My Motorcycle Class

[Komag]

So yesterday and today I've been taking this all-weekend motorcycle class (today was from 6:45am to 6pm!) and I really am amazed at how much I didn't know before! I had a permit a few years ago and had my own bike for around a year, but I've learned more in one day than I did all that year!

 

So how many of you ride? Did you know about countersteering? I had NO IDEA! Here's a pic of what I mean:

 

 

You can see his wheel is not turned the direction he's turning, but is even slightly the other way! This isn't the normal thing that happens, but at super high speeds it can. The effect can also sometimes look quite exaggerated if the guy is actually sliding the rear around some.

 

Normally the wheel will be turned slightly the turn direction, but it's not because you turned it that way. In fact, you push out the handlebar in the opposite way you think you should to turn, and this makes the lean tighter, making the turn tighter! It really works, I was doing it today and it sharpened up my turns like nothing else! Crazy!

[sparhawk]

I always rue it, that I did not include the motorcycle licence when I did my car licence. Now it is much more expensive because I have to do it all along. I would enjoy it though.

[demagogue]

I sometimes think about getting either an old British Triumph (to be unique and retro-cool) or a big Kawasaki (because I lived in Japan and like to stay connected to it) ... 2 very different bikes, I know, but just what I was thinking.

 

I get worried because one of my best friends died in a motorcycle accident about 5 years ago, and it's always struck me as gratuitously risky just to drive around town ... but there's no denying it's a real thrill to be on a bike and feel right on top of the road.

 

The turning you described does sound unintuitive, but it's easy to imagine once you think about it and "feel" the physics of it. Sounds fun, actually.

Edited September 3, 2006 by demagogue

[Komag]

Everyone knows that motorcycle riding is very dangerous, but once you study some real statistics you learn that it's not nearly as dangerous as everyone thinks.

 

For instance, in 2004 (or 05, can't remember), almost 50% of all motorcycle fatalities were impaired with alcohol (something like 30% legally intoxicated).

 

More significant, however, is the fact that over the past many years, over 90% of all motorcycle accidents (fatal and non-fatal) were riders with no formal training! I can really believe it, because in the class (which finished just a few hours ago) I learned and practiced a lot of very useful techniques that I just had no idea about before.

 

Other statistics are important as well, such as how many fatalities caused by lack of helmet, riding without a license, speeding over 20 mph over the limit, etc.

 

So if you are going to be a good rider, have training, be licenced, don't speed (much), wear a helmet, don't drink, etc, then your danger level can drops over 95%! It's still more dangerous than auto driving, but not a whole lot at that point.

[Vadrosaul]

Yes, but what is the ratio of fatal:non-fatal accidents compared to automobiles? I can only imagine it's a fair bit higher

[obscurus]

Everyone knows that motorcycle riding is very dangerous, but once you study some real statistics you learn that it's not nearly as dangerous as everyone thinks.

 

For instance, in 2004 (or 05, can't remember), almost 50% of all motorcycle fatalities were impaired with alcohol (something like 30% legally intoxicated).

 

More significant, however, is the fact that over the past many years, over 90% of all motorcycle accidents (fatal and non-fatal) were riders with no formal training! I can really believe it, because in the class (which finished just a few hours ago) I learned and practiced a lot of very useful techniques that I just had no idea about before.

 

Other statistics are important as well, such as how many fatalities caused by lack of helmet, riding without a license, speeding over 20 mph over the limit, etc.

 

So if you are going to be a good rider, have training, be licenced, don't speed (much), wear a helmet, don't drink, etc, then your danger level can drops over 95%! It's still more dangerous than auto driving, but not a whole lot at that point.

 

 

I've been riding motorcycles for years. I'm a big fan of Ducati, personally. Motorcycle sfatey comprises two factors: rider attitude, and the attitude of other road users.

 

The first is the only thing you can do anything about. Most motorcycle accidents are the fault of the rider being foolish or unobservant, and usually occur as the result of the rider thinking he or she is Valentino Rossi on every corner, instead of riding to the road conditions. Public roads are NOT racetracks, and if you ride as though all car drivers are out to get you, and you bear in mind that although your motorcycle might well be able to accelerate from 0 to 300KPH in under 8 seconds (a stock Suzuki Hayabusa GSX1300R can do this), it would be a very foolish thing to do so away from controlled racetrack conditions, you will likely be OK.

 

Ride safe and stay upright dude, motorcycling can be fairly safe, but you have to ride with your brain, not your wrist. And don't be a dickhead and pull wheelies or flout the law, it only gives the rest of us responsible riders a bad name.

 

[Gildoran]

More significant, however, is the fact that over the past many years, over 90% of all motorcycle accidents (fatal and non-fatal) were riders with no formal training!

To me, that statistic appears meaningless unless I know what percentage of riders recieve formal training.

 

For example, if 95% of all riders have no formal training, then that statistic would suggest that the training does more harm than good. If 90% of all riders have no formal training, then the formal training has no effect. If 80% of riders have no formal training, then the formal training has only a very slight effect. If only 25% of riders have no formal training, then the training has a significant effect. Etc...

 

I'd be very interested in knowing what percentage of riders have formal training.

[obscurus]

To me, that statistic appears meaningless unless I know what percentage of riders recieve formal training.

 

For example, if 95% of all riders have no formal training, then that statistic would suggest that the training does more harm than good. If 90% of all riders have no formal training, then the formal training has no effect. If 80% of riders have no formal training, then the formal training has only a very slight effect. If only 25% of riders have no formal training, then the training has a significant effect. Etc...

 

I'd be very interested in knowing what percentage of riders have formal training.

 

 

Here in the ACT (Australia), formal training is a mandatory requirement for obtaining your motorcycle license, and the testing is very thorough - you can't pass it unless you know how to operate a motorcycle competently and safely. So we basically have 99.9% formal training. Most motorcycle accidents involve the motorcyclist going too fast around bends (single vehicle accident, rider's fault) or they are two vehicle accidents casued by drivers of cars/trucks etc that don't bother to look out for small two wheeled vehicles, especially at traffic lights and intersections. Motorcycle accidents can often be less serious than car accidents, because the rider can 'control' the accident to a greater degree than a car driver can, and they can also eject theselves clear of the motorcycle under certain types of crash conditions. But you need to be wearing adequate safety gear (helmet, full leathers, armour, back protection, gloves, proper boots), because it aint a pretty sight when human flesh hits the bitumen at 100KPH.

 

If you ride safely according to the road conditions, don't speed excessively, and restrain yourself from using the throttle too vigorously, the only thing you have to worry about is four wheeled vehicles, black ice and oil slicks. Which is why you have to ride as though you are invisible to other vehicles.

 

Motorcycles can be reasonably safe, but only if the rider has an attitude of safety and is aware of their vulnerability.

 

Motorcycle crashes do more damage to your wallet than anything else, motorcycles aren't cheap to repair (I'm talking from experience here, and even the most dilligent rider is no match for an oil slick on a roundabout).

[Ombrenuit]

Honestly, if you are safer riding a motorcycle then a bicycle. So called "Hardcore" bicycle riders get more injuries then my dad has ever riding a motorcycle with all the armor he does. Sure, you will probably die if you get in an accident on the highway--but then again, what if someone veers to the side of the road while you are riding your bike at thirty miles an hour and have your feet strapped into the pedals? You are riding slower, which gives you less stability, you are going slower then the rest of traffic, which is dangerous, and you have less protection (well that depends whether or not you are an idiot when it comes to riding a motorcycle).

 

My dad could show you his first helmet. He took a turn too fast when he was first learning on a 35 mph street. He woke up in someone's fence and the viser of his helmet (we're talking about plexiglass) has grooves in it from contact with the pavement. He was fine. But that would have been his face if not his helmet.

Edited September 4, 2006 by Ombrenuit

[obscurus]

Honestly, if you are safer riding a motorcycle then a bicycle. So called "Hardcore" bicycle riders get more injuries then my dad has ever riding a motorcycle with all the armor he does. Sure, you will probably die if you get in an accident on the highway--but then again, what if someone veers to the side of the road while you are riding your bike at thirty miles an hour and have your feet strapped into the pedals? You are riding slower, which gives you less stability, you are going slower then the rest of traffic, which is dangerous, and you have less protection.

 

 

People can often be way off when it comes to assessing the relative safety of various modes of transport.

 

The most dangerous mode of transport, statistically (don't ask me for figures right now, I'm going off memory form a study I read, so take the following with a grain of salt) is horseback riding, with helicopters coming in second, pushbikes are more dangerous than motorcycles, and you are more likely to be run down as a pedestrian than you are to crash your car and be seriously injured (most car accidents involving alcohol are due to a drunk pedestrian walking in front of a car nexpectedly).

 

You also have to look at various parts of different modes of travel. for example, flying in a passenger jet is at its most dangerous during takeoff and landing, but is quite safe when you are actually cruising at altitude.

 

The space shuttle has a 2% crash rate (approximately), and if you crash a spaceshuttle, you're fucked, so you would have to say it isn't all that safe. But cars are actually worse, so are motorcycles (something like 30% of motorcyclists have at least one serious accident). Don't ever get in a Black Hawk helicopter if you can help it - more of those have crashed for no apparent reason than have been shot down in combat.

 

And stay away from horses.

[Gildoran]

Er... I'm not trying to make a point about whether or not motorcycles are safe. It just bugs me when I see statistics that sound convincing but are completely meaningless. It's like quoting the murder rate for a city in raw numbers rather than per-capita.

[obscurus]

Er... I'm not trying to make a point about whether or not motorcycles are safe. It just bugs me when I see statistics that sound convincing but are completely meaningless. It's like quoting the murder rate for a city in raw numbers rather than per-capita.

 

 

Oh, yes, in a round about sort of way I was doing the same thing (I was being a bit toungue in cheek, but I guess that is hard to convey in a brief text) - it is all very well to say this or that is dangerous, but you have to put the statistics into context.

 

Smoking is bad for your health, as everyone knows, but how bad depends on the frequency and quantity of cigarettes you smoke, whether you smoke in enclosed spaces or in a well ventilated room, how aerobically fit you are, what your diet is like, whether you also drink alcohol when you smoke and so on. A statistic like "smoking kills 50% of smokers" sounds shocking (perhaps), but it doesn't really tell you all that much about any given individual's risk.

 

For example, one person could smoke 10 cigarettes a day outdoors, but otherwise leads a very healthy lifestyle, doesn't drink, exercises frequently and so on. Another person might not smoke normally, but they might go into a poorly ventilated bar at the end of the week, chain smoke while drinking (which massively increases the damage cigarretes do), and doesn't excercise regularly, eats fatty processed food, ad generally doesn't take care of themself.

 

While the statistics for smoking could be taken at face value for each individual and lead you to the conclusion that the regular smoker is more likely to die of heart disease or lung cancer, a closer look at all of the information should lead you to the opposite conclusion.

[Darkness_Falls]

Other statistics are important as well, such as how many fatalities caused by .... speeding over 20 mph over the limit, etc.

I think it is a given that once you own a motorcycle, speed limits are irrelevant and cars are just fun pylons to weave in and out of. A motorcycle rider actually doing the speed limit is an oxymoron.

[oDDity]

I knew the great road-racing motorcycle legend Joey Dunlop. Lived quite close to him. You proabaly don't know him in the US, but he was very famous in Europe. You yanks are very incestuous when it comes to sport.

Died in a motorcycle accident, like a lot of them do.

[Komag]

Gildoran - I don't know how many have training in the US, but I see your point. If 10% of everyone has training, and 10% of crashes were riders with training, then it doesn't show any affect of training!

 

So you're right, without that info, the training affect on safety can't be calculated into the equation. But from what I learned in the class and how well it worked, I'm confident that I will be safer because of my training, so I guess that's the most important part to me personally. I'm careful and defensive, but I suppose some with training might just get cockier and end up taking on MORE risk than they might have otherwise.

 

---------------

 

Now I just have to wait a week or two for my updated drivers license to arrive in the mail, woohoo! I've been looking to get a small bike, probably a 250cc (maybe up to 500 or 750, but that would be tops). Since I live in a densely populated area nothing is very far away and I almost never use highways anyway, so a small motorcycle would be great (and easy to find parking for!).

 

I'll probably spend between $1500 and $2500 for a used bike, hopefully less than 5 or 6 years old and under 5 or 6k miles on it.

[sparhawk]

I was also considering to upgrade my license, if it were just for the fun of it. Also the argument with parking space is a good one. The only thing that prevented me from doing it is, that I always have the impression that the maintenence of a bike is much higher than for a car. And I'm not exactly the guy who is constantly wielding a screwdriver himself. Don't know wether this impression is true, I mostly got it from observing friends who have bikes. maybe they are just fond of screwing with their bike. Another issue would be that the bike itself and the insurance is also not exactly cheap. You can get almost another car for it.

[Darkness_Falls]

That's awful, RE: Joey Dunlop. At least he was doing what he loved to do...

 

yanks are very incestuous when it comes to sport.

Do you know all the US sport stars and follow US sports (football american, baseball, basketball), and actually enjoy watching or reading about them? I'm genuinely curious. If not, you can see how easy it is to be incestuos with sports. You remain focused on what your own country participates in.

 

Historically, it hasn't really been that easy for the US to have international gameplay (whereas you have quick access to all the European nations and more) so I think it's only natural the states compete against each other in sporting events here. And even though it might be easier to fly all around the world now, Europe is still like 8 hours ahead of us in time; so it's still not the most feasible thing.

 

Since world soccer doesn't seem very pervasive here, and F-1 racing doesn't like us, and football/basketball/baseball are our primary 3 sport (takes us all the way around the year), etc., it's not exactly easy to get into all the sports going on around the world. Although I enjoy watching F-1 and soccer.

[Komag]

I always have the impression that the maintenence of a bike is much higher than for a car. .... Another issue would be that the bike itself and the insurance is also not exactly cheap. You can get almost another car for it.

 

 

Older bikes are like that, over 10 years old, but if it's just a few years old there is no real maintenance (other than oil change, etc). As for cost, only larger bikes cost a lot. I can get a nice little Honda 250 brand new for $3500, or used a couple years for $2500. On the other hand, I wouldn't spend less than $8k - $10k on a car, and the motorcycle gets about 3-5 times the gas mileage too, so bikes are a whole lot cheaper.

[Ombrenuit]

Well it also depends on what kind of bike you are looking at. The Italian and Japanese bikes are fantastic. My father owns a Suzuki r-750, and he says its definitly enough for him (if anything at all...too much). But it gets 50 mpg on average and really, he rides his bike a lot less then he drives his car, so as for maintenance, it's dirt cheap. He isn't really putting that many miles on it. And yes, for the most part he's driving the speed limit, and yes, he isn't riding his bike during rush hour traffic; just in the early mornings. He also felt that the motorcycle class was very helpful to him and he plans on signing up for it next year just to further increase his skill, safety, and knowledge.

 

By the way, have any Americans here heard of the "Tail of the Dragon"? It's something we stumbled upon in Tennessee. It's essentially a highway that snakes up a mountain (and down it).

 

"The Tail of the Dragon at Deals Gap, with 318 curves in 11 miles, is America’s number one motorcycle and sports car road."

 

Then again, thrill riding is what causes you to get killed.

[obscurus]

Older bikes are like that, over 10 years old, but if it's just a few years old there is no real maintenance (other than oil change, etc). As for cost, only larger bikes cost a lot. I can get a nice little Honda 250 brand new for $3500, or used a couple years for $2500. On the other hand, I wouldn't spend less than $8k - $10k on a car, and the motorcycle gets about 3-5 times the gas mileage too, so bikes are a whole lot cheaper.

 

 

I think you would be surprised how expensive motorcycles are to maintain. They are not a cheap alternative form of transport by any means. I've been riding long enough to find this out the hard way:

 

Although you might spend $7000 AUD to $16,000 AUD on a brand new motorcycle of decent quality (compared with $20,000 AUD + for a car), and although you will use much less petrol, the costs of services and tires, insurance, safety gear and crash damage (should you be unfortunate enough to have it happen to you) can be quite disproportionately expensive.

 

Eg

 

Motorcycle costs $12, 000, you need to get it serviced every 6-8000 Km, and services will cost just as much as a typical car service ($200 a pop, minimum), new tires every 6-12,000Km at $100 - $400 AUD each (a good set of 2 tires for a motorcycle can set you back more than a full set of 4 tires for a car in some situations, and this depends on how you ride and how soft your tires are - softer tires have more grip and are safer, but don't last as long). Insurance for motorcycles can be very expensive, as they are riskier to drive, and more likely to be involved in an accident. Good safety gear is essential unless you are an idiot aiming for a Darwin Award, so expect to spend $2000 on helmet ($250 - 1000 AUD, full leathers, boots and gloves. You will probably want some winter/wet weather gear, so there is another $800AUD if you get decent stuff.

 

If you drop your helmet, you need to buy another one as they are single use items - you simply can't trust a dropped helmet to protect your head, it works for one impact only. Don't ever buy a second hand helmet if you value your head.

 

If you drop a fully faired motorcycle, it can cost you $2000 or more per side to fix the damage, and even minor damage can cost you hundreds if not thousands of dollars to repair. (Don't ask me what happens to your bank balance when you drop a Ducati ) And sooner or later, you will probably have an accident - there are too many things out of your control that are too easy to happen, so you need to be prepared for the eventuality.

 

If you have a minor accident and break some bones or end up in hospital for a while, that could cost you a lot if you don't have any sick leave available.

 

Motorcycles are way, way more expensive than their price tag and petrol consumption might lead you to believe, and in the end, they can be just as expensive as cars. Of course, you could take risks and skimp on safety gear etc, not service your bike when it is due and so on, not insure it, but, you would be a retard for doing so.

 

Bikes ain't cheap, I've spent more on them than I ever would have on a car, but they are worth the expense. Nothing beats the feeling of riding a bike in the country on a nice day

[Komag]

$2000 for helmet, leathers, boots, and gloves?! Mine will be more like $300 to $500 altogether. Everything else on your list as well, I will do just fine (not stupid or risky) spending 1/2 what you say or less.

 

Nothing personal, if you want to spend a lot on the best stuff that's fine, but I don't think that type of spending is required fare. An $80-$120 helmet protects as well as a $400 helmet, it just doesn't have the nice designer label or the advance air flow ventelation. My $35 boots will hold up well enough. Etc.

 

Maybe everything just costs 2x-5x more in Australia!

[obscurus]

$2000 for helmet, leathers, boots, and gloves?! Mine will be more like $300 to $500 altogether. Everything else on your list as well, I will do just fine (not stupid or risky) spending 1/2 what you say or less.

 

Nothing personal, if you want to spend a lot on the best stuff that's fine, but I don't think that type of spending is required fare. An $80-$120 helmet protects as well as a $400 helmet, it just doesn't have the nice designer label or the advance air flow ventelation. My $35 boots will hold up well enough. Etc.

 

Maybe everything just costs 2x-5x more in Australia!

 

Those prices weren't for the best stuff at all, that was in the lower middle range of what I would call acceptable quality. The really high end stuff will set you back maybe 3 times as much.

 

Well, unfortunately, I have a wierd shaped head that only fits into expensive Shoei or Arai helmets, and prices in Australia are probably quite a bit dearer than the US, even taking into account the conversion between the dollars. Australia is probably 50% more expensive than the US for many things, especially auto-related. Here, the cheapest, nastiest helmets cost about $200AUD including GST, which would be about $130 USD, give or take. Don't know if ther is a sales tax in the US, here it is 10%.

 

In terms of the quality to price ratio, sure the cheaper helmets are just as safe as the expensive ones (after all they have to pass the same safety standards), but for the rest of the safety gear, you mostly get what you pay for. And if you ride a lot (eg, you comute via motorcycle), a well ventilated, quality helmet is worth every cent in comfort.

 

How much is your skin worth? If you skimp on cheaper leathers that are thinner and more poorly stiched than the more expensive quality gear, you might live to regret it.

 

Motorcycles are not for people who don't have a fair bit of disposable income to spare. They can start off cheap, especially if you make compromises to quality safety gear, but you end up paying for it later (well, I hope you don't, but luck is not on your side).

 

I'm not trying to disparage your enthusiasm for motorcycles, just trying to give you a reality check and make sure you are aware of what is involved - it isn't as cheap as it seems, and you need to be prepared for unexpected expenses. Motorcycles can also often be cheaper to replace than to repair after even minor prangs, and if it is your fault, don't expect an insurer to pay for it.

[Komag]

Well, you may be right over time, but I hope not!

[obscurus]

Well, you may be right over time, but I hope not!

 

 

I hope not too, safe riding!

[sparhawk]

Obscurus, I had a collegue in one company who also was an ehtuisast for bikes, and the picture you draw here, is pretty much the same that I learned from him as well. So even though his is enthusiastic about it, he still managed to give me the fear of the price tags and I must say I believed him. He also told me, that he drove without leather often in the beginning, but then he had an accident, where he had it on, and he said, from that day on he would never go without it. If he hadn't had it strapped on that day, he would have a lot of injuries, so I wouldn't really go without it, but that's also quite an expensive part.