What say you - review of motorcycle licences

[rastuscat]

How would you feel if the gubbermint did this.

When you go to renew your licence, you have an eye test, and pays yer money. Your car licence is rolled over, no probs.

But if you want to renew your bike licence, you have to pass a practical assessment. Pass, and you're all good. Fail, you get some ACC subsidized training, and you're good to go.

See, there are 480 thousand people in NZ holding Class 6 full licences, but only 80 thousand bikes registered. What's apparent is that there are a shit load of people with bike licences who haven't ridden in years. Some will never.

These are over represented in crash stats, when they have their mid life crisis and get back onto a bike after not having ridden for decades.

I for one think it should include a driving test for all classes, but how would you feel if it was applied to just Class 6 licences?

Just seeking opinions, which flow freely on here.

[MIXONE]

It'll never fly.
1.It's far too sensible.
2.It discriminates against bikers.

[bogan]

Well, for starters there are more bikes ridden on the roads than there are registered :shifty:

For seconders, if the true aim is to <s>catch</s> saferise returning bikers then exempt anyone who has had one registered in there name more than 3 years out of last ten. Or just retest everyone, especially the old grannies in their 85kmhr shitboxes.

[FJRider]

See, there are 480 thousand people in NZ holding Class 6 full licences, but only 80 thousand bikes registered. What's apparent is that there are a shit load of people with bike licences who haven't ridden in years. Some will never.

What percentage of that 480,000 ride their Wives/partners/son/daughter/mates/or other Bike ... ????

No law stating the bike you ride ... must be registered in your name. An assumption they DO/SHOULD is a wrong reason to attempt a change in legislation.

And ... plenty of bikes are being ridden with NO rego ... :shifty: Perhaps a change in legislation to prevent THAT ... ??? :innocent:

[James Deuce]

Don't ask these idiots.

Just do it. And do it to IAM standards.

[rastuscat]

It'll never fly.
1.It's far too sensible.
2.It discriminates against bikers.

My thoughts exactly.

I think everyone should have to sit a test to renew their licenses, regardless of class. That'd learn 'em.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[BigAl]

Crashing eliminates them anyway so why bother?

Oh that's right.... $$$$$$$$

[FJRider]

My thoughts exactly.

I think everyone should have to sit a test to renew their licenses, regardless of class. That'd learn 'em.




Perhaps .. <_<

RESIT to renew all licenses ... with a cost for each class of license renewed. With options to not renew a license class they no longer use (and want to pay for .. to renew) ... :shifty:

[FJRider]

Don't ask these idiots.

Just do it. And do it to IAM standards.

Speak for yourself ... :yes:

Oh ... you ARE ... :pinch:


as you were ... :facepalm:

[unstuck]

License. :lol::lol::lol:

[FJRider]

License. :lol::lol::lol:

Does the Republic of Gore ... not issue them ... ?? :scratch:

[BlackSheepLogic]

Don't forget about those of us who own more than one bike.


What percentage of that 480,000 ride their Wives/partners/son/daughter/mates/or other Bike ... ????

No law stating the bike you ride ... must be registered in your name. An assumption they DO/SHOULD is a wrong reason to attempt a change in legislation.

And ... plenty of bikes are being ridden with NO rego ... :shifty: Perhaps a change in legislation to prevent THAT ... ??? :innocent:

[BlackSheepLogic]

Do it to IAM standards.

IAM is not officially recognized with a license endorsement. I think if it was more people would be interested in getting the additional training.

[unstuck]

Does the Republic of Gore ... not issue them ... ?? :scratch:

Nope, you have to go to invegiggle for that.:msn-wink:

[FJRider]

Don't forget about those of us who own more than one bike.

rastuscat original post referred to those not having a motorcycle registered in their name ...

Some (like you) obviously must have more than one motorcycle ... not registered in their name ... :killingme

[Murray]

I for one think it should include a driving test for all classes, but how would you feel if it was applied to just Class 6 licences?

Just seeking opinions, which flow freely on here.


And it could be charged out at an over inflated rate

sounds like it will happen then

[TheDemonLord]

How would you feel if the gubbermint did this.

When you go to renew your licence, you have an eye test, and pays yer money. Your car licence is rolled over, no probs.

But if you want to renew your bike licence, you have to pass a practical assessment. Pass, and you're all good. Fail, you get some ACC subsidized training, and you're good to go.

See, there are 480 thousand people in NZ holding Class 6 full licences, but only 80 thousand bikes registered. What's apparent is that there are a shit load of people with bike licences who haven't ridden in years. Some will never.

These are over represented in crash stats, when they have their mid life crisis and get back onto a bike after not having ridden for decades.

I for one think it should include a driving test for all classes, but how would you feel if it was applied to just Class 6 licences?

Just seeking opinions, which flow freely on here.

I somewhat support the idea, however I strongly disagree with what the reality will be.

Let me Explain - the reality will be that the checkup rides (once ACC levies, govt taxes etc. are added) will be very expensive and this will result in 3 knock on effects:

1: People won't bother taking them
2: this same class of people, will now be riding unregistered bikes and unlicenced
3: Those of us who wish to remain law abiding motorcyclists will get screwed even harder for the privilege of riding legally

Now, if the checkups were free and you only had to pay for a re-test if you failed, I would be okay with this, but the next issue is, how do you stop someone from riding a bike without a licence? the only conceivable way would be to confiscate the licence AND motorcycle (however if it was unregistered, how would you know?)

As a thought - there is a licencing system in place in this country that does have internal methods for preventing the equivelant of the Born-Again-Biker - which is the Pilots licence.

To remain current, you have to do 3 take offs and landings for a specified aircraft type within 90 days and every 2 years you have to take a test flight. if you let it lapse, you then have to get re-tested (ie do you 50 hours training and your exams)

Now comparing Air travel to road travel may seem a little extreme given the extra responsibility of air travel, but would we have BAB smearing themselves if they had to go on 3 rides in 3 months to hold onto their Bike licence?

the only issue is that if this was to go forward, I would DEFINATELY need it to be applied to Car Drivers as well. IMHO on any given day, ANY licence holder should be able to pass a full licence test - given that the test represents the minimum standard of driving required to safely drive on NZ roads - I would also implement a system where anyone who had failed their licence test after more than 3 attempts would have to do a mandatory reset (at no charge) within 3 months (to make sure it wasn't a fluke that they passed). Anyone who fails more than 6 times in a year period would be barred from taking their licence test for a 1 year period (they clearly lack the necessary skills to drive a car safely, so can have a year off to learn)

[Madness]

Fail, you get some ACC subsidized training, and you're good to go.

All for the idea myself. That said, if you do fail and have a currently licenced motorcycle, the subsequent training should be completely free of charge. It's not like we've actually got anything for our money since the levies went through the roof, is it?

[Gremlin]

All classes of licence thanks. No discrimination, everyone gets tested. If you've taken alternate training recently, then you fly through. Mostly thinking of commercial trucking, but for motorcycles stuff like IAM could apply (and technically IAM is 3 arms, car, truck and motorcycle in NZ).


IAM is not officially recognized with a license endorsement. I think if it was more people would be interested in getting the additional training.
Correct re IAM, and quite honestly, we don't have the capacity required for it... yet. We're working on it, but it's not a quick thing...

[mossy1200]

Charge acc tax on a yearly licence renewal rather than registration.
Don't renew (pay acc tax) then don't ride. Have not renewed within 2 years of expiry then need sit a practical skills test.

Lower average cost. Riders who ride but don't own contribute. Multi bike owners are not penalised. Returning riders need prove skills. Easy to enforce (riding without licence).

[R650R]

NO!!! except for the eyesight part which is already part of it? (I did it for my truck renewal but don't know if needed for car/bike?)

And regarding eyesight test, police should make every speeder undergo a roadside eye test. There are heaps of people out there who are half blind and refuse to admit to it.

Back to your concept my reasons for no are based on:

Any test is going to be too easy to be worth any tangible benefit. It will have to be easy as most people would need serious training to iron out years of bad habits (not necessarily directly dangerous) and training to pass a rigid test structure.
When I went to the UK I had to sit and pass their practical tests as the EU does not recognise our HT licences. I had professional training from UK instructors and it was very hard to change my habits and conform to their schedule of how to drive. Now it did have benefits related to their local conditions but overall very little impact on my safety and conduct as a driver.
Part of the reason it was so hard and I talked about this with instructor at Coastgaurd is that once your older and outside that constant learning environment its very hard for your brain to handle the stress of a test situation, even though you have the real life skills to do it.

I was thinking about getting my bus licences but you have to resit your car license and I'm not sure I could stand all the associated BS...

All this will do is add another layer of beauracracy and cost to society and save very little or no lives.
Also the non conformists will end up riding unlicensed and therefore uninsured and guess who they are going to run into...

How about every six months you have to watch a random Russian dashcam vid with an embedded code somewhere in the vid that you txt to confirm watched and keep your licence? :)

[haydes55]

My golden opinion.

How many crashes are a result of, or made worse by unroadworthy vehicles? Sweet fuck all compared to the amount of crashes caused by driver error.

We have to get a WOF at least once a year, even though our driving never gets tested..... That's like telling electricians to use insulated pliers to prevent them from inhaling asbestos.

My ideal scenario: All drivers are required to undergo training every 3 years. If you have a car and motorbike license, you need to just do the motorbike training, if you have a truck license, that takes priority over car training. No matter how many licenses you have, you just need the single training session. But you will always need to take the most advanced training relevant to your license. Truck will be more advanced than motorbikes.

WoFs every year, regardless of the age of the vehicle.

[R650R]

But you will always need to take the most advanced training relevant to your license. Truck will be more advanced than motorbikes.


From the horses mouth... there's nothing special about truck driving, like anything else, do it long enough and you dial into it and it feels just like driving a car, second nature etc.
Now loading one safely, that's another story altogether and there's no test for that ever. Fatigue management, no test for that also!
Trucks crash due to a combination of errors adding up, and the edge from being inside a safe performance envelope to rollover conditions is very small.
Already there is an exodus of experienced drivers to higher paying jobs and a tsunami of fresh inexperienced drivers entering the industry, all your inconvenient scheme will do is accelerate the rate of departure.

[SNF]

I think its shit! Cagers are the ones that need it. Swerving, not looking, tailgating. More cars than bikes too, which means more $$$ and hopefully some better driving (Wishful thinking).

[mikeey01]

Proper testing for tourists who hire vehicles in NZ firstly or is that to sensible?

[speights_bud]

My ideal scenario: All drivers are required to undergo training every 3 years.

This is the case for forklift OSH Cert.

F endorsement (ability to operate a forklift on the road) is for life. Allowed to operate up to GLW of 18,000kg too!

But every 3 years you have to do a refresher course for OSH which is the part that lets you actually lift stuff with it. Interestingly enough after 10 years of occasional operating I've done 4 courses and I always forget something little and niggly that the course reminds me of.

[Mike.Gayner]

More licence conditions simply increases the number of people riding without a licence. If you're trying to change behavior on the margin this is the wrong way to go about it.

Then again since when are cops or legislators known to engage their brains and act on rationality and evidence?

[R650R]

This is the case for forklift OSH Cert.

F endorsement (ability to operate a forklift on the road) is for life. Allowed to operate up to GLW of 18,000kg too!

But every 3 years you have to do a refresher course for OSH which is the part that lets you actually lift stuff with it. Interestingly enough after 10 years of occasional operating I've done 4 courses and I always forget something little and niggly that the course reminds me of.

F expires every ten years when your licence does...

OSH forklift certification does NOT expire. That is just scam by the training providers to suck in the big companies cash. Its proven by the fact they call it (the three year retest) a 'refresher' course and charge less than the full forklift course even though in practice its the same thing.
I challenge you to show any evidence from a govt site of the right to operate a forklift expiring after three years from the OSH course date.

I've done plenty and remembered nothing except how tedious and boring it was the time before...

[speights_bud]

F expires every ten years when your licence does...

OSH forklift certification does NOT expire. That is just scam by the training providers to suck in the big companies cash. Its proven by the fact they call it (the three year retest) a 'refresher' course and charge less than the full forklift course even though in practice its the same thing.
I challenge you to show any evidence from a govt site of the right to operate a forklift expiring after three years from the OSH course date.

I've done plenty and remembered nothing except how tedious and boring it was the time before...

The F carries over when you renew your licence though?

If what you say about the OSH cert is true then thousands of businesses are getting ripped off... Glad I never pay for it personally.

And yes I agree, the courses are boring as shit...

[speights_bud]

OSH forklift certification does NOT expire. That is just scam by the training providers to suck in the big companies cash. Its proven by the fact they call it (the three year retest) a 'refresher' course and charge less than the full forklift course even though in practice its the same thing.
I challenge you to show any evidence from a govt site of the right to operate a forklift expiring after three years from the OSH course date.

Department of Labor website :

http://www.dol.govt.nz/workplace/knowledgebase/item/1404

"The certificate will specify the type of training received by the operator (basic, refresher.... .... It is required that retraining be undertaken every three years."


F endorsement automatically renews when you renew your licence.

http://nzta.govt.nz/licence/renewing-replacing/endorsements.html

[Madness]

I challenge you to show any evidence from a govt site of the right to operate a forklift expiring after three years from the OSH course date.


Department of Labor website :

http://www.dol.govt.nz/workplace/knowledgebase/item/1404

"The certificate will specify the type of training received by the operator (basic, refresher.... .... It is required that retraining be undertaken every three years."

. :corn:

[BlackSheepLogic]

Maybe if you have not used your bike licence for 10 years or more it is automatically suspended until you have done a test. Registration data could be used to determine who has not ridden for 10 years or more.

Nope, there's too many reasonable explanations for not having a registered bike under your name. Also, just cause you have a bike registered in your name don't mean you are riding regally either.

[HenryDorsetCase]

I for one think it should include a driving test for all classes, but how would you feel if it was applied to just Class 6 licences?

Just seeking opinions, which flow freely on here.

I was all set to be "OUtraged, of Cashmere" but the more I think about it the less I mind it.

I also agree that it should include a driving test for all classes, and there should be mandatory testing for anyone hiring a car or campervan.

Like the fuckwit who clearly drove a Fiat Punto at home driving a Ducato Maxipad down Bealey avenue taking up three of the available two lanes.

He did have quite the clear space around though.



It must be hilarious driving a cop car, because in that little bubble around it, everyone is sweating bullets and being super polite. they wait till they cant see it before resuming their arrogant, dangerous aggressive normal driving. Next time I steal one I will conduct an experiment.

[James Deuce]

I think its shit! Cagers are the ones that need it. Swerving, not looking, tailgating. More cars than bikes too, which means more $$$ and hopefully some better driving (Wishful thinking).

You DEFINITELY need it. And some counseling for the victim attitude.

[rastuscat]

Proper testing for tourists who hire vehicles in NZ firstly or is that to sensible?

Tourists account for 1% of the vehicle crashes.

yeah, that'll make ALL the difference.

[bogan]

Tourists account for 1% of the vehicle crashes.

yeah, that'll make ALL the difference.

And how many is that per km traveled? and how many do bikers account for?

Deja vu eh...

[rastuscat]

And how many is that per km traveled? and how many do bikers account for?

Deja vu eh...

The 1% of the crashes caused by tourists means that they are over represented in crashes per km travelled. But it's still 1%.

Just like disqualified drivers. They are over represented in terms of crashes per km travelled, but they are still bugger all overall.

If we can effect the habits of the masses, that's better than targeting small special interest groups.

It's not popular to say it, but most people who crash are just Mr and Mrs Average. Far easier for Mr and Mrs Average to point the finger at their special-interest-group-du-jour.

[bogan]

The 1% of the crashes caused by tourists means that they are over represented in crashes per km travelled. But it's still 1%.

Just like disqualified drivers. They are over represented in terms of crashes per km travelled, but they are still bugger all overall.

If we can effect the habits of the masses, that's better than targeting small special interest groups.

It's not popular to say it, but most people who crash are just Mr and Mrs Average. Far easier for Mr and Mrs Average to point the finger at their special-interest-group-du-jour.

Mr and Mrs average cager, why are bikers being targeted again?

[rastuscat]

Mr and Mrs average cager, why are bikers being targeted again?

I'm with you on this. All drivers should be retested, just as with riders. No argument there.

[BMWST?]

rastuscat original post referred to those not having a motorcycle registered in their name ...

Some (like you) obviously must have more than one motorcycle ... not registered in their name ... :killingme

Rastuscat 's original post did not say anything about having (or not) a bikes registered in ones name.He referred to a large number of licesnse holders compared to a smaller number of registered motorcycles

[James Deuce]

I'm with you on this. All drivers should be retested, just as with riders. No argument there.

However, given the political climate, getting riders retested regularly should be a piece of cake.

It should be said though, that while I'm sick to fucking death of going to avoidable funerals, I've been to so many now that it's all getting bit, "Gosh, another one, pass me a lager."

[BMWST?]

What would get a lot of people to do these tests would be to offer half price registration to those who pass. Maybe cars drivers who hit bikes through not seeing them could be ordered to do the test before they can drive again. Double their registration as punishment as motorcyclists are paying high registration irrespective of fault which is discriminatory. Maybe if you have not used your bike licence for 10 years or more it is automatically suspended until you have done a test. Registration data could be used to determine who has not ridden for 10 years or more.
just because i dont register a motorcycle doesnt mean i havent ridden a mates,or hired one does it?

[mossy1200]

just because i dont register a motorcycle doesnt mean i havent ridden a mates,or hired one does it?

That would be riding legally while avoiding the cost of contributing to the acc tax. :yes: Free stuff is good.

[R650R]

Department of Labor website :

http://www.dol.govt.nz/workplace/knowledgebase/item/1404

"The certificate will specify the type of training received by the operator (basic, refresher.... .... It is required that retraining be undertaken every three years."


F endorsement automatically renews when you renew your licence.

http://nzta.govt.nz/licence/renewing-replacing/endorsements.html

That is 'colour of law' eg a statement made incorrectly by someone in authority that ends up being believed as law by the uneducated.
I challenged you to find it in legislation and you haven't.
You could not prosecute someone in court with the quoted statement as it is not law decreed by parliament.
There is a provision to recommend refresher courses but there is no law saying you have to or that you are breaking the law by not doing it.

[Reckless]

Charge acc tax on a yearly licence renewal rather than registration.
Don't renew (pay acc tax) then don't ride. Have not renewed within 2 years of expiry then need sit a practical skills test.

Lower average cost. Riders who ride but don't own contribute. Multi bike owners are not penalised. Returning riders need prove skills. Easy to enforce (riding without licence).

I like Mossy's ideas as above :yes: BUT we could still be reamed up the ass depending on what the ACC portion of the bill might be??
It would certainly weed out the born agains as Rastuscat was wanting and be a more equatable solution for all of us.
Mind you it has seemed to go unnoticed even on here.

Like to see you get that one through though :brick:

[HenryDorsetCase]

I like Mossy's ideas as above :yes: BUT we could still be reamed up the ass depending on what the ACC portion of the bill might be??
It would certainly weed out the born agains as Rastuscat was wanting and be a more equatable solution for all of us.
Mind you it has seemed to go unnoticed even on here.

Like to see you get that one through though :brick:

No, charge it in fuel. Separate, transparent, pay as you go.

[HenryDorsetCase]

Tourists account for 1% of the vehicle crashes.

yeah, that'll make ALL the difference.

What percentage of deaths? that is. of those crashes that result in a fatal, are the tourists disproportionately represented?

because, you know, 20 year old chinese tourist girl that took out two (nearly three) people on motorbikes in the LIndis.

[Reckless]

No, charge it in fuel. Separate, transparent, pay as you go.

Damn good idea
BUT since they have left the original ACC Woodhouse theory behind and turned it into risk evaluated compulsory insurance!
They would want to charge bikes a different fuel rate therefore it wouldn't get off the ground on fuel.
Not under the present ideology??

[rastuscat]

I certainly don't want to discourage riding.

I'd just like people who ride to be sufficiently skilled to live beyond the end of their mid life crisis.

[mossy1200]

Damn good idea
BUT since they have left the original ACC Woodhouse theory behind and turned it into risk evaluated compulsory insurance!
They would want to charge bikes a different fuel rate therefore it wouldn't get off the ground on fuel.
Not under the present ideology??

Yes I would get myself a 30 litre lawnmower fuel can to mow said lawns acc tax free every weekend.

[speights_bud]

That is 'colour of law' eg a statement made incorrectly by someone in authority that ends up being believed as law by the uneducated.
I challenged you to find it in legislation and you haven't.
You could not prosecute someone in court with the quoted statement as it is not law decreed by parliament.
There is a provision to recommend refresher courses but there is no law saying you have to or that you are breaking the law by not doing it.

No you challenged me to:

"show any evidence from a govt site of the right to operate a forklift expiring after three years from the OSH course date."

:eek:

The govt site stated:
"Operators must be trained, have a Forklift Operator's Certificate to use a forklift and must be authorised to use it by the employer...

...It is required that retraining be undertaken every three years.

You never asked for it in 'legislation'.

[Madness]

Tourists account for 1% of the vehicle crashes.

yeah, that'll make ALL the difference.

Perspective is everything.

http://www.sunlive.co.nz/news/87901-petitioning-change.html


...there is no law saying you have to or that you are breaking the law by not doing it.

Start a petition?

[bogan]

The only way to seriously increase the odds there is to ride less or give up riding completely as the chances of being taken out on a bike are greater irrespective of how skilled a rider you are. Some bikes are safer than others in certain situations too and the most safest bikes for all situations are not sadly affordable by all riders.

Well you've failed the defensive riding attitudes test, please resit again in 30 years... :laugh:

[HenryDorsetCase]

I rode my motorcycle in the rain today. Across town (this fucking town) in traffic. And only nearly was killed the one time.

[FJRider]

.. He referred to a large number of licesnse holders compared to a smaller number of registered motorcycles

The disparity would / could be caused by ...

1: a large number of unregistered motorcycles.

2: a large number of shared motorcycles.

3: some license holders not riding at all.



So ... possibly a third of the numbers he mentioned ... not riding at all.


Enough for a change of legislation ... ???

[FJRider]

The only way to seriously increase the odds there is to ride less or give up riding completely as the chances of being taken out on a bike are greater irrespective of how skilled a rider you are. Some bikes are safer than others in certain situations too and the most safest bikes for all situations are not sadly affordable by all riders.

Increase the odds of doing what ... ???

Many motorcyclists I know of seem to have deeply set suicidal tendencies ... so if they do die (quick question) have they succeeded or failed ... ???

[FJRider]

Yes I would get myself a 30 litre lawnmower fuel can to mow said lawns acc tax free every weekend.

Sorry to burst your bubble ...

BUT ...


The majority of the amount you spend on fuel IS TAX.

ACC levies in vehicle registration ... do not make up the total funding ACC receives.

Any further ACC funding is made from treasury. (ie: TAX)




30 litres of petrol each weekend ??? ... you must have a big lawn ...

[george formby]

I think everyone should have to sit a test to renew their licenses, regardless of class. That'd learn 'em.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Not sure where your tongues at but I have thought, for donkeys years, that on going testing / training is a good way of making the roads safer.
But. It has to cover all road users, well, license holders.
ACC are making a significant investment in the Pro Rider training courses through subsidies but the majority of participants want to be safer & better riders. The swathe of riders who are most at risk don't give a shit. License based testing sounds good and will wake up the swathe but will cost a fortune. I would rather contribute to that through my rego than hospital care. I ain't paying for both. Some folk should not be on the road, they are permanently incapable of being safe but in my experience a lot of bad driving / riding comes from ignorance and that's curable.
Yeah, if you want safer roads you have to invest in the road users. Like it or not.

[Big Dog]

Same standards need to apply for all classes. No registered vehicles in the last period of renewal? Provide documentary evidence of ongoing use of this class type. (Rental docs, employment contracts that state the types of vehicle etc. ), proof of professional instruction or proof of approved ongoing education.

I know plenty of people who have not driven a car more than 500 km total in the last 10 or more years. It scares me silly they are allowed to drive v8s, at night and without supervision.

I don't know about losing the class altogether. Maybe suspend it. If suspended for longer than 5 years start over? If renewed via a practical back to restricted until full is re-attained via a second practical in six months or after an approved course?

Be expensive to set up the tech side, but oh so cheap long run.

Stupid phone / Tapatalk, apologies in advance.

[Gremlin]

And regarding eyesight test, police should make every speeder undergo a roadside eye test. There are heaps of people out there who are half blind and refuse to admit to it.
Just on the flipside, I'm one of those with some thing where one eye is slightly (very slightly) more powerful than the other. Looking normally into the AA machine, I can't see what I'm supposed to see... but sometimes I can ;) It's bloody annoying, so I'm doubtful of any valid roadside test...


It must be hilarious driving a cop car, because in that little bubble around it, everyone is sweating bullets and being super polite. they wait till they cant see it before resuming their arrogant, dangerous aggressive normal driving. Next time I steal one I will conduct an experiment.
So you've also seen the rolling starts on the motorway, no-one passing the cop, even though he's under the speed limit? :facepalm:

[Akzle]

one licence: road user.
Week long testing, two yearly. On ten kinds of vehicle. Truck car motorbike scooter tractor horse etc.
Cause an accident you get beaten with a hose pipe.
Cause a fatality you get shot.
Also 'D' endorsement for driving drunk and 'H' for driving high, if you pass the testing.

[James Deuce]

one licence: road user.
Week long testing, two yearly. On ten kinds of vehicle. Truck car motorbike scooter tractor horse etc.
Cause an accident you get beaten with a hose pipe.
Cause a fatality you get shot.
Also 'D' endorsement for driving drunk and 'H' for driving high, if you pass the testing.

So when are you going to register your political party?

[Akzle]

So when are you going to register your political party?

haha. Register.

[willytheekid]

How would you feel if the gubbermint did this.

When you go to renew your licence, you have an eye test, and pays yer money. Your car licence is rolled over, no probs.

But if you want to renew your bike licence, you have to pass a practical assessment. Pass, and you're all good. Fail, you get some ACC subsidized training, and you're good to go.

See, there are 480 thousand people in NZ holding Class 6 full licences, but only 80 thousand bikes registered. What's apparent is that there are a shit load of people with bike licences who haven't ridden in years. Some will never.

These are over represented in crash stats, when they have their mid life crisis and get back onto a bike after not having ridden for decades.

I for one think it should include a driving test for all classes, but how would you feel if it was applied to just Class 6 licences?

Just seeking opinions, which flow freely on here.


Or!...they could just stop handing licenses out to any twot that can get around the block & parrelle park!<_<

There IS an easy solution to reduce the amount of carnage on our roads Rastuscat...but we both know its not a "profitable" soulution...so it will never be introduced.:no:

Start building engaging and well designed roads and primarily, introduce REAL! driver testing AND training, the kind that will ensure only well trained and educated drivers are issued licenses.(Any license!)
(And if you don't meet the standards ->TUFF!, Free public transport pass for life, as its been PROVEN you are simply to dumb to drive on a public road)


But lets face it, the primary focus of Govt "Road safety"...is there own Profit!
...Not INVESTING in the people and infrastructor of NewZealand and implimenting solutions to EXTREMELY profitable problems

Hence
If they targeted JUST motorcyclists as you mentioned, and no doubt charge me EVEN MORE $! to ensure non riders with a GOVT ISSUED LICENSE can be tested AGAIN, in the hope that the shitty testing system (that gave him the license, but none of the required traning!), will determine if he's "competant enough" to ride again and not kill himself:facepalm:

:no:


Hmmm....How bout linking Rego data to license's issue? (never rego'd a bike in 10yrs...bike license revoked till shit arse "testing" completed:confused:)...Ahh, all this sorta crap just makes me wanna go for a ride :msn-wink: (while I can still afford it!:killingme)





:eek:...MAYBE OUR NEW OWNERS FROM CHINA WILL SORT IT ALL OUT FOR US

[SNF]

You DEFINITELY need it. And some counseling for the victim attitude.

I call BS. I do Pro rider courses every few months. I used to split daily without problems. I generally have a good idea of what I am doing while riding. Ever been to Auckland? Ever seen what passes as driving?

[James Deuce]

I call BS. I do Pro rider courses every few months. I used to split daily without problems. I generally have a good idea of what I am doing while riding. Ever been to Auckland? Ever seen what passes as driving?
Your attitude is key to a long an happy life of motorcycling. With that attitude, I suspect you'll be driving an Impreza with your hat on backwards before long. A non-turbo one with a fake blow-off valve.

[swbarnett]

I for one think it should include a driving test for all classes,
Exactly. This is the crux of the matter.



but how would you feel if it was applied to just Class 6 licences?
Two words - FUCK OFF!!!!

Without applying this to ALL license classes it's just another form of discrimination. Hell, there are a number of car drivers that drive every day that could do with a retest.

[Devil]

Too many posts to read. Taking into account the practicalities of testing, i'm all for re-testing every 10 years.
In the case of a multi class licence holder, then tested on only one class, typically the toughest. Limit testing to Class 1, Class 6, Class 2 - in that particular order. Got them all? Your test is class 2. Got car and bike? Your test is bike.

Testing all would be impractical. Testing only motorcyclists would be stupid. Like you say - its to affect the masses.

There MUST be a change to catch all these 'lifers' who scraped through the first time, and just develop worse and worse habits.

[TheDemonLord]

Or!...they could just stop handing licenses out to any twot that can get around the block & parrelle park!<_<

There IS an easy solution to reduce the amount of carnage on our roads Rastuscat...but we both know its not a "profitable" soulution...so it will never be introduced.:no:

Start building engaging and well designed roads and primarily, introduce REAL! driver testing AND training, the kind that will ensure only well trained and educated drivers are issued licenses.(Any license!)
(And if you don't meet the standards ->TUFF!, Free public transport pass for life, as its been PROVEN you are simply to dumb to drive on a public road)


But lets face it, the primary focus of Govt "Road safety"...is there own Profit!
...Not INVESTING in the people and infrastructor of NewZealand and implimenting solutions to EXTREMELY profitable problems

Hence
If they targeted JUST motorcyclists as you mentioned, and no doubt charge me EVEN MORE $! to ensure non riders with a GOVT ISSUED LICENSE can be tested AGAIN, in the hope that the shitty testing system (that gave him the license, but none of the required traning!), will determine if he's "competant enough" to ride again and not kill himself:facepalm:

:no:


Hmmm....How bout linking Rego data to license's issue? (never rego'd a bike in 10yrs...bike license revoked till shit arse "testing" completed:confused:)...Ahh, all this sorta crap just makes me wanna go for a ride :msn-wink: (while I can still afford it!:killingme)





:eek:...MAYBE OUR NEW OWNERS FROM CHINA WILL SORT IT ALL OUT FOR US


We could always implement the german method for getting a car licence - $2000 cost to get a licence, minimum number of hours with a certified instructor including night, Autobahn and city driving...

[swbarnett]

Some bikes are safer than others in certain situations too and the most safest bikes for all situations are not sadly affordable by all riders.
Not true. The safest bike is one ridden by a safe rider. All the modern "safety" gadgets account for very little if the rider is not up to par.

[SNF]

We could always implement the german method for getting a car licence - $2000 cost to get a licence, minimum number of hours with a certified instructor including night, Autobahn and city driving...

It'll have the opposite effect, more unlicensed people driving around. This happens now, if the punishment is less than the reward, or they simply just don't give a shit which is most of them. Case in point motorway patrol (I must have been bored to watch that). Bitch you had 42 years to get a license - okay she said something about seizures but what about after they stopped? "I just never got around to it...." In over 42 years? Come on!

[James Deuce]

One incident on a reality TV show isn't evidence for a horde of unlicensed drivers terrorising the demon roads of Auckland.

[Blackbird]

All classes of licence thanks. No discrimination, everyone gets tested. If you've taken alternate training recently, then you fly through. Mostly thinking of commercial trucking, but for motorcycles stuff like IAM could apply (and technically IAM is 3 arms, car, truck and motorcycle in NZ).


Correct re IAM, and quite honestly, we don't have the capacity required for it... yet. We're working on it, but it's not a quick thing...

Being a charitable institution, it's not IAM's job, neither would I want to mentor people who didn't want to be there :innocent: There is a current incentive though - reduced insurance premiums for IAM Advanced Test holders

[Big Dog]

Or!...they could just stop handing licenses out to any twot that can get around the block & parrelle park!<_<

There IS an easy solution to reduce the amount of carnage on our roads Rastuscat...but we both know its not a "profitable" soulution...so it will never be introduced.:no:

Start building engaging and well designed roads and primarily, introduce REAL! driver testing AND training, the kind that will ensure only well trained and educated drivers are issued licenses.(Any license!)
(And if you don't meet the standards ->TUFF!, Free public transport pass for life, as its been PROVEN you are simply to dumb to drive on a public road)


But lets face it, the primary focus of Govt "Road safety"...is there own Profit!
...Not INVESTING in the people and infrastructor of NewZealand and implimenting solutions to EXTREMELY profitable problems

Hence
If they targeted JUST motorcyclists as you mentioned, and no doubt charge me EVEN MORE $! to ensure non riders with a GOVT ISSUED LICENSE can be tested AGAIN, in the hope that the shitty testing system (that gave him the license, but none of the required traning!), will determine if he's "competant enough" to ride again and not kill himself:facepalm:

:no:


Hmmm....How bout linking Rego data to license's issue? (never rego'd a bike in 10yrs...bike license revoked till shit arse "testing" completed:confused:)...Ahh, all this sorta crap just makes me wanna go for a ride :msn-wink: (while I can still afford it!:killingme)





:eek:...MAYBE OUR NEW OWNERS FROM CHINA WILL SORT IT ALL OUT FOR US

God dammit. That made sense.


Stupid phone / Tapatalk, apologies in advance.

[p.dath]

You have to re-sit a test of some kind when you turn 75 (from memory). Perhaps a compromise might be to change this to being every 20 years or so for every class you hold.

Not too onerous, yet will eliminate those licence classes that have not been used for a long time.

[george formby]

You have to re-sit a test of some kind when you turn 75 (from memory). Perhaps a compromise might be to change this to being every 20 years or so for every class you hold.

Not too onerous, yet will eliminate those licence classes that have not been used for a long time.

I was thinking a sliding scale. 2, 5, 10, 15, 20 years etc after getting full licence. New license holders will have less chance of becoming complacent & good habits ingrained.

[Big Dog]

Fundamentally I am opposed to needing to meet arbitrary standards beyond what we already know as our full license. It can be bad enough trying to meet the shifting goal post that is an examiner who may not be enthusiastic today, may have other stuff on their mind may have a prejudice etc but I do feel a test is necessary.

I am also opposed to single channel compulsory training. There is no one size fits all for motorcycles in particular. Some fundamentals are fixed such as going faster into the wall hurts more but the suspension advice I would receive would be different ( and should be ) than that given to a 45kg rider. Big bike, small bike? Big rider, small rider? Sports rider, cruiser rider? Etc ad nauseam. This is why I would be more supportive of these are approved trainers and formats. Discounts on ACC component of registration for those that have wilfully selected an appropriate trainer and had appropriate training.

The element of choice allows you to find a tutor you gel with who is capable of offering advice that is both useful and understood in full by the recipient.

Much the same as some who struggle at uni do well at tech and vice versa.


Stupid phone / Tapatalk, apologies in advance.

[TheDemonLord]

It'll have the opposite effect, more unlicensed people driving around. This happens now, if the punishment is less than the reward, or they simply just don't give a shit which is most of them. Case in point motorway patrol (I must have been bored to watch that). Bitch you had 42 years to get a license - okay she said something about seizures but what about after they stopped? "I just never got around to it...." In over 42 years? Come on!

We should take another lead out of the German book, all unlicensed drivers will be taken to the police station where they will be invited to take a shower....

[more_fasterer]

Regular driving tests throughout your life is a bloody good idea and one I've been wishing would happen for quite a while. It looks like this might be starting to get some traction if you're asking this question Rastuscat?

My view is that it shouldn't be only class 6 licenses, if it's not being applied to all license classes then the only class it should apply to is class 1. Reasoning being that if you ride a bike, you (by necessity) need to know the road rules or you risk getting squashed because you (for example) don't give way when you should, and on top of that most bikers are enthusiast road users - so they generally tend to take pride in what they're doing, and are thus much more likely to know all the road rules. The anecdotal evidence I see regarding car drivers is that they don't know or care about most of the rules, as long as they're not speeding or drunk then they're a good driver, right?

Wrong, mr. middle-aged car driver, now please get the f*** out of the fast lane.

[BlackSheepLogic]

Being a charitable institution, it's not IAM's job, neither would I want to mentor people who didn't want to be there :innocent: There is a current incentive though - reduced insurance premiums for IAM Advanced Test holders

Forced mandatory training is never a good thing, people have the be willing and ready to accept the training.

It really irritates me how many people on here want to focus on how others ride. If you want to improve the average skill level take a look at your riding and stop being so judgmental on how others are riding. The testing we have if followed insures we license people who have the basic handling skills to ride, it's graduated and good riding habits are ingrained though experience an a willingness to advance one own skills.

Someone's general behavior when riding is not changed by further testing and/or education on what they know already. Instead of commenting on how poor everyone else's riding is, go out there and set a good example by the way you ride.

[HenryDorsetCase]

One incident on a reality TV show isn't evidence for a horde of unlicensed drivers terrorising the demon roads of Auckland.

If its good enough for TV, its good enough for me.

[James Deuce]

If its good enough for TV, its good enough for me.

Yeah, but you're a lawyer.

[HenryDorsetCase]

Yeah, but you're a lawyer.

well, sure, but my more important role is as a consumer and as a statistic for multi national companies, and their minions, the failing nation-states of USA and UnZud to manipulate and control.....


something like that, anyways

[R650R]

No you challenged me to:

"show any evidence from a govt site of the right to operate a forklift expiring after three years from the OSH course date."

:eek:

The govt site stated:
"Operators must be trained, have a Forklift Operator's Certificate to use a forklift and must be authorised to use it by the employer...

...It is required that retraining be undertaken every three years.

You never asked for it in 'legislation'.

Yes my bad on that one, I meant to say legislation... :)

[R650R]

One incident on a reality TV show isn't evidence for a horde of unlicensed drivers terrorising the demon roads of Auckland.

Think of it as a promo trailer for the multi season drama to follow

[R650R]

Just on the flipside, I'm one of those with some thing where one eye is slightly (very slightly) more powerful than the other. Looking normally into the AA machine, I can't see what I'm supposed to see... but sometimes I can ;) It's bloody annoying, so I'm doubtful of any valid roadside test...


One eye isn't more powerful, its more like one eye is more knackered than the other!
You should get it sorted out. When I got my first glasses it had been such a gradual progression that it wasn't till my vision was corrected that I realised how little I could see before...
99% of the time you can prob get by safely.......

Perhaps the roadside test could be Russian roulette, you get to tell the office which rounds on the boot of the car are blanks and which ones hollowpoints live rounds to insert into revolver :)

[FJRider]

Trucks crash due to a combination of errors adding up.

Errors not usually of THEIR making ...

[swbarnett]

One eye isn't more powerful,
When I was about 11 years old I had my eyes tested (random thing at school). One eye had twice the resolving power of the other. Nothing wrong with either of them - both better than normal for my age.

No two eyes are ever exactly the same. It's just that for most people they're near enough that it makes no difference.

[Gremlin]

One eye isn't more powerful, its more like one eye is more knackered than the other!
You should get it sorted out. When I got my first glasses it had been such a gradual progression that it wasn't till my vision was corrected that I realised how little I could see before...
99% of the time you can prob get by safely.......
Already had it properly tested (thought I was going crazy when I couldn't see one of the columns in the machine) and the difference isn't big enough for glasses...

[Coldrider]

480, 000 class 6 licence holders, , 80, 000 registered motorcycles, how many nz active KB members as a pecentage of how much?

[george formby]

Some bikes can be safer than others even if they don't have electronics to try and make them safe. Eg some bikes handle better than others in traffic and have better brakes even without ABS.
How much of them is touching the road? That's the limit. A bit of black rubber.

[Gremlin]

Eg some bikes handle better than others in traffic and have better brakes even without ABS.
uh? :scratch:

ABS, in most situations, outperforms non ABS, as it's able to maintain maximum braking without locking (which usually leads to loss of control). There are some (ie, in the minority) situations where ABS does make a situation worse, such as gravel or loose surface roads (where locking of a wheel is usually preferable), or perfect conditions, excellent surface, and the rider is doing testing of ABS (ie, planned stopping). Other than that, ABS is better than non-ABS... and proven so by testing.

[swbarnett]

Some bikes can be safer than others even if they don't have electronics to try and make them safe. Eg some bikes handle better than others in traffic and have better brakes even without ABS.
Sure, for the same rider equal the safety level of the bike can be a factor. In practice the rider's skill will be the greater factor. A less "safe" bike ridden by a safe rider is likely to be safer than a "safe" bike ridden by a not so safe rider.

[swbarnett]

ABS is better than non-ABS... and proven so by testing.
I've always wondered how they do the comparison? It's impossible to do rigorous testing in real world situations. Any test will involve a rider that is doing "planned stopping".

In the last course I did there were 3 of us that could outbreak both the car and the ABS bike that were there on the day.

[Swoop]

Tourists account for 1% of the vehicle crashes.
Cool! Do they get given a "1%er" patch at the rental company office?

Enough for a change of legislation ... ???
No. We already have enough "legislation" on the books that can be used. Keep the public-servant bastards away from any more of it.

Or!...they could just stop handing licenses out to any twot that can get around the block & parrelle park!
Most definitely.
There is no automatic entitlement to operate a vehicle on our roads.
Of major concern is now the amount of retards who seem to want to "move into the right hand lane!!" for no reason at all. Gooks are top of this list.

[mossy1200]

I've always wondered how they do the comparison? It's impossible to do rigorous testing in real world situations. Any test will involve a rider that is doing "planned stopping".

In the last course I did there were 3 of us that could outbreak both the car and the ABS bike that were there on the day.

To many variables to compare anything other than the SAME bike and rider running same temp and pressure in tyres with same rider with abs on then off to even get close to a test condition.

Front suspension and tyre could be as big a factor as abs in stopping distance. Im thinking ABS in the wet with a surprise EB would be the biggest results difference.

Even height of the bike and length of wheel base and centre of gravity will effect results.
How long could the list of contributing factors get.

Idd say I could pull my bike up faster than most cars on a good road surface. In the wet riding with abs off not so much. Add some painted road lines(Give way) or manhole covers and most cars are going to do a lot better.

[MrKiwi]

How would you feel if the gubbermint did this.

When you go to renew your licence, you have an eye test, and pays yer money. Your car licence is rolled over, no probs.

But if you want to renew your bike licence, you have to pass a practical assessment. Pass, and you're all good. Fail, you get some ACC subsidized training, and you're good to go.

See, there are 480 thousand people in NZ holding Class 6 full licences, but only 80 thousand bikes registered. What's apparent is that there are a shit load of people with bike licences who haven't ridden in years. Some will never.

These are over represented in crash stats, when they have their mid life crisis and get back onto a bike after not having ridden for decades.

I for one think it should include a driving test for all classes, but how would you feel if it was applied to just Class 6 licences?

Just seeking opinions, which flow freely on here.

Are you suggesting returning bikers are showing up in the accident stats in their droves. Only ACC and a few misinformed Policemen believe that... a thorough examination of the stats won't support that myth.

[swbarnett]

To many variables to compare anything other than the SAME bike and rider running same temp and pressure in tyres with same rider with abs on then off to even get close to a test condition.

Front suspension and tyre could be as big a factor as abs in stopping distance. Im thinking ABS in the wet with a surprise EB would be the biggest results difference.

Even height of the bike and length of wheel base and centre of gravity will effect results.
How long could the list of contributing factors get.

Idd say I could pull my bike up faster than most cars on a good road surface. In the wet riding with abs off not so much. Add some painted road lines(Give way) or manhole covers and most cars are going to do a lot better.
Exactly. Which means that there's no strong evidence to suggest that ABS helps at all. Just a thought experiment that suggests it "might" help.

[caspernz]

Exactly. Which means that there's no strong evidence to suggest that ABS helps at all. Just a thought experiment that suggests it "might" help.

ABS on a bike is a no-brainer, for its value is in the surprise situation, whether this be a panic stop or a sudden surface change. Now that I've got a bike with ABS, regardless of my many years and distance covered on two wheels...wouldn't buy a bike without ABS now.

As for the licence retest idea...only if it's for all classes. Even a compulsory defensive driving course done periodically would help with accident stats I reckon. The Yankee approach of traffic school could have some merit.

As a career trucker, many years hauling fuel, the on-going training certainly helps. Heck, even the annual medical can be a benefit. Any changes to make it unduly difficult to obtain or keep a licence would however be a difficult political hot potato I'd venture.

[rastuscat]

Inexperience is an issue. Age too. Riders new to bikes, regardless of age, don't have the experience that experience brings.

Young and inexperienced is a big issue.

[R650R]

Idd say I could pull my bike up faster than most cars on a good road surface.

Has anyone ever done some real world tests on this??? A modern twin disk sportsbike vs a suitable modern car with good brakes.
A mate of mine had a Subaru B4 as company car when they were new and not a hoodie mobile like they are these days, man that thing could haul up in a short distance.
I think bikes are better braking from high speeds but in normal legal speeds 100k or less I think a good car will stop quicker, way more rubber on road/traction and braking power that overcomes the weight factor.
Just like how a car will actually change direction faster than bike...

Its a pity for what ever reason EBS hasn't made it onto bikes instead of just ABS.
In a truck same model vs another the difference between ABS and EBS is massive. EBS systems actually measure how fast your depressing the brake pedal, takes the brakes to lock up point then backs off a smidgen and whoa!
I reckon EBS with electronic suspension control could be worth several metres on a bike easy.

[MrKiwi]

I would say that ACC and the police would know more than you however I bet the data would not show if the older rider was returning or had never stopped riding.

Actually I do know the data, very well. It has been my job over the years to know it and I still have access to it for analysis.

The Ministry of Transport have been investigating this for sometime. I myself, when I led the work to develop the current road safety strategy in 2008/09 thought this was a real issue as ACC kept banging on about it. Turns out this is not quite the problem many think it is.

What is true is that the majority of fatalities involve men (much more than woman) in the age range of 30-55. Many factors are at play.

[MrKiwi]

Has anyone ever done some real world tests on this??? A modern twin disk sportsbike vs a suitable modern car with good brakes.
A mate of mine had a Subaru B4 as company car when they were new and not a hoodie mobile like they are these days, man that thing could haul up in a short distance.
I think bikes are better braking from high speeds but in normal legal speeds 100k or less I think a good car will stop quicker, way more rubber on road/traction and braking power that overcomes the weight factor.
Just like how a car will actually change direction faster than bike...

Its a pity for what ever reason EBS hasn't made it onto bikes instead of just ABS.
In a truck same model vs another the difference between ABS and EBS is massive. EBS systems actually measure how fast your depressing the brake pedal, takes the brakes to lock up point then backs off a smidgen and whoa!
I reckon EBS with electronic suspension control could be worth several metres on a bike easy.

There has been some work done on this, and my understanding of it is cars fitted with ABS can stop in almost all conditions more quickly than a bike, even bikes with ABS. However, it can be misleading as bikes are lighter than cars (yeah go figure) and with powerful twin disk brakes the issue becomes how to control the bike under heavy breaking. ABS helps. Bikes also stop quicker when fitted with ABS.

[MrKiwi]

Inexperience is an issue. Age too. Riders new to bikes, regardless of age, don't have the experience that experience brings.

Young and inexperienced is a big issue.

Yes.

I had a discussion with the Insurance Council beginning of last year. Insurance companies will tell you that one of the most vulnerable times for accidents is in the first few days/weeks of new vehicle ownership. This changed my view of driving/riding quite a lot. I recently bought a new bike and instead of doing my normal 'lets ride it to test it' thing I've done in the past, this time I did four rides to learn about the bike. I rode the bike in the dry, in the wet, on different road surfaces and in the wind (lots of that here). Now I'm beginning to understand the bike I can begin to ride it a bit harder from time to time.

[BlackSheepLogic]

What is true is that the majority of fatalities involve men (much more than woman) in the age range of 30-55. Many factors are at play.

Was that conclusion adjusted for KM traveled? (was there a difference?)

[BlackSheepLogic]

Inexperience is an issue. Age too. Riders new to bikes, regardless of age, don't have the experience that experience brings.

Young and inexperienced is a big issue.

Repeated intermittent testing (every 10 years) wan't catch or fix that. It's not hard to get to a level sufficient to pass a basic handling/riding test, little experience will be gained by it.

What will happen is that this will become an expensive test though a approved school or a very long wait for a cheaper gov test. Probably a good half day or more time investment as well.

[Paul in NZ]

The one thing a regular retest wont measure is attitude. Some folks have all the skills in the world but because they get all antsy on the road tend to be a danger to themselves and others…

I attended a rider training day a while back on my 1970 TR6C and my mate went on his 1951 6T.

The dynamics of the bikes that day were just so different. The emergency stopping was a hoot as both our old bikes have really effective rear brakes. The tester was a bit amazed that we could stop so effectively with just the rear… Sort of ruined the message he was trying to get across LOL…

Doing the cone things easier on these bikes too… I’d feckin hate to do it on the 1050 ST which is a top heavy tall in the seat lump…

Thing is – I ride the TR6C way more than I do the ST and I have owned it a LOT longer. So when I do ride the ST I tend to treat every ride as a test ride and am uber cautious… I’m not sure a retest is going to pick up on that. If I was being retested I’d take the TR6C but really would that qualify me for the ST? Maybe not…

[caspernz]

The one thing a regular retest wont measure is attitude. Some folks have all the skills in the world but because they get all antsy on the road tend to be a danger to themselves and others…



Attitude is 90% of the problem I'd venture, as much as 80 clicks in the fast lane is a problem, the one who undertakes at 140 clicks and weaves thru traffic is just as bad.

Perhaps the biggest issue in this debate is getting the "average" motorist to see their skill set could use a refresher from time to time.

[swbarnett]

ABS on a bike is a no-brainer, for its value is in the surprise situation, whether this be a panic stop or a sudden surface change. Now that I've got a bike with ABS, regardless of my many years and distance covered on two wheels...wouldn't buy a bike without ABS now.
Which just goes to prove my point. Unless someone can point me to the study, there seems to be no imperical evidence that ABS actually works in real world situations.

Having never ridden a bike with ABS I can't say either way. However, from the description of how it works there seems to be some evidence that I have actually achieved this manually.

I really question whether the benifit (if any) outweighs the cost.

[caspernz]

Which just goes to prove my point. Unless someone can point me to the study, there seems to be no imperical evidence that ABS actually works in real world situations.

Having never ridden a bike with ABS I can't say either way. However, from the description of how it works there seems to be some evidence that I have actually achieved this manually.

I really question whether the benifit (if any) outweighs the cost.

Fair call. And once upon a time I was just as doubtful of the benefit as yourself. Maybe your admission that you've never ridden a bike with ABS under varied conditions is the key here?

Having moved from non-ABS to ABS modes of transport in car/truck/bike I'd go as far as to suggest the bike is the one which offers the most benefit to the operator, for keeping them wheels turning is paramount to avoiding hospital food. When I suggest having an ABS bike is a no-brainer it's supremely simple, under perfect conditions a good rider can do better than ABS, but in the real world...nope. Personal experience merely backs up the anecdotal evidence offered by various means. No in-depth study required for me.

Adapting the riding style to correctly utilise ABS is critical though. Bit like the change in braking methods required in car/truck when moving from non-ABS to ABS equipped gear. Expert cadence braking is well beyond todays' average motorist, wouldn't you think?

[MrKiwi]

Was that conclusion adjusted for KM traveled? (was there a difference?)

No. Sadly. Quite hard to get that information.

[Big Dog]

If ABS id suboptimal on gravel (several pages back this was suggested) is ABS valid on our roads?
Most days I don't encounter gravel, but my last two emergency braking procedures IRL were in either roadworks deep gravel or gravel scree.


Stupid phone / Tapatalk, apologies in advance.

[BlackSheepLogic]

Which just goes to prove my point. Unless someone can point me to the study, there seems to be no imperical evidence that ABS actually works in real world situations. Having never ridden a bike with ABS I can't say either way. However, from the description of how it works there seems to be some evidence that I have actually achieved this manually. I really question whether the benifit (if any) outweighs the cost.

From what I've read, a really good rider with traditional non-ABS brakes will stop in a shorter distance. However, under a true emergency braking situation where a rider snatched at the brake it's probably a good option to have.

[p.dath]

ABS is not a pro-active technology. It is re-active. It kicks in after the wheel has locked (or is on the verge of locking).

So a really good rider will never notice it, even in an emergency. You should only notice if you over cook the braking, and cause a wheel to lock up. I have no objections to ABS, and I suspect Europe will move to mandate it, so eventually you will have no choice in the matter - all bikes will be made to ship with it (like cars).

It shouldn't mater too much weather it is gravel or tar seal. In either case once the rotational speed of the wheel hits zero (which is what ABS measures to determine a lock up) the brake will be momentarily released. Often a feedback pumping is sent back to the brake leaver to let the rider know that ABS has intervened (model dependent).

I have seen examples of motorcycle ABS performing poorly on cold tyres - increasing the stopping distance compared to not using ABS. I suspect this might have something to do with cold tyres heating rapidly under heaving braking, and suddenly gaining a lot more traction during the braking manoeuvre than what they had at the beginning of the manoeuvre. In this case relying on only the rotational speed of the tyre may not be accurate enough.

ABS on bikes can get a tad more complex though as many designs also incorporate inter-linked braking, so the front and rear brake work in unison to some degree.

[_Shrek_]

My thoughts exactly.

I think everyone should have to sit a test to renew their licenses, regardless of class. That'd learn 'em.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

:angry2: but who is going to pay for it? would that be a written or practical?
I for one have all my classes & if I have to sit a test to renew them... it's going to take a day or two then I loose $$$ coz I can't work, then the gubberment will say but some one has to pay for the shinny bum who doesn't know shit about bikes diggers trucks etc... to take said test & if you piss them off or a bit of extra revenue is needed "We Fail"

rant over carry on :facepalm:

[willytheekid]

Its ok...change is coming :yes:

http://www.stuff.co.nz/motoring/news/63958044/Driving-test-contractor-changes-after-16-years

Nothing to worry about here!...Im sure they will be JUST as competant as they are with WOF checks! :killingme



VTNZ issued WOF = get a REAL mechanic to check it....quickly!!

[MrKiwi]

If ABS id suboptimal on gravel (several pages back this was suggested) is ABS valid on our roads?
Most days I don't encounter gravel, but my last two emergency braking procedures IRL were in either roadworks deep gravel or gravel scree.


Stupid phone / Tapatalk, apologies in advance.

There is quite a bit of research on the benefits of ABS on motorcycles coming from overseas. ABS is best suited to tarmac, marginal on gravel. The research indicates significant benefits from ABS, reducing both the severity and and number of accidents on tar seal roads. Much of the research is reporting up to 30-40% reductions in severity of injuries and number of fatalities.

Earlier this year I test rode a KTM 1190 for 3 months, including a week long ride around the South Island in both dry and wet conditions. ABS will not cut in when breaking unless the bike detects front wheel slippage. The other feature the KTM 1190 has is variable electronic stability control (yeah I didn't know what this meant either until I picked up the bike from KTM.) The advantage of this system is it alters the algorithm for ABS and traction control depending on the lean angle of the bike. It's a neat system. The bike was very sure footed.

[p.dath]

I just had a read about the issue with ABS and gravel/snow. It seems that allowing the wheel(s) to lock in gravel or snow causes them to dive into the surrounding material and with the tyres semi-submerged they slow the motorbike/vehicle down more.

As ABS tries to prevent wheel locking the tyre remains on the surface of the gravel/snow, and hence takes longer to stop.

I can't see how ABS could easily detect that the tyre is on a surface that it can dive into. It would really need some kind of manual control to indicate you are going "off-road" or riding on a "soft surface". Perhaps some kind of sensor on the forks that can detect the loss of compressibility might do the trick. Sounds hellishly complicated.

[Gremlin]

I just had a read about the issue with ABS and gravel/snow. It seems that allowing the wheel(s) to lock in gravel or snow causes them to dive into the surrounding material and with the tyres semi-submerged they slow the motorbike/vehicle down more.

As ABS tries to prevent wheel locking the tyre remains on the surface of the gravel/snow, and hence takes longer to stop.

I can't see how ABS could easily detect that the tyre is on a surface that it can dive into. It would really need some kind of manual control to indicate you are going "off-road" or riding on a "soft surface". Perhaps some kind of sensor on the forks that can detect the loss of compressibility might do the trick. Sounds hellishly complicated.
It's precisely why making it mandatory and non-switchable on adventure bikes is stupid.

What you want on gravel, is to lock the wheel. The sliding builds up loose material in front of the tyre and this is what slows you down. As above, the KTM 1190 has different modes, including one where ABS works on the front wheel, but is disabled for the rear, allowing you to lock and slide it.

[swbarnett]

Fair call. And once upon a time I was just as doubtful of the benefit as yourself. Maybe your admission that you've never ridden a bike with ABS under varied conditions is the key here?
Yeah, I would definitely be keen to do my own experiments with ABS but I'm not lilely to have it on a bike in the foreseable future. Or indeed two of the same bike with and without.


Having moved from non-ABS to ABS modes of transport in car/truck/bike I'd go as far as to suggest the bike is the one which offers the most benefit to the operator, for keeping them wheels turning is paramount to avoiding hospital food. When I suggest having an ABS bike is a no-brainer it's supremely simple, under perfect conditions a good rider can do better than ABS, but in the real world...nope. Personal experience merely backs up the anecdotal evidence offered by various means. No in-depth study required for me.
The thing is that moving from non-ABS to ABS isn't the only variable. Presumeably you didn't move from non-ABS to the same bike with ABS?


Expert cadence braking is well beyond todays' average motorist, wouldn't you think?
I would totally agree with this. I am of the opinion that ABS is probably of use at least to some. Like anything of this nature my only real concern is that, without real proof of its efficacy, it either becomes mandatory or you can't buy a bike without it. This results in artificially inflated prices for those of us that would perhaps opt out by choice.

[swbarnett]

There is quite a bit of research on the benefits of ABS on motorcycles coming from overseas. ABS is best suited to tarmac, marginal on gravel. The research indicates significant benefits from ABS, reducing both the severity and and number of accidents on tar seal roads. Much of the research is reporting up to 30-40% reductions in severity of injuries and number of fatalities.
Compared to what? I'll bet it wasn't the same bike in the same situation without ABS.

[Big Dog]

It's precisely why making it mandatory and non-switchable on adventure bikes is stupid.

What you want on gravel, is to lock the wheel. The sliding builds up loose material in front of the tyre and this is what slows you down. As above, the KTM 1190 has different modes, including one where ABS works on the front wheel, but is disabled for the rear, allowing you to lock and slide it.

Which firmly puts me back in the camp of ABS is only as good as its engineer and the fact that they need to make the best of all situations... which means averaging things out.

IMHO there will never be a better sensory system for braking than an experienced rider who has taken the time to do braking drills on differing surfaces.

Once you start talking about "changing algorithms" to suit conditions you also start talking about introducing software... Software means errors... sorry... but it does.


I have no doubt at all that if I had had ABS when I was learning I would have been able to avoid at the very least a few changes of undies. At best some very expensive lie downs.
Personally I think ABS is too immature a technology for me to buy a bike because it has it. I might buy a bike in spite of having it though, depending on intended use.

[Laava]

Having very recently crashed on gravel, ploughing into a farm quad which turned in front of me, I can testify to the effectiveness of the ABS. There is no way a person who rides on the road all the time is going to regulate the brakes to avoid lockup in this situation. Ever. I would prefer the rear to be ABS free as well but meh.

[Gremlin]

IMHO there will never be a better sensory system for braking than an experienced rider who has taken the time to do braking drills on differing surfaces.
Actually, that's not good enough. Being mentally prepared, or practising emergency braking is good, but won't necessarily save you when a vehicle suddenly pulls out in front of you and you slam the brakes on in panic. There are actually different mental triggers for each situation.

Ultimately, for an average road rider riding on a road, yes, absolutely, ABS can stop the bike faster than you can when you need to panic brake. In a test situation, in good conditions, where the riders are prepared to emergency brake, then you might be able to outperform ABS, but in most normal situations, ABS does work better.

How many riders actually take their bikes off road/rough unsealed roads? Even BMW knows that most GS riders don't leave the tarmac. Yes, in most of those situations, ABS doesn't help much, but as long as it remains switchable, then those that are taking bikes off road normally know what they're doing, and would turn it off (as I do).

[Big Dog]

Actually, that's not good enough. Being mentally prepared, or practising emergency braking is good, but won't necessarily save you when a vehicle suddenly pulls out in front of you and you slam the brakes on in panic. There are actually different mental triggers for each situation.

Ultimately, for an average road rider riding on a road, yes, absolutely, ABS can stop the bike faster than you can when you need to panic brake. In a test situation, in good conditions, where the riders are prepared to emergency brake, then you might be able to outperform ABS, but in most normal situations, ABS does work better.

How many riders actually take their bikes off road/rough unsealed roads? Even BMW knows that most GS riders don't leave the tarmac. Yes, in most of those situations, ABS doesn't help much, but as long as it remains switchable, then those that are taking bikes off road normally know what they're doing, and would turn it off (as I do).

That's just it though. You have chosen a model you can switch it off when you don't want it, or you believe you can brake better than the ABS.

I am probably wrong and I don't care, rider aids remove some of the experience of riding. I don't mind if there is more experience added as a result or removing some there has to be balance.
E.g. The GS with its switchable ABS offers experiences my CB1300 is not able to while I am unwilling to be that cruel to it. E.G I reckon the CB would be next to useless on anything more off road than the road to Whatipu or if feeling really adventurous the off shoot up the hill (Don Mclean lookout?) which I am sure would be no more difficult on the GS than my driveway.
E.g. The Kawasaki concourse with it's transcontinental intentions. My CB could but no doubt with a great deal more rider fatigue.

[swbarnett]

panic brake.
There's the problem. I have only ever panic braked once in my life. I came off, learned from it and have never done so again.

Condition the sub-conscious and it takes over when the conscious mind is too slow.

[caspernz]

Presumeably you didn't move from non-ABS to the same bike with ABS?

Prior to buying my current bike (Busa with ABS) I did the test ride thing over a period of months, with various bikes being tried out. For me the safety net of ABS has merit, since while I consider myself a competent rider, it's in the unforeseen situations that ABS comes into its own. I'm not delusional enough to think I can do better than an ABS equipped machine under those unforeseen circumstances.

I look at the changes that have happened over the years with cars and trucks, ABS, traction control, roll stability etc and it's in some ways sad to see how slow this type of safety net technology has made its way to bikes.

So for my type of riding, sealed roads only but in all types of weather 24/7, it's just a no brainer to take the bike with ABS...end of story for me.

[swbarnett]

So for my type of riding, sealed roads only but in all types of weather 24/7, it's just a no brainer to take the bike with ABS...end of story for me.
My bike is my primary transport and has been since 1982. My riding is the same as yours (with a rare bit of gravel now and then). When we were taught to ride we were taught to find the point just as the wheel starts to skid and ease off, rince and repeat. Sounds like ABS to me. Could ABS out-break me given the same conditions otherwise? I honestly don't know and doubt I'll ever find out. Do I think I need it? No. I've been in enough emergency braking situations to know that, at least for the way I ride, I can haul up the bike plenty fast enough as it is.

If you think that ABS helps and you want to use it I'm the first to say you should go for it. I'm not against ABS as such. I just don't think it's proven from a cost-benifit angle. And what I don't want to see is a risk homeostasis whereby the technology is used as a substitute for good training and conditioning. This has already happened far too much with other "safety" technologies.

The ABS argument is a lot like the ATGATT argument. It all boils down to how far you're willing to go towards total cotton-wool emersion and at what cost.

[Gremlin]

That's just it though. You have chosen a model you can switch it off when you don't want it, or you believe you can brake better than the ABS.
I know I can't brake better than ABS under normal road circumstances. The vast majority of the time ABS is left fully enabled (and it's enabled by default every time you turn it on).

However, on technical descents on loose material it's always turned off. The potential is there that I would be unable to brake and simply careen down the hill.

[Big Dog]

My bike is my primary transport and has been since 1982. My riding is the same as yours (with a rare bit of gravel now and then). When we were taught to ride we were taught to find the point just as the wheel starts to skid and ease off, rince and repeat. Sounds like ABS to me. Could ABS out-break me given the same conditions otherwise? I honestly don't know and doubt I'll ever find out. Do I think I need it? No. I've been in enough emergency braking situations to know that, at least for the way I ride, I can haul up the bike plenty fast enough as it is.

If you think that ABS helps and you want to use it I'm the first to say you should go for it. I'm not against ABS as such. I just don't think it's proven from a cost-benifit angle. And what I don't want to see is a risk homeostasis whereby the technology is used as a substitute for good training and conditioning. This has already happened far too much with other "safety" technologies.

The ABS argument is a lot like the ATGATT argument. It all boils down to how far you're willing to go towards total cotton-wool emersion and at what cost.

I can't speak for bikes because I don't know enough riders with abs or riders with both options. I have noticed amongst car drivers a trend of pushing the limits of safe following distances and generally driving harder with abs.


Stupid phone / Tapatalk, apologies in advance.

[swbarnett]

I know I can't brake better than ABS under normal road circumstances.
Have you tested this? Given that you can turn it off you do have the opportunity, even if not under emergency circumstances.

[MrKiwi]

Compared to what? I'll bet it wasn't the same bike in the same situation without ABS.



Ummm, yes!

[Gremlin]

Have you tested this? Given that you can turn it off you do have the opportunity, even if not under emergency circumstances.
If mentally prepared etc, it's not a true road test. Yes, perhaps in this ideal situation I could but it would need to be a longer braking (giving you time to detect wheel slip, modulate, continue braking etc). Even from 100kph you can stop pretty quickly. Most of the time it's about anticipation, good following distances (ie, roadcraft) so I very seldom brake hard.

Remember that the BMW is a little different to normal bikes, having linked brakes and telelever front end which makes it unlikely the rear wheel will lift off the deck even under very hard braking.

[nzspokes]

http://www.americanmotorcyclist.com/Features/RideReports/AntiLockBraking.aspx

http://www.superstreetbike.com/features/mythbusters-abs-equipped-bike-good-rider-doesnt-need-abs

[swbarnett]

Ummm, yes!
So they recreated the exact emergency situation after removing the ABS from the broken bike?

[swbarnett]

If mentally prepared etc, it's not a true road test.
Which is, of course, my point. There's no way to imperically test ABS.

ABS may help in an emergency situation on a slick surface. My experience without ABS is that more than once I've felt the front tyre repeatedly slip and regrip under heavy real-world emergency braking (some in the wet). Could ABS have done better? I don't think anyone can say for sure either way. There is simply no way to do rigorous scientific testing.

I've ridden a lot in all weathers since 1982 and I've only once come to grief in an emergency stop* so I feel quite safe without ABS.



*ABS wouldn't have helped because I was leaning heavily at the time. A noobie mistake of braking at exactly the wrong time.

[MrKiwi]

So they recreated the exact emergency situation after removing the ABS from the broken bike?

You do not need to create the exact emergency situation to understand trends, and it is trends we are after. It is always trends in the results we are after.

The research looks at several factors. None of this is unusual, it is how all road safety research works. The more research articles done looking at the problem from different angles combined with similar findings the more we can rely on those findings to generally be correct.

The research I've read analyses:

markets where models with and without ABS fitted are analysed over time comparing accident rates of bikes with ABS to those without. No one accident is compared to any one, but if you find a wide range of riders on bikes with ABS are having less accidents over time, or the severity of injuries is less over time, compared to the bikes not fitted with ABS then you can start to document trends in road safety between bikes with and without ABS. Research using this methodology are finding undeniable trends due to fitment of ABS. And at the end of the day this is exactly the type of research you would want in order to validate the difference, ie is ABS better across a range of bikes, roads and users compared to bikes without ABS. It's the extent to which ABS can add benefits.
you can also analyse long term trends in accident rates in markets looking at the rate of ABS penetration and compare these to drops in rates of number and severity of accidents pre and post ABS being introduced into the market. Generally you need longer term trends and also need to ensure drops in rates are not attributable to other safety initiatives.


In my view ABS on road bikes ridden on tarmac is a no brainer. However, for adventure bikes, as noted by many in this thread, ABS on gravel is a mixed blessing. I'd definitely want to turn off ABS when riding on gravel, although at times I choose to leave it on. The most critical function for me is being able to turn off traction control, I want to be able to spin up my back wheel. It's traction control that affects this. I'd also want to have ABS turned off on my back wheel to lock it up when needed.

[MrKiwi]

Which is, of course, my point. There's no way to imperically test ABS.

ABS may help in an emergency situation on a slick surface. My experience without ABS is that more than once I've felt the front tyre repeatedly slip and regrip under heavy real-world emergency braking (some in the wet). Could ABS have done better? I don't think anyone can say for sure either way. There is simply no way to do rigorous scientific testing.

I've ridden a lot in all weathers since 1982 and I've only once come to grief in an emergency stop* so I feel quite safe without ABS.



*ABS wouldn't have helped because I was leaning heavily at the time. A noobie mistake of braking at exactly the wrong time.

Not so. And if you feel quite safe without ABS continue your merry way. However, there is plenty of perfectly valid research that says you'd be better off with it.

[willytheekid]

You people USE brakes?:blink:

306592

...Am I helping? :confused:

[MrKiwi]

You people USE brakes?:blink:


...Am I helping? :confused:


lol, not if I can help it, but I do need to use them, well then that's a different story...

[swbarnett]

http://www.americanmotorcyclist.com/Features/RideReports/AntiLockBraking.aspx

http://www.superstreetbike.com/features/mythbusters-abs-equipped-bike-good-rider-doesnt-need-abs
I had a read of the MythBusters article. They say the myth was busted but the numbers say otherwise. The stopping distances were lower or slightly over (as close as would make no real difference to an attentive rider). And the one "crash" doesn't change things. Whose to say that this wouldn't have happened with ABS as well if more runs were done.

[swbarnett]

You do not need to create the exact emergency situation to understand trends, and it is trends we are after. It is always trends in the results we are after.

The research looks at several factors. None of this is unusual, it is how all road safety research works. The more research articles done looking at the problem from different angles combined with similar findings the more we can rely on those findings to generally be correct.

The research I've read analyses:
...

This smacks of the Hi-Vis debate. i.e. "Correlation does not mean causation". In a market where ABS is optional it is quite possible that those that choose to buy a bike with ABS are safer riders anyway. Thus completely skewing the findings and making all the studies base on accident data inherently flawed.

As I said. There is no way to emperically test ABS. As far as I know all the studies are based on statistical data and as such cannot state an outcome to a large degree of certainty as the causality is not proven.

This is a problem with all statistically based human research. It, by definition, cannot adhere to the basic principle of only changing one variable at a time. Only with a time-machine could this be done. Maybe if we discover a parallel universe where the only difference is ABS we will finally know for sure.


When I was at school we were given the story of the man that hung a leg of pork in his garden and observed it from inside his house over a period of a number of weeks. At the end of that time the meat was gone and only flies were left. He concluded that, left alone long enough, meat will metamorphosise into flies. The moral of this story is that observation of a system does not always yeild a true picture of the processes behind that system.


Just to be clear I'm not against ABS. I just don't want to not have the choice. It's like back and chest protectors. They are just beyond what I'm prepared to do to keep myself safe.

[nzspokes]

Just to be clear I'm not against ABS. I just don't want to not have the choice. It's like back and chest protectors. They are just beyond what I'm prepared to do to keep myself safe.

ABS reacts the same every time. It doesn't have a bad day. It doesn't ride tired. It doesn't ride pissed. Its not pissed off with the missus. It doesn't get low on sugar. Its doesn't get sun strike. It doesn't ride dehydrated.

It does the same thing every time. You dont. Simple as that.

[Rhys]

I have never owned a bike with abs but my under standing is that it only starts to "work" after the brakes lock? so if you are one of the expert riders who can stop faster without abs you should be able to stop an abs equipped bike just as quickly because you're not locking the wheels ?

[swbarnett]

ABS reacts the same every time. It doesn't have a bad day. It doesn't ride tired. It doesn't ride pissed. Its not pissed off with the missus. It doesn't get low on sugar. Its doesn't get sun strike. It doesn't ride dehydrated.

It does the same thing every time. You dont. Simple as that.
Agreed. So you'd be in favour of a fully automated motorcycle then? If you're willing to let the bike do the braking for you then why not the cornering?

As you say, computerised bikes wouldn't have off days.

[swbarnett]

I have never owned a bike with abs but my under standing is that it only starts to "work" after the brakes lock? so if you are one of the expert riders who can stop faster without abs you should be able to stop an abs equipped bike just as quickly because you're not locking the wheels ?
The trick is to get the braking just on the point where the tyre starts to lock and no further. When my wife and I were taught to ride this was one of the drills that was drummed into us over and over again.

[nzspokes]

Agreed. So you'd be in favour of a fully automated motorcycle then? If you're willing to let the bike do the braking for you then why not the cornering?

As you say, computerised bikes wouldn't have off days.

You count with your fingers at work then? Dont use computers at all.:tugger:

[MrKiwi]

I have never owned a bike with abs but my under standing is that it only starts to "work" after the brakes lock? so if you are one of the expert riders who can stop faster without abs you should be able to stop an abs equipped bike just as quickly because you're not locking the wheels ?

Exactly, ABS cuts in as the front wheel begins to slide, effectively preventing it sliding. Every test done on ABS in cars or with motorcycles shows improved stopping capability in both the dry and wet.

If you are riding appropriately, within good riding practices 99% of the time ABS will not cut in.

I now own a bike with ABS. On the one occasion I needed it (so far), it worked a treat.

[MrKiwi]

Agreed. So you'd be in favour of a fully automated motorcycle then? If you're willing to let the bike do the braking for you then why not the cornering?

As you say, computerised bikes wouldn't have off days.

My view is your response suggests to me that you do not understand how ABS works? ABS does not do the braking for you. It never does the braking for you. All it does is it prevents the wheel from locking up and therefore prevents skidding.

[swbarnett]

You count with your fingers at work then? Dont use computers at all.
Yeah, good point.

Computers are my job. Theres an adage that I was taught long ago that applies mostly to application development - "Never let the user do something that the computer can do". Since then I've agonised long and hard as to exacly how far this should go. Take it to it's extreme and you end up doing nothing because computers are doing it all.

The point I was trying to make was that if you let a computer do your braking because it doesn't fuck up then why not let it corner for you for the same reason. I agree that this is non-sensical. However, it does go to show that you've made the decision to go at least as far as letting ABS do your braking (at least the hairiest parts). Up until now I've chosen to stop before ABS as I don't think it's necessary (I'm still open to being convinced otherwise when I inevitably get a bike with it).

[swbarnett]

My view is your response suggests to me that you do not understand how ABS works? ABS does not do the braking for you. It never does the braking for you. All it does is it prevents the wheel from locking up and therefore prevents skidding.
I understand that fine.

What I was getting when I said that ABS is braking for you is that it does the job of stopping the wheel skidding. This is something that we were taught to do ourselves. I really think this is a generational issue. I'm starting sound like the old guy saying "in my day we didn't have ABS, we just knew how to control our own wheel skid".

[swbarnett]

If you are riding appropriately, within good riding practices 99% of the time ABS will not cut in.
i.e. a perfect example of the law of diminishing returns.

Each time a new technology like this comes out it addresses a "problem" that is less of an issue than anything that went before it. Often it was never cconsidered a problem by anyone other than the technologists. Eventually we'll have to spend mega bugs on a technology that will save us in the event of a flash flood in the Sahara.

[_Shrek_]

Exactly, ABS cuts in as the front wheel begins to slide, effectively preventing it sliding. Every test done on ABS in cars or with motorcycles shows improved stopping capability in both the dry and wet.

If you are riding appropriately, within good riding practices 99% of the time ABS will not cut in.

I now own a bike with ABS. On the one occasion I needed it (so far), it worked a treat.

what about adventure riders?.... I for one, want to be able to lock up the back wheel with out abs cutting in & that goes for integrated brakes as well, be alright on road bikes, but when you want to take the long way home you want to be able to switch all that shit off
& not have some shiny bum who thinks he/she knows better telling us what we need on our bikes because it makes them safer to ride

[Big Dog]

but when you want to take the long way home you want to be able to switch all that shit off
& not have some shiny bum who thinks he/she knows better telling us what we need on our bikes because it makes them safer to ride
That there is the entire argument.
How much of our riding is over coming the challenges that pop up in a day?
Would your average rider still ride if there was no challenge?

If I offered you an R1 for the day would you rather have one with no aids, or one with traction control, stability control, linked ABS, some gismo that prevents the bike from ever falling over with both pitch and yaw stabilisation, Weather protection, climate control, air bags, side intrusion bars, side intrusion detection, blind spot detection, comfy seats, and a boss stereo with auto adjust volume control.

I think 60% of the pleasure I got from the Hayabusa was taming that beast.
Shot if I wanted all the above if drive a car.


Stupid phone / Tapatalk, apologies in advance.

[Big Dog]

And if life was that depressing I would move back to Auckland and walk to work.


Stupid phone / Tapatalk, apologies in advance.

[bluninja]

Perhaps there should be a 6A on the license for those that can only ride with ABS :rolleyes:

[Gremlin]

That there is the entire argument.
How much of our riding is over coming the challenges that pop up in a day?
Would your average rider still ride if there was no challenge?
On the other hand, I rounded a corner in the South Island at 100kph in the rain to find myself metres from a road of shiny tar. First I lost rear traction, noted by a flashing orange light in the corner of my vision and the bike sounding rough as guts as traction control kicked in. Then I lost front traction but through gentle moves I stayed upright and with momentum slid across a reasonable distance of tarmac (guessing 20+m) with no traction, before finding some on the other side.

The aids helped reduce a complicated situation. I could concentrate on keeping the bike balanced while closing the throttle slowly as the power had already been removed...

On the other hand, I'm reasonably certain in another situation traction control woke up far too late, while I was already trying to deal with a sideways bike and cutting the power while I was at full opposite lock and turned a lowside or save into a high side... All at 30kph with traction control fully engaged :facepalm:

[nzspokes]

Yeah, good point.

Computers are my job. Theres an adage that I was taught long ago that applies mostly to application development - "Never let the user do something that the computer can do". Since then I've agonised long and hard as to exacly how far this should go. Take it to it's extreme and you end up doing nothing because computers are doing it all.

The point I was trying to make was that if you let a computer do your braking because it doesn't fuck up then why not let it corner for you for the same reason. I agree that this is non-sensical. However, it does go to show that you've made the decision to go at least as far as letting ABS do your braking (at least the hairiest parts). Up until now I've chosen to stop before ABS as I don't think it's necessary (I'm still open to being convinced otherwise when I inevitably get a bike with it).
ABS gives you options when shit goes bad.

[swbarnett]

ABS gives you options when shit goes bad.
Having not used ABS you're going to have to explain that one. What options do you have that you didn't have before?

[p.dath]

Having not used ABS you're going to have to explain that one. What options do you have that you didn't have before?

You don't have to have used ABS to have some appreciation of the potential benefits, no matter how hard you try and argue otherwise. I'm guessing many people with cars and motorcycles that do have ABS haven't used it. Then there is the next group who have ABS, have had ABS activate, and didn't know. The mind gets very pre-occupied with the situation when things go badly wrong.

The obvious benefit is gaining some traction back after you have completely cocked it up and locked the front up. It is never a technology you plan to use [hopefully]. It is a technology to help you when things didn't go to plan.

If you can't imagine any benefit then its easy. You don't spend your hard earned money on the technology. It is currently an individuals choice. Personally I wouldn't mind having ABS, but I wouldn't be prepared to pay much extra to have it. As like you, I'm not sure how much benefit I would gain - but I do see some benefit.

[Big Dog]

On the other hand, I rounded a corner in the South Island at 100kph in the rain to find myself metres from a road of shiny tar. First I lost rear traction, noted by a flashing orange light in the corner of my vision and the bike sounding rough as guts as traction control kicked in. Then I lost front traction but through gentle moves I stayed upright and with momentum slid across a reasonable distance of tarmac (guessing 20+m) with no traction, before finding some on the other side.

The aids helped reduce a complicated situation. I could concentrate on keeping the bike balanced while closing the throttle slowly as the power had already been removed...

On the other hand, I'm reasonably certain in another situation traction control woke up far too late, while I was already trying to deal with a sideways bike and cutting the power while I was at full opposite lock and turned a lowside or save into a high side... All at 30kph with traction control fully engaged :facepalm:

Yes, hat is the imagined benefit. Which takes me full circle to my original position, if your riding a big rig perhaps there is more value to this benefit.

Just not sure I get myself into that position often enough to justify the expense and the loss to the experience of riding.


Like I said though a big rig like the GS with all the kit is a bit different to a DR350.

Don't get me wrong I see value there.


Stupid phone / Tapatalk, apologies in advance.

[swbarnett]

The obvious benefit is gaining some traction back after you have completely cocked it up and locked the front up.
Something I was trained to do and have done in anger a couple of times. I didn't even have to think about it. My subconscious took over.


It is never a technology you plan to use [hopefully]. It is a technology to help you when things didn't go to plan.
I'm definitely getting the impression that it's a technology mainly for those that worry about things not going to plan.


If you can't imagine any benefit then its easy. You don't spend your hard earned money on the technology. It is currently an individuals choice.
Of course there's the rub. That situation looks likely to change and I don't appreciate someone else deciding what is good for me. Especially when they know nothing about me. I'm open to being convinced and choosing to use ABS, but I would object strongly if that choice is taken away completely.

And, come to think of it, if I had the money to buy a new bike (not second hand) right now I don't really have a choice as the bike I would likely want to buy doesn't come without it (not that that would stop me).

[nzspokes]

I'm definitely getting the impression that it's a technology mainly for those that worry about things not going to plan.


Wow thats backward. Again, you dont have Anti Virus on your computers then?

ABS gives you the ability to move the bike under hard braking or even turn a little. It does not do anything until it detects a slip.

Years ago I had a car pull out on me on a highway. I was in an old VS Commodore doing 100kph. Im somewhat of a trained driver. The ABS gave me the chance to brake hard and turn the car to clear the car that pulled out on me. I would have hit it in a car that did not have ABS even if I used threshold braking.

[caspernz]

Wow thats backward. Again, you dont have Anti Virus on your computers then?

ABS gives you the ability to move the bike under hard braking or even turn a little. It does not do anything until it detects a slip.

Years ago I had a car pull out on me on a highway. I was in an old VS Commodore doing 100kph. Im somewhat of a trained driver. The ABS gave me the chance to brake hard and turn the car to clear the car that pulled out on me. I would have hit it in a car that did not have ABS even if I used threshold braking.

Thank you, my point all along. ABS, when used in that once in a blue moon event, gives you options in the form of time and control...that no amount of training/practice/mind voodoo can replace.

In reality it takes a bit of practising to find the point of lockup on any bike. It also takes a lot more force to lock the front than most riders realise, so getting the ABS to activate in a practice scenario is quite an enlightening experience. The variables of surface condition, tyre temps etc make practice on day 1 irrelevant to a panic brake scenario on day 4711....

[nzspokes]

Thank you, my point all along. ABS, when used in that once in a blue moon event, gives you options in the form of time and control...that no amount of training/practice/mind voodoo can replace.

In reality it takes a bit of practising to find the point of lockup on any bike. It also takes a lot more force to lock the front than most riders realise, so getting the ABS to activate in a practice scenario is quite an enlightening experience. The variables of surface condition, tyre temps etc make practice on day 1 irrelevant to a panic brake scenario on day 4711....

Also dosent hurt to make your ABS fire from time to time. Its good for it. I make my car do it every month or so.

[swbarnett]

you dont have Anti Virus on your computers then?
In today's climate, yes. That's a bad compaison though because the chances of me getting a virus are a hell of a lot higher than that of getting into a situation where I "need" ABS.

My wife has no anti-virus on her computer because she runs a Mac. The risk is a hell of a lot lowere and a much better comparison to the risk of braking where ABS would change the outcome.


ABS gives you the ability to move the bike under hard braking or even turn a little. It does not do anything until it detects a slip.

Years ago I had a car pull out on me on a highway. I was in an old VS Commodore doing 100kph. Im somewhat of a trained driver. The ABS gave me the chance to brake hard and turn the car to clear the car that pulled out on me. I would have hit it in a car that did not have ABS even if I used threshold braking.
I can't say I've ever had a situation where braking and turning together would've been of help. I've done the brake then turn to avoid an obstacle. But I do take your point. This is probably the one thing I can see that ABS will give a rider.


As I've said before I'm not really against ABS, I just see it the same as other essentially superfulous "safety" advances - the chances of it actually being of use are so slim it's just not worth the cost. Both in money and natural resources.

[nzspokes]

the chances of it actually being of use are so slim it's just not worth the cost. Both in money and natural resources.

Do you have seatbelts in your car? Do you have a car with airbags? Do you wear a helmet? If your so good at braking then obviously you dont need a helmet. :facepalm:

For someone that works in computers I would have thought you would know how to turn on the spell checker.....



And to agree with others, for ADV bikes I see the need to have switchable ABS. Either nothing, not back wheel or full. If I had ABS on my trail bikes front wheel I may stay on it a bit more.

[Big Dog]

Do you have seatbelts in your car? Do you have a car with airbags? Do you wear a helmet? If your so good at braking then obviously you dont need a helmet. :facepalm:

For someone that works in computers I would have thought you would know how to turn on the spell checker.....



And to agree with others, for ADV bikes I see the need to have switchable ABS. Either nothing, not back wheel or full. If I had ABS on my trail bikes front wheel I may stay on it a bit more.

Do you have ABS?


Stupid phone / Tapatalk, apologies in advance.

[nzspokes]

Do you have ABS?


Stupid phone / Tapatalk, apologies in advance.

Car yes bike no. Have not been able to afford a bike with it yet but due to my little disability Im keen to get it. Even more so now I do a lot of pillion work.

Off to look at a bike today with it on.

[swbarnett]

Do you have seatbelts in your car?
Yes, their effectiveness is emperically proven.


Do you have a car with airbags?
Not by choice. Wouldn't worry me either way.


Do you wear a helmet?
Mostly as weather and bug protection.


If your so good at braking then obviously you dont need a helmet. :facepalm:
You do realise that there are a lot more ways to go down than under braking? The only time I've ever "used" my helmet I was hit from behind.


For someone that works in computers I would have thought you would know how to turn on the spell checker.....
I've never managed to get it to work in firefox. Windows is not my area of expertise.

[_Shrek_]

If I offered you an R1 for the day would you rather have one with no aids, or one with traction control, stability control, linked ABS, some gismo that prevents the bike from ever falling over with both pitch and yaw stabilisation, Weather protection, climate control, air bags, side intrusion bars, side intrusion detection, blind spot detection, comfy seats, and a boss stereo with auto adjust volume control.

I'll take the R1 :wari: but you can keep the rest of that other shit :puke:


I think 60% of the pleasure I got from the Hayabusa was taming that beast.
Shot if I wanted all the above if drive a car.

I'd most likely :shifty: have a black market bike that brakes all the rules rather than have to put up with....

[_Shrek_]

while I believe ABS has it's advantages, it has mostly turned us into lazy riders/drivers as we now rely on technology to save us from our own stuff ups & not riding/driving to the conditions

[Big Dog]

Car yes bike no. Have not been able to afford a bike with it yet but due to my little disability Im keen to get it. Even more so now I do a lot of pillion work.

Off to look at a bike today with it on.

Hmmm, that would be another challenge. Given the cost of a bike with ABS vs my relative income. I haven't looked for a while but I have not seen one for under 10k that is not severely neglected.

I took an FJR1300 for a spin a few years ago.
An odd bike.
IIRC Shaft drive, electronic clutch ( real clutch but operated off of sensors, no lever), traction control, linked ABS brakes on the front lever but not the rear and a few other bits and pieces.

I did not really gel with it. It did not feel like a bike I would be able to say 5-10 years later "I am glad I bought that". It did feel like an awesome option if I had something happen to cause me to be unsteady or no longer have the strength to run a hydraulic clutch. The brakes appeared to be assisted. Almost no resistance all the way back to well past where you would lock it up without ABS. I don't think I engaged it so I can't say what it is like.
Same day I took another one, might have been the previous model for the same circuit. None of the mod cons. Felt far more natural. It is amazing how much you miss the clutch when there is no lever there. Ditto for the brake resistance.
If I was to buy one it would be the basic model. But that is from the standpoint of who I am today.

If I was a summer only fair weather rider or only rode a few weeks a year on holiday loaded to the gunnels with gear and a pillion or had some minor disabilities I suspect the fully specced one would get the nod.

Either way would be with a nudge and a wink but very little change from 30k.
From memory there was about 3-4 k in the difference.


Stupid phone / Tapatalk, apologies in advance.

[nzspokes]

Yes, their effectiveness is emperically proven.


Not by choice. Wouldn't worry me either way.


Mostly as weather and bug protection.


You do realise that there are a lot more ways to go down than under braking? The only time I've ever "used" my helmet I was hit from behind.


I've never managed to get it to work in firefox. Windows is not my area of expertise.

Agree there are may ways to go down. But heavy braking would normally mean if you were to keep going you will be hitting something hard. Anything that gives you an option is a huge plus. You are clearly stuck in the past.

I don't work in computers and can barely turn one on but this may be of help as your spelling is shocking. http://lmgtfy.com/?q=firefox+spell+checker+how+to

[swbarnett]

heavy braking would normally mean if you were to keep going you will be hitting something hard.
Of course. This is a given.


Anything that gives you an option is a huge plus.
Yes and no. It comes back to the point of cost vs. benefit. Why should I add a couple of thou to the price of each bike I buy to cover a situation that has virtually no chance of happening (note that I don't say it will never happen). If I thought like this I'd probably always live under a reinforced roof to protect against meteor strike. I'd also probably put the guard back on my table saw.


You are clearly stuck in the past.
Perhaps. But if that is so then it's a past where you were expected to do things for yourself and not rely on technology to do it for you. My concern is that all this technology will come to nothing because of risk homeostasis. And all at great cost.


I don't work in computers and can barely turn one on but this may be of help as your spelling is shocking.
I copied the last two posts where you've commented on my spelling into Word and the only things that came up were "superfluous" which I typed as "superlfuous" and "empirically" which I spelled as "emperically". The former is a typo, not a spelling mistake. The second I will grant you is a genuine spelling mistake. Hardly what I'd call shocking.

I had the spell checker working in Firefox once. It stopped working and nothing I could do would get it working again.

[nzspokes]

Perhaps. But if that is so then it's a past where you were expected to do things for yourself and not rely on technology to do it for you.

Which why riders die.

[swbarnett]

I had the spell checker working in Firefox once. It stopped working and nothing I could do would get it working again.
Well, what do you know? Since you highlighted it I had another go and it worked. I haven't tried it in a year or so. I'd say one of the updates must have fixed the problem.

[nzspokes]

Well, what do you know? Since you highlighted it I had another go and it worked. I haven't tried it in a year or so. I'd say one of the updates must have fixed the problem.

Glad you don't work on my computers.

[swbarnett]

Glad you don't work on my computers.
I wouldn't know much about them anyway. I have absolutely no background in Windows. I work on enterprise level storage systems.

[bogan]

ABS gives you the ability to move the bike under hard braking or even turn a little. It does not do anything until it detects a slip.

Years ago I had a car pull out on me on a highway. I was in an old VS Commodore doing 100kph. Im somewhat of a trained driver. The ABS gave me the chance to brake hard and turn the car to clear the car that pulled out on me. I would have hit it in a car that did not have ABS even if I used threshold braking.

Ever seen a car do a stoppie?

If ABS wants to allow me to turn it better bloody well kick in before it detects slippage :sweatdrop

[R650R]

Back to topic another thread as reminded me of something.
The problem right at the start is we make a big fuss about getting a license after passing the test its treated like some crowning #$%^@* achievement in life, almost as good and 'skillful' as winning the lotto.
We should change it to a 'check' that you can operate to the required standard and are a suitable person to be in charge of one eg no criminal history or nutbars (why do we allow crims to have access to a tool to help shift drugs/stolen goods?) At any moment you could have your approval to operate a vehicle revoked indefinitely if your driving in a manner not of the required standard.
It would work a along the lines of the 85th percentile, anyone not driving like the others gets pulled, no need for fancy technology or signposts everywhere, just take it back to community level respect for locals and road conditions.

[Big Dog]

Ever seen a car do a stoppie?

If ABS wants to allow me to turn it better bloody well kick in before it detects slippage :sweatdrop

Seen a few vans / trucks do them.
Higher an more forward COM.


Stupid phone / Tapatalk, apologies in advance.

[swbarnett]

eg no criminal history
You don't want anyone to be able to turn their life around, do you?


At any moment you could have your approval to operate a vehicle revoked indefinitely if your driving in a manner not of the required standard.
The problem with with is that the standard will change from year to year. As with anything, society evolves (or devolves, depending on your point of view).


It would work a along the lines of the 85th percentile, anyone not driving like the others gets pulled
So, if I'm the only lemming that isn't jumping I'm the one that's targeted. Simply because an action is performed by the majority does not mean it's the sensible course of action. Rubber-necking is a perfect example.

[The Reibz]

Ever seen a car do a stoppie?
I was in a van that did one a few months ago, it was a beautiful thing

[bluninja]

What...like this?
http://youtu.be/FD1PXzA7DEI

[R650R]

You don't want anyone to be able to turn their life around, do you?


The problem with with is that the standard will change from year to year. As with anything, society evolves (or devolves, depending on your point of view).


So, if I'm the only lemming that isn't jumping I'm the one that's targeted. Simply because an action is performed by the majority does not mean it's the sensible course of action. Rubber-necking is a perfect example.

I don't know about turning lives around, rehabs not a speciality of mine. But repeat offenders seem to doa fine job of turning other people lives upside down by using cars to flee burglaries with peoples belongings or in the latest case here in the bay, a hit and run on cop at checkpoint....

The 'standard' would work much the way police do now, they already pick out the anxious driver wizzing in and out of lanes, accelerating rapidly etc.... All that would change is less paperwork, no roadside pedantic arguments over how many km/h or how long the skid mark was. Just hey mate your driving's shit! "Yeah Iknow I'm sorry, write me out the ticket"...

Don't start me on rubber necking! You are actually required by law to do that. When passing an accident scene you MUST by law slow to 20km/h if the police accident signs out, of course this creates a tailback. And if your already been held up and only doing 20 you may as well look out the window as you pass.

[swbarnett]

I don't know about turning lives around, rehabs not a speciality of mine. But repeat offenders seem to doa fine job of turning other people lives upside down by using cars to flee burglaries with peoples belongings or in the latest case here in the bay, a hit and run on cop at checkpoint....
So what you're saying is you want more of this? Accepting that people can and do change is one requirement of a compassionate society and reduces the overall number of offenders.


The 'standard' would work much the way police do now, they already pick out the anxious driver wizzing in and out of lanes, accelerating rapidly etc.... All that would change is less paperwork, no roadside pedantic arguments over how many km/h or how long the skid mark was. Just hey mate your driving's shit! "Yeah Iknow I'm sorry, write me out the ticket"...
Some driving is so bad as to be judged accurately from a 5 second observation. Then there's that in the middle that may look bad at a casual observation but is in actual fact perfectly fine. The one thing that can't be judged from outside is the state of mind of the driver/rider. It's usually the good little boys and girls "toeing the line" that are the most dangerous as they are generally the most distracted.


Don't start me on rubber necking! You are actually required by law to do that. When passing an accident scene you MUST by law slow to 20km/h if the police accident signs out,
Surely not if the accident is on the far side of a divided motorway?

[nzspokes]

So what you're saying is you want more of this? Accepting that people can and do change is one requirement of a compassionate society and reduces the overall number of offenders.



So does a bullet which is a permanent solution.

[swbarnett]

So does a bullet which is a permanent solution.
True in the individual case but it's likely to lead to more crime in the long run.