msf class sizes(sitting her watching one)

[Kurlon]

Hey, I guess if you don't have the skill to modulate the front perfectly AND keep the rear straightlined and rear suspension settled with a 30% rear brake, then just use the front. You should know that you WILL take longer to come to a stop. You canna change the laws of physics, Captain.

First, not questioning MSF in any way shape or form. As I noted, I'm trying to get back into dual brakes on the street. On a sport bike, max braking, not on the street, does the dual brake rule still outgun just using the front to the point of unloading the rear? If so, I'm going to go back to dual braking on the track also.

[OreoGaborio]

On a sport bike, max braking, not on the street, does the dual brake rule still outgun just using the front to the point of unloading the rear? If so, I'm going to go back to dual braking on the track also.

This is how I look at the whole on-track braking issue.... yes, using both brakes will shorten your braking distance (unless the tire is off the ground).... but because I'm using the front brake so heavily, this reduces the effictiveness of my rear brake (it's simple physics... the more weight is on the front, the less is on the rear and the less it can contribute to slowing you down without locking up).... Thus, the benefit of shortening my braking distance by a couple of feet is easily outweighed by the complexity of the situation and my inability to process that much info all at once... Too many things going on at once.... using my rear takes way too much of my concentration to make it worth using.

[Degsy]

How much throttle control do you have while covering the front brake? I'm a bit confused by you saying that experienced riders in high speed situations should be covering the front brake.

[Degsy]

This is how I look at the whole on-track braking issue.... yes, using both brakes will shorten your braking distance (unless the tire is off the ground).... but because I'm using the front brake so heavily, this reduces the effictiveness of my rear brake (it's simple physics... the more weight is on the front, the less is on the rear and the less it can contribute to slowing you down without locking up).... Thus, the benefit of shortening my braking distance by a couple of feet is easily outweighed by the complexity of the situation and my inability to process that much info all at once... Too many things going on at once.... using my rear takes way too much of my concentration to make it worth using.

Exactly. I'm not saying you should always use rear brake, far from it. I hardly ever do that on the track. However, in an emergency stop, both brakes is far far better. On the track, you know when you need to brake and how hard. On the street, you go around a corner at 60MPH and see a moose, you should be using both brakes after standing the bike up.

[oVTo]

The class last week I went to was 26 in the Friday evening class. Then, they split us into 13 each class, morning, and then afternoon. <snip>

RE- back to MSF class sizes.

Were there 3 Ridercoaches for the class of 13 on the range? It's supposed to be 12 max for 2 RCs.

[Degsy]

RE- back to MSF class sizes.

Were there 3 Ridercoaches for the class of 13 on the range? It's supposed to be 12 max for 2 RCs.

oops, sorry.

Yeah, what about that? I have seen 1 coach coaching 7 riders and 2 coaching 13 before though..

[oVTo]

oops, sorry.

Yeah, what about that? I have seen 1 coach coaching 7 riders and 2 coaching 13 before though..

One RC can coach up to 8 riders, but I thought 12 was max on any range. Did you see 13 during the whole course, or just the eval? Maybe it's ok to add riders for the eval since it's one rider at a time through all parts? I dunno.

[Jaynnus]

One RC can coach up to 8 riders, but I thought 12 was max on any range. Did you see 13 during the whole course, or just the eval? Maybe it's ok to add riders for the eval since it's one rider at a time through all parts? I dunno.

I think it is ok, because you could have 12:2 for the class and have someone come back only to re-test.

And I was always told the max was 6:1...thus why we have 8:2 even on a modified

[Kurlon]

Exactly. I'm not saying you should always use rear brake, far from it. I hardly ever do that on the track. However, in an emergency stop, both brakes is far far better. On the track, you know when you need to brake and how hard. On the street, you go around a corner at 60MPH and see a moose, you should be using both brakes after standing the bike up.

Ok, that's a logical explanation for the two styles, I'm now satisfied with this thread.

[toocrazy2yoo]

LOL this one is great. I have had students that are much larger than 6'2 do the whole course on a rebel and have been totally fine and great riders. I also am curious what techniques were taught that were totally unnecessary. Oh I am betting that you couldn't believe that to initiate lean you actually press on the hand grip in the direction that you want to turn.

My guess is that he put a foot down in the box (3), did good on the swerve, was 3 feet over the max braking distance (3), and on the corner he did not use both brakes and was too slow (8). Which comes to a total of 14.

Nice of the Deggs not to bounce me, so I'll answer these one at a time. Mutt, I was counter steering before you were born. You don't know shit. Read my post, check with Reed and Derrick at Apex, Corp., Virginia, ask em how Jim Christian did on the BRC. They'll tell you just like I did. They lost over 25% of the course Sunday morning. My bike crashed on final practical eval in the morning class. They hadda hammer the starboard footpeg back to stock, and a pair of channelocks had to be employed to straighten the throttle-side brake lever so I could ride the damned thing. They'll also tell you they didn't hear a word of complaint from me until THEY asked, at the end, when they handed me my card, minus 5 points, over the rear brake in the 135. So go suck, ok, Mutt?

[toocrazy2yoo]

alot can be learned by the students while watching their peers mistakes and successes. It also gives them time to relax and take in the task at hand.

There are of course those that need and will benefit from a one and one situation for which is available for a price.

The MSF ratio is 6:1 student to instructor and has a high success rate, it can't be all that bad!

Agreed, Jaynns, I said that. For a novice, it's better than nothing except for a couple of points.

[toocrazy2yoo]

Didn't learn much in your 28 years then did you? You haven't a clue if you think using the rear brake isn't right and you haven't a clue what we earn so why speculate?

I wish you were in my MSF class and I wish you had tried to undermine me in the class or on the range. I get at least one know-it-all per class and I cut 'em down in seconds. Usually the people who whine about the bike "not fitting them" are the people who are having problems getting through the exercises. It's always the bike's fault. The rebel's footpeg to bar distance is 27" You must have one hell of an inside leg meaurement if that's your feet to knee length. You're either 7'3" or full of shit. My guess is the latter.

I wouldn't do that to you, undermine you in/during the class, that is. But, the cables for the clutch on one side, and the throttle on the other hang down another two inches below the handlebars. As I said, I accommodated the piece O' shit without complaint. Doesn't change the fact the bikes don't fit. YOU are full of shit, not me, given you weren't there to see the bikes. YOU, cut ME down? You take that attitude with me, as a paying customer, I'd have your ass fired, Deggs. It would stick, too. You have no clue.

[toocrazy2yoo]

Why didn't you take the ERC?

As for the bike, why did you pick that one? (We let our students pick).

I am glad you didn't undermine the instructors, It shows class and maturity. I would like to know what you think is a joke in the class for my own education to try and make my classes better. I would also like to know what you think is ineffective and hard on the bikes?

I can't change MSF curriculum but being aware of what students might find a "joke" would be a good thing. (You know my stance on using both brakes

As I told Deggs, I wouldn't and didn't undermine the instructors. Glad you respect that. Sorry Deggs takes all this personal-like. And I NEVER said rear brakes aren't effective in some scenarios. But not every scenario. If Deggs can't handle that, I can't help that. And I acknowledged you folks, as employees, can't change a damned thing. But, what, I'm not entitled, for my 350 bucks, to contradict, in the face of a bunch of noob crashes, the methods? That's nuts. You and me, Doc, we agreed to disagree. But these other folks? Their opinions are NO more valid than mine just because the state (Commonwealth) tells them what to think and teach if they're instructors. The vehemence of the protest from Mutt and Deggs leads one to wonder if they're hiding their REAL opinons. In any case, they don't like being talked back to, do they?

[toocrazy2yoo]

First of all never have I had someone crash or seen someone crash in the braking exercise or eval. If they do "crash" in that exercise it is a low speed tip over because their handlebars were not straight when they stopped. And yes, clutch, both brakes, and down shifting is going to be a challenge to some people at first. OH NO A CHALLENGE!?!? What are people going to do now? I WILL stay at the range through lunch if asked, or even show up early if someone is looking for remedial coaching. If you truly want to do well in this class some extra effort may need to be shown depending on the person.

Back to the braking issue. Do you think all novices are going to have brakes just like yours? Seems like you want this course to be custom tailored to you when it has to fit in all kinds of riders and non-riders. Are you really going to tell someone who rides a cruiser that they should not use their rear brake when stopping quickly in a straight line because their rear wheel will be too light which may cause the rear to skid? I just hope that "their company" does not take your evaluation of them too seriously.

So how do you think that this course should be taught then? What other techniques are inadequate? Seems like you are just still upset that you lost your M?

Jeez, Mutt, you really are a hard head. I said if I were riding a cruiser, had a passenger or some other form of weight over the rear wheel, I'd advocate using the rear brake. Why are you so obstinate? Go back and read my post. But equal use of the front and rear brake leads to crashes in noobs. YOU might handle it, *I* DO handle it, but a noob that grew up on rear coaster brakes? Not always. And the best advice offered was 'keep it locked until you crash, because that's better than a high-side"? Seriously. That's the advice. Well, that ain't good enough shipmate. If the training bikes have limitations, fine. But don't teach to those. Teach perspective. Because you know and Deggs knows, and Doc knows, in half the cases, pass or fail, these folks are gonna go out and buy a 600 Ninja or bigger sportbike and lock an ineffective rear brake and have nothing to fall back on but the MSF advice to "keep it locked". That's a BS, lazy teaching technique and you know it. But then, you're an instructor. You have your marching orders.

[toocrazy2yoo]

toocrazy -- I know you're an opinionated guy, but Degsy knows what he's talking about...


I took the motorcycle safety course May 2008 and I would recommend it to anyone, some stuff is very basic, but it's very worth the time.

Deggsey knows what MSF tells him to teach, and what he knows from his own experience. That's all Deggsey knows. And he doesn't know one bit more than I know, or you, or anyone else. He has opinions. And, his opinions clash with far more knowledgeable folks than himself. He takes off on folks from there. But one size does NOT fit all, and I think teaching noobs that one size DOES fit all, given the consequences, is lazy, if not immoral. But I DID say from the start, for absolute noobs, BRC is better than nothing, but the braking thing needs adjustment in the information department. That's all I said. Doc was the only one thought my position was reasonable, if unworkable, given the limitations of the course. The rest of the folks that had objections, MSF instrctors all, went through the roof.

[butcher bergs]

[Doc]

Maybe you should take the MSF Rider coach class...

Too crazy (Jim?) As an experienced rider you have some habits and education that a noob wouldn't. That makes some of what the BRC teaches irrelevant or unnessecary. That is not to say it is wrong.

Since 1973, the MSF has set internationally recognized standards that promote the safety of motorcyclists with rider education courses, operator licensing tests, and public information programs. Its mission is to make motorcycling safer and more enjoyable by ensuring access to lifelong quality education and training for current and prospective riders, and by advocating a safer riding environment.

The MSF works with the federal government, state agencies, the military, and others to offer training for all skill levels so riders can enjoy a lifetime of safe, responsible motorcycling. The MSF is a not-for-profit organization sponsored by BMW, Ducati, Harley-Davidson, Honda, Kawasaki, KTM, Piaggio, Suzuki, Triumph, Victory and Yamaha.

Smarter people than you OR me came up with this stuff...

[toocrazy2yoo]

The ERC is the experienced rider course. You don't have to take the BRC prior to taking the ERC. (Not according to the MSF).

FYI, I took my ERC and lofted the rear wheel about 3 feet in the quick stop, the instructor asked me to try and modulate the front brake better.

Why didn't you pick the dual sport? It might have fit better. Some people can jump on ANY of the bikes and pass with flying colors. Some can't You quote racers on braking... don't you think there is a difference between racers and noobs? 70/30 is not equal... How would anyone think it is?

I offered to bring my Bandit 1200, Doc. No way. In Va, the only path to a scot-free "M" is the BRC. So the BRC is what I bought. I'd have ridden a scooter, a Goldwing, or a god damned bicycle if that's what they had to ride in order to pass. I can ride anything on two wheels. As I said, they had 90% Honda Rebels, a dual purpose of some sort (crashed and in the trailer), and a 250 Ninja. also crashed. The rest were Honda Rebels and GN 250s. And I didn't bitch. I rode what they had and passed the course. And I didn't say a word of complaint until THEY asked what I thought of the course, after I passed -5 practical and an aced written (big deal, I got 150,000 miles and no crashes). Any moron except an absolute noob, me, and Mutt and Deggsey included, can pass BRC or Advanced. But lord forbid anyone contradict the Gawds of the MSF.

If 70/30 is NOT equal and we all know it isn't, don't teach it as if it is. Or at least, MSF shouldn't force you folks, instructors, to teach it as if it is without qualification.

[toocrazy2yoo]

Agreed.

Besides don't you think it is a good idea to have good habits and not 'forget' to use your rear brake in an emergency situation? Those extra feet of stopping distance could be all the difference in the world. As for the comments about crashing the bike on the emergency stop...Derek said it right it is usually a tip over either for the bars not being straight or for releasing the rear brake when it locks and that right there is a good skill to learn how to react if you get a rear or a front tire skid. If they can't do it at 15 mph, how will they make an emergency stop at street speeds?

My favorite are guys that are the same height as me and complain about the bike, it's this, it's that, it's the bike...blah blah blah. I just make sure to use their bike for the demo and say..'nope, I don't see a problem with the bike"

Better to teach good progressive use of the front brake and if the bike and situation is appropriate, THEN feed in rear brake. As for the bikes and your "favorite guys", I've said a hundred times, I passed and didn't complain about their crashed, bent, broken, mal-adjusted bikes at the time until THEY asked, and onlt after I passed. So take your blah-blah-blah somewhere else, will ya Jaynnuus? Clearly you don't know every damned thing either, if you think one size fits all noobs and all bikes..

[toocrazy2yoo]

Wirelessly posted (Samsung Lube.... Er, Glyde: Mozilla/5.0 440x240 Samsung SCH-U940 NetFront/3.4)



Who shit in your cheerio's this morning? The course is designed to teach the widest spectrum of riders how to safely operate a motorcycle and I think it does a great job of that. Not everything it teaches is 100 percent correct for every bike design out there, but all of the techniques still apply to some degree. The course is not the be all end all of motorcycle education, it's up to the student to contine learning about THEIR bike and THEIR riding..... So stop acting like a friggin d-bag and go eat some more of that awesome lobster. Maybe it'll put you in a better mood.

Deggsey sat down and shit in my Cheerios, and if he knew what he's talking about or voiced it in a respectful tone, I'da kept my mouth shut. But he came on as if HE knows everything, and he doesn't. MSF is not infallible, but Deggs works for them, he's an admin, he's gotta flex those know-it-alls. It's fine, really. Ultimately, we all care about what happens to peeps out there. We just disagree about methods and instructions. And, to the limits of ejection, I tend to talk back. So's Deggs. No harm done.

I already said, MSF, in the BRC, does what it can. But that doe NOT mean there isn't room for disagreement and adjustment. That's all I ever said. And it comes from watching noobs, following MSF instruction, crash out. That's nearly 25% of a 26-man/woman class. I dunno if it's the bad advice they got, or the fact it's going to cost them another 349.00 to take another shot at it that pisses me off.

You tell me..

[toocrazy2yoo]

Wirelessly posted (Tilt: HTC-8900/1.2 Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows CE; IEMobile 7.11) UP.Link/6.3.1.20.06.3.1.20.0)

I think you shit in his cheerios pete.

It's cool. In the end, we're all gonna agree to disagree.

Dunno WHY peeps have to be so disagreeable right outta the box, though. It started out pretty respectful with me and Doc and went from there. But I'll hang with it!

[toocrazy2yoo]

Wirelessly posted (Samsung Lube.... Er, Glyde: Mozilla/5.0 440x240 Samsung SCH-U940 NetFront/3.4)

With that attitude, I'd like to... But the guy scored lobster for Spence's party so I'll give him a pass even though he needs to learn some respect..... Degsy doesn't know what he's talking about? ''Yeah, right... Yeah fuckin' right... You don't like lighthouses? You suck.''

No pass necessary, I brought Lobstahs for Spense and the boyz. So if ya wanna smack me around at the next lobstah party, what do I care? It was fun though, no?

Deggsey knows what HE knows, I know what *I* know, but noobs don't know nuttin. And teaching rear brake equal to front brake with no qualification ain't right. MHO.

Besides, I dig the Chesapeake Light, does that count?

[toocrazy2yoo]

Hey, I guess if you don't have the skill to modulate the front perfectly AND keep the rear straightlined and rear suspension settled with a 30% rear brake, then just use the front. You should know that you WILL take longer to come to a stop. You canna change the laws of physics, Captain.

Oh and Keith Code? 45% voodoo and 45% based on understood and accepted priciples and practices, with 10% of a mix thrown in just to be controversial. Name a top racer from the last 5 years (or even 10 years) who uses him.

Just my opinions, you understand.

Of course, Deggs.. But I didn't lead off shitting in your Cheerios, YOU did that. But Keith Code coached the greats, since you revisit the subject, and that's more than you've done. You coach noobs, a valiant activity to say the least. I just don't agree with a major element of the course. Call it voodoo and controversial if you like, since the one part doesn't fit MSF, but there IS merit in my argument, and the enormous protest resulting from the difference of opinion proves it. Folks are very sensitive on this, and mostly the MSF types. It's cool though.

[toocrazy2yoo]

One thing to keep in mind is the BRC is designed for beginning riders, especially those who have never even sat on a bike. That includes people who take to riding easily and those that need a bit more support. Some things in the program make sense for working on the range but will change as they advance on the street. For example, on the range we tell the students to cover the clutch but not the front brake. I'd hope most new riders would go from the range to riding in very light traffic where covering the front brake still isn't needed. Eventually, they may start riding in situations where a faster response is needed, so covering the front brake is necessary. But should we teach that as part of a beginner curriculum? Not in my opinion because the risk of a new rider over-reacting to a situation with too much front brake is greater than the risk of the delayed response due to not covering the brake. There's a few other examples of things that may seem odd to an experienced rider going through the BRC, but believe it or not, there are reasons behind the actions we teach in MSF.

Another RC recommended taking the Experienced (or Advanced) Rider Course instead of the BRC. In VA, the BRC is the only license-waiver course, so that wasn't an option. When this was brought this up in an earlier thread, I contacted some VA RCs and asked. It's too bad, this is a classic case of someone who would have gotten more value out of the ERC if that option was available.

I understand the Rebel complaint. It's unique to the Rebel, I've never had a problem with the Kawasaki or Suzuki cruiser-style trainers. I'm about 6'1" too (34" inseam) and had a hell of a time with the bars hitting my legs and restricting the full lock turn. The only exercise it impacted is the tight u-turns, and the solution was as you described, move your knees out enough to get the bars past them. But that's not a good riding posture. I think that if the handlebars were adjusted properly, this wouldn't be an issue. If bars adjustment is the cause, it would explain why others haven't had this same problem. It's also not an issue for shorter riders, so swapping bikes would have solved it as well.

Like Doc, I'm interested in learning what other techniques you thought were hard on the bikes and ineffective or a 'joke'. If you don't want to air it out on the list, feel free to PM me. It's always good to get different perspectives. It's likely that a number of things that seemed ridiculous to an experienced rider like you are important to help a total beginner take those first steps.

Ovt0, I recognize all this. And I'm a public animal, I've answered each dogging one-by-one. And I recognize EVERYONE comes from a place of concern. We're all sick and tired of bikes going down over bad skills. We see it in the "rider down" threads we see three times a week. We don't say it, but we all know a lot of it is mistakes, rider or whatever, but we're all concerned.

Even the folks that consider that my "Cheerios were shit in", I know damned well they're deeply concerned about what we're seeing out there and also that their opinion is different from mine. I just have a difference of opinion about rear braking. I'm seeing too many accidents in the papers that were avoidable by folks slamming on the rear skids and crashing out when the front brake and avoidance woulda pulled their fat outta the fire.

Whether the MSF folks have time to teach it or not, when I went through the BRC, I heard not ONE word about the fact that a bike is two feet wide and that's all you need to get through if you'll just LOOK for that two feet instead of blowing all your attention on equal application of front/rear brake as if THAT is all you need. In all due respect, I think that's a hole in the BRC that needs adjustment. Why does that have to be a bad thing?

As I've said a hundred times, I did NOT hassle these guys. Reed and Derrick, or whatever his name was, are wonderful doods, they teach to the course, and they recognize the problems of time, space and bikes.. And I welcome anyone to call APEX and talk to them and ask them about me. If they will. If not, is ok. Like I said, I did the team-player thing, I gave em what they wanted, passed, and analyzed throughout, without undermining them, what they were giving us. I didn't offer my opinions until THEY asked, after they handed over my card.

But for me to voice objection in a forum separate and apart from that time and place and get so completely shit on over it, especially by an MSF-type makes no sense. In aviation and motorcycling, constant analysis should be made for improvement in training and operational methods, and the rigid vehemence and objection in support of the status quo, which is so clearly lacking given the number of accidents, is a little shocking to me. But I appreciate yours' and Docs replies and responses. The other stuff, I might just send you a PM. No point dragging it out here.

Regardless, I don't doubt Deggs and Mutt mean well, are concerned, and simply won't budge on the issues at hand. We all come from a place of concern, whatever we all think of one anothers' opinions.

Edited to add, because yall wore me flat out, that's all I have to say on the matter, unless anyone else has other issues to add?

[OreoGaborio]

Jim... try quality, not quantity... you're getting worked up and throwin shit at the fan over practically nothing because apparently you were misinformed and misled by a couple of crappy MSF instructors.

Quit while you're behind and stop digging your own grave... cuz I'll be brutally honest, you're seriously making it look like you're a gigantic asshole.


All I'll say is going through the RiderCoach Workshop opened my eyes to WHY the MSF teaches what it teaches and I gained another level of understanding and acceptance. I personally don't ride by the MSF book, but I have absolutely no qualms about teaching by it & that's got NOTHING to do with a paycheck.