Downloaded from SAE International by University of New South Wales, Saturday, August 25, 2018
970963
Motorcycle Slide to Stop Tests
Christopher J. Medwell, Joseph R. McCarthy, Michael T. Shanahan
ABSTRACT
This paper reports the results of testing
conducted to determine the post-upset sliding friction
factor on asphalt pavement for a sport motorcycle
equipped with a full coverage fairing. A literature review
revealed limited data regarding this type of motorcycle.
Therefore, these tests were conducted and are reported
in the interest of adding to the database available to
accident investigators.
BACKGROUND
Motorcycle accident reconstruction often
involves the determination of the speed of a motorcycle
at the beginning of an accident sequence. In virtually all
serious motorcycle accidents, the involved motorcycle
will, at some point, fall to the ground and slide along the
road surface for some distance. Accurate calculations
of the motorcycle’s speed prior to it falling over depend
on evaluating the energy dissipated by the sliding
motorcycle. This energy calculation, in turn, depends on
the determination of an appropriate friction factor.
A brief review of the published literature reveals
some data sources which address the friction factor of
motorcycles sliding on their sides. For example, Day
and Smith (1) reported on motorcycle friction factors in
1984. Various accident reconstruction handbooks
(2,3,4) either refer to Day and Smith’s paper or publish
similar values from other testing. Typical friction factors
for motorcycles sliding on their sides on asphalt
pavement range from 0.35 to 0.75. Values for softer
surfaces such as grass, gravel, or sand are higher,
ranging from 0.65 to 1.1 or more. Refer to the Appendix
of this paper for a review of the published data.
Most of the data originate from tests performed
in the mid 1980’s. Some dependence on speed was
noticeable in some testing, with higher speeds generally
resulting in lower friction values. Some dependence on
motorcycle type was also observed, with lower friction
values obtained from tests of motorcycles with broad or
rounded surfaces such as crash bars or fairings.
Friction factors for racing style sports motorcycles with
BTS Consulting Engineers
Windsor, Ontario, Canada
full coverage fairings were unavailable, since this type of
motorcycle was not generally available for street use.
A few more recently published test results for
modern motorcycles (5,6,7) indicate that fairing-
equipped sport motorcycles do tend to slide on their
sides at lower friction values than do conventional
motorcycles. Results for these tests range from 0.26 to
0.42 for high speed tests (80 to 100 km/hr). Data for
current motorcycle designs, however, continue to be
sparse. Therefore, a decision was made to undertake
the tests reported herein.
PROCEDURE
The motorcycle utilized in the slide tests was a
750cc 1992 Kawasaki Ninja ZX-7. The motorcycle had
approximately 4400 km on its odometer at the time of
the testing. The Ninja was a sport-style street
motorcycle equipped with triple disc brakes, in-line 4-
cylinder engine, aerodynamic full fairing covering both
sides of the motorcycle, cast aluminum wheels with
relatively wide tires and low mounted handlebars. The
fairing presented a large, smooth surface to the
roadway, much like a toboggan. The handlebars and
foot pegs, made of aluminum, protruded less from the
side of the motorcycle than corresponding steel
components on other classes of street motorcycles.
These factors were expected to produce a lower friction
factor than that of a conventional motorcycle. The
motorcycle was also equipped with a factory 4-into-1
exhaust with a single large muffler canister on the right
side.
This motorcycle had been involved in a single
vehicle accident prior to our tests. The accident involved
a long slide to a stop on the motorcycle’s right side. The
motorcycle’s left side was undamaged. In order to
prepare the right side of the motorcycle for our tests, we
undertook a number of repairs prior to the test. These
repairs included:
•Rotation of the muffler on the exhaust pipe so an
undamaged surface of the muffler was exposed to the
road surface during our test.
 Downloaded from SAE International by University of New South Wales, Saturday, August 25, 2018
•Replacement of the right side lower fairing assembly.
•Replacement of the right side driver’s foot peg bracket.
•Replacement of the upper fairing support bracket.
•Installation of the handlebar, turn signals, and side
reflector from the left side of the motorcycle onto the
right side.
With the exception of the right outboard edge of
the upper fairing, the right side of the motorcycle was
undamaged immediately prior to our testing. The fairing
had sustained slight cracking and scuffing during the
original accident which we did not deem necessary to
repair prior to our tests.
The tests were designed to approximate, as
closely as possible, the motion of a motorcycle falling
over from an upright position. The motorcycle was
positioned upright on a fabricated platform mounted on
the right side of a pickup truck. (See Figure 1.) The
height of the platform was adjusted so that its underside
was as close as possible to the roadway surface. This
test setup resulted in the motorcycle tire contact surface
being approximately 90mm above the roadway. The
motorcycle was held upright by an assistant riding in the
bed of the pickup truck. The truck was accelerated to the
test speed, then the motorcycle was released and
allowed to fall over sideways onto the road surface.
Figure 1. Test Vehicle Platform
The tests took place on a straight, level roadway
located on the property of a local airport. The road
surface consisted of asphalt pavement approximately
6.5 m in width. The surface was weathered and had not
been open to vehicular traffic for some time. The
roadway aggregate projected beyond the level of the
black binder, giving a light colour and some coarseness
to the surface as opposed to a smooth pavement
surface. The road surface was bordered on both sides
by grass-covered shoulders. The grass was quite long
and well-established. The surface underlying the grass
was relatively smooth.
Tests were conducted at a speed of 80 km/hr.
The test speed was monitored to within 1 km/hr by radar
aimed at the pickup truck. The radar device was a
Muniquip MDR2 and was calibrated with a 50 km/hr and
a 95 km/hr tuning fork just prior to the tests.
The motorcycle was photographed before and
after each test and the damage documented. The tests
were video taped by cameras located both in the pickup
truck and on the side of the roadway.
After the motorcycle slid to a stop, the sliding
distance was measured. Measurements were taken
from the location of the first evidence of the motorcycle’s
touchdown on the road surface to the centre of the
position of the motorcycle at rest. A total of four tests
were conducted, three on the right side of the
motorcycle and one on the left.
OBSERVATIONS
RESULTS OF TEST NO. 1 - During test no. 1,
the pickup truck was driven parallel to the roadway, and
the motorcycle was released at a location near the
centre line. Gouge marks created by the right foot peg
and front axle, along with green paint transfers from the
fairing, were the first evidence of touchdown. Also at
touchdown, the front tire and wheel rim of the
motorcycle left a deep scrape and a black tire scuff in
the asphalt. A radial deformation of the cast aluminum
rim of the front wheel was obvious after the test. The
motorcycle, with the exception of its front wheel, slid
smoothly on the asphalt surface. The front wheel, after
the initial touchdown, immediately bounced up and then
back down, leaving another black scuff mark at a second
location. The tire then came down again and bounced
lightly several more times, leaving black scuff marks to
the road surface during the contact time. The
intermittent black tire scuff marks were visible for the
majority of the length of the slide on the paved surface.
The motorcycle slid in a direction about 4 or 5
degrees to the right of the travel path of the pickup truck
and test platform. The motorcycle slid for 41 m on the
asphalt surface before it left the right edge of the
roadway and went onto the grass. During the "on-
pavement" portion of the slide, the motorcycle was
relatively stable with the front wheel leading. Evidence
from the slide along the road surface consisted of
intermittent black tire scuff marks from the front tire, as
previously described. There were also scrape marks
and scuff marks from the various aluminum components
of the motorcycle contacting the road surface. Beyond
the paint transfers at initial touchdown, there was no
other evidence on the asphalt of the fairing contact.
After the 41 m on the asphalt, the motorcycle continued
on the grass shoulder to a point 56 m from its original
touchdown point before coming to rest. While on the
grass, it tore up a substantial quantity of turf which
became lodged in the fairing. The motorcycle rotated
 Downloaded from SAE International by University of New South Wales, Saturday, August 25, 2018
counterclockwise approximately ½ of a revolution about
the front wheel during the final 15 to 20 m of the slide. It
came to rest with its front wheel pointing in the direction
from which it had come.
In addition to the deformation of the front wheel
rim, the motorcycle sustained abrasions to the lower
right side fairing assembly, the lower edge of the right
fork tube, the right handlebar, the brake lever, the brake
lever pivot area, the right side of the upper fairing, the
driver’s foot peg, the passenger’s foot peg, and the
outboard casing of the muffler. The right mirror broke
from its mount, and the right front turn signal came out
of its mounting area. With the exception of the damage
to the front wheel, all of these damages were consistent
with the expected damage for this kind of slide.
RESULTS OF TEST NO. 2 - Test no. 2 was
also conducted at 80 km/hr. The motorcycle’s initial
sliding trajectory was similar to test no. 1. It came into
contact with the grass 43.2 m from the touchdown point.
During the slide on the asphalt, the motorcycle rotated
slightly in a clockwise direction. As a result, the front tire
of the motorcycle came into contact with the grass first.
This occurred after the motorcycle rotated approximately
90 degrees to an orientation approximately
perpendicular to the roadway, with the tires of the
motorcycle leading the slide. As the front tire entered
the grassy surface, turf was dug up and the motorcycle
began to rotate rapidly clockwise. As it entered the
grass, the motorcycle rotated rapidly while traveling
approximately parallel to the edge of the road (i.e.,
having changed direction slightly from its original path
towards the right). The motorcycle rotated
approximately 540 degrees before coming to rest with its
front wheel pointed towards the direction of the start of
the slide. The total slide distance was 63 m, 43 m on
asphalt and 20 m along the asphalt/grass shoulder
interface. At rest, the handlebars and front wheel were
located over the asphalt surface with the remainder of
the motorcycle on the grass.
The evidence on the road surface from test no.
2 was similar to that from test no. 1 except the initial
front wheel contact with the asphalt was less severe. A
black scuff from the front tire was visible for the majority
of the slide distance on the asphalt. Various scrapes
and short duration scratches to the asphalt were noted
along the entire distance of the slide. There was
sufficient evidence to note the beginning of the slide, the
direction of the slide, the location of the interface
between the asphalt and the grass, and the distance the
motorcycle slid on the edge of the grass.
Additional damage to the same surfaces of the
right side of the motorcycle was noted. There was new
evidence of additional scuffing to the front tire and wheel
rim from this test; however, there was no deformation of
the wheel rim.
RESULTS OF TEST NO. 3 - For test no. 3, the
pickup truck was driven on a 4 or 5 degree angle to the
left at the time of the release so that the motorcycle
would travel parallel to the road during its slide. This
method produced a slide straight down the roadway a
distance of 69.5 m. The motorcycle was initially stable
with the front wheel leading, but rotated 180 degrees
counterclockwise toward the end of the slide and came
to rest with the front wheel pointing back toward the start
of the slide. Similar evidence on the road surface was
produced during this test. The initial front wheel contact
with the asphalt was minimal. The black tire scuff from
the front tire was present throughout the length of the
slide. Additional damage to the same surfaces of the
right side of the motorcycle was noted.
RESULTS OF TEST NO. 4 - The last test was
conducted by releasing the motorcycle onto its left side.
Since the platform was mounted to the right side of the
pickup box, this involved releasing the motorcycle with
its rear wheel leading. The absence of a muffler on the
left side of the motorcycle exposed more of the plastic
fairing to the road surface and allowed the end of the
rear axle to contact the asphalt.
During the initial portion of the slide, the
motorcycle rotated clockwise 180 degrees to a position
with the front tire leading. It was stable in this attitude
until near the end of the slide, when it began to rotate
counterclockwise slightly, just before it came to rest.
The pickup truck was again driven on an angle
so that the total slide distance was on the paved surface
as in test no. 3. The test speed was 80 km/hr, and the
sliding distance was 86.3 m.
Short gouges were created on the road surface
at touchdown by the handlebar end and the rear axle.
The remainder of the slide distance exhibited short
scratches and scuff marks similar to those observed in
the other tests.
The motorcycle exhibited abrasions to a larger
area of the lower fairing assembly than had been the
case on the right side tests. At the rear, the absence of
a muffler canister had allowed abrasions to the rear
fairing area just below the seat and to the protruding end
of the rear axle.
ANALYSIS
TEST NO. 1 - Based on an 80 km/hr release
speed, and the 56 m slide length, the average friction
factor for the slide was 0.45. Because of the grass torn
and dug up during the portion of the slide on grass, it
was obvious that the motorcycle had decelerated more
rapidly on the grass than on the asphalt. Also, the
digging in of the front wheel rim and tire at the beginning
of the slide probably created a temporary additional
drag. Drag from the front tire of the motorcycle
 Downloaded from SAE International by University of New South Wales, Saturday, August 25, 2018
eventually resulted in the motorcycle’s rotation as the
sliding velocity decreased.
TEST NO. 2 - Based on the 80 km/hr test speed
and the 63 m slide distance, the average friction factor
for the total slide was 0.4, a factor slightly lower than in
test no. 1. Two reasons were immediately apparent for
the difference:
1.The digging in of the front tire at touchdown was much
less than during test no. 1.
2.The interaction with the grass at the edge of the road
was less, with less material being torn up and the
motorcycle never being fully onto the grass.
Other possible factors such as the grinding
down of projecting surfaces are less likely, in our
opinion, to have had a significant effect.
TEST NO. 3 - The motorcycle slid a distance of
69.5 m on asphalt pavement during test no. 3. Based
on the 80 km/hr release speed, the friction factor for this
test was 0.36.
TEST NO. 4 - The motorcycle slid a distance of
86.3 m on asphalt pavement during test no. 4. Based
on the 80 km/hr release speed, the friction factor for this
test was 0.29. We suspect that the lower friction factor
was at least partially due to the absence of a left side
muffler, which increased the portion of the weight of the
motorcycle which was resting on plastic fairing
components during this test.
Test Number Distance (m) Drag Factor
Asphalt Grass Average
1 (right side) 41 15 0.45
2 (right side) 43 20 0.4
3 (right side) 69.5 - 0.36
4 (left side) 86.3 - 0.29
The tests were designed to obtain values for the
friction factor on asphalt. However, due to the 4 or 5
degree angle at which the motorcycle departed from the
test platform, the last 15 m of sliding in test no. 1 and
the last 20 m of sliding in test no. 2 took place on the
grass. The 4 or 5 degree angle stayed constant
throughout the four tests, suggesting that it was due to
the lateral velocity attained during the fall to the
roadway. The angle could affect the test speed by
about 0.3 km/hr. The asphalt portions of all tests
appeared to be virtually identical in terms of motorcycle
dynamics, except for the unusually severe front wheel
interaction at the start of test no. 1. Therefore, tests
nos. 1 and 2 should have produced results similar to
those of tests nos. 3 and 4 if not for the fact that the
motorcycle left the asphalt surface.
Based on the similar distances the motorcycle
slid on the asphalt in tests nos. 1 and 2, the motorcycle
should have been traveling at about the same speed in
both tests as it entered the grass. Because the grass
portion of test no. 1 involved much more interaction with
the turf than was the case in test no. 2, the motorcycle
slid a significantly shorter distance on the grass in test
no. 1.
To test the hypothesis that the asphalt friction
factor was similar for all four tests, we calculated the
resultant grass friction factors. Our calculations,
assuming an asphalt friction factor equal to the average
of the results from tests nos. 3 and 4, suggest that the
motorcycle was traveling at about 53 to 55 km/hr when it
entered the grass in test nos. 1 and 2. Thereafter, the
friction factor on the grass was approximately 0.78 in
test no. 1 and 0.55 in test no. 2. The magnitude of
these values appeared to be consistent with the
observations made of the motorcycle during these two
tests.
In analyzing the data from tests nos. 3 and 4, an
error factor of plus or minus 1.5 km/hr for the initial
speed was included. This error factor accounts for the
possible error within the radar unit and for the angle at
which the motorcycle slid with respect to the path of the
pickup truck. Therefore, the range for the asphalt
friction factor for this motorcycle in these tests was
between 0.28 and 0.38.
We note that the lower end of the range was
obtained from test no. 4, when the motorcycle was
sliding on its left side. During this test, more of the
weight of the motorcycle was being carried by the
fairing, since there was no muffler canister on the left
side of the motorcycle. The reduction in friction factor
expected from a fairing equipped motorcycle may
depend on how much of the weight of the motorcycle is
borne by the fairing components as opposed to the
metal protrusions such as foot pegs, handlebars, and
exhaust components.
The lower end of the range from these tests was
consistent with the results reported by Raftery (6).
Raftery’s method used cables to suspend the motorcycle
horizontally an unspecified distance above the roadway
before it was released. Raftery reported a result of 0.26
after testing an unspecified make and model motorcycle
retrofitted with a fairing at a speed of 85 km/hr.
A similar test method was utilized by Carter et al
(7) to test a number of motorcycles, including two sports
models with fairings. The motorcycles were suspended
with their lowest point approximately 50mm above
ground. For the 1987 Yamaha FZ700T, a sports model,
tested once at 97 km/hr, the reported result was 0.42.
When the same motorcycle was tested at 48 km/hr, the
results ranged from 0.40 to 0.48.
 Downloaded from SAE International by University of New South Wales, Saturday, August 25, 2018

4. Baxter, Albert T., Motorcycle Accident Investigation,

Carter et al also tested an earlier sports
motorcycle, the 1984 Yamaha FJ1100, and reported
results ranging from 0.38 to 0.48 at 97 km/hr and from
0.42 to 0.52 at 48 km/hr. The fairing on the FJ1100 did
not extend to fully cover the sides of the motorcycle as it
does on most current sport model motorcycles. It may
be that the fairing on this motorcycle does not bear the
majority of the weight of the motorcycle during sliding
tests.
Institute of Police Technology and Management,
University of North Florida
5. Golder, U., and Becke, M., “Skid Deceleration Values
for Motorcycles with Full Fairings,” Verkehrsunfall
und Fahrzeugtechnik,Sept 1990
6. Raftery, Barry, “Determination of the Friction factor of
a Fairing Equipped Motorcycle,” 950197, Society of
Automotive Engineers, 1995

FALL TIME - Analysis of the video tapes
showed that the time for the motorcycle to fall from an
upright position to roadway contact was about 2/3 of a
second. This fall time was relatively constant throughout
the testing.
7. Carter, Thomas J.,et al, “Measurement of Motorcycle
Slide Coefficients,” 961017, Society of Automotive
Engineers, 1996
8. Lambourn, Richard F., “The Calculation of
Motorcycle Speeds from Sliding Distances,” 910125,
Society of Automotive Engineers, 1991

SUMMARY 9. Donohue, M.D., “Motorcycle Skidding and Sideways

Based on our test results, the friction factor for
fully-faired motorcycles on asphalt ranges from 0.28 to
0.38 when considering a typical accident scenario with a
fall; some distinct, short gouges at touchdown; and a
final rest position on, or near, the pavement. Where
gouge marks are deep or longer than a few inches, or
where significant deformation of motorcycle components
has occurred due to digging in, higher friction values
may be warranted. Where the plastic fairing
components bear all or nearly all of the weight of the
motorcycle during the slide, the lower values would
probably apply.
The values we obtained fall within the lower
portion of the range of values previously published. As
always, we recommend that accident investigators apply
this and any other test data with caution. Motor vehicle
accidents are complex events, and the test data
reported here does not necessarily apply in every case.
Sliding Tests,” Accident Reconstruction Journal, Vol.
3,No. 4,1991
10. Daily, John, “Motorcycle Speed Estimates,” Accident
Reconstruction Journal, Vol. 2, No. 2, 1990
11. Ouellet, James V., “Motorcycles,” Personal Injury
Scientific Automobile Accident Reconstruction, Vol.
4, 1986
12. Lynch, George F., “Conducting Test Slides -
Motorcycles on Asphalt Surfaces (Omaha Police
Department),” Law and Order Magazine, November
1984
13. Searle, John A., “The Trajectories of Pedestrians,
Motorcycles, Motorcyclists, etc., Following a Road
Accident,” 831622, Society of Automotive Engineers,
1983

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

The authors wish to thank the members of the

Traffic Unit of the Windsor Police Service for their
valuable assistance in the staging of these slide tests.

REFERENCES

1. Day, Terry D., and Smith, Jay R., “Friction Factors

for Motorcycles Sliding on Various Surfaces,”
840250, Society of Automotive Engineers, 1984

2. Fricke, Lynn B., Traffic Accident Reconstruction,

Northwestern University Traffic Institute,1990

3. Limpert, Rudolf, Motor Vehicle Accident

Reconstruction and Cause Analysis, Third edition,
The Michie Company,1989
 Downloaded from SAE International by University of New South Wales, Saturday, August 25, 2018

Appendix A: Review of Published Motorcycle Drag Factors

Ref. Motorcycle Type Surface Test Test Friction Factor
Year,Make,Model Type Method Speed Low High Avg.
(7) 1981 Kawasaki KZ400 Standard asphalt drop 48 km/h 0.46 0.53 0.49
1981 Kawasaki KZ400 Standard asphalt drop 97 km/h 0.38 0.41 0.40
1982 Yamaha XJ650 Standard asphalt drop 48 km/h 0.62 0.72 0.67
Maxim
1982 Yamaha XJ650 Standard asphalt drop 97 km/h 0.59
1982 Yamaha XJ650 Standard dirt drop 48 km/h 0.82 1.36 1.02
1981 Kawasaki KZ440A Cruiser asphalt drop 48 km/h 0.49 0.68 0.61
1986 Yamaha FZ700T Sport asphalt drop 48 km/h 0.4 0.48 0.43
1986 Yamaha FZ700T Sport asphalt drop 97 km/h 0.42
1988 YamahaYX600U Standard asphalt drop 48 km/h 0.54 0.56 0.55
Radian
1988 YamahaYX600U Standard asphalt drop 97 km/h 0.48 0.6 0.54
1984 Yamaha FJ1100 Sport asphalt drop 48 km/h 0.42 0.52 0.47
1984 Yamaha FJ1100 Sport asphalt drop 97 km/h 0.38 0.48 0.42
1984 Yamaha XV700LC Cruiser asphalt drop 48 km/h 0.62
Virago
1984 Yamaha XV700LC Cruiser asphalt drop 97 km/h 0.51
1984 Yamaha XV700LC Cruiser gravel drop 48 km/h 0.83
1985 Yamaha XVZ12DN Touring asphalt drop 48 km/h 0.38
Venture Royale
1985 Yamaha XVZ12DN Touring asphalt drop 97 km/h 0.38
1985 Yamaha XVZ12DN Touring gravel drop 48 km/h 0.72
(6) Sport asphalt drop 80 km/h 0.26
Standard asphalt drop 80 km/h 0.33
(8) Honda CB 750G Standard fine textured sliding from 34 to 80 km/h 0.25 0.35 0.28
asphalt trailer
Honda CB 750G Standard fine textured dragged 10 km/h 0.25 0.33 0.31
asphalt
Honda CX500 Standard coarse asphaltic sliding from 46 to 80 km/h 0.33 0.54 0.42
concrete trailer
Honda CX500 Standard coarse asphaltic dragged 10 km/h 0.44 0.57 0.51
concrete
Honda C-90 Standard coarse asphaltic sliding from 37 to 80 km/h 0.36 0.65 0.50
concrete trailer
Honda C-90 Standard coarse asphaltic dragged 10 km/h 0.43 0.66 0.53
concrete
Honda C-90 Standard coarse asphaltic towed upright 40 to 92 km/h 0.49 0.62 0.54
concrete and released
Honda CG125 Standard fine textured towed upright 41 to 92 km/h 0.32 0.42 0.36
(with rt. side leg shields) asphalt released-rt side
Honda CG125 Standard fine textured towed upright 41 to 91 km/h 0.33 0.42 0.37
(no left side leg shields) asphalt released-lt side
Honda CG125 Standard fine textured dragged 10 km/h 0.32 0.37 0.35
asphalt
Suzuki 125ER Dirt fine textured towed upright 40 to 90 km/h 0.45 0.53 0.49
(side stand-left side) asphalt released-lt side
Suzuki 125ER Dirt fine textured dragged 10 km/h 0.42 0.51 0.45
(side stand-left side) asphalt on left side
Suzuki 125ER Dirt fine textured towed upright 41 to 92 km/h 0.34 0.4 0.37
(no side-stand) asphalt released-rt side
 Downloaded from SAE International by University of New South Wales, Saturday, August 25, 2018

Ref. Motorcycle Type Surface Test Test Friction Factor

Year,Make,Model Type Method Speed Low High Avg.
(8) Suzuki 125ER Dirt fine textured dragged 10 km/h 0.34 0.37 0.35
(no side-stand) asphalt on right side
Yamaha TZR125 Sport coarse asphaltic towed upright 39 to 95 km/h 0.39 0.54 0.43
(right side fairing) concrete released-rt side
Yamaha TZR125 Sport coarse asphaltic dragged 10 km/h 0.33 0.47 0.39
(right side fairing) concrete on right side
Yamaha TZR125 Sport coarse asphaltic towed upright 40 to 78 km/h 0.47 0.79 0.62
(left side- no fairing) concrete released-lt side
Yamaha TZR125 Sport coarse asphaltic dragged 10 km/h 0.48 0.61 0.54
concrete on left side
(9) 1982 Kawasaki KZ1000 sharp asphaltic towed upright 51 to 69 km/h 0.38 0.5 0.44
Police Special concrete and released
(2) unspecified asphalt or unspecified unspecified 0.4 0.75
portland cement
unspecified gravel unspecified unspecified 0.65 1.05
(10) unspecified Std street unspecified unspecified 0.3 0.35
(light pavement
scratching)
Crash bars unspecified unspecified 0.2
unspecified Std street unspecified unspecified 0.5 0.6
(1/4 inch deep
scratching)
(3) unspecified unspecified unspecified 48 km/h 0.5 0.55
unspecified unspecified unspecified 80 km/h 0.4 0.5
unspecified unspecified unspecified 105 km/h 0.35 0.4
(11) Standard Standard ordinary unspecified unspecified 0.35 0.45
pavement
front & rear ordinary unspecified unspecified 0.2
crash bars pavement
objects sticking ordinary unspecified unspecified 0.5
out of side (pegs) pavement
oil on unspecified unspecified 0.2
roadway
soft dirt, unspecified unspecified 0.7
tumbling
(1) 1967 Honda CB305 Standard moderately worn drag 40 km/h 0.45 0.54 0.51
asphalt
1967 Honda CB305 Standard gravel drag 40 km/h 0.68 0.79 0.74
1967 Honda CB305 Standard hard-packed,dry drag 32 km/h 0.7
grassy earth
1973 Yamaha 500 Standard moderately worn drag 40 km/h 0.49 0.58 0.54
Special asphalt
1973 Yamaha 500 Standard gravel drag 40 km/h 0.74
(12) unspecified asphalt unspecified unspecified 0.57
Dual Purpose asphalt unspecified unspecified 0.38
(13) unspecified dry asphalt unspecified unspecified 0.35 0.5
unspecified wet asphalt unspecified unspecified 0.3 0.4
(4) unspecified asphalt unspecified unspecified 0.3 0.4
unspecified concrete unspecified unspecified 0.43 0.53
round & smooth asphalt unspecified unspecified 0.2
crashbars
unspecified asphalt, unspecified unspecified 0.2
oil soaked