YEah Tuff the wall is getting tired.....
Foot Anchors Review
- Thread starter fallenarch
- Start date
I understand that brick wall very well. lts the unsuspecting souls that I target. Without critics, the uninformed would be at the mercy of the preacher spreading the gospel, no?
IG.
Registered
Arch, thank you for your suggestion. I re-read your post a few times, but not getting it. FA is not a footpeg, and would never perform as a footpeg, nor can it replace what adjustable rearsets offer. Those two have different purpose. Therefore, a footpeg has non-biased indentation (to prevent movement of a rider's foot in any direction), while FA has biased indentation (allow to move rider's foot in back-forward direction easily, but prevent movement away from the bike). Maybe I am missing something, so please clarify.
Arch, all it takes is one racer to deploy FA, and move up by many positions as a result, or a magazine to do a successful test/review. Thank you for the suggestion regarding the CNC machine. I have no problem accessing CNC machining as I have a local machine shop where I established a very good and warm relationship with the owner, who understands what needs to be done. The problem is that it is only economically feasible for significant quantities. While anchors themselves are identical, the mounting plates are different for every bike. So, that's a challenge.
kml, thank you for your suggestion. I will follow on it. However, doing exactly as you suggested would not work in the real world. If I just send a set, it will get tossed out without paying much attention. I will try to reach out to Kent.
Aaron Frank from Motorcyclist indicated he wanted to test FA, however he delegated the test to their test guy Ari Hennings, who I haven't heard from. Upon my reminder, Aaron indicated that Ari was very busy, however Aaron said he directly instructed Ari to give this a shot. It's a waiting game. You have no idea how busy these guys are (and I am not even mentioning another magazine which wants to do a test). Needless to say, he didn't come back to me saying this is non-sense. On the contrary, upon my initial contact regarding FA, he said that he remembered my prior email and asked whether someone from Motorcyclist already contacted me, and was somewhat surprised when he learned that no one did.
What I was saying IG is you are focused on FAs as an addition to regular pegs. What I was suggesting is why not replace the regular pegs and add the FA's too. There is a big need out there for regular pegs that can be mounted lower. Why not make a peg that can do more than stock pegs and offer the option of FA's? That way you are selling a bunch of pegs and for the people who want to buy them FA's can be added. You have limited capitol, and you are trying to make a big change in motorcycling. Focus on a product that has more broad appeal so you have the money to get the right people interested in FA's. What I noticed about the FA's you sent me is how easy it is to move the peg around. So I was thinking man, I wish the rearsets were designed like this too. I know this is a bit of a reach for manual tools, but it would transform your product from something you have to get people to change the way they ride to something everyone already wants. This will make the FA's a much easier sell too, as people will already be using your product.
So I was not saying give up on the FA's. I was saying there is another really good idea in the technology you already created that's immediately marketable.
Edit: Right now most rearsets are designed to give you a racier riding position. Why not have a "rearset" that allows you to lower the pegs? Then on the mounting plate have the holes for the FA's.
So I was not saying give up on the FA's. I was saying there is another really good idea in the technology you already created that's immediately marketable.
Edit: Right now most rearsets are designed to give you a racier riding position. Why not have a "rearset" that allows you to lower the pegs? Then on the mounting plate have the holes for the FA's.
IG.
Registered
OK, now I got it! Sorry, I am either not that smart or tired after shoveling snow for a few hours, LOL. I see what you are saying. I need to think about it more, so take what I say below as simply an immediate reaction...
Before I started making FA myself, I naturally thought that it would make sense to incorporate FA into the existing aftermarket rearsets. I contacted about 8 different rearset makers. Only few of them were somewhat interested in pursuing it, but later either said they wouldn't be interested or completely fell of the radar and stopped communicating. I simply had no choice, but to come up with my own design. One of the makers went as far as asked me to draw a design of how their rearsets would look like with FA. I did. There was a talk of me and a rep flying out to Japan to see the main guy. After a while, the main guy thought about it, and decided not to proceed.
The problem with making a larger mounting plate (to accommodate a footpeg) is that I would have to remove a footpeg and associated shifter/rear brake control. So, I would have to come up with something else. In the end, I would have to produce a brand new rearset assembly.
Making rearsets is a task which is more complicated by 1 or 2 orders of magnitude than FA. I've spent hours on the phone talking with some very friendly and knowledgeable people who provided a lot of insight in how rearsets are designed and made. Man, it's complicated and requires lots of $$ just to start.
The key point why FA can be attached so easily is because it is meant to carry a lot less load than a footpeg, and therefore FA attachment could be simplified. On the other hand, a single footpeg should be able to reliably sustain the weight of the heaviest rider out there standing with all his weight on a footpeg and even slightly jumping up and down on it. That's why a simple bolt-on won't be as reliable and safe.
Arch, it is an interesting idea nonetheless, as it hasn't occurred to me to even think in this direction (making everything myself) - a preconceived notion on my part, and a good illustration how this limits one's thinking process. I really appreciate your suggestion as it clearly indicates to me that you were doing some serious thinking in how to better introduce FA to other riders. And for that, I thank you very much!
Before I started making FA myself, I naturally thought that it would make sense to incorporate FA into the existing aftermarket rearsets. I contacted about 8 different rearset makers. Only few of them were somewhat interested in pursuing it, but later either said they wouldn't be interested or completely fell of the radar and stopped communicating. I simply had no choice, but to come up with my own design. One of the makers went as far as asked me to draw a design of how their rearsets would look like with FA. I did. There was a talk of me and a rep flying out to Japan to see the main guy. After a while, the main guy thought about it, and decided not to proceed.
The problem with making a larger mounting plate (to accommodate a footpeg) is that I would have to remove a footpeg and associated shifter/rear brake control. So, I would have to come up with something else. In the end, I would have to produce a brand new rearset assembly.
Making rearsets is a task which is more complicated by 1 or 2 orders of magnitude than FA. I've spent hours on the phone talking with some very friendly and knowledgeable people who provided a lot of insight in how rearsets are designed and made. Man, it's complicated and requires lots of $$ just to start.
The key point why FA can be attached so easily is because it is meant to carry a lot less load than a footpeg, and therefore FA attachment could be simplified. On the other hand, a single footpeg should be able to reliably sustain the weight of the heaviest rider out there standing with all his weight on a footpeg and even slightly jumping up and down on it. That's why a simple bolt-on won't be as reliable and safe.
Arch, it is an interesting idea nonetheless, as it hasn't occurred to me to even think in this direction (making everything myself) - a preconceived notion on my part, and a good illustration how this limits one's thinking process. I really appreciate your suggestion as it clearly indicates to me that you were doing some serious thinking in how to better introduce FA to other riders. And for that, I thank you very much!
From a riding point of view I am by no means the one to argue whether or not this part is a benefit to riding or not. That being said the part works as advertised, seems to be well made and looks cool. From a fabrication stand point that's a win. You might think about marketing towards the custom guys. Even if its only pseudo functional it looks cool its more bling and every one wants to be the first to have one. I for one respect the effort involved.
IG.
Registered
Thank you! I appreciate your kind words - a rarity these days. May I call you Mr. Right instead of your actual screen name?
Dang, it even rhymes! It is a very interesting idea about bling. I am more of a straight shooter guy, and it would be so hard... no, so out of my character to BS others into something. But you have a good point. Let me think about it. Thanks again!
It wouldn't be that you are BSing anyone you could even call it something else like mid frame sliders. These guys know that a 300mm back tire will only slow the bike down but it looks fast so they like it. There is all kinds of room on the piece to even do custom engraving or a grill look if you do some for the Kwai guys.
Similar threads
