Are footpegs superior if you don't pedal?

[ebike4healthandfitness]

Low COG does improve tire grip....for any given weight, dynamic forces, tire gum/thread/profile/psi and riding surface. It will be always be that way.

I don't know where you developed that misconception, but it absolutely does not apply to single track vehicles. Once you're leaned into a turn, the tire has no way to discern how far away the center of mass is. The combination of gravity and centrifugal force passes straight through the center of mass regardless how high or low or is.

Lower center of gravity for single track vehicles will always be better for cornering. Can we finally just accept this? This because for any given speed, weight, tire width, tire stickiness, etc etc etc less lean angle is needed when a lower center of gravity is used.

 

[tmho]

Low COG does improve tire grip....for any given weight, dynamic forces, tire gum/thread/profile/psi and riding surface. It will be always be that way.

I don't know where you developed that misconception, but it absolutely does not apply to single track vehicles. Once you're leaned into a turn, the tire has no way to discern how far away the center of mass is. The combination of gravity and centrifugal force passes straight through the center of mass regardless how high or low or is.

Lower center of gravity for single track vehicles will always be better for cornering. Can we finally just accept this? This because for any given speed, weight, tire width, tire stickiness, etc etc etc less lean angle is needed when a lower center of gravity is used.

I agreed with ebike4healthandfitness. I have experience with riding bikes with low and high center of gravity. The one with high center of gravity is less stable than the one with low center of gravity. However, I would love to hear the disadvantage of bike with low center of gravity, but please explain in simple terms if possible.

 

[ebike4healthandfitness]

Low COG does improve tire grip....for any given weight, dynamic forces, tire gum/thread/profile/psi and riding surface. It will be always be that way.

I don't know where you developed that misconception, but it absolutely does not apply to single track vehicles. Once you're leaned into a turn, the tire has no way to discern how far away the center of mass is. The combination of gravity and centrifugal force passes straight through the center of mass regardless how high or low or is.

Lower center of gravity for single track vehicles will always be better for cornering. Can we finally just accept this? This because for any given speed, weight, tire width, tire stickiness, etc etc etc less lean angle is needed when a lower center of gravity is used.

I agreed with ebike4healthandfitness. I have experience with riding bikes with low and high center of gravity. The one with high center of gravity is less stable than the one with low center of gravity. However, I would love to hear the disadvantage of bike with low center of gravity, but please explain in simple terms if possible.

Having a bike with a lower center gravity means your body has a shorter lever to work on. So on a bike with higher center of gravity it is easier to influence the bike's behavior by shifting bodyweight from one side to the other than on a bike with a low center of gravity. This is useful for when direction needs to be changed quickly. Basically high center of gravity gives up aerodynamics, max cornering, max braking (e.g. imagine someone trying to max brake on that tall bike Chalo posted on page 2 of this thread) for the ability to change direction more quickly via bodyweight shifts.

 

[Chalo]

Excellent low center of mass handling qualities:

[youtube]5UBWTshFEIg[/youtube]

 

[BalorNG]

I don't know where you developed that misconception, but it absolutely does not apply to single track vehicles. Once you're leaned into a turn, the tire has no way to discern how far away the center of mass is. The combination of gravity and centrifugal force passes straight through the center of mass regardless how high or low or is.

Lower center of gravity for single track vehicles will always be better for cornering. Can we finally just accept this? This because for any given speed, weight, tire width, tire stickiness, etc etc etc less lean angle is needed when a lower center of gravity is used.

I agreed with ebike4healthandfitness. I have experience with riding bikes with low and high center of gravity. The one with high center of gravity is less stable than the one with low center of gravity. However, I would love to hear the disadvantage of bike with low center of gravity, but please explain in simple terms if possible.

Having a bike with a lower center gravity means your body has a shorter lever to work on. So on a bike with higher center of gravity it is easier to influence the bike's behavior by shifting bodyweight from one side to the other than on a bike with a low center of gravity. This is useful for when direction needs to be changed quickly. Basically high center of gravity gives up aerodynamics, max cornering, max braking (e.g. imagine someone trying to max brake on that tall bike Chalo posted on page 2 of this thread) for the ability to change direction more quickly via bodyweight shifts.

Is it possible to be absolutely dead wrong about ALL things you post about without being a deliberate troll? Either case is rather unflattering if you ask me.

1. If you disregard tire contact 'pulling you back upright' patch forces, there is absolutely no difference between lean angles of high and low CG bikes, just like Chalo said. If you do NOT disregard them, high CG bike will actually need to lean LESS.

2. High CG bike is more *stable*, especially at slow speed (reversed pendulum effect), but less manueverable (same reason, basically, you need more time to get to achieve lean angle for cornering, if you try cornering too hard before that you assume correct leaning angle you will high side).
*body weight shifts*, however, affect balance on a bike with low CG more, but effect is very minor - except for 'differential leaning' on wide handlebars - that it can be pretty significant (but, again, lower CG is better), but again this means mostly for slow speed handling that of little interest for majority of this forum

So far, ebike4healthandfitness was a veritable fount of knowledge and wisdom for this forums. With a single caveat - you simply have to take everything he is talking about and put it on it's head.

 

[BalorNG]

Obviously, however, low CG (and long WB) bike will indeed allow better braking/acceleration.
An other thing regarding high cg (and long WB) - to achieve stable, predictable handling the bike will have to be much more rigid (laterally and torsionally), which increases mass, which require further frame stiffening... is there a Tsiolkovsky equation for bicycles?

 

[Eastwood]

Just ordered these foot peg mounts and will try to put one long bolt through the bottom bracket to connect these brackets. Will have to add a couple of large washers to keep the mounts from pulling inside the bottom bracket. Also that lock washers, I can’t think of the name

Once I get the peg brackets sorted and mounted I can mount these types of pegs.

Plan to switch back between pedals and motorcycle pegs depending on what type of riding.

Need the motorcycle pegs for Enduro riding. My pedals are killing my shins from pedal slips

 

[alexscard]

can you post the link to those footpegs? having a 3kw ebike i found hard to ride for long with just the pedals, because my weights goes too much on the saddle without something stable to support the feet and on long trips this becomes uncomfortable

 

[Eastwood]

can you post the link to those footpegs? having a 3kw ebike i found hard to ride for long with just the pedals, because my weights goes too much on the saddle without something stable to support the feet and on long trips this becomes uncomfortable

Here’s the links for the foot peg mounts and motorcycle pegs. Please note I haven’t tried this yet as it probably will take some slight modification to get this to work. It’s definitely not plug and play. The brackets are for a Harley Davison rear peg mounts.

If I can get this to work I’ll give you the details.
Need to find a really strong bolt to connect the two mounts through the bottom bracket. I’m sure the standard junk from Lowe’s Home Depot would bend!

https://www.ebay.com/itm/Wide-MX-Style-Foot-Pegs-Rests-Pedals-Bobber-For-Harley-Dyna-Sportster-XL883-1200-/184026965460?mkcid=16&mkevt=1&_trksid=p2349624.m46890.l6249&mkrid=711-127632-2357-0

https://www.ebay.com/itm/Passenger-Foot-Peg-Bracket-Female-Clevis-Male-Mount-for-Harley-Softail-50900-72-/234132781433?mkcid=16&mkevt=1&_trksid=p2349624.m46890.l6249&mkrid=711-127632-2357-0

 

[Eastwood]

So if one adds motorcycle pegs to their E bike and you see a cop just start fake pedaling as if you have crank arms and pedals :lol:
You got to get the peddling motion just right, From a distance no one would even know :lol:

 

[Eastwood]

I was able to bolt the motorcycle pegs directly to the bottom bracket. Used M8 1.0 - 25mm bolts. Probably will get some longer bolts, 30 or 35 mm long. Using a wrench to hold the bottom bracket from rotating while testing. The wrench is temporary, I’ll figure out a different solution to keep the Bottom bracket/pegs from rotating.

 

[Eastwood]

I may still use these as it would give a wider stance to the pegs. Did some test riding and the pegs work great!.. but they do feel a little narrow. So hopefully I can bolt the adapter straight to the bottom bracket then connect the pegs. That should be 1” extra of width on each side. Haven’t received these adapters yet.

 

[Eastwood]

In response to the original post, which was a question asking if motorcycle pegs are superior if you’re not peddling.

Well in my perspective absolutely yes! I rode yesterday for the first time with motorcycle pegs and had way more control over the bike. Everything was easier with the motorcycle pegs. The only downfall to the pegs is the legal issue, but that really depending on where you live and what you’re doing.

So yeah if you don’t need to pedal and you’re not worried about Karen’s or legal issues then go for it!

I plan to switch back-and-forth because when I commute through urban environments I would rather have the pedals for legal purposes. That being said I found some 75 mm crank arms to try out when using pedals.

 

[sleepy_tired]

Excellent low center of mass handling qualities:

[youtube]5UBWTshFEIg[/youtube]

lol.

As far as high vs low center of gravity. Imagine you have a stick with a weight on one end. Imagine balancing that upright on one finger, like most kids do.

Is it going to be easier to balance when the stick is 3 inches tall or 3 feet tall?

 

[BalorNG]

Excellent low center of mass handling qualities:

[youtube]5UBWTshFEIg[/youtube]

lol.

As far as high vs low center of gravity. Imagine you have a stick with a weight on one end. Imagine balancing that upright on one finger, like most kids do.

Is it going to be easier to balance when the stick is 3 inches tall or 3 feet tall?

To truly understand this analogay (that is very upt), one must understand to balance the bicycle *by steering* you steering into the fall, change your direction and create an impulse of centrifugal force that puts you back upright (and leaning on the other size of if you overshoot, resulting in possible wobble issus) - so indeed the bike is balanced 'from ground up'.

Body english input is possible and vital, but usually at slow speed and on slippery surfaces (and bike trials of course), because without good traction you are left with 'body english'.

And the higher the CG, the more reaction time for balance corrections of course - both with brooms and tall bikes

But *stability* and *manueverability* are negatively correlated, so there are tradeoffs.

 

[ebike4healthandfitness]

Excellent low center of mass handling qualities:

[youtube]5UBWTshFEIg[/youtube]

lol.

As far as high vs low center of gravity. Imagine you have a stick with a weight on one end. Imagine balancing that upright on one finger, like most kids do.

Is it going to be easier to balance when the stick is 3 inches tall or 3 feet tall?

A low racer recumbent is a poor example to use because it is not just a lowering of center of gravity but it is a changing of a whole bunch of other variables at the same time as well.

A much better example of lower center of gravity would be to simply lower bottom bracket height but keep all other aspects of geometry and seating position roughly the same.

 

[Chalo]

A much better example of lower center of gravity would be to simply lower bottom bracket height but keep all other aspects of geometry and seating position roughly the same.

This is an easy experiment you can do yourself. Get a beach cruiser or other simple bicycle that rides nicely, and try it with different size wheels. You can even use shorter cranks when pedal strike becomes a problem.

If you do it, you'll have an informed opinion rather than only conjecture.

I've owned commercial bikes with original bottom bracket heights between 10.25" and 13", and I've made bikes with BBs as high as about 15" (not including my own tallbike at about 40"). I can tell you from riding them that higher BB/center of mass by itself is not inferior in maneuvering or stability. But you don't have to believe me; you can check it out on your own.

 

[speedmd]

I can tell you from riding them that higher BB/center of mass by itself is not inferior in maneuvering or stability.

Maybe while seated and coasting along on daily commutes. While standing? NoT so much so. Just try it, with a bunch of stumps-logs to traverse or in your favorite rock garden or on real steep stuff. Count the number of times you end up on your head in comparison! :lol:

 

[BalorNG]

A much better example of lower center of gravity would be to simply lower bottom bracket height but keep all other aspects of geometry and seating position roughly the same.

This is an easy experiment you can do yourself. Get a beach cruiser or other simple bicycle that rides nicely, and try it with different size wheels. You can even use shorter cranks when pedal strike becomes a problem.

If you do it, you'll have an informed opinion rather than only conjecture.

I've owned commercial bikes with original bottom bracket heights between 10.25" and 13", and I've made bikes with BBs as high as about 15" (not including my own tallbike at about 40"). I can tell you from riding them that higher BB/center of mass by itself is not inferior in maneuvering or stability. But you don't have to believe me; you can check it out on your own.

On steep, technical terrains low CG (and long WB) IS good, but it has nothing to do with stability per se - current crop of 'progressive geometry' bikes are pretty horrible from that perspective, but with being able to ride down (and) very that steep, technical terrain without pitching backward or forward.

 

[BalorNG]

I can tell you from riding them that higher BB/center of mass by itself is not inferior in maneuvering or stability.

Maybe while seated and coasting along on daily commutes. While standing? NoT so much so. Just try it, with a bunch of stumps-logs to traverse or in your favorite rock garden or on real steep stuff. Count the number of times you end up on your head in comparison! :lol:

Hah, beat me to it

 

[Chalo]

I can tell you from riding them that higher BB/center of mass by itself is not inferior in maneuvering or stability.

Maybe while seated and coasting along on daily commutes. While standing? NoT so much so. Just try it, with a bunch of stumps-logs to traverse or in your favorite rock garden or on real steep stuff. Count the number of times you end up on your head in comparison! :lol:

My bike with a 13 inch bottom bracket is an East Coast style woods bike, so designed to do what you're talking about. Anyway I don't ride on terrain that's not for riding on, so I wouldn't know about that.

Standing pedaling or tight maneuvering on pavement shows no disadvantage of higher BB.

 

[speedmd]

Pedal strikes are major issues off road so you do need to raise the bb a bit for certain. I have often wondered if a simple- light bb lock up mechanism would be useful for 60 + degree drop off's. Such a device would allow one to load only a lowered rearward pedal with most of the rider weight. That and a dropper post would be trick for getting the correct body position and weight where you need to keep from doing a superman.

 

[Hummina Shadeeba]

maybe said in the thread but wouldnt a higher center of weight be worse for fast stopping? lifting the back wheel off more easily if high. when talking about control or handling surely that's included.

not related but why wouldnt i want longer chainstays? especially if i want to get from zero to whatever in the shortest time

 

[ebike4healthandfitness]

A much better example of lower center of gravity would be to simply lower bottom bracket height but keep all other aspects of geometry and seating position roughly the same.

This is an easy experiment you can do yourself. Get a beach cruiser or other simple bicycle that rides nicely, and try it with different size wheels. You can even use shorter cranks when pedal strike becomes a problem.

That idea sucks.

By reducing wheel size you are also reducing trail.

Then there is the tire and rim change which will also impact handling

 

[Chalo]

This is an easy experiment you can do yourself. Get a beach cruiser or other simple bicycle that rides nicely, and try it with different size wheels. You can even use shorter cranks when pedal strike becomes a problem.

That idea sucks.

By reducing wheel size you are also reducing trail.

Then there is the tire and rim change which will also impact handling

Trail works adequately well within a very large range of values, and this experiment wouldn't change it by a very large amount.

Also, this experiment is easy and inexpensive to do, which is a benefit for you because you obviously haven't done any real world experimentation with your ideas.