h a l f b a k e r yNormal isn't your first language, is it?
add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random
news, help, about, links, report a problem
browse anonymously,
or get an account
and write.
register,
|
|
|
Most two wheelers come with two brakes, one for front and one for rear wheel. This is not the case with cars; Cars have one single brake that applies to all the wheels.
So, why the hastle of two saperate brakes for two wheelers ? ..Simply combine them into one single brake for ease of operation and
increasing safety.
Baked.
http://en.wikipedia...ined_braking_system
You didn't really think you were the first to think of this, did you? [spidermother, Jun 08 2011]
Please log in.
If you're not logged in,
you can see what this page
looks like, but you will
not be able to add anything.
Annotation:
|
| |
There is a very good reason for separating the brakes. Braking a two-wheeled vehicle is very, very different from braking a four-wheeled one. Separate and proportional control of the front and rear brakes is essential for safe riding. Even the most sophisticated bikes, with ABS, shaft drive and traction control, still have separate braking controls. |
|
| |
I completely agree with [8of7]. Locking a front wheel
in a car is a minor inconvenience, the same on a
motorcycle causes a REALLY bad day. To complicate
this, the contact patch on a motorcycle is SO small
that is can actually fit on common bits of debris
found on roads like leaves. The same is not true for
"most" cars. |
|
| |
One problem with saperate brakes is that , rider might use only front brake in slippery conditions, which can lead to disaster. Combining brakes with proper propotions, will always be safer than using only one of the brakes( either front or rear). |
|
| |
// rider might use only front brake in slippery conditions // |
|
| |
Yes, but only once. Thus are incautious riders efficiently removed from the Gene pool. |
|
| |
Dependant upon circumstances, it may be appropriate to use ALMOST entirely front brake, even though it sounds counter intuitive. |
|
| |
Any system that automatically combines the two would have to be very smart, taking into account not only speed but more than one axis of orientation of the bike. In addition, surface traction (dirt vs wet pavement vs mud) would influence the decision. |
|
| |
As [normzone] says, you'd have to make this device complicated in some way, such as as tilt sensor, or a deceleration sensor or anti-lock. Without at least some suggestion of such a method, such as a pendulum on a lever, this is just a wish for something fairly obvious. |
|
| |
Although a one-lever system would be nice for some people. I have heard many a beginning bicycle rider told to never touch the front brake, and seen a few others lock up the front and go over. |
|
| |
But a little bit of training and thought could and should be used instead. [ ] |
|
| |
I mostly use ONLY the front brake (due to it being on the right, and me having issues with left-hand control) except for major downhill speed. Luckily it's pretty flat where I live. I'm not a hardcore mountain biker or anything, mostly roads and easy tracks.
(Also, a friend of mine devised a one-handled, two-brakes antilock system for me, that we never got around to implementing. I should revisit his design, to see how well it might work...) |
|
| |
In addition to the numerous points of my fellow
(motorcycle) riders
illustrating the need for separate braking, may I point out
that a few of the gigantic touring cycles available these
days have computer-controlled balance-braking.... Making
this idea baked, cooled, packaged and sold. Sorry. |
|
| |
// it may be appropriate to use ALMOST entirely front brake// |
|
| |
Can you explain which circumstances ? |
|
| |
Due to the weight shift while braking, the front
brake has significantly more stopping power than the
rear. As long as you carry your weight intelligently
and aren't going down a super-steep hill, you can use
the front brake alone, although the best is a
combination of both. |
|
| |
I can only guess that VJW doesn't ride a two wheeler. |
|
| |
The relatively short wheelbase and high centre of gravity of motorcycles creates significant changes in load distribution between the front and rear contact patches. This requires that brake force distribution can be controlled in order to optimise the use of those contact patches. |
|
| |
This is also the case, to a lesser extent, with any vehicle. Recently, systems have been developed which control brake force distribution in cars, in order to achieve what riders have been doing since bikes had two brakes. |
|
| |
I once owned a bike which had a heavy forward weight bias. On that machine, it was appropriate to use almost entirely the front brake. |
|
| |
In the UK, legislation requires that the vehicle has two independent braking systems. Bikes with linked brakes still have a handlebar lever and a foot brake pedal, plus some more hose and valves in between. Even without bias control, the linked system is more complex. |
|
| |
So, we're saying this is a bad idea then? |
|
| |
The general view seems to be moving that way, yes. |
|
| |