Welcome to Netrider ... Connecting Riders!

Interested in talking motorbikes with a terrific community of riders?
Signup (it's quick and free) to join the discussions and access the full suite of tools and information that Netrider has to offer.

Weird front suspension system, but it sure rides well

Discussion in 'Bike Reviews, Questions and Suggestions' started by Loz, Mar 22, 2016.

  1. ...So I went up to Sydney last week to ride this thing. Didn't end up getting a crack at it on the track, but had a chance to ride it around the car park a bit and can verify that it's extremely solid and has great front-end feel for a hub-steer, brakes beautifully and has a very tight turning circle. It's lighter than a pair of forks and the thick steering head you need to brace them with, it handles braking better, you can tune the rake and trail with a spanner, and you can decide exactly how much you want the bike to dive, or even rise, under brakes.

    The guys reckon it's up to a second faster PER CORNER than a GSX-R750 once you work out how to use its trail braking advantages and figure out the line it needs. Fascinating. I think they're dreaming, but we'll all find out when they get their Moto2 bike built.

    More here: Up to a second faster per corner? Motorcycle Innovation's futuristic front end

    • Informative Informative x 3
    • Funny Funny x 1
  2. Why go for moto2 ? Why not just prove it locally first?

    The videos on the link explain the concept quite well.
  3. If it works, it might well be the breakthrough of the century...
  4. Which local series could you run it in? It's a prototype chassis. Are there any bike series that allow that locally?

    The Moto 2 class runs a control engine with prototype chassis, so it's probably a good test bed for a bike with a chassis as different as this and no expensive engine/electronics r&d required, so probably relatively cheap. It would also get a lot more attention in regards to potential buyers in an international series if it were to-do well.
    • Informative Informative x 1
  5. Not to disparage this particular effort, which may well be wonderful, the history of funny front ends suggests that it won't be a long term success, if only because motorcyclists, when it comes to spending money, are roughly as conservative as my 116 year old grandma.

    On a personal level, I do recognise the advantages of getting the stering and the suspension and the braking forces properly separated. I found BMWs telelevers allowed even a numpty like me to outbrake some fairly serious sports bikes without running wide and ending up in the scenery.
    • Like Like x 1
    • Agree Agree x 1
  6. If it went real well and was to become the standard on in an international race series and then trickled down to production bikes, are you saying no one would buy it?
  7. Not definitively, but I'd be betting against it selling to enough people to sustain economic mass production.
    • Agree Agree x 1
  8. GeorgeOGeorgeO, wasn't this at Grey Gum on the weekend?! I'm sure I saw a bike there on the concrete bit with a'weird' front end!
  9. I though so too DrSleepyDrSleepy - not sure
  10. BMW managed it, because they could afford to spread the large development cost over several models of popular sellers. It's the tiny companies who can only manage to produce ultra premium boutique models who inevitably price themselves out of the market IMO.
  11. And, undoubtedly, the profitable car division's coffers were raided too :LOL:
  12. I think the other thinng with BMW is that they waited until Norm Hossack forgot to make a patent payment, then swooped in and took it for free.
  13. There's the aesthetic angle too - the alternatives the BMW put into the market were ones that look good (or at least, not too weird). Duolever/Hossack has uprights that align roughly in the direction of the steering head, while Telelever just looks like telescopic forks unless you know what you're looking for. The MotoInno front end doesn't look too bad either, so I wouldn't write it off prematurely.

    Hub-centre steering, on the other hand, just looks wrong with its front swingarm and daylight between the front wheel and handlebars. I'd be hugely surprised if it ever made it big beyond the odd exotic like the Tesi and Vyrus.

    To be fair - and not disputing that Hossack came up with his design independently - Claude Fior came up with it first.
    • Agree Agree x 2
  14. I reckon 10 years ago on an internet forum somewhere, someone was saying the same thing about traction control, 15 years ago it was ABS and fuel injection, yet here we are in 2016 and the latest bikes have all of that plus the whole gyro thing and coloured screen instead of a couple of gauges in the case of the new R1.

    We are slow to take up the latest and greatest in technology or improvements but it does trickle through if the cost justifies the increase in safety, efficiency or the experience of riding eventually. If it didn't we would still be riding around on jam pot suspended, drum braked 10 HP monsters with pushrods and a lever to retard or advance the ignition and a kickstarter! LOL

    I wouldnt be suprised to see a Yamaha, Kawasaki or Ducati flagship sports bike with a front end like this in 10 years time, IF it can be mass produced without adding too much cost to the bike and it provides only positives with no draw backs.

    The big question for me is will a manufacturer pony up the $$ to use it for racing purposes initially. That will probably be the ice breaker.

    They seem to have no issues spending millions of dollars a year on race teams at the top level, so if it really does better lap times, I can see someone wanting to use it to gain an advantage if it is as good as we are being told
    • Like Like x 1
  15. 16 years too late. If it's this century I will be bitterly disappointed. I'm hoping the breakthrough of this century will be a hover bike. One that still corners with leaning, corners faster, and will go over the top of any cars that pull out in front of riders or cut blind corners for head on's thus saving the rider.

    Either that, or a breakthrough with the governments mentality where they stop lying and look at safety through the eyes of anyone not focused on revenue - but I've got to be realistic here and stay out of the realm of fantasy, so I'll just continue to hope for my hover bike. ;)
  16. Good luck with that!
  17. Ah, thanx. I already commented on this thing on Ewe Choob...

    We have been playing around with alternative front ends now for a century. There are some very distinct and logical reasons why that might be a better idea, overall. But so far, the top classes of racing (on road, real road, off road) all do better with telescopic forks. Bimota have been flogging this horse for nearly 40 years. (Tessi.) Ron Haslem used to race a thing paid for by Elf (Oil company) based on an NSR500 motor. It was quick, and it had some advantages over forks. But it had some disadvantages too. Probably the greatest one, is that you can change from Cerriani Italian, to Ohlins Swedish, Showa Japanese, and while there are some differences, there are many more similarities, and there are thousands of people who have some idea how to work on the stuff or set it up. Once you change things, even like BMW does with a system that is a lot like tele-forks, you get into a grey zone... There are quite a few people who know exactly what they're doing with forks, but nobody knows exactly what they're doing with a Tessi... Yes, you can set them up with exactly the same geometry as with forks. But that doesn't always produce exactly the same reaction. And other things entirely become possible, which you just could not do with forks. But is that the right thing to do? ....
    • Agree Agree x 2
  18. Hopefully the hover bike doesn't follow in the bitterly disappointing footsteps of the hoverboard.
    • Agree Agree x 1
  19. #19 kneedragon, Mar 23, 2016
    Last edited: Mar 23, 2016
    Soapbox of mine - sorry.

    We have had people loudly and confidently predicting the imminent arrival of personal flying machines (cars or similar) for OVER a hundred years. But the state of personal aviation (think para-gliders and ultra lights, hang gliders) has not changed much in that hundred years. We have more technology, yes. But that does not change the fact a flying machine is by its very nature, a rather less friendly device than a car. By the end of WW1, a person who wanted to make a personal backyard aircraft, could. Not many people do... Hover boards and hover bikes, like flying cars - perfectly possible, but don't hold your breath.

    There is a right way to build a small aircraft. Look at a Cessna 172. There is a right way to build a car. (Choose a sedan, I'm not getting into that argument...) You can build a car that flies, or a 'plane that drives, but it won't be very good at either... What was that gag that Clive James used to run out all the time? About his mobile phone and fish processing and canning factory?
  20. Unlike abs and traction control, though, as kneedragon has noted, unconventional front ends have a century long history of failing to deliver. Even when backed by Yamaha when they tried it.
    • Agree Agree x 1