The Perfect Bike?

So, ergonomics 101

The ergonomic ideal is a relationship between individually effective components that lets the rider naturally fall into a position that affords the best combination of comfort & control. That includes at a minimum considering handlebars and related hand controls, footpeg design and location, seat and their relationship to each other. This could be extended to include displays, and their usefulness and ease of use.

First I need to re-state that I think the SS is a cool bike with great potential, and that these are MY issues based on my peculiar anatomy and brain. :laugh:

Factory hand levers are at an angle that forces the wrists and fingers to bend backwards to operate. My anatomy isn’t designed to go that way very easily.

The standard Supersport seat feels secure and the position is good initially, but all the pressure is concentrated on a small area, so becomes miserable for me beyond a short distance. I can squirm around to choose bruising either the prostate or the coccyx for a long ride.

The factory grips are almost always a diameter for Trumpian hands. My hands are large, so fatigue is increased by small hard grips.

So…

Simplest free adjustment is angle of the clutch & brake levers. On low sporting handlebars, rotating them down from the factory angles, as in roadracing, takes the strain from the wrist allowing greater comfort and more precise control. Some impediments on factory controls, but easily hacked.

More freebies: Adjusting the freeplay of the throttle, clutch lever, brake lever position and shift lever angle.

Less free, but not too pricey: Grips that fit your own hands, and of a soft enough material that actually grips. Unless you enjoy simulating a racing crouch as you commute, if it’s not a full-time race or track bike consider installing conventional handlebar mounts, giving a nearly infinite choice of bar position: Low flat bars to Ape-Hangers! The comfy bar doesn’t impress the onlookers? Who are you doing this for anyway?

Seat: **** yes! I’ll spend serious money on this item (cheerfully ordered a ‘comfort’ seat, and if needed will have it tailored). I find for me that a firm flat ‘ample’ seating area allows me to distribute the weight between thighs and butt.

Notice the difference in lever angle in the first picture after the brake lever has been rotated down to natural grip position that allows me to comfortably operate it while still maintaining throttle control. Note the lock tab for the clutch adjuster has been bent to allow the clutch lever to be rotated down. This is a temporary solution until I find levers I like.

This thread is not to judge the bike, but to optimize it.

It's important to realize how the bike is to be ridden to determine setup. If this is to be used as a 'sporty' bike then the priorities will be different than for touring. There certainly are both better sportbikes and touring bikes, buy there aren't many prettier bikes, and does count for something to me. The adventure touring bikes are probably the best compromise bikes going, with 160+HP, all the bells and whistles and max comfort, but yet I didn't buy one. They haven't the feel I want, and God are they grotesque!

Right now the bike is a compromise, and that's not a bad thing, the limitations just need to be understood and accepted, or else modified. If a rider is operating in that perfect arena that avoids the Supersport's limitations then it WILL be perfect for that rider: for me that would mean not too fast, not too far, no passenger, clean dry roads, avoid city driving etc etc.

Unfortunately, I occasionally want to ride some distance, so my old body says "work on comfort". I will ride in the rain, and would rather not have mud all over the back of my jacket, and spend hours cleaning grime out of the crevices, so I will put on some sort of fender in back. I will occasional haul my wife, so would like a seat that encourages her to come back for more. I will frequently have to ride in town, so will lower the gearing a touch to address the horrendous drive line lashing below 20 mph, while removing slop from the throttle. The sporting performance is a little tame, but it's STILL more than I will ever be able to use on the street, so I won't spend a penny to try to make it faster, quite happy there.

se7en said:

For me, this bike borberlines "perfect" just as it came from the factory. Minus some cosmetic farkles and TWM levers. The lever position is great, but stock levers left a great feel, so TWM fixed that. Otherwise, good to go. To each their own, so make all the mods you see fit and, most importantly, keep us posted with pics. Inspection is mandatory. :nerd:

Click to expand...

Is the Supersport a little like the sexy girlfriend/boyfriend whose irritating little habits are forgotten every time you look at them (...or ride them? ), but then they open their mouth or eat crackers in bed, again? The good news is that the bike can be modified, that person can't be. :wink2:

To a great extent the right setup is subjective and personal...whatever works for that rider's body and the kind of riding he/she does. But there are some general principles that apply, and if the rider adapts too completely to the bike's initial setup the results can limit comfort & control.

It's great that many riders find everything on this bike just right for them...kudos to the factories for trying to tailor a bike for us. But I've personally never had a new bike remain stock for more than two weeks. That's probably because I'm an old fart and there was little specialization of models when I started riding, and the rider had to adapt the bike to its intended mission. Bikes had different shift patterns, some "1 up", some "1 down", some left side, some right side shift. So I'm used to it. Also when building race bikes I address this from the outset, because the bike will be ridden near 100% of its potential, and I have to be relaxed while doing it.

The rider may be comfortable with the setup because they will remain comfortably within those limits, but attempts to push beyond will be awkward - whether it's speed or endurance being measured. Look at how obsessively factory roadrunners and their teams tweak the bike ergonomically to accommodate the rider, while being careful to not compromise the bike's basic design. A racer needs to be hyper-aware of riding tensely or awkwardly while trying to go faster, as it has the evil consequence of both slowing you while increasing the odds of crashing. BTW, 100% is the limit. :laugh: When Rossi or Marquez crash they've probably exceeded 100%...when the average clubracer/trackday rider crashes they're trying hard at about 90% (and NOT 110% like they claimed :laugh of the bike's potential pace and are baffled as to why they crashed.

I can go to a trackday and watch a rider pushing harder trying to drop laptimes, yet going slower and scaring themselves in the process. Suggesting a few adjustments to controls, setting proper suspension, occasional chassis geometry setup tweaks (e.g. rake, trail, s/a droop etc) and gearing can transform a rider's experience. Of course it's much harder to adjust the rider than the bike, but that's another topic. :laugh: