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

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 08-09-2006, 10:14 AM   #31
pdad13
Founding Member
 
pdad13's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 1,754
Default Re: 'Sayonara, Hayabusa', says ESPN Writer.

So are you going to advocate banning SUVs, too?



They many, many more times more people than any motorcycle.



Come to think of it, so do regular cars.
pdad13 is offline   Reply With Quote

Sponsored Links Remove Advertisements
Motorcycle Forum
Advertisement
Old 08-09-2006, 10:24 AM   #32
bigdx
Founding Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 780
Default Re: 'Sayonara, Hayabusa', says ESPN Writer.

I am assuming you meant to say there are more SUVÂ’s than motorcycles? Yes, that is very true. Not sure what your point is though.



I have not seen an SUV travel at 100mph on a road kids have to cross. I see motorcycles do that often. Get my drift?



I have no hassle with the bikers (helmeted or not) that keep within speed limits and not endanger others. I strongly suspect the vast majority of (voting) Americans feel the same. Sadly a minority of people is acting in a way that is going to cause the majority to force them to comply.

bigdx is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-09-2006, 10:27 AM   #33
bigdx
Founding Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 780
Default Re: Which views he expressed are ignorant?

"Just wondering, what is sensible?"



No need to wonder, the government (either state or federal) will make a unilateral decision on what is sensible and what is not sensible. Unfortunately we cannot look to either the motorcycling community or manufacturers to impose a mutually agreed upon limit to prevent this. Legislation will be forced upon us because of imbeciles that do not have the presence of mind to moderate their behavior.



"Laws don't prevent accidents, people do."



So how will you have a motorcycle accident if you cannot ride one? Best youÂ’ll be able to do is go out make a motorcar accident, which I believe is a lot safer. A lot of folks out there are eager to help you be safe.

bigdx is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-09-2006, 10:28 AM   #34
ksquid
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: My new favorite site is CycleWorld.com
Posts: 3,775
Default Re: This is what I sent to him ...

Excellent point.. Well written..
ksquid is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-09-2006, 10:30 AM   #35
pdad13
Founding Member
 
pdad13's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 1,754
Default There isn't even a safety benefit for the driver

This is perfect, except for one point.



According to statistics, SUVs, especially the larger truck-based ones, are actually more dangerous to their drivers, too. 8% more deadly for truck-based SUVs and 6% more deadly for the smaller models according to the numbers I've seen.



And, as you mentioned, their "kill ratio" (meaning the number of people they kill in other vehicles) is many times higher than cars like a Honda Accord.
pdad13 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-09-2006, 10:33 AM   #36
bigdx
Founding Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 780
Default Re: 'Sayonara, Hayabusa', says ESPN Writer.

"if he were as concerned about public welfare as he claims, he would have called for the ban of Corvettes in that column"



Well he wonÂ’t because he probably owns one himself. Most people are to small to see the error of their own actions; which is why the majority of posters here do not consider exceeding speed limits as wrong, nor do they think owning a 200mph motorcycle for road use as irresponsible.



"And he mostly skirts the real point, which is stupid behavior"



No, I believe he is saying owning and operating a 200mph motor vehicle on public roads is stupid behavior. I think he is quite right.

bigdx is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-09-2006, 10:35 AM   #37
MotoGP_54
Founding Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 3
Default Re: 'Sayonara, Hayabusa', says ESPN Writer.

I wrote this reply:



What do you care if people go zooming by you on high performance bikes? Bikes weigh nothing in comparison to cars and SUVs, and speed though they may, their drivers are PAYING attention, unlike the hordes of soccer moms piloting 5000 pound SUVs. Rather than make issue of performance motorcycles' disproportionate accelerative potential, why not take issue with the disproportionate weight of cars and SUVs relative to their function--transport a person. I use the accelerative potential of my performance motorcycle to reach legal speeds or flow of traffic speeds, quick enough to hopefully put a small cushion between myself and the soccer mom on her cellphone bearing down on my rear end while applying makeup and chowing down on a Cinnabun.
MotoGP_54 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-09-2006, 10:40 AM   #38
pdad13
Founding Member
 
pdad13's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 1,754
Default No, that's not what I mean

The kill ratio for (the number of second-party deaths in accidents with SUVs) compared to other passenger vehicles is huge. Many times higher than the average sedan. It has nothing to do with total numbers, although when you look at the total number of SUVs and the kill ratio together, you should be appalled.



And I have seen SUVs traveling at very high rates of speed often. Although speed isn't even the biggest threat. It's pretty well known in the auto and insurance industries that SUVs promote agressive and inattentive driving behavior. (Remember the ESUVEE ad campaign?), whether speed is involved or not.



I don't condone excessive speed for given conditions, either. But speed is not the only problem by a longshot.
pdad13 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-09-2006, 10:41 AM   #39
ForrestGump
Founding Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 6
Default Re: This is what I sent to him ...

Everything in this comment and the others above it is very true and well said.



But I'm not sure if the ESPN article isn't just a joke. The section after the one about motorcycles describes in details which scenes in "Mission Impossible 3" don't make sense . Like if someone thinks the whole movie makes sense...



If this is not a joke, the author seems to be a serious nut.
ForrestGump is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-09-2006, 10:44 AM   #40
pdad13
Founding Member
 
pdad13's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 1,754
Default I'm surprised no one else pointed this out

The 0-100 time is in the neighborhood of 5.3 seconds, maybe a bit less with a really good run.



I'm pretty sure the 0-60 time is about 2.7 seconds.



And the author was so emphatic about it, too. What an idiot.
pdad13 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools

Posting Rules

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