much of what he is saying currently is bang on the money - those struggling to get by are being held down in that position by the government and its policies. He's managed to break free of that, and is using his fame to speak out for those who remain. He regularly donates to charity and good causes. And the Islamification? It's not happening as much as people are led to believe. But, countries should not have laws dictated by any religion's doctrines - that is the slippery slope, and one we've been on for a long time, anyway. She's addicted to fame, and as long as she gets attention, she will continue to spew her bile.