Go Back   Motorcycle Forum > Motorcycle.Com General Discussion > Motorcycle News > Old News > Paranoid News Clips

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 01-25-2003, 05:37 PM   #21
arizonagerg
Founding Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 67
Default Re: Crash! Splat!

Since when does the media report good stuff? They always are the harbingers of gloom and doom to sell their stuff. That info was out there if media wanted to put it out there.
arizonagerg is offline   Reply With Quote

Sponsored Links Remove Advertisements
Motorcycle Forum
Advertisement
Old 01-25-2003, 05:39 PM   #22
jmeyn
Founding Member
 
jmeyn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 780
Default Re: Crash! Splat!

There are lots of entry level bikes; it's just that "real men" don't buy them.



Fashion dictates that the motorcycle is a statement, not a device for transportation. People don't seem to understand that the fun of a motorcycle has little to do with how fast it gets you from here to there. A 250 is the most anyone sane really needs; a 40 bhp 400 cc bike is reasonable overkill; a 110 bhp 600 is over the top.



Guess which one I like?
jmeyn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-25-2003, 05:52 PM   #23
jmeyn
Founding Member
 
jmeyn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 780
Default Re: Crash! Splat!

Good point. When I learned to ride, in the 60s, I didn't understand or conciously use counter steering. The bike performance levels of the day kept that from being lethal, just terrifying sometimes.



The Hurt Report of 1990 reported a huge number of single vehicle accidents due to "under turning" and "off the road on corners".



With todays performance standards a rider who doesn't countersteer intuitively and, in an emergency, agressively is dead. Without training or at least instruction, and lots of practice, lack of this critical skill makes new riders way more vulnerable than they used to be.
jmeyn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-25-2003, 05:56 PM   #24
arizonagerg
Founding Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 67
Default Re: Crash! Splat!

Disturbingly misleading? I dont get it. They used an 11 year sample. Seems pretty straight forward to me. If they would have gone back further, it would have shown the same trend. M/C fatalities decreasing every year until 1998, and then rising. Seems pretty significant to me.



And why not use vehicle miles? Need to use some sort of comparison that takes into account more drivers/cars/riders/motorcycles on the road than 10-20 years ago. It aint perfect, but I dont hear you coming up with a better way. Frankly, I agree somewhat. I would like to see the M/C fatality rates based on motorcycle miles driven. That should take into account the explosion of new motorcyles coming onto the roads in the last few years. I find it interesting why they didnt use that method, but maybe they dont have an accurate guess as to that number. Or they are trying to skew the results. Who knows. Thats why it would be good to have a new complete study done.



Where do you get your info on the rest of your assertions. All traffic deaths or even car or motorcyle deaths looked at individually have been going down every year since they started keeping statistics. So I find that fairly large increases in the fatality rate for 4 straight years is very significant, and not statistically right where we should be. That is a reversal of a 50+ year trend! In fact, according to the report, the increase in M/C fatality rate has skewed the overall fatality rate (including cars) to edge higher also.
arizonagerg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-25-2003, 07:27 PM   #25
arizonagerg
Founding Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 67
Default Re: Crash! Splat!

Or point to more total miles driven by motorcycles each year.



Everything I have read in recent memory states that motorcycle sales have been increasing dramatically for several years now. I will have to re-read the report, but I dont think I saw anything that actually takes this important factor into account.



I mean, if total miles driven by motorcyles has increased significantly since 97, that would correlate to increases in fatalities, without necessarily increasing the fatality rate. Hmmm. Still, how do you even semi-accurately calculate total miles driven by motorcycles? Anyone out there have any idea?
arizonagerg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-25-2003, 08:25 PM   #26
MrDeadeye
Founding Member
 
MrDeadeye's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 142
Default Re: Crash! Splat!

Reports like this can lead to knee-jerk legislative action. If we can better identify the types of bikes and riders causing the increase in fatalities, then the new laws can target these bikes and riders and leave the rest of us alone. The alternative is blanket laws, like horsepower limits, that affect everyone. BTW - I am not advocating ANY new laws regarding motorcycles.
MrDeadeye is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-25-2003, 08:51 PM   #27
Betamax
Founding Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 236
Default All of the above

There's probably no one single factor, and all the above are together likely causes for the increase, including the hard-to-quantify stuff (which Sarnali mentions above) like cell phones and SUV's.



The older riders who begin riding or return to riding after long absence (myself included) seem reluctant to buy entry-level bikes.



It's an ego thing: they're grown men, not kids, so they want to jump up immediately to the liter-plus bikes of whatever style they choose. When I was taking the MSF course, a 35 year-old newbie rider in the course told me he just bought a 929 Fireblade for his first bike; and I suspect he's not atypical.



At another (unnamed here) motorcycle site, I've seen many posts by newbies who invariably ask the same question: is a Hayabusa/RC51/ZX-12R too big a bike for a newbie.



These people simply do not understand what that kind of power is like. They think it's like a new driver buying an Audi; they don't understand that it's more like a new pilot buying an F16.
Betamax is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-26-2003, 02:33 AM   #28
Cherii
Founding Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 31
Default What would tiered licensing accomplish?

The difference between how quickly you can get over your head on a 30hp motorcycle versus a 130hp motorcycle is seconds at best, and frequently fractions of seconds. In many circumstances it makes no difference at all, and in a few less horsepower is actually a disadvantage. The only people who benefit is insurance companies, who get an excuse for exhorbitant rates. Just take a look at Japan and Europe, where it doesn't work.
Cherii is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-26-2003, 03:44 AM   #29
crashedupderby
Founding Member
 
crashedupderby's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 8
Default Re: Crash! Splat!

"nothing can now be believed which is seen in a newspaper. truth itself becomes suspicious by being put into that polluted vehicle."

Thomas Jefferson to John Norvell, June 11, 1807

crashedupderby is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-26-2003, 04:16 AM   #30
seruzawa
The Toad

 
seruzawa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: 8501 ft.
Posts: 17,461
Default Re: Crash! Splat!

The problem with sportbikes is that the riding position makes you give away visibility vs. the straightup Cruiser or Naked streetbike riding position. Also the increase leverage of the wider cruiser handlebars over the sportbike's clipons give a steering advantage.



At least in my experience. Before the sprtbike mafia starts the flaming.
__________________
"Make no mistake, Communism lost a big argument - one we know today as the 20th century."
seruzawa 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