Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
2 hours ago, KiwiBob said:

For someone who hasn't passed their test and I presume never ridden one you seem to know an awful lot about them!

I’ve spoken to plenty of bikers, watched plenty of videos on YouTube and read many threads online.

Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, Stu said:

 

How do you know they are scary? 

 

Have you ridden them? 

 

I have :popcorn:

 

No.

 

Why was the law changed so people could only ride a 125cc bike on L plates?

 

Why was the CBT introduced?

 

Why was the age to do DAS increased?

 

Why do you have to do two parts to pass your bike test?

 

You already know the answers. Inexperienced riders were either ending up seriously hurt by having bad accidents or even worse they were being killed. 
 

I can research 0-60mph and 0-100mph times and the top speed of bikes to know that they’re not meant for people with limited experience riding bikes.

Edited by Geoff Wilson
Posted

Way back when I started out riding bikes, there were many features which could easily get you into trouble. Things like 2 strokes with power bands which were effectively on/off switches coupled with brakes and tyres which were lethal in the wet.  Not to mention poor handling, elastic frames, speed wobbles.  In the 90s we saw major improvements in tyres, brakes, handling; all needed for the rocketship performance which became available. These days, generally, the performance hasn’t increased that much over bikes from the 90s, but the technology to keep everything right side up has seen big improvements. The gradient of the path to a full licence is shallower than it was back when I took off the L plates - I had zero training beyond copying and talking to mates. These days, there is no way you get to ride a powerful bike without having undergone a lot of training.  If someone ends up on a modern, powerful bike and gets into trouble, it’s much less likely to be because they were unprepared than it ever was in previous times.

 

As someone who has been riding bikes since the mid 70s, I would say the biggest dangers to a rider are that cars have undergone a big increase in performance, they’re often in the hands of knobheads, and traffic volume has increased massively. There have always been and always will be knobheads, banning powerful bikes/cars won’t change that.  

Posted
3 hours ago, Geoff Wilson said:

I can research 0-60mph and 0-100mph times and the top speed of bikes to know that they’re not meant for people with limited experience riding bikes.

 

I don’t agree with your assertion that it is too easy for the inexperienced to unwittingly end up on a bike too powerful for them. But ignoring that, what would be your proposed solution?  
 

 

 

Posted (edited)

I think the OP is missing the point. Nobody is saying you must have  1000 cc bike straight after you pass your test but if you want to then crack on. It's a personal choice. You may get into trouble but if you have half a brain you probably won't. You are not going to find universal agreement with your pov here so just give it a rest. Try riding a few bikes yourself and then tell us all how scary they are or aren't. I'm bowing out as arguing with a brick wall is pointless and hurts my head.

Edited by S-Westerly
  • Like 2
Posted (edited)

The reason they altered the test rules, etc, they were inadequate. My "test", in 1978, (on a uprated cb125s capable of triple digits) was outside the test centre and consisted of two roundabouts and a straight section of road. 

Examiner; "I want you to set off and at the roundabout go all the way round and head back towards me, then continue on to the next roundabout and repeat. At some point I will stand at the kerb and raise my clipboard, at which point I want you to come to a safe, controlled stop without stalling the engine". I passed, but he did mention I should use my mirrors more, as I had them set to see behind me without having to move my head much. 

The introduction of "lifesavers" was for the very same reason, to prove you were checking behind you before setting off or turning. All my test proved was I could ride in a straight line and go round a roundabout, nothing about slow speed control, figure of eights, u turns, hazard avoidance they have now. The test was just too inadequate to cope with busier roads. I was 17,the bike had been worked on to increase bhp, with a skimmed head, high compression piston, gas flowed ports. The only thing stopping me reaching those triple digits were the tyres, there wasn't any out there of the size needed that were rated to cover the speed, so I hit very bad speed wobble at about the ton mark. My 125 was actually a lot faster, by a huge margin, than the CB250 super dream I bought when I went back to bikes in 1992 after my divorce

Edited by billy sugger
Changed year
Posted
5 hours ago, Geoff Wilson said:

There is one “rule:

 

New riders are inexperienced and cause the most accidents. 
 

 

That's not true! 

 

Most accidents are from middle aged men who are born again bikers

  • Like 4
Posted
9 minutes ago, Stu said:

 

That's not true! 

 

Most accidents are from middle aged men who are born again bikers

A good few years ago there was a spate of born again bikers having accidents on an industrial estate in Northampton called Brackmills, where Barkleycard had their headquarters. They were meeting up down there and showing off the bikes, I assume, without realising what they were capable of, and crashing

Posted
8 hours ago, Geoff Wilson said:

If you had a son who wanted to get a CBR1000RR as his first bike after passing his test, would you not have a word with him?

No I would say buy what you like son its your life do what you want. Its a free country dont listen to the armchair warriers who dont know what they are talking about.

  • Like 4
Posted
6 hours ago, Geoff Wilson said:

Why do you think faster bikes and cars are more expensive to insurance when you are young with no experience?

Because the earth is flat* and fast bikes/cars and kids on tricycles fall off the edge. 

 

*Some people may dispute this scientific fact but there's lots of evidence on the internet to prove that it's true.

  • Haha 4
Posted

We seem to be flogging a dead horse here but as the law stands if you pass you car test you can buy any car you like and as powerful as you like.

 

Its the same with motorcycles, if you pass your A licence you can buy any motorcycle you like and as powerful as you like.

 

If you don't think its a good idea then that's OK, buy one your happy with.

  • Like 1
Posted (edited)
8 hours ago, Geoff Wilson said:

I’ve spoken to plenty of bikers, watched plenty of videos on YouTube and read many threads online.

Happy Cracking Up GIF by Regal
I HaVe A dEgWeE In InTeRnEt wEeSeARcH!!

Edited by Joe85
  • Haha 5
Posted (edited)
4 hours ago, Stu said:

 

That's not true! 

 

Most accidents are from middle aged men who are born again bikers

Do you have any evidence to back up your claim?


From 9 years ago:

 

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/447673/motorcyclist-casualties-2013-data.pdf

 

From 2 years ago:

 

https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/reported-road-casualties-great-britain-motorcyclist-factsheet-2020/reported-road-casualties-in-great-britain-motorcycle-factsheet-2020#sex-and-age-comparisons

 

12% for people aged between 17-20 and 15% for people aged between 20-24. Those ages are when people are restricted. 30% for people aged between 30-34. 

Edited by Geoff Wilson
Posted
5 hours ago, Essem said:

 

I don’t agree with your assertion that it is too easy for the inexperienced to unwittingly end up on a bike too powerful for them. But ignoring that, what would be your proposed solution?  
 

 

 

I’m happy that there are restrictions in place because it helps to reduce fewer casualties/deaths. 
 

I believe in freedom of choice so it is essentially his/her choice to get a superbike as a first proper bike but I don’t think it’s a wise choice. 
 

I’m not saying that everyone who gets a superbike would end up seriously hurt or dead, but there are reasons why people do not normally go for such a large bike to start off with and tend to gradually work their way up i.e. plenty of miles on the roads and overall experience.

Posted
3 hours ago, Old-codger said:

No I would say buy what you like son its your life do what you want. Its a free country dont listen to the armchair warriers who dont know what they are talking about.

I don’t believe you. 
 

Any decent parent would warn him against making that decision. 

Posted
3 hours ago, Mississippi Bullfrog said:

Because the earth is flat* and fast bikes/cars and kids on tricycles fall off the edge. 

 

*Some people may dispute this scientific fact but there's lots of evidence on the internet to prove that it's true.

So you can’t even be bothered to respond to me in a mature manner so you decide to troll me. Gotcha.

Posted
2 hours ago, KiwiBob said:

We seem to be flogging a dead horse here but as the law stands if you pass you car test you can buy any car you like and as powerful as you like.

 

Its the same with motorcycles, if you pass your A licence you can buy any motorcycle you like and as powerful as you like.

 

If you don't think its a good idea then that's OK, buy one your happy with.

Why do you think the DAS age was increased from 21 to 24?

Posted (edited)
7 minutes ago, Geoff Wilson said:

Why do you think the DAS age was increased from 21 to 24?

I'm not interested and I don't care!

 

In New Zealand you can do a cbt and jump straight on a 650! .. Why? because they are the rules!

 

Why do you keep flogging a dead horse?

Edited by KiwiBob
Posted
34 minutes ago, Geoff Wilson said:

Why do you think the DAS age was increased from 21 to 24?

In New Zealand all you have to is the Basic Handling Skills Test(CBT), where you don't even have to get out of second gear, at the age of 16 and you can ride a 650cc motorcycle on L plates!

 

Why? .. Because they are the rules!

 

 

 

Posted

I woke up and thought this thread would just be a bad dream, it's not its still here like a boil on my arse😭

  • Like 2
  • Haha 3
Posted
1 hour ago, Geoff Wilson said:

I believe in freedom of choice so it is essentially his/her choice to get a superbike as a first proper bike but I don’t think it’s a wise choice. 
 

I’m not saying that everyone who gets a superbike would end up seriously hurt or dead, but there are reasons why people do not normally go for such a large bike to start off with and tend to gradually work their way up i.e. plenty of miles on the roads and overall experience.


This sounds like you are almost agreeing with me - it used to be the case that it was far too easy to end up on poorly designed bikes (tyres, brakes, power delivery, handling) and only discover this when things went pear shaped. Everyone from my era went down that path and learned the hard way. The unlucky few, and it was a few, ended up dead or bent. Rules were changed (training, tiered tests), technology improved (frame geometry, suspension, brakes, tyres, software control) and there is almost no chance of ending up on a bike which is hiding a suite of dangers. The biggest danger is the person in control. If they are a knob, they’ll be a knob on a moped.

 

 

  • Like 1
Posted

Let me sum it up.

Many wouldn't advise it but you can. Some wouldn't advise against it but you can. All Iin all whatever anyone advises you can if you want.

The above applies to 1000cc bikes, eating too much cake, choosing a rich tea biscuit over a chocolate digestive, shitting your own pants and many other things in life.

Thread now closed I hope. 

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Clothing
  • Welcome to The Motorbike Forum.

    Sign in or register an account to join in.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of Use Privacy Policy Guidelines We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.

Please Sign In or Sign Up