Go Back   Motorcycle Forum > Motorcycle.Com General Discussion > Motorcycle News > Old News > MO Reader Feedback

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 10-24-2001, 08:22 AM   #41
luvmyvfr
Founding Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 237
Default Re: Sad News: Single-Vehicle Motorcycle Deaths Rise (Again!)

Uh, you doubt that the elderly heal slower and are more stressed by injury/illness than young people? Get any book on geriatrics; you'll get all the answers you want. Puh-lease. What a lame thing to nit-pick. Are you an old guy trying to justify your own immortality in your old mind? Not too many things are "common" knowledge (just as "common" sense isn't that common) but I'd wager this information would easily fall into that category.



luvmyvfr
luvmyvfr is offline   Reply With Quote

Sponsored Links Remove Advertisements
Motorcycle Forum
Advertisement
Old 10-24-2001, 08:23 AM   #42
Lincoln
Founding Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 203
Default The Problem is 3-fold

1) The motorcycle is at fault:

Make a safer motorcycle - anti-lock brakes and fatter front and rear wheels. Loud(but NOT obnoxiously so) mufflers can't hurt



2) The rider is at fault:

Outlaw lane splitting and keep both wheels on the ground



3) Opposing traffic is at fault:

Educate car drivers. Motorcycle awareness should be a big part of every car license course
Lincoln is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-24-2001, 08:24 AM   #43
das
Founding Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 237
Default Re: NHTSA ministry of propaganda

Yeah, I have to agree with that. In my one reported MC accident, the cop wrote down all the wrong contributing factors, in spite of being told the truth.



The truth was, I was traveling about 25mph on a 25mph road (which was in the witness' statement), and lost the front end on gravel covering a newly-laid road patch in a curve. He wrote on the ticket that the bike slid 76ft before stopping at the side of the road, and concluded that excessive speed was the primary contributing factor.



Upon seeing the ticket the next day, I went back with a camera and tape measure, and discovered that the bike stopped about 30ft from the patch, or about 25ft from the first scratch in the road. When I confronted the officer about how he determined that it slid 76ft, he said couldn't remember. The talk of the bike sliding was completely bogus - it flipped in the air (also in the witness' statement).



Only one example, to be sure, but it makes me take some of the causality statistics with a grain of salt.

das is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-24-2001, 08:38 AM   #44
CarsSuck
Founding Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 282
Default I just saw another report...

that stated it was re-entry riders on big displacement cruisers that were crashing most. I think it's just everyone that thinks motorcycles are toys.
CarsSuck is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-24-2001, 09:12 AM   #45
VFRider
Registered Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 101
Default Re: Maybe you gotta make it visual for them, blip.

Frankly, we're not worried one bit. Crashing your bike is life threatening. In fact, you may not survive. Do I wonder why? No. It seems pretty obvious. Do I want my tax dollars spent to find out why? No. We've all got better things to worry about.
VFRider is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-24-2001, 09:15 AM   #46
CarsSuck
Founding Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 282
Default What a bunch of crap!

Thanks for the brilliant solutions! Safer motorcycles? Do you actually ride a motorcycle? You're really a politician aren't you. Motorcycles don't have fatter front tires because of "kick back" when cornering. Look into that. Racers have swapped out 190 rear street tires for 180's because so far the 180 street tires handle better combined with most front tires. Some day tires may get (significantly) wider, when the tire and suspension technology changes completely--but that's just a guess. Maybe that's not the answer at all. Who knows where technology will go? Do you really think they just didn't feel like putting on wider tires?

Anti-lock brakes suck for skilled riders. I don't go out and play on my bike, I'm a full time rider, and motorcycles are my only transportation--just in case you think I don't appreciate practicality. ABS is absolutely not better for a skilled rider who knows how to use any available control to their advantage. It goes in the same category as linked brakes--an absolutely ridiculous idea for anyone that really knows how to ride. ABS takes control from the rider. It may be better for some, but keep ABS and linked brakes off my bike. I will not be safer with it.

Ok opposing traffic is at fault in a lot of motorcycle accidents. Most, actually. But the particular article you're responding to is about SINGLE VEHICLE ACCIDENTS. Think about each of those words.

Please keep in mind when you talk about what WE need, it doesn't include me, or any half serious rider with a clue. It's not my fault more morons are out there killing themselves. I'm less likely to crash than the average car driver, and experienced riders similar to me know this is absolutely true. See David Edwards' most recent column in Cycle World. It's about time someone in the press admitted this, instead of pandering to the low mileage recreational hobbyists who generate these negative statistics.
CarsSuck is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-24-2001, 09:19 AM   #47
longride
Super Duper Mod Man

 
longride's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Anywhere they let me
Posts: 10,479
Default Re: Sad News: Single-Vehicle Motorcycle Deaths Rise (Again!)

I am guessing that your venom is directed at my questioning of this quote:

"They are more likely to be injured, and there(sic)injuries are worse than for young men in accidents. "



Now sir, I would like to know WHY supposed "old men on Harleys" are MORE likely to be injured and the injuries are going to be far worse. At what age does this phenomenon occur? You seem to be an expert on the subject, but your post above said NOTHING about likelyhood of injuries or them being more serious. You DID blather about long healing times of "geriatrics" or something of that sort, but addressed NOTHING of the quote above. I do appreciate your expert opinion on "lameness" also, but since common reading comprehension isn't your forte, I wouldn't expect you to get the response to this post correct either. Since I made no claims WHATSOEVER of healing times or stress of illness/injury, I have no idea why you even wrote anything at all. Was it to justify your young intelligence in your own young mind?
__________________
I'm a knucklehead
longride is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-24-2001, 09:21 AM   #48
jmeyn
Founding Member
 
jmeyn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 780
Default Re: I just saw another report...

Right. Attitude, attitude, attitude.
jmeyn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-24-2001, 09:31 AM   #49
luvmyvfr
Founding Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 237
Default Re: Maybe you gotta make it visual for them, blip.

That wasn't "we're worried" VFRider and luvmyvfr, but "we're worried" blip and luvmyvfr.



Relapse dude. I'm sure your tax dollars aren't being spent to find out why people are dying at a higher rate per accident, so don't worry too much about that either. Do you really think whatever part of your tax dollars spent (whatever you make) that actually went to this study even make a measurable percentage of the total cost of the study? Get a life. You paid how much to use MO, and they don't measure anything! The $0.02 (probably less) of your tax dollars that went to this study at least measured something, and motivated you to think a little.



This study is only a small part of what the NHTSA spent it's money on, and I, for one, am glad that they study motorcycle operator safety and statistics. It may not always be good press, and the statistics are usually skewed, but it gives some of us an idea as to what is happening nationwide to motorcyclists.
luvmyvfr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-24-2001, 09:33 AM   #50
DataDan
Founding Member
 
DataDan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 117
Default Re: Maybe you gotta make it visual for them, blip.

Huh? Who has established that people are dying more per crash? The subject report says nothing about fatalities per crash. Only fatal crashes are even mentioned.



I hope you're not relying on NHTSA's General Estimates System numbers for non-fatal-injury and non-injury crashes, which, by design, include only crashes reported to the police. While they may be reasonably accurate for cars, I simply don't believe them for bikes. I've crashed on a bike more than once and have been injured more than once, but I've never called the cops to take a report.
DataDan is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off