Can you teach fast?

[butcher bergs]

It's easier to start on a shitty bike and move up, not the other way around.

Is this fact or opinion?

[csmutty]

Is this fact or opinion?

Neither. I'm not fast so it should be irrelevant in this thread anyways.

[butcher bergs]

Neither. I'm not fast so it should be irrelevant in this thread anyways.

The thread, from what I've been able to surmise, has established that fast is relative and is determined and defined by an individual. IMO, your post is definitely relavent and in the spirit of the thread in that it is part of the determining factor of how an individual might go about defining "fast".

While I realize the context of your post defining a "shitty bike" was in reference to an EX500, is that not to say that an individual's perception (or definition) of "fast" cannot be realized on a bike of that class? Speed has already been defined in miles per hour. The variable is "fast" and how that is determined as well as when the point of "fast" is acheived.

Let's say there is a local track hero who is able to click off the fastest laps during every weekend however these hot laps occur only at this one track. Is that considered "fast"? Perhaps. If someone asked me, my answer would be "yes.....at that track". (no, this is not a cryptic dig at anyone)

So, back on the EX500. Is it really considered a "shitty bike" when a rider attacks a corner on his/ her EX500 and can manage to scare the bejesus out of themselves the same exact way as if a MW rider attacked that same corner but with the same outcome of scaring themselves? The EX500 rider is indeed going fast....for that bike.

Point is, IMO, "fast" can be realized in many differing ways however I'm not sure that a blanket statement such as "it's easier to start on a shitty bike and move up, not the other way around" is anything more than opinion for the simple reason that attacking a corner at 115mph on a MW bike feels nothing like attacking that same corner at 115 mph on our example bike, the EX500. Regardless, same speeds, different perception of "fast".


Disclaimer: I have not attacked any corners at any speed on an EX500. I just know that it'd be a hell of alot scarier doing so on the EX compared to a MW.




EDIT: avatar

[csmutty]

The thread, from what I've been able to surmise, has established that fast is relative and is determined and defined by an individual. IMO, your post is definitely relavent and in the spirit of the thread in that it is part of the determining factor of how an individual might go about defining "fast".

While I realize the context of your post defining a "shitty bike" was in reference to an EX500, is that not to say that an individual's perception (or definition) of "fast" cannot be realized on a bike of that class? Speed has already been defined in miles per hour. The variable is "fast" and how that is determined as well as when the point of "fast" is acheived.

Let's say there is a local track hero who is able to click off the fastest laps during every weekend however these hot laps occur only at this one track. Is that considered "fast"? Perhaps. If someone asked me, my answer would be "yes.....at that track". (no, this is not a cryptic dig at anyone)

So, back on the EX500. Is it really considered a "shitty bike" when a rider attacks a corner on his/ her EX500 and can manage to scare the bejesus out of themselves the same exact way as if a MW rider attacked that same corner but with the same outcome of scaring themselves? The EX500 rider is indeed going fast....for that bike.

Point is, IMO, "fast" can be realized in many differing ways however I'm not sure that a blanket statement such as "it's easier to start on a shitty bike and move up, not the other way around" is anything more than opinion for the simple reason that attacking a corner at 115mph on a MW bike feels nothing like attacking that same corner at 115 mph on our example bike, the EX500. Regardless, same speeds, different perception of "fast".


Disclaimer: I have not attacked any corners at any speed on an EX500. I just know that it'd be a hell of alot scarier doing so on the EX compared to a MW.




EDIT: avatar

You are quite correct sir. What I was making reference to is the fact that if you are running lap times on a EX500 and then move to a bike that doesn't have frame flex and has a supersport riding position, you will probably make yourself faster timewise. If you make the jump from say a 600ss to an EX500 you will be sower by laptimes.

This isn't to say that you will not be fast for that class when you make the jump to the EX. So like you said speed is relative to the bike and the class.

[Kurlon]

I'll provide the counter to the 'shitty bike first' argument. A shitty bike with bad feedback/etc is going to teach a rider to ignore a lot of things that down the road on a better machine they better pay attention to if they want to take the machine to the limit. The other possibility is the overwhelming feedback keeps them constantly scared and never able to move past.

I think what you're TRYING to get across is starting on a LOWER SPEED TIER machine first and then moving up is the way to go. Slow doesn't have to mean shitty, slow with proper feedback teaches you how to read and react without needing to respond as quickly as say jumping on a full build MWSB. Once you've got the program down on the lower tier machine, jumping up will just be a matter of responding 'quicker' to familiar input.

Look at one Mr Dages as an example. He had to get on a machine with cleaner feedback to learn how to push his EX further because the EX wasn't giving him clean feedback to advise him that 'Yeah, you can brake deeper safely, go ahead' in my opinion.

[csmutty]

I'll provide the counter to the 'shitty bike first' argument. A shitty bike with bad feedback/etc is going to teach a rider to ignore a lot of things that down the road on a better machine they better pay attention to if they want to take the machine to the limit. The other possibility is the overwhelming feedback keeps them constantly scared and never able to move past.

I think what you're TRYING to get across is starting on a LOWER SPEED TIER machine first and then moving up is the way to go. Slow doesn't have to mean shitty, slow with proper feedback teaches you how to read and react without needing to respond as quickly as say jumping on a full build MWSB. Once you've got the program down on the lower tier machine, jumping up will just be a matter of responding 'quicker' to familiar input.

Look at one Mr Dages as an example. He had to get on a machine with cleaner feedback to learn how to push his EX further because the EX wasn't giving him clean feedback to advise him that 'Yeah, you can brake deeper safely, go ahead' in my opinion.

SO what you are saying is start on something like a 125 GP bike and then move up to a 250GP or a 600 once you have gotten fast on the 125. That makes perfect sense as long as you have the funds to do so. There is something to be said for pushing the envelope on a shitty bike with a whole bunch of other shitty bikes right next to you.

[Kurlon]

SO what you are saying is start on something like a 125 GP bike and then move up to a 250GP or a 600 once you have gotten fast on the 125. That makes perfect sense as long as you have the funds to do so. There is something to be said for pushing the envelope on a shitty bike with a whole bunch of other shitty bikes right next to you.

SV, motard, lots of other cheapie cheap options besides the EX that I think make a better LEARNING platform rather than the absolute CHEAPEST platform to start on.

Like I said, learning to go 'fast' on an EX is basically learning to ignore the world, you get good at hitting markers but you're not figuring those markers out with the bike, you're matching what others have done before you... aka you'll only ever be as fast as everyone else.

[OreoGaborio]

I think my experiences on the EX500 and it's feedback characteristics taught me how to ride in a way that minimizes that feedback, not ignore it. I often hear comments about my smooth riding and I always attribute that to what I learned on the EX. If you can make an EX500 "shut up" and stop getting out of line, you can most certainly keep a bike with a more stable chassis from complaining. And once you start riding that more stable bike enough that that it starts getting out of shape, you know how to 1: not overreact or get intimidated by it, and 2: change your inputs or riding style so that it smooths out again... Start going faster, it'll get out of shape, rinse & repeat. A bike like the EX may give a lot of feedback, but I wouldn't call it bad feedback. I also wouldn't say that it teaches a rider how to "ignore" what the bike is saying. If anything, the EX amplifies what a more stable bike would say to the rider in similar circumstances, so it teaches the rider how to listen to a bike and how NOT to ignore it.

Like Paul_ED says, "The EX500 is so bad it's good". I think it's a much better learning platform than you give it credit for.

With all of that said, I definitely reached a point on the EX where my riding hit a brick wall. The bike itself was CERTAINLY capable of much faster lap times, but for some reason I just couldn't improve... and in fact, I was going backwards. My best time on the EX was a 1:24.8 and I did that my rookie year. By the time I finally switched to the SV 2 years later, I couldn't even break a 1:29 on the EX. I'm not certain why that happened. I have my theories and they aren't related to the bike itself. I think they were much more rider oriented. Chances are I could have sorted things out and started improving again, but I just wasn't having fun and I needed something different to mix it up and hit the "reset" button.

Regarding Mark Dages experience: What a racer of his level needs to experience to improve may or may not apply to a racer starting from scratch. I don't think anyone here can argue that riding both the SV and the EX served Mark well this year but I'm not so sure that it had to do with the "bad feedback" he was getting from the EX. If I had to guess why riding both bikes helped him out, I think it may be because he found that he was doing or could do things with the SV that he wasn't doing on the EX & vise versa and he used that information to improve his riding on each bike. From what I've seen, that's a rarity. It's not often that a racer can race two bikes on a regular basis and makes huge breakthroughs like he did. More often than not I see it hold people back a little bit.

Hopefully Mark will chime in here, I'd really like to hear his thoughts on the subject

[Degsy]

Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_0_2 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/532.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0.5 Mobile/8A400 Safari/6531.22.7)

I disagree largely. I think it is a mistake for someone who wants to race middleweight to start on an ex500. It's such a bad chassis that it causes bad habits and a lack of confidence. Far better to start on a smaller sportbike like a gp125 or 250 or 400 sportbike or a hawk or something. I don't subscribe to the "if you can get an ex500 around the track fast, you will be that much better on a 600". I believe that if you have the ability to ride an ex500 fast you are probably a pretty good rider anyway and will be good on a 600. The ex didn't teach you anything, you did well on the bigger bike DESPITE the ex500 riding you did.

[csmutty]

Has anyone started racing an EX500 and then moved to a middleweight? If so I would be curious to hear what they have to say.

[Degsy]

Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_0_2 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/532.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0.5 Mobile/8A400 Safari/6531.22.7)

No, they are all cheap bastards. Haha.

[Doc]

fuck those guys on the EX500s and Hawks and SVs. they all think they're fast.

Not fast... Just good.

And you can take my Hawk out anytime.

[OreoGaborio]

Far better to start on a smaller sportbike like a gp125 or 250 or 400 sportbike or a hawk or something. I don't subscribe to the "if you can get an ex500 around the track fast, you will be that much better on a 600". I believe that if you have the ability to ride an ex500 fast you are probably a pretty good rider anyway and will be good on a 600

The parts above I can agree with. If I could have started on a 125GP or something, I probably would have. The rest I have my doubts about. While I'll never tell anyone that the EX500 is the BEST starter race bike, I also wouldn't say it'd be a mistake for anyone to start out on it, although they may want to limit the amount of time they spend on the bike if they plan on racing a more race oriented machine.

I still feel that I learned a lot riding the EX. Could I have learned the same lessons on another bike? Sure, I suppose. But part of the fun of riding the EX was to get the thing all corked up, twisted & squirrely and still ride it out. If anything, that improved my confidence, both in myself and the machine.

It's quite possible that for some riders, it can teach them to ignore the warning signs and ride with bad habits, but I think if you go into it knowing that the goal is to make the bike STOP whining like a bitch and still go fast, it can be a pretty decent learning tool.

I wonder what the Woods & others would say about the EX500 now after having used them for Penguin for such a long time. I'm sure they wouldn't have many STELLAR things to say about it, but I wonder what their opinions are about their use as a training bike.

No, they are all cheap bastards. Haha.

Well yeah, I'll drink to that I'm gettin better though (and by "better" I mean I'm spending too friggin much on this damned hobby!)

[G21forme]

You are quite correct sir. What I was making reference to is the fact that if you are running lap times on a EX500 and then move to a bike that doesn't have frame flex and has a supersport riding position, you will probably make yourself faster timewise. If you make the jump from say a 600ss to an EX500 you will be sower by laptimes.

[TheIglu]

I started on a shitty bike.

Still on a shitty bike

[TheIglu]

Bergs, you are more than welcome to take my EX for a session next trackday I'm at with you. It's a hoot!

[butcher bergs]

Bergs, you are more than welcome to take my EX for a session next trackday I'm at with you. It's a hoot!

Something tells me that my brain would not be able to process waiting for the 1 board before stabbing the brakes.

[csmutty]

He's scared. It's ok bergs.

[butcher bergs]

I believe I did type the word "scared" before rewriting and submitting my post.

[csmutty]

I believe I did type the word "scared" before rewriting and submitting my post.

I need to make sure I am at this TD to witness this.

[Paul_E_D]

The EX served me well as a learning bike. I think it does demand better fundamental skills than a 600 in order to get up to speed. Of course, all bikes require great fundamental skills when you push them to the limits, it's just that you can get nearer the limits of the EX much sooner, so the learning begins sooner. I do think it's important to move on from the EX though.

I find it funny when people talk about the 125 as a starter bike. It's a fully developed race bike capable of higher corner speeds than any other. It demands more precision and skill than most, and plenty of pros in europe have spent their whole careers on them. For me, there wasn't a reason to move up from that bike. Although, now that the class is almost non-existent, I would likley have moved to an SV, or a 600 (if I could afford it)

[Degsy]

Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_0_2 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/532.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0.5 Mobile/8A400 Safari/6531.22.7)

The EX served me well as a learning bike. I think it does demand better fundamental skills than a 600 in order to get up to speed. Of course, all bikes require great fundamental skills when you push them to the limits, it's just that you can get nearer the limits of the EX much sooner, so the learning begins sooner. I do think it's important to move on from the EX though.

I find it funny when people talk about the 125 as a starter bike. It's a fully developed race bike capable of higher corner speeds than any other. It demands more precision and skill than most, and plenty of pros in europe have spent their whole careers on them. For me, there wasn't a reason to move up from that bike. Although, now that the class is almost non-existent, I would likley have moved to an SV, or a 600 (if I could afford it)

I'd put the average 12 year old on an RS125 before I put them on an ex500 from a safety standpoint and a learning standpoint.

[TheIglu]

Just an PSA here:

I will have TWO prepped EX500's ready to ride next trackday season. Sign up now! Be a glutton for punishment!

[Kurlon]

Just an PSA here:

I will have TWO prepped EX500's ready to ride next trackday season. Sign up now! Be a glutton for punishment!

I have a GS500E, but thanks for the offer!

[Chippertheripper]

i'm still waiting for my mentor to sign up to take me on as pupil next year...