captainscarlet

Bzzt. The speed of the bike is limited in the UK and other European countries. There is a finite speed limit due to gearing and engine revs.... 

Err ok on that basis every vehicle ever built is limited.  However I think we both know we're talking about artificially limiting the speed of the bike to a speed lower than the finite speed limit determined by the bikes mechanical construction. 
Just so we're all on the same page. 
 
CS

These are the reasons Yamaha limited top speed.

They haven't, except in the "land of the free". 
HTH
 
CS

These...
 
 

 
Daytona Trans Open GTX. Superbly comfortable for all day riding, completely waterproof, protection in all the right places and pretty good for walking around when off the bike.  I have removed the "bling" metal plates on the front as I found them slippery under foot and also liable to cause scratches on engine casings when getting on and off the bike.  As Wessie mentioned earlier, Daytona boots seem to cost silly money anywhere outside Germany so best to order from there.  Last for ages and can be refurbished if needed.  I recommend them.
 
CS

I agree with this statement 100%.  This is my first bike with ABS, and I am trying how to use it most effectively, which means being able to modulate lever pressure of front brake lever. 

Yeah but I think the point is you don't need to learn how to use ABS effectively, it does everything for you.  If you modulate the brake lever you will not be using ABS.  The brakes on an ABS equipped bike perform identically to the brakes on a non-ABS bike, right up until the point a wheel loses traction.  I believe this has already been stated earlier in this thread. 
To use ABS effectively i.e. to allow it to do it's job you must brake as hard as possible and let the system do the work.  When the system was first introduced on cars and even today people tend to lift off the brake pedal when it starts pulsating.  This is a bad thing because you're reducing brake pressure and extending the stopping distance.
 
CS
 

I'll try this tomorrow. What force did you apply to the brake lever each time, was it in Nm ft-lb? How many runs did you have to do to reach a 95% confidence level when you calculated the variance between ABS and non-ABS? Presumably you used the Chi-Squared test? I'm a little rusty on some of the comparative stats but appreciate the need erradicate any theories or assumptions.

Start easy and don't exceed your riding skills.  I have no idea what Chi-Squared test means.   I don't think you need a MN ft-lb gauge, just use rocks, cracks, shadows for measuring stopping distance.  That way there is nothing to calculate.  But be prepared for all the scientific criticism from all the scientists around here.   But my assumption is this whole discussion has turned into comical side show from a bunch of theorists who read the owners manual to figure out how to mash down on a brake pedal.  (pun intended) 
I doubt I will have any more to contribute to this conversation until I get my bike back together and get some of my own test riding done.

Whoosh!

Yes, this I believe to be true...and why I leave my ABS on.... 
 
But equally many including me, see the dangers when you stop on dirt...that shouldn't be an issue for road riding, but in the UK sometimes it is.

Mind you ABS is becoming so good these days that even on gravel it can far outperform non-ABS. 
I have attended Simon Pavey's Offroad Skills course in Wales on a number of occasions.  The first time was probably about 9 years ago using the relatively new at that time 1200GS.  On the first day they said, "We've disabled the ABS and whatever you do, don't try and switch it back on!".  In those days you had much more control modulating the brakes yourself.
 
Last time I did the course was about 2 years ago with the latest 1200GS with its various riding modes including Enduro mode.  This time they said on the first day "We've put the bikes in Enduro mode with the ABS [b style=text-decoration:underline]ON[/b], and whatever you do, don't try and switch it off!".  I must say it was amazing.  Riding down steep, gravelly inclines with slippery roots in your path and the front brake on and the bike just rolled down the hill in a controlled safe manner.  I was suitably impressed.
 
CS

Check out that front beak!!!!!! Just wish it wasn't so expensive.

Hmm on Powerbronze UK website the list price is £85 which is around $120.  Either there's been a mistake or you're being ripped off over there.  If the latter, it makes a pleasant change as it's usually the other way around. 
 
CS

Right I'm off to blast around on my bike and find some sports bike riders to embarrass, when we stop to chat, I will bore the feck off of them explaining aerodynamics, and how it allows me to ride around them on corners because of it.

 
Haha, brilliant. More riding and less bollocks is just the ticket....
 
CS

Air can get trapped if it cant escape fast enough. I think the air is hitting the rad and moving upwards but the opening are to large which cause the air to move up and out of the openings but not big enough for all air to escape and flow smoothly. It cause turblance. Having smaller openings would let the air travel down and around the sides. Hope that makes sence. I really dont think yamaha put the Fj in a wind tunnel.

 
But the radiator is angled downwards and backwards which means that most of the air hitting it will be forced down towards the exhaust downpipes and bottom of the engine.
 
CS

the issue with lift isn't that the fairing is "flying" or acting as a foil. I don't have access to a 120+mph wind tunnel but there isn't "huge amount of daylight" between the forks and the bodywork - Yamaha put blanking panels in there to keep the cockpit area calm but the side-effect is it traps air. It is my contention that the lift is coming from what amounts to a 'ball' of high-pressure air trapped in the nose to radiator section. Look at the FZ1, the FZ8, the versys 1000, sv1000. Only the FJ has such large vertical distance between fender and fairing nose.

 
Sorry to keep banging on about this but what you've stated in my opinion simply isn't correct. If you look at the bike from side-on the radiator is angled downwards and backwards. This means any air striking the front of the bike is mostly directed downwards towards the downpipes and engine.
 
Any air channelled upwards can easily escape in the space around the steering head and up through the cockpit area.  Below is a picture looking down through the handlebars. As you can see there is plenty of space to allow air to be funnelled up through the gap. In fact on full lock I can get my arm through that gap.  The second image shows how it looks with the bars straight.  I simply can't understand where air would get trapped, sufficient to lift the front end/extend the forks.  The more likely cause of the forks extending in the video you referred to is that the rider's weight shifted backwards as speed increased. Likely combined with them pulling on the bars in the process of holding on as the speed increased thereby causing the forks to extend somewhat.
 

 

 
 

This bike has a big 'pocket' for air pressure to build up at speed (80mph+) and Yamaha has blocked off spillover on the sides and upward flow. If you look at the Z1000 tourer, the old FZ1 and a bunch of others that can (and are) ridden pretty fast, they don't have the shrouds and they have noses that are canted downward. The FJ has it's 'mouth' open wide and angled upward to catch as much wind as possible. What you need at speed is downforce and the Yamaha is designed for lift; never a good idea.

 
I'm sorry but surely that's bollocks isn't it. The Tracer has no more of a gaping mouth than virtually any fully faired of half faired bike. In fact if you look carefully (actually you don't need to look carefully) there are huge amounts of daylight between the forks and the fairing which allow air to pass up through the area where the triple trees are. Also there's loads of gaps between the top of the radiator and sides of the tank. The Tracer could never be described as aerodynamic and I don't find it credible that the front end is generating lift. The bike has far too many angles and (as far as airflow is concerned) messy details that disturb airflow.
 

As to the forks, this is what contributed mightily to my Triumph's stability issues. I had 10mm more preload in one leg than I had in the other. At 80mph even with 50lbs of luggage on the back it was no problem. Just steered a little odd - left was easier to initiate over right. With the shock not sufficiently preloaded for the bag contents I was running nose-light which set up and then quickly escalated the head shake once aerodynamic forces had built up enough.

 
Hang on a minute I'm not sure I follow your logic here. As I read what you've written above your suspension was wrongly adjusted and the bike got out of shape. Surely that should tell you that it is always prudent to check your suspension and adjust it according to the type of riding you're going to be doing. The situation with your Triumph has to my mind nothing whatsoever to do with the Tracer.
 
I have been following this thread with some interest and it seems to me that most people have "solved" their difficulties by adjusting the suspension correctly and not holding onto the bars for grim death whilst riding. I was out for a fairly spirited ride during the week and barrelling along some extremely bumpy Swedish roads at around the 150-160 km/h mark. The bike never once got into a wobble. At one point I touched 200 km/h and still nothing. As others have noted if you hold the bars too tightly your own arm inputs and wind on the upper body can induce oscillating steering inputs that could be interpreted as a wobble. Of course I too have watched the videos where people have got a wobble on and would suggest that like any powerful, quick steering bike, when the front end gets light, for whatever reason things can start moving around.
 
What is it I'm trying to say? I'm at odds with the idea that the Tracer is fundamentally flawed or dangerous or that people should "start ripping plastic off to make it safe". To my mind this is simply not true.
 
All IMHO of course.
 
CS