What is gr8 about motorcycling?

[Cyril Haearn]

Thanks very much for the various answers, I will spend some time reading them in detail.

Seems to me a cheap small motorbike really could make sense, cheaper than a car.


But what happens when one is in thick traffic on a single-carriageway road with an unpatient lorry driver behind, when one can not overtake to get away?

That is bad enough in a car, what is it like on a motorbike?

[kwackers]

But what happens when one is in thick traffic on a single-carriageway road with an unpatient lorry driver behind, when one can not overtake to get away?

In near 40 years of riding motorcycles I can't think of a single time that has ever happened. In fact I don't remember ever being tailgated by anyone (in the car - often, but not on the bike).
I suspect they realise you're much faster than them and simply hang back waiting for you to go...

[Tangled Metal]

Ride on the pavement. Well if it is ok for cyclists then why not motorcyclists too? Afterall if trapped in among bigger, heavier steel boxes motorcyclists feel in danger too. Let them ride up on pavements like a lot of cyclists do. Can motorbikers lower their seat right down so they could not possibly sit on it or even take their seat away too then they would fit in with the pavement riding cyclists too!!

[BigFoz]

Even a smallish motorbike (not a limited 125...) can seriously out accelerate a car, simply wait for a gap (doesn't have to be big) and pop the car in front, and make the tailgater their problem. Motorbikes don't just accelerate quickly from a standing start, they get from (for example) 40-70 faster than any car too, making many more overtaking opportunities.

[BigFoz]

It comes down to power to weight ratio (Just like cycling!) power may be 45-50hp on a small bike, but the weight is less than 10% of a car, so one third to half the power, with 1/10th of the weight makes it zippy.

For example the commuter Suzuki 650 is 71bhp, and 196Kg. Size that up to a Ford Mondeo (approx 1600kg) and to get same power to weight ratio, you'd need 600+ BHP... And that's a nice sensible little 2cyl bike. A zx-10 Kawasaki (not even the most powerful in their range) cranks out 200Hp for 200Kg, now your Mondeo needs 1,600BHP.

[bigjim]

I ride a 1999 VFR800. It is a beautifully made precision piece of machinery. It is a joy to ride. But. It is too crazily powerful to use on English roads. It is supposed to be a mid range Sports Tourer. Nothing near as powerful as todays bikes but it is quite capable of doing double the 70mph limit.
I really should get rid of it but ... Oh I don't know...

[reohn2]

It comes down to power to weight ratio (Just like cycling!) power may be 45-50hp on a small bike, but the weight is less than 10% of a car, so one third to half the power, with 1/10th of the weight makes it zippy.

For example the commuter Suzuki 650 is 71bhp, and 196Kg. Size that up to a Ford Mondeo (approx 1600kg) and to get same power to weight ratio, you'd need 600+ BHP... And that's a nice sensible little 2cyl bike. A zx-10 Kawasaki (not even the most powerful in their range) cranks out 200Hp for 200Kg, now your Mondeo needs 1,600BHP.

What I find mind boggling TBH is that motorcycles with such power output are allowed to be sold for road use.
I suppose this is called freedom and that any restriction of that power would be seenas a restriction on that freedom.
It's what I term as madness.

Tangled Metal
On the subject of power limiters,a 17 year old with a full motorcycle licence is allowed to ride upto 600cc m/cycle,providing the power is limited to 33bhp.
Here's the catch.
The limiter can be removed in a matter of minutes meaning that same 17 year old has now a 100+bhp projectile at their disposal.
Two and a half years ago my granddaughter was killed by such an unrestricted and illegal maniac when he ran into her m/cycle at an estimated 80mph.
He killed himself at the same time.
He'd been reported to an ineffectual and incompetent police force on at least 10 occasions previously that we know of, and twice local people had presented the police with video evidence to back up their claims.
The very night before he killed our granddaughter and himself, he was reported (yet again)for wrecking havoc by riding through the local town on the back wheel at over twice the speed limit,on numerous occasions in the same evening.
An effective police force and judicial system,would have taken his illegal bike and his licence away from him.
My granddaughter would still be alive and so would he,she was 19 and he was 17.
Her identical twin sister will never be the same,as will non of us.

The devastation can only guessed at,unless,and I hope it never does, happens to yourself.

Motorcycles like any other vehicle on the roads, are safe.
It's only when placed in the hands of idiots with far too much testosterone and not enough sense,all the freedom in the world and no responsibility,checks or balances that the problems begin.

[Tangled Metal]

I agree with you which is why I tried to put it as some limiter that was not tamper proof except by those registered to do so on a track day. I could imagine a day when a limited bike rider turns up on a limited bike to a track. It goes through scrutineers who unlock it with some seal of a kind for traceability. Then after the day or half day on the track they go home after the same scrutineers take off the seal (after checking) and replace the limiter. Basically the rider would not be allowed to remove the bike without being limited again. As I said not beyond the wit and widom of man to achieve just unlikely to happen. Not least because of such half hearted attempts at restriction in the past is more likely as a fudge on any curtailing of freedoms in the West.

BTW I know of idiots who very nearly wiped themselves out, which I am sure was not their plan when they got onto the bike that morning. One guy was a really clever university researcher/lecturer who got major brain damage. While he lived and operated it was with major learning difficulties and other physical impairments. Another guy was truly lucky to survive, one in a million crash to survive on the roads I think. He is functioning well, as well as before but with a stick to walk. People getting wiped out by any mechanical device is possible not just de-restricted bikes. I know of mountain bikers with brain damage (despite wearing helmets obviously but let's ignore helmet debates) as a result of stupid thrill seeking kind of behaviour that I have seen on motorbikes. It is the idiot that you can not be sure of that is the problem. If you can trust say middle aged bike tourers (especially if there is a couple on the bike, trust me the lass on the back will keep him under control) then that is not a problem. It is anyone on their own riding the bike for thrills that need ever more speed, excitement or acceleration to achieve them that is the problem. If that is not controlled then you will have problem. That could easily be kids on a stolen bike as middle aged men on their super sports with race ready package (or whatever you call the tuning they can get done).

[hondated]

Thanks very much for the various answers, I will spend some time reading them in detail.

Seems to me a cheap small motorbike really could make sense, cheaper than a car.


But what happens when one is in thick traffic on a single-carriageway road with an unpatient lorry driver behind, when one can not overtake to get away?

That is bad enough in a car, what is it like on a motorbike?

I an give you an answer on that as even though I am not a fast rider my friend is even slower and I have actually been over in France with him looked in my mirror and seen him riding along with an artic literally nearly on his back wheel.
His view is that I am going as fast as I want to so wait behind or pass when you can.
He is right of cause as you should only ever ride at a speed you are comfortable with within your capability.

One of the great things of getting old is that you have nothing to prove and you can wear the T shirt that as on it the motto " The older I get the faster I was ".

[BigFoz]

Let's get this into perspective. A 200hp motorbike is restricted - i.e. a 17 year should NOT be riding it - it's illegal, there is a qualifying period. Before you can have a more powerful bike. NO SUCH restriction applies to cars. You can take the test at 17 in a Fiat Panda, walk out of the test and get into a 1,200BHP Bugatti and do as you please.

Like most things (cars / trucks / guns / motorbikes / ladders / stairs / power tools) it's not the article that causes the problem, it's the operation. A motorbike is no more dangerous than a bicycle. It's how they're used that causes problems. If you want to ban all fast bikes, then you will also have to go to bat on banning all fast cars. Should we apply a 70mph limiter to all motor vehicles? I have exceeded the speed limit (pretty sure I have, no speedo...) on my bicycle, do we limit those somehow? Why do motorbikes polarise people so badly? They're either cool, or the spawn of satan, and no middle ground. For those who are in the latter camp, think carefully whether you're being rational.

[Bicycler]

Like most things (cars / trucks / guns / motorbikes / ladders / stairs / power tools) it's not the article that causes the problem, it's the operation.

True enough I guess but we could use the same logic to allow people to carry knives or handguns.

A motorbike is no more dangerous than a bicycle. It's how they're used that causes problems.

At any given speed the potential to injure is many times greater and the vast majority of the time we're not talking about the same speed.

Should we apply a 70mph limiter to all motor vehicles?

Yes. With an exception for Emergency vehicles and of course vehicles which need to be limited to a lower speed.

I have exceeded the speed limit (pretty sure I have, no speedo...) on my bicycle, do we limit those somehow?

There's no speed limit for bikes. The situations aren't comparable. If cars and motorbikes had a maximum sustainable speed of 20mph and weighed less than 100kg fully laden I wouldn't see a need for urgent regulation.

Why do motorbikes polarise people so badly? They're either cool, or the spawn of satan, and no middle ground. For those who are in the latter camp, think carefully whether you're being rational

I think I'm in the middle. I don't think the road is a place for charging about on and if you are intending to ride perfectly sensibly why would you need a massive engine. That said I see them as a symptom rather than the problem. As you remarked earlier the problem is the human driving/riding. But then does the available power contribute? Would we see the same recklessness if all bikes were 250cc or less?

[bigjim]

Would we see the same recklessness if all bikes were 250cc or less?

Would not solve the problem. There were 250cc, 100mph bikes on sale to the public in the 1960s The manufacturers would just up the game. Speed sells unfortunately.

[reohn2]

Would we see the same recklessness if all bikes were 250cc or less?

Would not solve the problem. There were 250cc, 100mph bikes on sale to the public in the 1960s The manufacturers would just up the game. Speed sells unfortunately.

Not if it's illegal.
TBH restricting anything to 70 is too slow IMHO,perhaps 90mph would be more realistic as sometimes the extra speed help get you out of trouble.
The problems begin when starry eyed numpties believe they have the same ability to ride and drive as their racing heroes,99.99999% clearly don't.
Add to that a vehicle capable of similar speeds of their heroes or at least very rapid acceleration,and you have a recipe for disaster,some people can't help themselves.
As I mentioned above if any restrictor to engine power is capable of being removed in minutes,then the whole thing becomes a joke,which is the state of affairs ATM.

Just to be clear I'm no way anti motorcycle,but I am anti very fast vehicles,there's simply no need for them,end of.
Vehicles that can achieve crazy 3 second 0 to 60 speeds or 160+mph top speeds are useless to sane people and dangerous to all in the hands of people on roads with two way traffic.

If some one wants to go fast there's race circuits all over the country they can use.

When the crazy powered machines,however many wheels they have, are removed from the roads,the remainder of this kind of behaviour can be kept to a bare minimum,(it'll never be completely stamped out)by better policing and stiffer penalties.

[pete75]

Would we see the same recklessness if all bikes were 250cc or less?

Would not solve the problem. There were 250cc, 100mph bikes on sale to the public in the 1960s The manufacturers would just up the game. Speed sells unfortunately.

When I were a lad - well 16 anyway I had a Suzuki Super 6 that would do the best part of a ton. You could ride a 250 on L plates and if you passed your test at 16 you could ride any sized bike. These days I believe a 16 year old can only ride a moped and older learners only a 125 until they pass their test.
Back then you taught yourself on a Bantam or something with a Villiers engine on farm tracks and then on the road when you were 16. It seemed to work ok - you knew how control a motorbike from riding on muddy tracks and you knew about the roads from riding your bicycle.
What was great about motorcycling was the sense of freedom particularly in your teens. Before I got my Super 6 I had an Ariel Golden Arrow - a crap bike really but it seemed wonderful to me at the time.

Still got a few bikes but slow old clunkers by modern standards - 1960 BSA A10, 1971 Honda CB750 K1, 1984 Kawasaki GPZ900 and a 1978 MZ TS250.

[Mark1978]

The requirements to pass a motorbike test are rather more stringent than those far cars are they not?