BMW4VWW

You are of course right about the current perception of a beginers bike. True entry level bikes used to displace under 100cc. I can remember when a number of my peers thought that a Honda S90 was a fast and cool bike to own. VWW

BMW4VWW

Zenier diodes? VWW

Abe_Froman

I'd say you could blame that more on Ralph Nader than Richard Nixon, but I digress.....

Abe_Froman

Sorry that in England you have Big Brother staring at you with a video camera all the time. Our population has thus far been sufficiently freedom-oriented to prevent that from happening in the vast majority of municipalities. If they did in fact have them on camera, then I retract the statement, and perhaps the guys did the only thing they could do. However, if that was the case, then #1) England sucks and #2) if the penalites are really that high, then they were pretty stupid to do it (if jail time for gross speed were normal here, I would never go that fast.)

Abe_Froman

No doubt, Britons have allowed themselves to be declawed and behaviorally regulated by vast myriads of social engineering laws (of course you could easily say that of us to, just not to the same extent perhaps.)

Abe_Froman

Now calculate the energy potential of an 80,000# tractor trailer combination and see how fast they should be allowed to travel (my guess is 3MPH without doing the math.)

Abe_Froman

GOD BLESS THE USA!!

Abe_Froman

Absolutely, I hit an indicated 173 (at least 150 actual) going up a hill on my R1 earlier this summer. It is no big secret what we buy these 150hp bikes for. Reasons and alibis and lectures from the bench are moronic. Why this is a news story anyway is beyond me. If this is a story, then the real story is how they didn't know this was happening before. What are they stupid?

sarnali

I believe thats what my mis-informed friend is refering too. You know how those Suzuki riders are.

wakked1

I'll save the textbook stuff for the professors, but I was thinking momentum as that is generally conserved in a collision, and then your body has to deal with the energy introduced by the corresponding and rather abrupt change in velocity.



i.e. energy is the problem for the vehicle/body to absorb (esp when hitting a stationary/immovable object), but momentum is how you figure out the effect of a collision with another vehicle upon your own... hence the fast bike vs slow SUV discrepency.. you will slow down lots, SUV will slow down relatively less (hence 35% vs 77% relative ratios).



The delta in velocity is key as that is what your body has to absorb in the form of your_mass/2*your_speed^2. So the speed you should be looking in your energy equation is not the velocity of a given vehicle, but the relatively change in velocity upon its occupants caused by change in momentum.



You're right that I shoulda said momentum vs energy, didn't think there were any physicists lurking nearby.



Hopefully I've confused the issue further.