Where has common sense gone? [Archive]

Mom

27th August 2010, 09:25

Rhetorical question I agree, but honestly some days you really have to wonder.

Enjoying my morning coffee and browsing the NZ Herald online this morning, I saw a picture of a woman on a scooter.

www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c...mp;objectid=10669175

Now I am always interested in anything biking so I clicked in and read an article about Aucklanders slowly getting greener. This is surely a good thing to happen? Auckland is a big, busy city and suffers the problems associated with being so. Congestion comes at the top of the list. I read that The Ministry for the Environment estimates that congestion in greater Auckland costs the New Zealand economy about $1billion a year. $1billion! That is an enormous amount of money, we each and every one of us should be concentrating on reducing congestion.

That is where as bikers we are already doing our bit, it is a proven fact we cause less congestion and less pollution than 4 wheeled road users. People should be encouraged to ride a motorcycle; there should be a big push towards increasing the numbers of riders on the roads. Motorcycles should be promoted as a legitimate and “green” alternative to the private car in the same way that walking, cycling and public transport is currently.

I read in this article that scooter use has skyrocketed, with a 123 per cent increase in registrations but, and it is a big but, this increase has dropped significantly since ACC levies were raised for two-wheeled vehicles. The example used in the Herald article states that the registration costs for this woman are in fact more expensive than her annual fuel bill. How can this be justified?

We must take action to ensure that the powers that be acknowledge and support motorcycling and respect the transport choices we have made. I encourage you all to write to your MP’s, write to Nick Smith, contact your councils demanding our voice is listened to.

Bikemad

27th August 2010, 09:35

say what?????......common sense!!!!.........in local or national government............
mwahahahaha..........your crackin me up Mom...........

simpy1

27th August 2010, 09:40

I hate to be a downer here but the only situation where motorcycles reduce pollution is if they are replacing one person driving an older, large-displacement car. Motorcycle engines in general are not terribly clean, and most bikes lack catalytic converters! 2 people on bikes is usually worse, pollution-wise, to two people in one car.

But in terms of congestion, yes they're a good thing!

NONONO

27th August 2010, 09:50

I hate to be a downer here but the only situation where motorcycles reduce pollution is if they are replacing one person driving an older, large-displacement car. Motorcycle engines in general are not terribly clean, and most bikes lack catalytic converters! 2 people on bikes is usually worse, pollution-wise, to two people in one car.

But in terms of congestion, yes they're a good thing!

Hmm, not sure you're on the mark there cocker..
Think I read somewhere once that 1 gallon gas burned by internal combustion produces 5 lb carbon in the air...
Bikes doing 40-50 MPG, scooter double that.
Cars, use bout double the amount of fuel, more depending on size, which is roughly 4 times more than scooters...
That math would suggest 2 wheels produce much less carbon (reduced by a factor of 2 for bikes and 4 for scooters).
Not so?

MSTRS

27th August 2010, 09:54

That math would suggest 2 wheels produce much less carbon (reduced by a factor of 2 for bikes and 4 for scooters).
Not so?

Not so. The burnt petrol contains the same waste. Put it in terms of mileage travelled and bikes produce less.

NONONO

27th August 2010, 10:01

Not so. The burnt petrol contains the same waste. Put it in terms of mileage travelled and bikes produce less.

Yep, was my point, but badly put....

simpy1

27th August 2010, 10:02

It's not as simple as fuel burnt. How it is combusted makes a difference. More NOx is bad - NO2 for example is 298 times more potent than CO2 in affecting climate change. Plus, think about how people ride bikes/scooters - not tamely like granny in her Daihatsu Move.

Here's a link to the research:

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2006/01/060101155000.htm

In saying all that, China is building one new coal-fired power plant per week. So don't worry, it's all insignificant and we'll all be underwater soon. Might as well enjoy our time here eh?

Banditbandit

27th August 2010, 10:10

ACC were told exactly that in a submission - that the cost of the ACC levies on the scooters would be more than the fuel bill .. hence fewer scooters, more cars, more pollution. more congestion

But guess what .. that was ignored.

jafar

27th August 2010, 10:10

I hate to be a downer here but the only situation where motorcycles reduce pollution is if they are replacing one person driving an older, large-displacement car. Motorcycle engines in general are not terribly clean, and most bikes lack catalytic converters! 2 people on bikes is usually worse, pollution-wise, to two people in one car.

But in terms of congestion, yes they're a good thing!

I find it difficult to believe that a person sitting in traffic in their toyota corolla will use less fuel than someone riding a nifty 50 down the bus lane to the same destination.
Same goes for a rider & pillion making progress through traffic would use considerably less fuel than 2 people sitting in a cage.
A fair amount of bikes DO have catalytic converters, it is only a small minority of us that replace them with aftermarket pipes for performance or other reasons.

Spearfish

27th August 2010, 11:35

Even with high rego bikes/scoots are still cheaper than a car for inner city work, quicker across town than cars or public transport and free to park.
There is no speed difference across town between good scoots and bikes given the same rider, the only difference is true running costs.

One of the side effects of the ACC saga was the fear it generated of being seriously hurt. For people still kicking tyres and a little undecided at the time they couldn't see the point of the high risk for what is essentially just transport to work.

PirateJafa

27th August 2010, 11:54

Meh.

I'd rather keep "commuters" off bikes anyway. It's these people who are uninterested in any form of biking bar getting to and from work that provides the Govt with some of it's best ammunition against us. I don't want to be further associated with those idiots.

Keep bikes for those who ride them from enjoyment.

Bald Eagle

27th August 2010, 11:56

Meh.

I'd rather keep "commuters" off bikes anyway. It's these people who are uninterested in any form of biking bar getting to and from work that provides the Govt with some of it's best ammunition against us. I don't want to be further associated with those idiots.

Keep bikes for those who ride them from enjoyment.

You missed a point there pj. I ride to work every day 'cos it provides enjoyment to soften the economic shackle of having to go to work. I also ride on weekends for 'extra' enjoyment.

Eyegasm

27th August 2010, 12:04

I agree with BE here.

I ride daily. The best thing about my job, riding to and from work. It's the 8 hour wait in the middle that I hate.

Then the weekend excursions give me the freedom of having no determined destination.

"The road goes that way.....OK"

neels

27th August 2010, 12:05

Seems pretty simple to me.

My options are a big v-twin bike doing over 40mpg or car doing around 30mpg or 4wd doing around 25mpg, less time on the road on the bike, bike must be more environmentally friendly. If you conservatively double the fuel economy for a scooter how the hell can it be worse than a car?

PirateJafa

27th August 2010, 12:21

You missed a point there pj. I ride to work every day 'cos it provides enjoyment to soften the economic shackle of having to go to work. I also ride on weekends for 'extra' enjoyment.

You miss my point. You also ride for enjoyment, which makes you a biker. It's those whose only interest in motorbikes is cheap commuter transport that often (not always, but often) give us a very bad name. I've talked to several who have zero interest in even buying any protective gear above their battered open-face helmet, as "I bought the scooter to save money, I don't want to spend more money!"

Still, I'm sure their view will change after a visit or two to the local medical centre.

Squiggles

27th August 2010, 12:54

You miss my point. You also ride for enjoyment, which makes you a biker. It's those whose only interest in motorbikes is cheap commuter transport that often (not always, but often) give us a very bad name. I've talked to several who have zero interest in even buying any protective gear above their battered open-face helmet, as "I bought the scooter to save money, I don't want to spend more money!"

Still, I'm sure their view will change after a visit or two to the local medical centre.

Alternatively its the ones who ride only for enjoyment/adrenalin fix (usually with scant regard for the rest of us) who provide the govt with the best ammunition... (Also, my experiences with this sort suggest they'll rack up a big bill in medical costs then retire from riding)

tamarillo

27th August 2010, 12:56

Seems pretty simple to me.

My options are a big v-twin bike doing over 40mpg or car doing around 30mpg or 4wd doing around 25mpg, less time on the road on the bike, bike must be more environmentally friendly. If you conservatively double the fuel economy for a scooter how the hell can it be worse than a car?

Ok - but why the hell does a bike only do 40 mpg? Any new car less than 2 litres can do that easily and many can do much better. My Trophy uses damn nearly as much gas as my old BMW car.
Answer is - we don't buy economical bikes - we buy fast ones. If we all bought modern 250 to 400 cc commuters we could claim moral high ground - but we don't.
Sorry but it pisses me off when bikers try to claim some moral high ground as if they are exempt from consumption and pollution problems. We should just admit we enjoy them.
I do agree that ACC charges are stupid - used to be some bikers kept a scooter for going to work whereas now that does not seem feasable.

avgas

27th August 2010, 13:49

Gremlin

27th August 2010, 14:11

Today we mourn the passing of a beloved old friend, by the name of Common Sense, who has been with us for many years.

No one knows for sure how old he was since his birth records were long ago lost in bureaucratic red tape. He will be remembered as having cultivated such valued lessons as knowing when to come in out of the rain, why the early bird gets the worm and that life isn't always fair.

Common Sense lived by simple, sound financial policies (don't spend more than you earn) and reliable parenting strategies (adults, not kids, are in charge).

His health began to rapidly deteriorate when well intentioned but overbearing regulations were set in place. Reports of a six-year-old boy charged with sexual harassment for kissing a classmate, teens suspended from school for using mouthwash after lunch, and a teacher fired for reprimanding an unruly student only worsened his condition. It declined even further when schools were required to get parental consent to administer aspirin to a student but could not inform the parents when a student became pregnant and wanted to have an abortion.

Finally, Common sense lost the will to live as the Ten Commandments became contraband, churches became businesses and criminals received better treatment than their victims. Common Sense finally gave up the ghost after athletes and CEOs salaries increased to between 9 thousand and 90 thousand dollars per HOUR, and woman failed to realize that a steaming cup of coffee was hot, spilled it in her lap, and was awarded a huge settlement for simply being stupid.

Common Sense was preceded in death by his parents, Truth and Trust, his wife, Discretion; his daughter, Responsibility; and his son, Reason. He is survived by two stepbrothers; My Rights and Ima Whiner.

Not many attended his funeral because so few realized he was gone.

Big Dave

27th August 2010, 14:14

Where?

I have it. I'll let you see it for $10.

Mom

27th August 2010, 14:20

Sorry but it pisses me off when bikers try to claim some moral high ground as if they are exempt from consumption and pollution problems.

I think it may actually be you that is claiming the high ground here. I will bet that a motorbike will be far more fuel efficient than a car as it pootles through Auckland peak hour traffic when compared to cars sitting idling along, burning gas up while stationary.

The article I have used to base this thread on is talking about scooters. You can not for one moment expect anyone to accept they are not more fuel efficient than a car?

ukusa

27th August 2010, 14:53

I think it may actually be you that is claiming the high ground here. I will bet that a motorbike will be far more fuel efficient than a car as it pootles through Auckland peak hour traffic when compared to cars sitting idling along, burning gas up while stationary.

The article I have used to base this thread on is talking about scooters. You can not for one moment expect anyone to accept they are not more fuel efficient than a car?

not to mention the landfill they create when they've past their used by date.

avgas

27th August 2010, 15:48

caseye

27th August 2010, 16:23

Hi Jacked ! Aw well, sorry Mom theer are Morons on here who'd rather argue the preposturious theory that a car is even remotely as efficient as a bike/scooter.
KB used to be a great place to come for a laugh, but these days all I see is a bunch of whining snivelling puppets with someone elses hand up their arse telling them what to say.
Since when do we hairy arsed bikers give someone like this bloody SIMPY1 the time of day.
Piss Off simpy1 and take yer ratty arsed 2fiddy with you.
BOLLOCKS to your theory and crap about "the research"
Petrol in, peetrol burnt vehicle goes so many K's.
As for Globsal Warming, don't get me started, like I said.Piss Off!

simpy1

27th August 2010, 17:25

KB used to be a great place to come for a laugh, but these days all I see is a bunch of whining snivelling puppets with someone elses hand up their arse telling them what to say.

Followed by a whole bunch of whining. Ahaha, irony is a wonderful thing.

I, being a qualified and professional environmental scientist, do believe that climate change is real. But also, as someone who thinks for themselves (and a rabid pessimist), I don't think we can do much to change peoples' behaviour. Plus, NZ is basically insignificant on the world stage.

We're all doomed. As sad as that sounds, the only logical thing left to do is to have a ton of fun. Hence why I bought a motorbike. I await my full licence, so I can get a bigger bike too. Sorry my 250 doesn't make me as manly as you, Caseye. But I wish everyone here well on their awesome machines!

I just don't recommend going around claiming to be saving the planet by riding a motorcycle instead of driving a car. Motorbikes are fun, that's all the reason you need!

Maha

27th August 2010, 18:03

Followed by a whole bunch of whining. Ahaha, irony is a wonderful thing.

I, being a qualified and professional environmental scientist, do believe that climate change is real. But also, as someone who thinks for themselves (and a rabid pessimist), I don't think we can do much to change peoples' behaviour. Plus, NZ is basically insignificant on the world stage.

We're all doomed. As sad as that sounds, the only logical thing left to do is to have a ton of fun. Hence why I bought a motorbike. I await my full licence, so I can get a bigger bike too. Sorry my 250 doesn't make me as manly as you, Caseye. But I wish everyone here well on their awesome machines!

I just don't recommend going around claiming to be saving the planet by riding a motorcycle instead of driving a car. Motorbikes are fun, that's all the reason you need!

Climate Change is real, state the obvious?
Its been changing forever, when has the worlds climate ever been stable?
I remember living in Taupo in the mid 80's and the temp during the summer was up in the 30's, often around 31-32 degs. Dont really get those temps nowadays, perhaps more high 20's if we're lucky. In summary, its cooling down. :shifty:

caseye

27th August 2010, 19:44

Followed by a whole bunch of whining. Ahaha, irony is a wonderful thing.

I, being a qualified and professional environmental scientist, do believe that climate change is real. But also, as someone who thinks for themselves (and a rabid pessimist), I don't think we can do much to change peoples' behaviour. Plus, NZ is basically insignificant on the world stage.

We're all doomed. As sad as that sounds, the only logical thing left to do is to have a ton of fun. Hence why I bought a motorbike. I await my full licence, so I can get a bigger bike too. Sorry my 250 doesn't make me as manly as you, Caseye. But I wish everyone here well on their awesome machines!

I just don't recommend going around claiming to be saving the planet by riding a motorcycle instead of driving a car. Motorbikes are fun, that's all the reason you need!

Ha nice Repart'e, the reference to taking yer 2fiddy was just that, riding anything is the whole point.
Irony is not lost on many here, strange as it may seem.
Climate change is real, I'll give you that.

Can you say which way it's going with any degree of certaintity?

I'm a simple soul who's been around engines of one sort or another for many years.
I've yet to see a car go as far for as little and without polluting what air we have left as much as a motorbike.
You make sweeping statements "we're all doomed"
We are all going to die, if thats what yoy mean?
Read some of the more popular posts going here and you'll soon see what I was referring to with regards to some being mouth pieces for others and the arguement never being completed for lack of a decent apology from one side or the other.
here in KB getting a concensus is nigh on impossible, even if your'e right there is always someone here who knows better.

"I, being a qualified and professional environmental scientist," Please could you tell me if your name appears on the register of "SCIENTISTS"( People, who deal only with proven, known, irrefutable facts ) who agree that global warming is a man made phenomenon.That is going to escalate to the point where we are all doomed.
To my knowldge there is not yet one actual Scientist who has put ther name to that particular document.
Yet it is adorned with the squiggles of upwards of 3000 people who are neither actual scientists or experts in the field of cause and effect for or against global warming .

Woodman

27th August 2010, 20:28

Getting away from the pollution debate, the other issue is the traffic congestion.

The theory being, that if more people rode motorcycles/scooters the congestion problem would be solved. This may well work in some countries with warm climates, but new Zealand just has not got the weather for everyday motorcycling. And then there are the ATGATT nazis who will make scootering around even more inconvenient.
Sorry but this just ain't the country to do it, Vietnam, Thailand yes definitely. UNZUD, no way.

bogan

27th August 2010, 20:38

just skimmed the rest, but didn't see any mention of pollution incurred in production, doesn't take as much to produce a scoot as it does a 'rolla. Many reckon the pollution cost of this far outweighs the pollution produce by running it.

Also, who the fuck thinks a car is more fuel efficient than a scoot :blink:

Mom

27th August 2010, 20:42

new Zealand just has not got the weather for everyday motorcycling.

Really? Best you tell that to all the people that commute to work every day on 2 wheels. I dont commute, but have been known to ride out in torrential rain in the dead of winter, just cos I can.

Woodman

27th August 2010, 20:49

Really? Best you tell that to all the people that commute to work every day on 2 wheels. I dont commute, but have been known to ride out in torrential rain in the dead of winter, just cos I can.

I know there are folk who will do that, but I do not think it will become universally popular here like in warmer climates. Yes in a lot of these countries a scooter is all a lot of people can afford and they use them a lot, not just twice a day to and from work.
How many of the motorcycling commuters here opt for their car on wet days? can you imagine if there were a lot of riders caging it on rainy days, wouldn't that rainy day commuting fun.

GOONR

27th August 2010, 21:34

.....The theory being, that if more people rode motorcycles/scooters the congestion problem would be solved. This may well work in some countries with warm climates, but new Zealand just has not got the weather for everyday motorcycling.....

Bugger, I wish someone had told me that earlier. I use my bike no matter what the weather, I've been doing it all wrong.

schrodingers cat

27th August 2010, 21:36

Meh.

I'd rather keep "commuters" off bikes anyway. It's these people who are uninterested in any form of biking bar getting to and from work that provides the Govt with some of it's best ammunition against us. I don't want to be further associated with those idiots.

Keep bikes for those who ride them from enjoyment.

Yeah! And keep the drugs out of hospitals while you're at it

NONONO

28th August 2010, 08:11

I know there are folk who will do that, but I do not think it will become universally popular here like in warmer climates. Yes in a lot of these countries a scooter is all a lot of people can afford and they use them a lot, not just twice a day to and from work.
How many of the motorcycling commuters here opt for their car on wet days? can you imagine if there were a lot of riders caging it on rainy days, wouldn't that rainy day commuting fun.

Universally popular with me, every day, wet or dry...
But may agree with your idea bout sending all scooter riders to Vietnam,
Luvly pair of shoulders, show em off, show em off.

rastuscat

28th August 2010, 10:06

Not sure how scientific my thoughts are but...........

A 175cc motor putting along at 50 km/h might make more smoke than a 5000cc motor idling along beside it.

But it's not only the visible smoke that counts. The CO churned out by the extra 4825cc can't be seen, but it still exists.

By my thoughts, bikes are more environmentally friendly mainly because they frequently burn less fuel. Seems like a simple thing. Bikes get blamed coz they are sometimes smokey (mainly 2-strokes). They are just an easy target to pick on.

Am I wrong?

Jonno.

28th August 2010, 10:35

Not sure how scientific my thoughts are but...........

A 175cc motor putting along at 50 km/h might make more smoke than a 5000cc motor idling along beside it.

But it's not only the visible smoke that counts. The CO churned out by the extra 4825cc can't be seen, but it still exists.

By my thoughts, bikes are more environmentally friendly mainly because they frequently burn less fuel. Seems like a simple thing. Bikes get blamed coz they are sometimes smokey (mainly 2-strokes). They are just an easy target to pick on.

Am I wrong?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catalytic_converter

Hi Jacked ! Aw well, sorry Mom theer are Morons on here who'd rather argue the preposturious theory that a car is even remotely as efficient as a bike/scooter.
KB used to be a great place to come for a laugh, but these days all I see is a bunch of whining snivelling puppets with someone elses hand up their arse telling them what to say.
Since when do we hairy arsed bikers give someone like this bloody SIMPY1 the time of day.
Piss Off simpy1 and take yer ratty arsed 2fiddy with you.
BOLLOCKS to your theory and crap about "the research"
Petrol in, peetrol burnt vehicle goes so many K's.
As for Globsal Warming, don't get me started, like I said.Piss Off!

http://articles.latimes.com/2008/jun/11/autos/hy-throttle11

:weird:

caseye

28th August 2010, 10:49

What read all of that? Piss OFF!
You are going to go far here handing out reds like party pills.
BOLLOCKS Inspector, thats what I say, How an internal combustion engine that is 10% the size of another can do more damage than the bigger one.
I know, read the blurb/propoganda, that doesn't tell this simple soul how it comes about that a bike engine makes more pollution than a cars engine.

davereid

28th August 2010, 11:56

I hate to be a downer here but the only situation where motorcycles reduce pollution is if they are replacing one person driving an older, large-displacement car. Motorcycle engines in general are not terribly clean, and most bikes lack catalytic converters! 2 people on bikes is usually worse, pollution-wise, to two people in one car.

But in terms of congestion, yes they're a good thing!

Lots of bikers choose motorcycles simply for performance. So comparing an eco-car to a super-bike is not really a fair comparison.

Comparing an eco-bike to an eco-car might be a better comparison.

There are dozens of 200cc and smaller bikes that get fuel economy of around 2 litres per 100km.

Thats twice as good as the best hybrids or eco cars.

They also used a tiny fraction of the energy used to manufacture a hybrid vehicle, and will be much easier to dispose of at the end of life.

5 of them can park in a space large enough for one car.

Even larger bikes match eco-cars for fuel mileage.

My Harley Sportster gets an easy 55 or 60 mpg. My Kawasaki ER6 does even better, and it has a catalystic converter.

My TGB moped has done 44000 km, and uses a frugal amount of fuel - so little I have never bothered to work it out. Its extra emissions might be of concern in Bombay, but on the West Coast of New Zealand they are irrelevant.

There are certainly bikes out there that are not frugal, but a carefully selected commuter bike, even if only used on dry days is a great way to have a bit of fun, and be environmentally friendly.

Jonno.

29th August 2010, 19:12

What read all of that? Piss OFF!
You are going to go far here handing out reds like party pills.
BOLLOCKS Inspector, thats what I say, How an internal combustion engine that is 10% the size of another can do more damage than the bigger one.
I know, read the blurb/propoganda, that doesn't tell this simple soul how it comes about that a bike engine makes more pollution than a cars engine.

No. I gave you a red because of your pretentious "I'm right because I say so" bs.

http://www.worldcarfree.net/resources/freesources/motorcy.htm
http://www.latimes.com/news/printedition/highway1/la-hy-throttle11-2008jun11,0,1076364.story
http://thekneeslider.com/archives/2005/12/23/motorcycle-air-pollution/
http://www.healthnewsdigest.com/news/Environment_380/How_Much_Pollution_do_Motorcycles_Generate.shtml

Fuel efficiency doesn't mean emission friendly. Most motorcycles are carb'd and don't have a catalyst converter.

simpy1

30th August 2010, 09:21

Well I'm glad one other person here is willing to read something longer than a sentence!

Also, regarding a comparison of bikes and cars, it is never an easy comparison. Yes a hybrid uses more fuel than a bike, but can transport 5 people rather than 2. Also it's not likely to be raced over the Rimutakas for fun. But I hate this argument - bikes are for fun, not for practical load-carrying. Riding a bike is not going to be a major influence in the destruction of our environment, nor is it going to make any significant positive difference. Just go have fun.

MarkH

30th August 2010, 10:04

The article I have used to base this thread on is talking about scooters. You can not for one moment expect anyone to accept they are not more fuel efficient than a car?

Even my big (400cc) and heavy (199kg dry) scooter goes over twice as far on a litre of 91 octane petrol than my previous vehicle (EFI 1500cc small light 5 speed manual Toyota car) did. And when you add the fact that the scooter is moving and the cars often aren't - there is a huge difference.

but new Zealand just has not got the weather for everyday motorcycling.

Auckland does - plenty warm enough, even in Winter and I probably only need my wet weather gear less than 1 day in 10.

Answer is - we don't buy economical bikes - we buy fast ones. If we all bought modern 250 to 400 cc commuters we could claim moral high ground - but we don't.

I do agree that ACC charges are stupid - used to be some bikers kept a scooter for going to work whereas now that does not seem feasable.

It's hard to blame bikers when ACC actively discourage owning something economical for day to day commuting as well as the fun weekend ride. 2 bikes is bloody expensive on the rego - even a 125cc scooter is over $400 to register, add a bike >600cc and you are blowing a thousand bucks a year on rego.

2 people on bikes is usually worse, pollution-wise, to two people in one car.

I thought this was about Auckland commuting! 2 people - in the same car as each other? That's crazy talk!

I'd guess that >90% of cars commuting in Auckland are only carrying a single person. A huge queue of cars barely moving in rush hour has to be horribly inefficient compared to bikes that are actually moving. Using less petrol is a good thing, even ignoring levels of pollution - the worlds oil reserves wont last forever so burning less is a good idea.

I have been riding for the last 2 years - I've saved a shit load of time and use less than half as much petrol. The last time I paid for parking was over 2 years ago. My scooter can get better than 25km on a litre of gas while commuting around Auckland - that is better than a Prius. I only have 400cc and it is fuel injected - it's way more efficient than the average car on the road, I can get from Onehunga to the CBD and back to Onehunga on 1 litre of petrol.

marty

30th August 2010, 17:02

I, being a qualified and professional environmental scientist, do believe that climate change is real.

Of course climate change is real. I'm pretty sure there used to be a fucking huge glacier here, but now it's gone. Something warmed up to melt it...

217228

I hope you didn't get a $100k student loan to get that degree

davereid

30th August 2010, 17:38

Yes a hybrid uses more fuel than a bike, but can transport 5 people rather than 2. Also it's not likely to be raced over the Rimutakas for fun. But I hate this argument - bikes are for fun, not for practical load-carrying. Riding a bike is not going to be a major influence in the destruction of our environment, nor is it going to make any significant positive difference. Just go have fun.

I have never seen a hybrid with anyone except the driver in it. Mind you, I don't pay them any attention.

And you are right. A hybrid won't be taken for a thrash on a sunny day. But come to Kapiti. Any Saturday you will see dozens of V8s and Classic cars, taking a needless trip to a winery, a cafe or the beach.

Its not really accurate to suggest motorcycles aren't practical transport.

A quick trip to China, Vietnam or India will redefine your view.

I have seen a Vietnamese guy on a moped move two 44 gallon drums full of cabbage, faster than I could do it in my ute.

In those countries, two wheeled transport is real and practical transport.

The west has chosen the creature comforts of the car, simply because we can afford to do so.

As time goes on, so will the east.

As the east replaces the frugal motorcycle with the car, you will see real environmental damage.

Not Riding a bike is going to be a major influence in the destruction of our environment.

Just watch as in the next 20 years 3 Billion people swap the 80cc Honda they currently use, for the 2500cc V6 one they will then be able to afford.

I think you may just use your bike for fun.

But in my shed is a moped with 44,000 km on it and a BMW with 170,000 km on it.

They got that way by being used for daily commuting. Saving the rider and the planet heaps.

2wheeldrifter

30th August 2010, 20:07

Out of all my sense's "Common sense" I could live without.........

just had to say that sorry...... :)

jonbuoy

31st August 2010, 09:17

Its not really accurate to suggest motorcycles aren't practical transport.

A quick trip to China, Vietnam or India will redefine your view.

Or Spain, Italy or pretty much any large city centre anywhere in the world.

Sable

1st September 2010, 00:17

You miss my point. You also ride for enjoyment, which makes you a biker. It's those whose only interest in motorbikes is cheap commuter transport that often (not always, but often) give us a very bad name. I've talked to several who have zero interest in even buying any protective gear above their battered open-face helmet, as "I bought the scooter to save money, I don't want to spend more money!"

Still, I'm sure their view will change after a visit or two to the local medical centre.

They're not bikers, they're scootfags. It's called extreme ignorance. Answering the phone: "Hi, I'd like to get my scooter fixed" Sure, what's the probem? "It won't start" What brand of scooter is it? "Uhh, let me check" ..... "A red one." And the retards that think topping up the 2 stroke oil is an optional extra designed to make bike shops money, and the ones that park in spaces between parked cars (Happened to someone I know, they coudn't get out of the park so they just drove through the scooter). The idiot that I regularly see on the way to work wearing a bicycle helmet and the dicks wearing shorts and tshirts. Saw a scoot change lanes into a cage once, that was funny. Usually happens the other way round. The riders are the main reason I loathe scooters.

simpy1

1st September 2010, 09:38

...the ones that park in spaces between parked cars (Happened to someone I know, they coudn't get out of the park so they just drove through the scooter).

Jeez, park rage! They weigh about 50kg, should have just picked it up and put it somewhere else. Preferably somewhere hilarious and confusing.

avgas

1st September 2010, 10:51

Jeez, park rage! They weigh about 50kg, should have just picked it up and put it somewhere else. Preferably somewhere hilarious and confusing.
Like a swimming pool

varminter

1st September 2010, 20:05

I claim the moral high ground. No particular reason, just like the view up here.

Toaster

1st September 2010, 20:36

I find it difficult to believe that a person sitting in traffic in their toyota corolla will use less fuel than someone riding a nifty 50 down the bus lane to the same destination.
Same goes for a rider & pillion making progress through traffic would use considerably less fuel than 2 people sitting in a cage.
A fair amount of bikes DO have catalytic converters, it is only a small minority of us that replace them with aftermarket pipes for performance or other reasons.

I managed 800 kms on 40 litres in my Hybrid.... :innocent:

Rogue Rider

1st September 2010, 20:49

Sorry, it's gone lol. No common sense here.

DMNTD

1st September 2010, 20:57

I managed 800 kms on 40 litres in my Hybrid.... :innocent:
You put an effin big battery in that 'Busa fulla? :blink: :shifty:

swbarnett

1st September 2010, 21:43

I managed 800 kms on 40 litres in my Hybrid.... :innocent:
The last car I drove displayed fuel usage in l/100km. According to it I could do 100km on no fuel at all if I idled all the way.

The real answer, of course, is that an idling car will take an infinite amount of fuel to do 100km (unless you're coasting downhill). Can't think of anything less efficient than an idling engine (car or bike).

Woodman

1st September 2010, 23:14

They're not bikers, they're scootfags. It's called extreme ignorance. Answering the phone: "Hi, I'd like to get my scooter fixed" Sure, what's the probem? "It won't start" What brand of scooter is it? "Uhh, let me check" ..... "A red one." And the retards that think topping up the 2 stroke oil is an optional extra designed to make bike shops money, and the ones that park in spaces between parked cars (Happened to someone I know, they coudn't get out of the park so they just drove through the scooter). The idiot that I regularly see on the way to work wearing a bicycle helmet and the dicks wearing shorts and tshirts. Saw a scoot change lanes into a cage once, that was funny. Usually happens the other way round. The riders are the main reason I loathe scooters.

Why should they give a shit what brand etc the bike is?? To them its just cheap transport.

Also can't see an issue with parking between 2 cars, that is what scooters are good for e.g. not bunging up parking spaces.
You need to chill a bit, they just scooters.

avgas

2nd September 2010, 08:29

I managed 800 kms on 40 litres in my Hybrid.... :innocent:
I've done 1000km on 45L of Diesel. Lowest its ever done on that tank was 800.
Car is 2009 Ford Focus 1.8 Turbo Diesel.

Its a POS and I hate it. (company car)

avgas

2nd September 2010, 08:31

Can't think of anything less efficient than an idling engine (car or bike).
A Politician?

davereid

2nd September 2010, 08:43

They're not bikers, they're scootfags. It's called extreme ignorance. Answering the phone: "Hi, I'd like to get my scooter fixed" Sure, what's the probem? "It won't start" What brand of scooter is it? "Uhh, let me check" ..... "A red one." And the retards that think topping up the 2 stroke oil is an optional extra designed to make bike shops money, and the ones that park in spaces between parked cars (Happened to someone I know, they coudn't get out of the park so they just drove through the scooter). The idiot that I regularly see on the way to work wearing a bicycle helmet and the dicks wearing shorts and tshirts. Saw a scoot change lanes into a cage once, that was funny. Usually happens the other way round. The riders are the main reason I loathe scooters.

Scooters aren't a problem as Joe average doesn't think they are bikers either, so it doesn't affect us.

The real problem is young fellas who think they know everything.

They normally ride crappy sub-bikes from asia.

These guys ride shitters under 600cc. They don't really count as bikers, they are just wannabees, with big mouths.

Even ACC don't think they are real bikes.

These guys get flash helmets with graphics, and race replica leathers.

The trouble is, that to Joe average these guys LOOK like bikers.
But they aren't. They don't even have proper bikes, and they are all piss and wind.

They shit themselves when they meet the bikers they have abused on-line in real life, and go away crying about being assaulted for no reason.

They just ride their tiny jap shitters, try to look like real bikers and piss real bikers off.

The main reason I loathe these small bikes is the riders.

MSTRS

2nd September 2010, 08:49

I managed 800 kms on 40 litres in my Hybrid.... :innocent:

Pffft! my 3.8L Commode will only use about 60L for the same distance.

st00ji

2nd September 2010, 09:59

whats a proper biker then davereid? or are ya just attempting to carve out an exclusive little niche for you and your buddies

davereid

2nd September 2010, 10:19

whats a proper biker then davereid? or are ya just attempting to carve out an exclusive little niche for you and your buddies

Sigh...

It was tongue-in-cheek.

A little bit of light-heartedness at Mr. Sables expense.

If you had read my profile you would have seen my daily ride is a TGB Scooter.

Spyke

2nd September 2010, 10:59

I've done 1000km on 45L of Diesel. Lowest its ever done on that tank was 800.
Car is 2009 Ford Focus 1.8 Turbo Diesel.

Its a POS and I hate it. (company car)

how much are they new?

avgas

2nd September 2010, 11:45

how much are they new?
Too much.
I think $34K?

Its honestly a crap car - I prefer driving my 20 year old mazda than it
If you would like me to give you a list of why its crap PM me.

Actually here is is the list of features. Fuck knows why half of these should be considered a 'feature'

http://www.ford.co.nz/servlet/ContentServer?cid=1178855037119&pagename=FNZ%2FDFYPage%2FFord-Default&c=DFYPage&site=FNZ

jafar

3rd September 2010, 02:00

I managed 800 kms on 40 litres in my Hybrid.... :innocent:

That's only 20 km to the litre, I would have thought a hybrid would do better than that, my CB 1300 can do better than 20 km to the litre !! & my old BMW F650 G/S could do close to 30km per litre.
:innocent:

Toaster

3rd September 2010, 16:46

That's only 20 km to the litre, I would have thought a hybrid would do better than that, my CB 1300 can do better than 20 km to the litre !! & my old BMW F650 G/S could do close to 30km per litre.
:innocent:

Simple, its a car of nearly 1.5 tons, not a bike that weighs a couple hundred kilos.

5 litres per 100km is pretty damn good for any car and few can do that kind of economy.... my best so far was 4.4 l/100km on the motorway, but hard to maintain it that once on hilly country roads.

Toaster

3rd September 2010, 16:48

Pffft! my 3.8L Commode will only use about 60L for the same distance.

Around town? I doubt it very much. On the open road I can manage better.

MSTRS

3rd September 2010, 17:27

Around town?

No. Open road. Unimpeding traffic conditions etc. Granted - it's rare. But possible. Why would I (or anyone) want a poxy hybrid, in comparison?

davereid

3rd September 2010, 17:51

Why would I (or anyone) want a poxy hybrid, in comparison?

Because as long as you ignore the extra energy used making your car. And the extra energy used in carting around a dead battery pack for 10 years after it stops working. And the environmental cost of manufacturing the battery from rare metals. And the environmental cost of disposing of the toxic metals.

THEN

You can claim to be environmentally sound.

And thats GOT to be good.

tri boy

3rd September 2010, 19:52

If you syphon fuel from your rich neighbours Prius, and fill your thirsty 1980's V8, can you claim the poor fuel economy on them?

jafar

4th September 2010, 00:13

If you syphon fuel from your rich neighbours Prius, and fill your thirsty 1980's V8, can you claim the poor fuel economy on them?

Of course you can,but the old V8 will only run on 95+ octane while the prius uses 91. You could ask them to change to 95 so that your old tank will run better though :shutup:

Toaster

4th September 2010, 10:04

No. Open road. Unimpeding traffic conditions etc. Granted - it's rare. But possible. Why would I (or anyone) want a poxy hybrid, in comparison?

Well for a start you did not read my post properly. I said 800km on 40 litres. Further, that was with half town/peak traffic and half open road running. Your post said your car used 60 litres for 1000km.

I can do motorway running well in excess of your claimed 1000km on the same litres you statedl. The hybrid honda will do far further on 60L, so trumps your claims easily.

Spoke to Holden and they said they have never had any of their commodores anywhere near the claimed mileage you posted. I also drove them for years and also know they are not that good.... not even 700km at best.

Toaster

4th September 2010, 10:08

Because as long as you ignore the extra energy used making your car. And the extra energy used in carting around a dead battery pack for 10 years after it stops working. And the environmental cost of manufacturing the battery from rare metals. And the environmental cost of disposing of the toxic metals.

THEN

You can claim to be environmentally sound.

And thats GOT to be good.

Who cares? I don't.

I use it for fuel economy for the 700km a week to work and back. Saves me $2,500 a year in fuel over my previous run-about, but costs only $200 per year (amortised) to replace batteries. Well worth it.

Toaster

4th September 2010, 10:11

If you syphon fuel from your rich neighbours Prius, and fill your thirsty 1980's V8, can you claim the poor fuel economy on them?

Prius is one ugly car and way too overpriced. The honda hybrid is a far better deal at 60% of the cost to purchase. Most of their range will be hybrids by 2012.

Mine was second hand and bought it for half its market value from an elderly driver who stopped driving and basically gave it away. Sweet....