Crash statistics

[Hads]

Hi,

Long time no post, I just crunched some numbers on crash statistics, thought you may find it interesting.

References:

http://www.transport.govt.nz/assets/Uploads/Research/Documents/Motor-Vehicle-Crashes-2013/Motor-vehicle-crashes-in-New-Zealand-2013.pdf
http://www.transport.govt.nz/ourwork/tmif/transport-volume/tv034/






totals



Averages






Total KM's driven
Injuries/deaths
Death
Serious Injury
Minor Injury
per death
per serious Injury
per minor injury
injured or die


Car,Truck,Bus,Taxi
40021000000
6569
126
795
5780
317,626,984
50,340,881
6,924,048
6,092,404


Motorcycle
351000000
1188
38
345
768
9,236,842
1,017,391
457,031
295,455








34.4
49.5
15.2
20.6



EDIT: I actually took the deaths and injuries from all other injuries, makes the odds a bit worse, IE 34 x more likely to be killed in a motorcycle accident compared to any other type of accident. (not including pedestrians and bycycles)

[rastuscat]

Interesting things stats, but nothing beats a picture. There are two pages, the second one is actually more detailed.

312047

Amongst other items of note, the road to Akaroa is obvious, but not as bad as one might think.

Still the worst risk is crossing and turning crashes in the built up areas. The intersection which used to be the QE2/Marshland Roundabout really sticks out. That's why the money was spent to change it to lights.

Stats are for 2010 to 2014, from memory.

[Scuba_Steve]

Hey look there's me, I'm a stat! Glad to have done my part... Can't believe I only died 38 times tho, I'm sure it was more

[rastuscat]

Hey look there's me, I'm a stat! Glad to have done my part... Can't believe I only died 38 times tho, I'm sure it was more

Cheers for your effort Skoober. Saves us having to die to keep the numbers up.

[caspernz]

The stats sure as hell are sobering.

The main question would be what does one do with them?

I mean, how exactly does one convince those who are risk tolerant to become a little more risk averse? :facepalm:

[rastuscat]

The stats sure as hell are sobering.

The main question would be what does one do with them?

I mean, how exactly does one convince those who are risk tolerant to become a little more risk averse? :facepalm:

And that, McCoy, is the zillion dollar question.

Those who accept the risk and mitigate it are less likely to be the risk.

Those who are so shit hot and who get to blame everyone else for their issues don't accept the risk (it doesn't apply to them, see), so don't see a need to allow for it.

It's a bit like the voluntary training conundrum. Those who seek out training already have expressed a safety mentality. Those who don't need training are often those who need it most.

[caspernz]

And that, McCoy, is the zillion dollar question.

Those who accept the risk and mitigate it are less likely to be the risk.

Those who are so shit hot and who get to blame everyone else for their issues don't accept the risk (it doesn't apply to them, see), so don't see a need to allow for it.

It's a bit like the voluntary training conundrum. Those who seek out training already have expressed a safety mentality. Those who don't need training are often those who need it most.

Well yeah RTC it was pretty much a rhetorical question I posed of course. The one thing I try and do is to lead by example when out and about, whether this be on 2, 4 or lots more wheels.

[Scuba_Steve]

Cheers for your effort Skoober. Saves us having to die to keep the numbers up.

Just doing my bit for the community (this does count as community service, right?)

[Hads]

These haven't put me off riding, however what I found really interesting is 2/3 of the accidents are caused by the motorbike, additionally the most common reason is loss of control on a right hand turn. For that year at least.

[swbarnett]

I suspect that the real story is not as bad as these statistics make it look. What would really be of interest is what these figures would look like between motorcycles and cars.

I can believe that we are way more at risk than truck drivers. But so are car drivers. The fact that all other road users are lumped together very much clouds the results and essentially renders any analysis of the quoted reports meaningless. Which, I guess, was the intent of the authors - they were "sound men" in the words of Humphrey Appleby.

[Hads]

It would be easy enough to break it down to just cars. I just combined them together because I was comparing against all road users

[Hads]

Number of KM's driven isn't classified quite the same as the crash stats so I have guessed at a couple of things, but see the image below for comparison against passenger cars. Do note this doesn't include passengers, as often motorcycles don't have passengers.

http://s16.postimg.org/b0whxj3k5/mbike_crashstats.jpg

[Erelyes]

It would be easy enough to break it down to just cars. I just combined them together because I was comparing against all road users

Would make sense to me and I'd be interested to see just a car vs bike comparison. Truck drivers are thoroughly trained and monitored and do very high kms, so do skew the view. Car drivers get their licence and typically don't train for another decade or two, and do lower kms.

[Erelyes]

Do note this doesn't include passengers, as often motorcycles don't have passengers.

Ooof. Don't agree with that. Two people travelling by bike may mean two motorcycles, and only one crashes and becomes a stat (or both do, and both do). Passengers should be included.

[Banditbandit]

I mean, how exactly does one convince those who are risk tolerant to become a little more risk averse? :facepalm:

Some of us ride because it is an increased risk over car usage ... we are risk takers ...

Also, some of us ride because of pure rebellion - and riding in an illegal manner (speed mainly) and what people assume is an unsafe manner IS the rebellious act ..

How do you make us more risk averse??? You can't ...

[caspernz]

Some of us ride because it is an increased risk over car usage ... we are risk takers ...

Also, some of us ride because of pure rebellion - and riding in an illegal manner (speed mainly) and what people assume is an unsafe manner IS the rebellious act ..

How do you make us more risk averse??? You can't ...

And therein lies part of the problem...

[swbarnett]

Number of KM's driven isn't classified quite the same as the crash stats so I have guessed at a couple of things, but see the image below for comparison against passenger cars. Do note this doesn't include passengers, as often motorcycles don't have passengers.
Interesting. I had a quick look at the documents last night but couldn't find the data (should've been in bed hours before...).

As Erelyes said, would be good to add passengers in as well. This would be a more accurate figure as to the risk to any car occupant. If cars have more people per car this does add to the risk (number of potential corpses) over a driver-only vehicle.

BTW: Guessing isn't a good idea when quoting statistics. Especially when you don't say what figures were estimated. It definitely lowers the value of the analysis.

[swbarnett]

And therein lies part of the problem...
I think that the real solution to the problem of the disproportionate injury and death rate for motorcycles is more of them. If motorcycles start being seen as a valid form of transport for the masses then it will attract more of the risk averse and thus skew the stats away from the risk seekers.

[caspernz]

I think that the real solution to the problem of the disproportionate injury and death rate for motorcycles is more of them. If motorcycles start being seen as a valid form of transport for the masses then it will attract more of the risk averse and thus skew the stats away from the risk seekers.

And the starting point might be tolls for one occupant cars on motorways during peak times, with transit lanes for motorcycles.

[Scuba_Steve]

Some of us ride because it is an increased risk over car usage ... we are risk takers ...

Also, some of us ride because of pure rebellion - and riding in an illegal manner (speed mainly) and what people assume is an unsafe manner IS the rebellious act ..

How do you make us more risk averse??? You can't ...

Guy Martin's said as much on a few occasions


I still love motorbike racing – I love it because it can kill you; that’s why I do it. But the mountain bike racing I do for the mental side.

[How can you love something because it can kill you?]

Well, everything in the world has been bloody sanitised with health and safety, hasn’t it. There isn’t really anything left in the world where you can go out and actually kill yourself. I like being in control of my own destiny, really. You can go out racing on your bike, make one little mistake, and that’s it: you’re dead. I love all that. Being so near yet so far.

[baffa]

It's never going to be a great comparison when you can crash a modern car into a post at 70 kph and walk away unharmed.

I'd love to see some insurance stats on cars vs motorbikes vs vans and light trucks, as to show the ratio of at fault to severe losses (and injury).

[Hads]

Ooof. Don't agree with that. Two people travelling by bike may mean two motorcycles, and only one crashes and becomes a stat (or both do, and both do). Passengers should be included.

I didn't include pillions either.

[Banditbandit]

I think that the real solution to the problem of the disproportionate injury and death rate for motorcycles is more of them. If motorcycles start being seen as a valid form of transport for the masses then it will attract more of the risk averse and thus skew the stats away from the risk seekers.

That would do wonders for the percentage stats - but the number of actual motorcycle crashes, injuries and deaths would increase.

[Hads]

I wondered, has it been improving?

So I checked this, 4 grpahs below, higher is better(ie higher number of km's on average per crash)

http://s7.postimg.org/gz07jd3tn/stat_graphs.jpg

[Zedder]

I wondered, has it been improving?

So I checked this, 4 grpahs below, higher is better(ie higher number of km's on average per crash)

http://s7.postimg.org/gz07jd3tn/stat_graphs.jpg


If other factors, such as alcohol and excessive speed etc have been mitigated then yes.

[Jantar]

These haven't put me off riding, however what I found really interesting is 2/3 of the accidents are caused by the motorbike, additionally the most common reason is loss of control on a right hand turn. For that year at least.
As a comparison, when you look at light passenger vehicle accidents how many of these are caused by the driver?

[FJRider]

If other factors ....

Statistics prove some have died on our roads. And indicate many more will too ...


So ... be safe ... not a statistic ...

[FJRider]

I mean, how exactly does one convince those who are risk tolerant to become a little more risk averse? :facepalm:

Simple really ... It won't happen to ME ...;)

[FJRider]

As a comparison, when you look at light passenger vehicle accidents how many of these are caused by the driver?


If it's not the driver at (some) fault .. it must have been the passengers fault ... Barstard ... <_<

[Zedder]

Statistics prove some have died on our roads. And indicate many more will too ...


So ... be safe ... not a statistic ...

Well yeah, but that's not my point.

[FJRider]

Well yeah, but that's not my point.

There was a point to your post .. ??? :blink:

[98tls]

:facepalm:Isnt the internet a grand thing eh:wacko:Tonight we have a bunch of motorcyclists talking crash statistics;)Handy as crash stats:zzzz:Have no fear lads chances are you will know when you have one and stats will be the least of your worries.

[Zedder]

There was a point to your post .. ??? :blink:

Don't be so FJRider, there's missing information.

[FJRider]

Don't be so FJRider

I have to be FJRider ... it's in my profile ... :(


there's missing information.

So why didn't you post it then ... ??? ;)

[Zedder]

I have to be FJRider ... it's in my profile ... :(

So why didn't you post it then ... ??? ;)

Because I haven't got it. The graphs aren't the full story.

Look up "ceteris paribus" and get back to me after reading my post included with the graphs again.

[FJRider]

Because I haven't got it. The graphs aren't the full story.

Look up "ceteris paribus" and get back to me after reading my post included with the graphs again.

Posting half the story is never good. Unless you agree with what is inferred with that half story.

Nah ... can't be fucked ...

[Zedder]

Posting half the story is never good. Unless you agree with what is inferred with that half story.

Nah ... can't be fucked ...

I trust that means you can't be fucked agreeing with what is inferred by a half story.

[FJRider]

:facepalm:Isnt the internet a grand thing eh:wacko:Tonight we have a bunch of motorcyclists talking crash statistics;)Handy as crash stats:zzzz:Have no fear lads chances are you will know when you have one and stats will be the least of your worries.

'tis indeed ...

Statistics only prove what the statistision wants to prove.

[FJRider]

I trust that means you can't be fucked agreeing with what is inferred by a half story.

TRUE ... it's only half right ... :calm:

[FJRider]

..Tonight we have a bunch of motorcyclists talking crash statistics;)

AND ... Zedder ... :lol:

[Zedder]

AND ... Zedder ... :lol:

Oi! I'm a motorcyclist too.

[FJRider]

Oi! I'm a motorcyclist too.

Really ... I would never have known ... :blank:

[Zedder]

Really ... I would never have known ... :blank:

Bringing your old motto back?

[swbarnett]

...the number of actual motorcycle crashes, injuries and deaths would increase.
Two things would happen:

1. Congestion would be drastically reduced
2. Car drivers would be more motorcycle aware

This may mean that the opposite would be the case.

[Hads]

What the chart shows but doesn't prove is that proportionally the number of accidents of all types of injury are reducing, which I would guess would mean that it is possible road improvements and driver training may be contributing to improved rider safety.

It isn't improving as fast as cars however, but this is expected as cars have things like air bags.

[Hads]

Reason I put these charts together is I was interested in seeing how different it was when compared to the usual metric, number of crashes vs number of motorcycles. It has shown what I thought was the case, there was a larger factor of difference between car crashes and motorcycle crashes when using average km's driven vs the usual number of vehicles in fleet.

My thought was that a lot of people own motorbikes and only drive them about 1000km a year at most, whereas car drivers it is common to have them driven 10000km or more.

[Zedder]

What the chart shows but doesn't prove is that proportionally the number of accidents of all types of injury are reducing, which I would guess would mean that it is possible road improvements and driver training may be contributing to improved rider safety.

It isn't improving as fast as cars however, but this is expected as cars have things like air bags.

Yep, it's that other data I'm interested in:Road improvements, rider training, law enforcement activity etc.

[TheDemonLord]

My thought was that a lot of people own motorbikes and only drive them about 1000km a year at most, whereas car drivers it is common to have them driven 10000km or more.

There are all sorts of things you can read into about the above:

For some of NZs Motorcyclists, Motorcycling is a Fun, Fair weather activity - meaning that they only ride for a few weekend each summer - long periods of time spent not riding and very little time spent re-sharpening skills
For some of NZs Motorcyclists, Going for a ride means having fun on the corners on the open road, often on a 1000cc+ beast
For some of NZs Motorcyclists, a motorbike is more about the image or realisation of a dream as opposed from a desire to be a competent and safe motorcyclist
For some of NZs Motorcyclists, a motorbike isn't an everyday vehicle in the same way that a car is an everyday vehicle

Now, I am not saying that any of the above is bad, but if you consider that you might do 20-30000 km driving a car in a year and all the experianced gained, compare to only 1000-2000 Km a year on a bike (also with all the experiance gained) is it much wonder that we are more than 10 times more likely to suffer an accident?

Of those that ride - how many here can say that you ride your bike everyday, or that you consistently put in more than 10000 km a year on your bikes?

[Hads]

Speaking for myself, I commute on my bike about 50km each way, so clock up about 20000 ish km in a year, but I suspect that isn't the norm.

[Zedder]

Speaking for myself, I commute on my bike about 50km each way, so clock up about 20000 ish km in a year, but I suspect that isn't the norm.

I don't commute, but mostly go for rides of 180 kms each week "out of town" so you can see the difference.

[Hads]

I don't commute, but mostly go for rides of 180 kms each week "out of town" so you can see the difference.

Difference being you do fewer km's per week? You are more careful? Yes it is different, but I don't know why it needed to be stated? I suspect I'm missing something here.

[Zedder]

Difference being you do fewer km's per week? You are more careful? Yes it is different, but I don't know why it needed to be stated? I suspect I'm missing something here.

It's not a "pissing contest" if that's what you think. Just comparing your higher kms and commuting with longer rides and not commuting.

Different conditions, different riding styles, different skills brought into play.

[TheDemonLord]

It's not a "pissing contest" if that's what you think. Just comparing your higher kms and commuting with longer rides and not commuting.

Different conditions, different riding styles, different skills brought into play.

Yes and no - Commuting is still riding - it still utilizes the basic bike handling skills, it still practices Hazard awareness and identification, and if you are commuting in AKL - Emergency braking and emergency swerving :yes::yes::yes:

Granted though, I never get the pegs down when commuting - but that is only a small part of ones motorcycling skill (existing at the upper 10-20% of your riding toolbox)

[Zedder]

Yes and no - Commuting is still riding - it still utilizes the basic bike handling skills, it still practices Hazard awareness and identification, and if you are commuting in AKL - Emergency braking and emergency swerving :yes::yes::yes:

Granted though, I never get the pegs down when commuting - but that is only a small part of ones motorcycling skill (existing at the upper 10-20% of your riding toolbox)


Hads' original premise is though, higher kms are better. My premise is, there are other factors involved.

[Hads]

Living down a gravel road and out of the city, I get to experience lots of riding conditions, from black ice to strong winds. I probably don't as often experience the windy hills that recreational bikers do.

[Hads]

Hads' original premise is though, higher kms are better. My premise is, there are other factors involved.

Nope, never a premise, more that there will be fewer crashes with fewer km's travelled, which makes number of vehicles an inaccurate estimate of risk.

[Zedder]

Nope, never a premise, more that there will be fewer crashes with fewer km's travelled, which makes number of vehicles an inaccurate estimate of risk.

Your post number 24 states higher is better.

[Hads]

Your post number 24 states higher is better.

It was referring to the graphs, a higher average number of km's was better. If someone glanced at the charts it may have been confusing, as they could be lead to believe riders were getting worse, which didn't seem to be the case.

[Zedder]

It was referring to the graphs, a higher average number of km's was better. If someone glanced at the charts it may have been confusing, as they could be lead to believe riders were getting worse, which didn't seem to be the case.

It wasn't confusing to me at all. I read what you posted along with the graphs and they concur. Your premise is therefore higher kms are better.

[pritch]

We didn't used to have a riding season in this country, as they do in colder climes. The increased ACC levy has changed that to a degree, many people put their rego on hold over the winter months with a consequent signficant drop in their motorcycling mileage.

Is it possible therefore that the increase in ACC levies has made motorcyclists less safe? :whistle:

[TheDemonLord]

Hads' original premise is though, higher kms are better. My premise is, there are other factors involved.

I would put that Higher Kms are better - I grant that other factors are involved - but if one were to take a large enough sample size and compare riders who regurlarly did high Kms on their bikes and compared them to riders who didn't, then worked out injuries per Km travelled, I would put forward that those who did higher Kms would fare better than those who didn't.

would be interesting to see some solid data though - I could be wrong - but the habits of riders who ride everyday compared to those who just ride in the summer/for fun would tend to suggest my hypothesis is correct.

[Hads]

We didn't used to have a riding season in this country, as they do in colder climes. The increased ACC levy has changed that to a degree, many people put their rego on hold over the winter months with a consequent signficant drop in their motorcycling mileage.

Is it possible therefore that the increase in ACC levies has made motorcyclists less safe? :whistle:

Statistics from 2007 to 2013 would imply not, riding in winter is more dangerous than summer.

[Hads]

I would put that Higher Kms are better - I grant that other factors are involved - but if one were to take a large enough sample size and compare riders who regurlarly did high Kms on their bikes and compared them to riders who didn't, then worked out injuries per Km travelled, I would put forward that those who did higher Kms would fare better than those who didn't.

would be interesting to see some solid data though - I could be wrong - but the habits of riders who ride everyday compared to those who just ride in the summer/for fun would tend to suggest my hypothesis is correct.

Unfortunately I don't think it goes to that kind of detail, I would presume possibly because gathering it would be difficult considering the number of kms driven isn't even in the same publication of data.

[Zedder]

I would put that Higher Kms are better - I grant that other factors are involved - but if one were to take a large enough sample size and compare riders who regurlarly did high Kms on their bikes and compared them to riders who didn't, then worked out injuries per Km travelled, I would put forward that those who did higher Kms would fare better than those who didn't.

would be interesting to see some solid data though - I could be wrong - but the habits of riders who ride everyday compared to those who just ride in the summer/for fun would tend to suggest my hypothesis is correct.


If you start from my first post (number 25) you'll hopefully see what I mean.

[swbarnett]

Of those that ride - how many here can say that you ride your bike everyday, or that you consistently put in more than 10000 km a year on your bikes?
I'll put my hand up. I commute daily Tuakau to Auckland CBD and still ride the odd weekend and when on holiday. 30,000km+ annually. There is no way in hell I'm 30 times more likely to die or be seriously injured on a bike than in a car. More likely perhaps (even this is debatable) but certainly not by that much.


if you consider that you might do 20-30000 km driving a car in a year and all the experianced gained, compare to only 1000-2000 Km a year on a bike (also with all the experiance gained) is it much wonder that we are more than 10 times more likely to suffer an accident?
True. I would love to see these stats split into "serious daily riders" and "weekend warriors".

[baffa]

Actually, I want to see scooter stats vs motorbike stats.

Or dirt bikes vs road bikes

[rustic101]

I'll put my hand up. I commute daily Tuakau to Auckland CBD and still ride the odd weekend and when on holiday. 30,000km+ annually. There is no way in hell I'm 30 times more likely to die or be seriously injured on a bike than in a car. More likely perhaps (even this is debatable) but certainly not by that much.


True. I would love to see these stats split into "serious daily riders" and "weekend warriors".


Add to that sessional riders as there seem to be more crashes in summer. I could be wrong and base that of my observations as have no data.

[OddDuck]

The stats sure as hell are sobering.

The main question would be what does one do with them?

I mean, how exactly does one convince those who are risk tolerant to become a little more risk averse? :facepalm:

Yeah, good luck with that... It's brain wiring and emotion. If the wiring isn't there then they aren't able to assess risk correctly (pretty well known with under 25's, usually guys). Emotion is another story and can affect any of us, just see what happens to me after a couple of k's behind a pensioner.

My pet theory on it is that crazy guys score hot chicks and have kids. There's always going to be some loose units running around the place.

[TheDemonLord]

I'll put my hand up. I commute daily Tuakau to Auckland CBD and still ride the odd weekend and when on holiday. 30,000km+ annually. There is no way in hell I'm 30 times more likely to die or be seriously injured on a bike than in a car. More likely perhaps (even this is debatable) but certainly not by that much.

I agree, but would rephrase slightly:

You're less likely to have the accident in the first place due to riding daily and constantly using your hazard awareness etc. - that said if you were to actually have the accident - you probably would suffer more injuries of greater severity than if you had the same accident whilst in a car.....



True. I would love to see these stats split into "serious daily riders" and "weekend warriors".

Me too - it would make for some interesting discussion about both Motorcycling in NZ and the Culture of NZ riders.

[Hads]

They do break it down by age though, 20 - 24 have the most accidents, not sure though if that is relevant, as there might be more riders in that age bracket.

[Night Falcon]

Here's a more alarming statistic: 1 out of every 1 person dies regardless of weather they ride a motorcycle or not.

[98tls]

Here's a more alarming statistic: 1 out of every 1 person dies regardless of weather they ride a motorcycle or not.

Weather has a lot to answer for,i blame Huey.....

[rastuscat]

Statistics from 2007 to 2013 would imply not, riding in winter is more dangerous than summer.

I'd contend that that fact is due to lesser daylight, and I suspect an increase in SMIDSY crashes as a result.

While riders can influence the likelihood of SMIDSYs they are still the fault of the opposing driver.

So if suggest that a seasonal increase in crashes at a time when many riders have garaged their bikes is not an indicator of riding ability, rather the tendency of other road users not to see motorcyclists and cyclists being aggravated by the reduced daylight.

[rastuscat]

Me too - it would make for some interesting discussion about both Motorcycling in NZ and the Culture of NZ riders.

Really interesting topic right there. About culture, of which demographics would be an interesting thread.

The motorcycling demographic that polarises a lot of people is the Power Ranger on the bike model ending with lots of Rs. The bike that comes out once a week or less often, and which won't operate unless the rider has matching leathers with a back protector and sliders all over. And of course a helmet with The Doctor splashed across it.

I've always been more a fan of The Cure, than of The Doctor.

Sunday comes, they dress up like Valentino Rossi, and ride on public roads as if in qualifying for a local GP.

I've always been dim on those, as all it takes to join that crowd is a big cheque book and an ego to match.

Of course there are those in that group who are totally skilled and risk averse, but sadly they get lumped in with the rest.

They seem to be the ones with the Go Pro obsession too. Both to record their own exploits and those of other people who they want to capture doing dumb stuff so they can post it on social media.

Just venting really.

[Zedder]

Here's a more alarming statistic: 1 out of every 1 person dies regardless of weather they ride a motorcycle or not.

Please supply deaths data and weather charts for the last 12 months.

[Ocean1]

Or dirt bikes vs road bikes

Why? If you're not crashing your dirt bike regularly you're not doing it right.

[Zedder]

Really interesting topic right there. About culture, of which demographics would be an interesting thread.

The motorcycling demographic that polarises a lot of people is the Power Ranger on the bike model ending with lots of Rs. The bike that comes out once a week or less often, and which won't operate unless the rider has matching leathers with a back protector and sliders all over. And of course a helmet with The Doctor splashed across it.

I've always been more a fan of The Cure, than of The Doctor.

Sunday comes, they dress up like Valentino Rossi, and ride on public roads as if in qualifying for a local GP.

I've always been dim on those, as all it takes to join that crowd is a big cheque book and an ego to match.

Of course there are those in that group who are totally skilled and risk averse, but sadly they get lumped in with the rest.

They seem to be the ones with the Go Pro obsession too. Both to record their own exploits and those of other people who they want to capture doing dumb stuff so they can post it on social media.

Just venting really.

Lol rtc, very interesting post. You've probably well earned the right to the venting.

[rastuscat]

Lol rtc, very interesting post. You've probably well earned the right to the venting.

Wait til I no longer wear the blue suit. When I can vent without fear of the IPCA.

[Zedder]

Wait til I no longer wear the blue suit. When I can vent without fear of the IPCA.

I can almost see the blue layers peeling off from here now. Will you be selling tickets to the "show"?

[iaingsx1300r]

[QUOTE=rastuscat;1130865954]Really interesting topic right there. About culture, of which demographics would be an interesting thread.

The motorcycling demographic that polarises a lot of people is the Power Ranger on the bike model ending with lots of Rs. The bike that comes out once a week or less often, and which won't operate unless the rider has matching leathers with a back protector and sliders all over. And of course a helmet with The Doctor splashed across it.

Have to disagree there. The majority of Fknuckles I see on sunny weekend jaunts are those on cruisers. These are the clowns (many exceptions of course) most likely to barrel up the inside lane at warp speed and overtake all and sundry on blind corners. I'm still saving for the 'R' version of my bike so I'll reserve judgement as to how that will affect my riding.

[rastuscat]

[QUOTE=rastuscat;1130865954]Really interesting topic right there. About culture, of which demographics would be an interesting thread.

The motorcycling demographic that polarises a lot of people is the Power Ranger on the bike model ending with lots of Rs. The bike that comes out once a week or less often, and which won't operate unless the rider has matching leathers with a back protector and sliders all over. And of course a helmet with The Doctor splashed across it.

Have to disagree there. The majority of Fknuckles I see on sunny weekend jaunts are those on cruisers. These are the clowns (many exceptions of course) most likely to barrel up the inside lane at warp speed and overtake all and sundry on blind corners. I'm still saving for the 'R' version of my bike so I'll reserve judgement as to how that will affect my riding.

The cruiser crowd will be a topic of a future rant. As will the Tallulah riders of pretty scooters while wearing a skirt, no gloves and a pair of WW1 goggles.

Does anyone have that list of the various motorcycle demographics? I'll give them all a serve, except the one I'm in, of course. This is KB.

[Night Falcon]

Please supply deaths data and weather charts for the last 12 months.

The deaths data is still being gathered....just when ya think you've got it totalled another one pops off.


The weather data is solely dependant on whether the weather guy can weather the weather to deliver the weather data, as he's busy this time of year with his wether's. So in short, the data is dependant on whether the weather guys wether's are weathering the weather or whether they will wilt and wither in the weather.

[Zedder]

The deaths data is still being gathered....just when ya think you've got it totalled another one pops off.


The weather data is solely dependant on whether the weather guy can weather the weather to deliver the weather data, as he's busy this time of year with his wether's. So in short, the data is dependant on whether the weather guys wether's are weathering the weather or whether they will wilt and wither in the weather.


Lol, just don't delete the deaths data dude.

[swbarnett]

Why? If you're not crashing your dirt bike regularly you're not doing it right.
Which is a good reason to remove dirt bikes from the stats.

[eldog]

Which is a good reason to remove dirt bikes from the stats.

absolutely

should we also remove those accidents that occurred which weren't on the road too? - Adventure/gravel riders. Race track etc.

[swbarnett]

absolutely

should we also remove those accidents that occurred which weren't on the road too? - Adventure/gravel riders. Race track etc.
To draw a comparison to the average road-going car (which is what is really important for ACC cost relativity) then, as you say, absolutely.

[eldog]

To draw a comparison to the average road-going car (which is what is really important for ACC cost relativity) then, as you say, absolutely.

got to compare apples with apples

do the stats include, off road cars, etc etc etc.

[eldog]

[QUOTE=iaingsx1300r;1130865972]topic of a future rant the Tallulah riders of pretty scooters while wearing no skirt, gloves and a pair of WW1 goggles. This is KB.

Fixed it for ya RC - this is KB right :niceone:

[Erelyes]

Here's a more alarming statistic: 1 out of every 1 person dies regardless of weather they ride a motorcycle or not.

Statistically, out of 107 billion people that have ever lived, 7 billion are still alive.

[swbarnett]

got to compare apples with apples
Agreed.


do the stats include, off road cars, etc etc etc.
Probably. Would be good to see all categories broken down as much as possible.


Or.... We could make this whole discussion null an void and just evenly distribute the ACC cost via income tax. This is, of course, the main reason that most people are interested in these stats.

Of course there is the other salient point that it matters not if motorcyclists are 100 times more likely to kill themselves than car drivers. Charging motorcyclists more is just ideological prejudice. You don't see mountain climbers or sky divers charged according to the risk involved in their chosen activity.

[swbarnett]

Its physical size that puts us more at risk than trucks and buses
My physical size (and maneuverability) when riding has allowed me to escape to safety where a car or truck could not. Only once since I started riding in 1982 has it gotten me into any kind of trouble.


its not rocket science.
No, rocket science is actually simpler.

[swbarnett]

Statistically, out of 107 billion people that have ever lived, 7 billion are still alive.
And that's about 6 billion or more too many. Why are we all so worried about losing a few more and doing the human race a favour? Besides, it's better to live a short, happy life than a long, safe and boring one.

[FJRider]

Its physical size that puts us more at risk than trucks and buses its not rocket science. We should not necessarily be paying higher ACC than other motorists because of it though.

Here was I thinking ... It was lack of physical size that does not help us .... And the lack of a steel cage around us ... <_<

[FJRider]

... No, rocket science is actually simpler.

Yep ... light the fuse and hang on .. <_<

Oh wait .... that does sound like a Group Race ... oop's RIDE ... :innocent:

[eldog]

Agreed.


Probably. Would be good to see all categories broken down as much as possible.


Or.... We could make this whole discussion null an void and just evenly distribute the ACC cost via income tax. This is, of course, the main reason that most people are interested in these stats.

Of course there is the other salient point that it matters not if motorcyclists are 100 times more likely to kill themselves than car drivers. Charging motorcyclists more is just ideological prejudice. You don't see mountain climbers or sky divers charged according to the risk involved in their chosen activity.

We are an easy target......
easy to say we are unsafe, look at accident rate(not all accidents caused by mbikes but involve them, road, cars, drunks etc.)
easy to put cost in rego
Easy political & media target

need to make it harder for 'them' to pin stuff onto us.
maybe include cost in fuel tax, replace the upcoming tax reduction by increasing ACC part in fuel and keeping cost the same. (no one will notice aye)
reduce cost for multiple bike regos if 1 can be on road or make them day rego on line-got to think outside square a bit

[eldog]

Here was I thinking ... It was lack of physical size that does not help us .... And the lack of a steel cage around us ... <_<


we could get a lot of air bags:scratch: most new cars have 5 or 7 or more
increase penalty for at fault cage drivers who injure mbike riders

[swbarnett]

We are an easy target......
easy to say we are unsafe, look at accident rate(not all accidents caused by mbikes but involve them, road, cars, drunks etc.)
easy to put cost in rego
Easy political & media target
Only because we are small in number. If we get more people riding we won't be such an easy target.


need to make it harder for 'them' to pin stuff onto us.
maybe include cost in fuel tax, replace the upcoming tax reduction by increasing ACC part in fuel and keeping cost the same. (no one will notice aye)
reduce cost for multiple bike regos if 1 can be on road or make them day rego on line-got to think outside square a bit
Just put the cost ACC where it belongs - in income tax. Solves the problem of ACC related motorcycle prejudice.

[baffa]

I assume scooters are included in the Motorcycle stats?

I'd love to see some sort of No Claims Dicount applied to ACC.
Crash your dirt bike, your car rego rises slightly.
Drive and ride without injuries for a year or three, all your regos drop slightly.
That way they don't prejudice your chosen transport and entertainment choices, just what you cost the system.

[swbarnett]

... just what you cost the system.
Why do you have insurance? By your reasoning everyone should be paying 100% of their own accident costs.

The whole point of insurance (and ACC) is to spread the risk because of the detrimental affects on society if people are left to pick up their own pieces.

[baffa]

Why do you have insurance? By your reasoning everyone should be paying 100% of their own accident costs.

The whole point of insurance (and ACC) is to spread the risk because of the detrimental affects on society if people are left to pick up their own pieces.

Not at all. After all Insurance is to offset risk, as most cannot afford or justify covering their own.
ACC is just a State owned insurance Company.
If a private insurance company charged premiums solely on what they perceived as high risk, without taking into account historic data and claims history, they would be pretty inefficient. It is one of the few industries allowed by the Human rights act to assess people based on factors such as age, gender, etc. I highly doubt you'd be happy to pay the same premium on insurance for your vehicle that a 19 year old with a history of serious accidents would pay.

[swbarnett]

Not at all. After all Insurance is to offset risk, as most cannot afford or justify covering their own.
Which is exactly what I said.


ACC is just a State owned insurance Company.
It's not supposed to be.


If a private insurance company charged premiums solely on what they perceived as high risk, without taking into account historic data and claims history, they would be pretty inefficient. It is one of the few industries allowed by the Human rights act to assess people based on factors such as age, gender, etc. I highly doubt you'd be happy to pay the same premium on insurance for your vehicle that a 19 year old with a history of serious accidents would pay.
If the premiums were spread evenly across everyone I would have no problem with it. I know mine would go up but I don't see why someone that partakes in "risky" behaviour should be penalised for it.

I'd like to see all insurance scrapped in favour of a Government run scheme similar to what ACC is supposed to be. That way the whole country carries the risk and pays pro-rata based on income. Kind of like an Amish barn raising ala "Witness".

[eldog]

Just put the cost ACC where it belongs - in income tax. Solves the problem of ACC related motorcycle prejudice.

income tax, how does this cover children, beneficeries, crims and those who work under the table?

I would think increase in ACC petrol tax would be a far greater coverage and spreader of ACC levies.
High power and large cc bikes use more petrol - supposed higher risk compared to low power low cc bikes.

only problem is non oil based fuels/energy sources.

do we need to look at electric bikes? what sort of risk? because they dont have a cc rating
what ACC do they pay for?

like you i dont mind spreading it around evenly, just somethings seem to be a higher risk (eg offroad riding) and they dont seem to pay directly apart from fuel.

i dont think there is a silver bullet and i havent researched it enough to be any kind of expert.

I was only looking at it from a multiple bike owner perspective

[eldog]

I have been in a few accidents in my time mostly through work.
Not claimed any ACC, no time off or major injuries. just simple things gone wrong.
Apart from my mbike accident, I got back on the bike and rode it home.

Didnt even get an xray when visited doc. My ACC I didnt even take time off.
Maybe I should have and become a greater crash stat.

Suggest everyone who has an accident to goto doctor and get ACC number just in case something goes wrong-later.

from the OP looks to me that we need to either reduce the number of deaths/accidents OR increase the number of k's we drive. If more bikes on road then less ks the cagers will have driven. Should we include the number of ks offroad and farm bikes travel if they (those involved in mbike accidents also include these types?) this would reduce it too.

I say we should ride more ks and get more action about roads (conditions) and mbike awareness - more stuff on bikes to make them stand out, not just fluro jackets, soon there will be so many, people will become blase about them and not see them. Still wont save those knocked about by poor driving/riding

those smallpulsing LED lights are the go. they are a good start.

[swbarnett]

income tax, how does this cover children, beneficeries, crims and those who work under the table?
Children are covered in the same way that they are for other things. Beneficiaries are getting a handout anyway so no big deal there. As for crims, they're a drain on society anyway so again, no real difference.

The same same argument could be made for public hospitals. They're funded out of income tax. I still think this is the fairest alternative we have.

[rastuscat]

There's a critical mass point that folk need to know about.

When there are enough motorcycles on the road, people driving other vehicles will learn to factor them into their driving. Until that number is reached, people don't expect to see them.

It's kind of self defeating. Until there are enough, it's less safe. Coz it's less safe, less will take up the option of riding. If more took it up, it'd be more safe.

It's the same for cycling. The argument there is that if you build a safer infrastructure for urban cycling, it'll increase the safety, which will increase the numbers, which will increase the safety.

There's safety in numbers, but not so much in the pack riding around as a group. It's the general saturation of motorcyclists in the general motoring population.

[Zedder]

There's a critical mass point that folk need to know about.

When there are enough motorcycles on the road, people driving other vehicles will learn to factor them into their driving. Until that number is reached, people don't expect to see them.

It's kind of self defeating. Until there are enough, it's less safe. Coz it's less safe, less will take up the option of riding. If more took it up, it'd be more safe.

It's the same for cycling. The argument there is that if you build a safer infrastructure for urban cycling, it'll increase the safety, which will increase the numbers, which will increase the safety.

There's safety in numbers, but not so much in the pack riding around as a group. It's the general saturation of motorcyclists in the general motoring population.

Although the Gubbermint and the AA are doing their best to keep motorcycling to a minimum.

[Banditbandit]

Of those that ride - how many here can say that you ride your bike everyday, or that you consistently put in more than 10000 km a year on your bikes?

I bought my 650 in 2007 with zero miles on the clock and my 1250 in 2009 with zero miles on the clock.

The speedo readings on both of my bikes indicate I have done a minimum of 127,000 in the last 8 years. (I sold a BMW in 2009, so I can't include the ks I did on that one between 2007 and 2009 - that's why the figure is a minimum).

So that's a minimum of 18,143 ks per year.

If I use those figures to estimate what I did on the BMW in two years (2007 to 2009) I get an average figure of more than 20,000 per year. And I know riders who would do more than double that in one year ...

[Hads]

Updated stats for 2014, let me know if you would like some more detail.

322604