Thumb brake?

[sib]

Does anyone here have any experience with thumb brakes?  I'm interested in installing one on my 2021 V7E5850 Stone.  Thanks for any advice or comments.

[Cal3]

seen them on singles racers......

[lucky phil]

Does anyone here have any experience with thumb brakes?  I'm interested in installing one on my 2021 V7E5850 Stone.  Thanks for any advice or comments.

You can buy master thumb brake kits with the M/C the lever and a choice of fork or bar mounting but they're very expensive.

Phil

[Zenermaniac]

What are it’s advantages?

[HarveyMushman]

What are it’s advantages?

You don't have to use your foot.  They're popular in elite racing (MotoGP) for reasons not relevant to street riding but I can imagine a few reasons why someone would want one on the street. 

[sib]

What are it’s advantages?

In my case, it has nothing to do with racing.  A couple of years ago, I had a bad crash, which left my legs and feet not as trustworthy as before.  That, plus balance issues from advancing age, have made me less graceful on the bike.  I particularly have trouble coming to a stop properly, since if I use the rear brake, I can't simultaneously use my feet to hold the bike upright once stopped.  So, I cheat and use the front brake to stop with.  That, of course, leads to other problems, and I have dropped the bike a few times while coming to a stop.

I hope that a thumb brake would allow me to come to a stop with the rear brake while keeping the bike upright with both feet.

It ain't easy gettin' old!

[RinkRat II]

      From what I've read on them it sounds like a good fit for your application. Their purpose in racing is to allow some rear braking while cornering and hanging off the bike.  Good Luck.

     Paul B

[lucky phil]

In my case, it has nothing to do with racing.  A couple of years ago, I had a bad crash, which left my legs and feet not as trustworthy as before.  That, plus balance issues from advancing age, have made me less graceful on the bike.  I particularly have trouble coming to a stop properly, since if I use the rear brake, I can't simultaneously use my feet to hold the bike upright once stopped.  So, I cheat and use the front brake to stop with.  That, of course, leads to other problems, and I have dropped the bike a few times while coming to a stop.

I hope that a thumb brake would allow me to come to a stop with the rear brake while keeping the bike upright with both feet.

It ain't easy gettin' old!

In 50 years of riding road bikes from touring to GT to Hyper sports bikes the only things I've ever used a back brake for were holding the bike on a hill while waiting for the lights to change( very rarely) and for adjusting my exit line on the race track. If you think using the front brake to stop is "cheating" then I suggest you review your braking techniques. The rear brake on any of my 5 bikes could be disconnected and I'd probably never know for months.
In other words if you lean proper braking techniques you rarely ever need the rear.

Phil   

[Tom]

   I practice with only front brake stopping frequently.

[Moparnut72]

Several utube coaches say to not use the front brake when coming to a stop. I say bull shot. Could be trouble with a big heavy bike in a sharp slow turn but not necessarily. I use the front brake all the time, I also use the rear for slow speed stability.
kk

[AJ Huff]

My MSF class said to ALWAYS use the rear brake and then add the front brake. The rear brake drops the bike to stop level. How I've always done it.

-AJ

[Bisbonian]

My MSF class said to ALWAYS use the rear brake and then add the front brake. The rear brake drops the bike to stop level. How I've always done it.

-AJ

This is not what the current, or in the past 10 years, MSF class teaches. The MSF teaches both brakes simultaneously and if you choose one brake before the other on the written test question about this very thing then you will miss that question.

Of course it's hard to keep coaches from giving their opinions.

[kirby1923]

I've had my R1150R (Rockster) for going on 16 years and the rear pads have never been changed, track days included.

First time I rode a Guzzi I couldn't believe the poor brakes. I didn't know at first that the brakes were linked and you only got half the front unless you used the rear as well.

The first thing I did when I acquired my CX100 was Delink the brakes!

I was introduced to thumb brakes during my club racing days and this is a great help on the track,(won't bore anyone w/details on technique).

:-)

[AJ Huff]

This is not what the current, or in the past 10 years, MSF class teaches. The MSF teaches both brakes simultaneously and if you choose one brake before the other on the written test question about this very thing then you will miss that question.

Of course it's hard to keep coaches from giving their opinions.

Yes it was 20 years ago. That technique works great on my Ambo though. I guess we could all use a refresher course at some point.

-AJ

[lucky phil]

This is not what the current, or in the past 10 years, MSF class teaches. The MSF teaches both brakes simultaneously and if you choose one brake before the other on the written test question about this very thing then you will miss that question.

Of course it's hard to keep coaches from giving their opinions.

Vehicle testers and teachers, what a bunch of clowns they can be. My 89 YO mother has to do a driving test every 2 years here by state law. You should see the technique requirements the 20 something YO testers require. One is your hands (both) never leave the wheel at any time! So when you go around a corner, any corner but esp a tight one like a small roundabout instead of rotating the wheel and going one hand over the other as is usual and practical you are supposed to shuffle your hands around the wheel in small bites as you turn it. Try it sometimes, it's the most f***ing stupid and unnatural and ridiculous way to drive a car you can imagine, and unsafe. Another rule to pass the test is when you stop at a stop sign you must wait 3 seconds. So stop count 1,2,3, and if you go on 2 you fail! Stopped is stopped for gods sake. There's no road traffic law that says 3 seconds is required. Where on earth do these clowns come from.
I did a motorcycle magazine 4 way test once that went for a few days and one of the professional Journalists was a petite young woman (well we were all young at the time) and the bikes being tested were the latest Sports bikes. I noticed she killed the engine at every set of lights and restarted again so I asked hey why she did that. She replied that her riding instructor had told her years before that when stopped at lights to keep the bike in gear ready to accelerate out of harms way in case anyone was going to run into the back of you at the lights. Presumable you would accelerate through a red light into the intersection to do this or into the back of the car in front of you at the lights. Anyway this was her technique but she couldn't keep the clutch held in for long due to lack of grip strength so she kept the bike in gear, killed the engine and released the clutch. Restarted every time and rode away. Idiot instructor meets stupid rider, good combination.

Phil     

[Huzo]

In 50 years of riding road bikes from touring to GT to Hyper sports bikes the only things I've ever used a back brake for were holding the bike on a hill while waiting for the lights to change( very rarely) and for adjusting my exit line on the race track. If you think using the front brake to stop is "cheating" then I suggest you review your braking techniques. The rear brake on any of my 5 bikes could be disconnected and I'd probably never know for months.
In other words if you lean proper braking techniques you rarely ever need the rear.

Phil   

Why not Phil…?
The rear brake can and does provide a % of the stopping effort required. Also, because the brake is aft of the centre of mass, you will (as you know), inherit a level of stability.

Just use both of them to the level that is appropriate ?

[Huzo]

Multi world 500 champion Mick Doohan, resorted to one with good effect after his almost career ending leg injury.

[lucky phil]

Why not Phil…?
The rear brake can and does provide a % of the stopping effort required. Also, because the brake is aft of the centre of mass, you will (as you know), inherit a level of stability.

Just use both of them to the level that is appropriate ?

The rear brake can provide useful stopping power on some bikes like cruisers and laden touring bikes but on a sports bike or a race bike braking at any significant level it's more of a hinderance than a help due to the lack of weight on the rear wheel. So to give an extreme example the hardest braking I've ever done ( with one exception) is turn 4 at PI. Every one of my bikes has more than enough braking performance to get the bike stopped there with the front only with 2 fingers and the back has so little weight on it that it's moving around anyway. Why would I want to try using any rear brake there? All that does is add complexity for no gain at all. I dont get the bike stopped any faster and have even less control and one more thing to do.  Long touring bikes and cruisers with a low c of g are a bit different but I don't ride them. The centre of mass is irrelevant when the back wheel is basically carrying no weight. The rear brake for me is a secondary thing and used consciously more for bike control than stopping which is sensible for emergency situations as I will go for the front not the back in that scenario. Even on a bike like you Norge in a genuine emergency braking situation the pitch forward will make the rear brake virtually redundant. If I can have the back wheel of a fully loaded two up K100RS BMW off the ground in a full on life threatening emergence stop situation then you may understand my disregard for it.

Phil     

[Huzo]

The rear brake can provide useful stopping power on some bikes like cruisers and laden touring bikes but on a sports bike or a race bike braking at any significant level it's more of a hinderance than a help due to the lack of weight on the rear wheel. So to give an extreme example the hardest braking I've ever done ( with one exception) is turn 4 at PI. Every one of my bikes has more than enough braking performance to get the bike stopped there with the front only with 2 fingers and the back has so little weight on it that it's moving around anyway. Why would I want to try using any rear brake there? All that does is add complexity for no gain at all. I dont get the bike stopped any faster and have even less control and one more thing to do.  Long touring bikes and cruisers with a low c of g are a bit different but I don't ride them. The centre of mass is irrelevant when the back wheel is basically carrying no weight. The rear brake for me is a secondary thing and used consciously more for bike control than stopping which is sensible for emergency situations as I will go for the front not the back in that scenario. Even on a bike like you Norge in a genuine emergency braking situation the pitch forward will make the rear brake virtually redundant. If I can have the back wheel of a fully loaded two up K100RS BMW off the ground in a full on life threatening emergence stop situation then you may understand my disregard for it.

Phil     

Yeah ok.

[Huzo]

In 50 years of riding road bikes from touring to GT to Hyper sports bikes the only things I've ever used a back brake for were holding the bike on a hill while waiting for the lights to change( very rarely) and for adjusting my exit line on the race track. If you think using the front brake to stop is "cheating" then I suggest you review your braking techniques. The rear brake on any of my 5 bikes could be disconnected and I'd probably never know for months.
In other words if you lean proper braking techniques you rarely ever need the rear.

Phil   

Nah..
Certainly the harder you apply the brake/s, the more the weight is biased toward the front and the rear brake becomes progressively more redundant.
But in the world where us mortals live, an application of brake that represents 75% of maximum, you’d still have a significant amount of total mass on the rear wheel and as such, would be well advised to use the rear brake.
If part of you wants to believe you are Jack Miller and wave the rear in the air on each stopping action…?
Then yes, (almost) all of what you espouse is true.

[lucky phil]

Nah..
Certainly the harder you apply the brake/s, the more the weight is biased toward the front and the rear brake becomes progressively more redundant.
But in the world where us mortals live, an application of brake that represents 75% of maximum, you’d still have a significant amount of total mass on the rear wheel and as such, would be well advised to use the rear brake.
If part of you wants to believe you are Jack Miller and wave the rear in the air on each stopping action…?
Then yes, (almost) all of what you espouse is true.

You don't even need to have it in the air Huzo. On my track bike it's still on the ground, just, but the available traction from it is so minimal that why bother with the rear brake. Same on the road, even a 75% braking event, the front still has more stopping power available if you choose to use it so what's the pointy in using the rear brake? Save on pad wear? The truth is when a bike is on the maximum braking limit with the exception of cruisers and heavily laden tourers 98% or more of the available stopping power is on the front and what the rear provides is compromised by adding directional control and lockup modulation tasks the rider almost certainly doesn't want to focus on in those circumstances. There's a reason guys like Mick Doohan and other old 500 racers when they did the Suzuka 8 hour race on the "Diesels" as they called them (the 4 strokes) used to simply brake into the corners with the clutch pulled in because even the engine braking compared to a 2 stroke 500 used to upset the rear of the bike. it's also a major reason slipper clutches were invented for racing and then made their way to the street. If there was any value in engine compression helping the bike brake then they wouldn't have been invented it. The riders would have just used less rear brake into the corners but they were already using none at all.

Phil       

[jacksonracingcomau]

Option for OP might be a Clake (aussie made, popular with dirtbike riders) requires an hydraulic clutch but can be done using existing foot brake too

https://www.clake.com.au/

THE DESIGNER’S PERSONAL OPINION
Every rider has different preferences for their motorcycle controls – these are my thoughts and my personal opinions on the Dual Control system.This allows you retain your rear brake pedal when fitting the Clake One, Clake Two and Clake Pro Lever.  There are no disadvantages to having Dual Control (apart from the extra cost!) so generally I would recommend opting for this as it will make the transition to using a hand brake easier. Personally I don’t have dual control on any of my bikes –  a Gas Gas trials bike with a Pro Lever, a KTM motar with a Clake Two, and a Beta RR300 with a Pro Lever. At any rate the Dual Control system can be easily disconnected, allowing you to remove the rear brake pedal and master cylinder. You can also purchase a cover plate if you want to remove  the Clake Dual Control slave cylinder. Conversely, a there is a kit available to convert a hand-only unit to Dual Control. I hope this helps!
regards, Owen Hutchison

[jacksonracingcomau]

Multi world 500 champion Mick Doohan, resorted to one with good effect after his almost career ending leg injury.

Understatement of the year
Devastating  effect
So much so, still the go, simply because Mick’s leg was (is) fkd, I’m sure he’d rather have had an ankle that worked,  one of those points in history, no one had thought of it before, really odd when you think about it, bicycles grew motors, rear brake control moved to foot, long before gearchange did


 

In 50 years of riding road bikes from touring to GT to Hyper sports bikes the only things I've ever used a back brake for were holding the bike on a hill while waiting for the lights to change(

Phil   

 
Maddest modern control to me is “hill assist” front brake, not on learner bikes but massive adventure tourers
I’ve taught many 5-6 year olds to master throttle snd brake together for hill start but people get licences that can’t do this

[Kev m]

Just to enter the fray with a few thoughts....

* Harleys (and bikes sized/shaped/weight biased like them) really can benefit from the use of the rear brake too. But my current one is electronically linked through the ABS system and any braking that starts above 35 mph uses and modulates all three calipers on its own.

* But although I've owned plenty of Harleys I've also had more of everything else and THAT more and more prompted me to really rely on the front brake first, foremost, and often ONLY. I mean yeah I drag the rear during tight low speed maneuvers and maybe sometimes I consciously use it on hard braking elsewhere, but really it was sometime between the R1100RSa and the Breva 1100 (and one time braking the Breva 1100 like I did my own Harleys, which caused a rear tire lock up) that I changed to MOSTLY ignoring the rear brake.*

*Note see above regarding current Harley, that actually has made this habit worse because I don't NEED to use the rear brake lever almost ever....though it's still there for weird occasions - parking lots, gravel etc.

* Our current fleet makes this habit even WORSE.... the Ducati Monster really REALLY doesn't need that rear brake. It's for show man, especially considering the giant pizza cutters on the front. And both our V7s, yeah, I mean, I CAN use it, I just don't need it often.

I'm not saying the OP should or should not - you do you boo - but I don't use it much at all and I doubt it is really NEEDED much on a typical smallblock, typical usage, bla bla bla ...

RIDE SAFE(ly)

Kev