Using LAMS approved bikes for full license test?

[Laz]

Ok, Been thinking, (Unusual) .. Why do people have to sit their restricted to full license on a LAMS approved bike? The said person is going to a full license which enables him/her to ride any goddamn bike they want to. My thoughts are said person should be able to sit that test on any bike they want.
Why do they have to sit it on a LAMS approved fartbox when a test pass allows them to ride a superbike? Which is immediate upon paying the fee and getting the paper license. I think people should be allowed to sit the full test on any bike they want, Be it their own or something they are going to be riding in the future. I think we should lobby the NZTA about getting this changed as it is putting riders used to low powered bikes (LAMS) straight on to powerful bikes they can't handle at risk. And yeah, This should be fun!http://www.kiwibiker.co.nz/forums/images/smilies/baby.gif

[Moi]

And what if they should happen to fail? Are they going to walk home?

[Laz]

Seriously, Why would you fail? That would just prove you're not ready to ride anything. The restricted test is actually longer than the full test.http://www.kiwibiker.co.nz/forums/images/smilies/bleh.gif

[swbarnett]

Are you kidding? So you're saying it's OK to ride a bike you're not legally allowed to ride just for the test? The test period is no different to any other time on the road, legally. You have to ride a bike you're licensed to ride.

[Moi]

You could fail for a number of reasons... so, if you fail what do you do?

Also, as you arrive on a restricted licence to undertake the test you have to ride a LAMs approved bike to the test...

[This last statement has already been said... jeez wayne this internet thingy is fast...]

[Laz]

You lot are missing the whole point! What I'm saying is, The law should be changed to allow a transition period to bigger bikes during the restricted license period. Car owners can drive any bloody thing they like with a restricted license. SHEESH! Nah, Not saying anymore. I'll get kicked off here if I do.

[Gremlin]

You lot are missing the whole point! What I'm saying is, The law should be changed to allow a transition period to bigger bikes during the restricted license period.
It's called...

LAMS

:weird:

As said... you are not legally allowed to ride anything non-LAMS/over 250 etc. until you have your full licence. It's exactly the same as a learner driver needing a supervisor when they drive to their restricted test. Perhaps there should be a transition period for that too?

[swbarnett]

You lot are missing the whole point!
In all fairness it wasn't very well stated.

This is better...

The law should be changed to allow a transition period to bigger bikes during the restricted license period.
The problem with this is the requirement for riders to be evaluated as to their readiness to move up by someone qualified to do so. That's what the current test is for.


Car owners can drive any bloody thing they like with a restricted license.
This is a different matter. More that car drives should be held to the same restrictions as motorcyclists.

[Laz]

It's called...

LAMS

:weird:

As said... you are not legally allowed to ride anything non-LAMS/over 250 etc. until you have your full licence. It's exactly the same as a learner driver needing a supervisor when they drive to their restricted test. Perhaps there should be a transition period for that too?

And after the restricted test they don't need a supervisor. Are you really that thick? Take someone with you = Simple.

PS: I don't give a Rats Arse if you are a moderator on this site, I'm not talking about Learners here. I'm talking about full licence.:(

[Laz]

In all fairness it wasn't very well stated.

This is better...

The problem with this is the requirement for riders to be evaluated as to their readiness to move up by someone qualified to do so. That's what the current test is for.


This is a different matter. More that car drives should be held to the same restrictions as motorcyclists.

Thank you, Maybe motorcyclists can transition into bigger bikes through the restricted period if they changed the law is what I'm saying.

[deerworrier]

as a current 6r holder I would rather see a system in place that allowed me to "speed up" the year wait by actually taking lessons from an instructor. im not entirely sure what the value of the year is? you rock up to a tennis court or the likes, spin around on a 125/250 for 12min then answer 30 questions that are laughable at best and your off, go get yourself a 660cc bike and take to the road, week later do your restricted and then.....nothing, just ride around for a year or more likely until the end of summer and then a few good days every now and then until the next test.
would it not be of more value to follow an almost car route where you take lessons and then when you and the instructor are happy you sit your full? at least this way rather than riding like a saint for 30min one time you can actually receive some tuition and learn a bit of roadcraft along the way.
I have taken 2x1hr rides since passing my restricted to gain some feedback on my road position, speed through corners, hazard observation and a general measure of my ability. I don't see how 12months or 3 makes any difference. the bronze ACC course (if anyone ever comes to taranaki to do 1) could the successful completion of this not be a measure of ability and count towards a reduction in the 12month period. it all seems rather arbitrary.

just my noob outlook as it were.

[nzspokes]

And after the restricted test they don't need a supervisor. Are you really that thick? Take someone with you = Simple.

PS: I don't give a Rats Arse if you are a moderator on this site, I'm not talking about Learners here. I'm talking about full licence.:(

For a start, try getting insurance on a bike you are not licenced to ride. Do you think all people sitting the full test should do it on a 1200?

BTW car licences will be changing soon to restrict motor size.

[AllanB]

I think you need to stop thinking ..........

Basically until they have completed and passed the test they are not legally permitted to ride a non LAMs approved bike. Very simple.

[Ulsterkiwi]

.....it all seems rather arbitrary......

and there we have it. At some point there will have to be a cut off otherwise the system becomes unworkable.

Yes a transition would be good but as others have said, decisions would have to be made about the progression and a rider's readiness to do so. The system in place has a transition of sorts, not perfect but an improvement on the previous one.

Its not what the OP was talking about but in my limited time and experience I have seen plenty of riders on powerful machines, with a licence and their skill set leaves something to be desired. The revisions in the licencing system have been as much about transitioning to a scenario where learning and applying roadcraft is a more integral part of the licencing process.

I also think to call learner bikes "fartboxes" is more than a bit inaccurate. There are quite a few machines out there which fall into the LAMS scheme and are more than capable. The common denominator of a well thought out LAMS bike is that they are lively enough at real world speeds, the power restrictions have more impact on the top speeds which should only be happening on the race track (and road licences do not matter). How long it takes to get to those speeds is less affected when bikes with lots low to mid range torque are produced, as they have been. So if its straight line speed then CC rules but who wants a bike to go in a straight line?

[TheDemonLord]

Buy a 650 CC LAMS bike.
*cough*derestrict it*cough*
Take test on full power 650
Pass full licence test with virtually no mistakes.
Buy Hayabusa.

Not that I did this of course.

[swbarnett]

Thank you, Maybe motorcyclists can transition into bigger bikes through the restricted period if they changed the law is what I'm saying.
In a way that's what we have now. Albeit very course. I certainly have some sympathy for a more granular system. When I l started riding in the '80s I came up in a number of deliberate cc steps - 125, 250, 400, 750. At each step I felt confident to make the move.

[swbarnett]

as a current 6r holder I would rather see a system in place that allowed me to "speed up" the year wait by actually taking lessons from an instructor.
When I got my license in the '80s I did a course at Western Springs (8 weekend sessions I think). After that I took the certificate to the MOT and they gave me a full license without even a test.

[pritch]

You lot are missing the whole point!

No you are. The tester will refuse to conduct the test because the bike is illegal. It would be illegal on the way to the test, during the test, and on the way home if you failed. That's not an anomoly that's just common sense. Although common sense is perhaps not as common as it should be.

As for the car licence situation that's just purely expedient. Imagine the howls if mum and dad had to by another car just so junior could learn how to drive. The farmers already squeal about the hardships the peasantry face in getting licences for their heirs, let alone having to buy another car.

Some young people sitting licences have completely unrealistic expectations, I have heard someone complaining because his offspring was failed without even driving because his car had an expired warrant. Another complained his son was failed without driving because the kid turned up for the test with bare feet.

It worries me that these dopey bastards will be driving now, but they probably didn't suddenly get any smarter. :whistle:

[Moi]

There is possibly some merit in a transition period AFTER you have passed your 6F, however how that transition period would be decided would need careful thought and control. In the meantime the rules are what they are and if you want to ride you then need to jump through the hoops that are there... it's like many things, a form of initiation...

Of course we could go down the path of many of the EU countries and restrict what you may ride even if you hold a "full" licence and require you to complete proper driving/riding lessons and pay many Euros for the privilege to drive / ride on the public roads...

[neels]

The current system is designed to transition from knowing absolutely nothing to you can ride whatever you like after 2 years, as some have commented it's debatable if that's long enough.

There seems to be a mentality these days to shortcut or find a way around everything, be it shortening the licence time or derestricting LAMS bikes, despite the fact that these things came into being for logical reasons such as less dead motorcyclists in their first couple of years of riding.

Makes you wonder if it's all a symptom of too much time cheating at video games, and thinking it's possible to do the same in real life..........

[TheDemonLord]

The current system is designed to transition from knowing absolutely nothing to you can ride whatever you like after 2 years, as some have commented it's debatable if that's long enough.

There seems to be a mentality these days to shortcut or find a way around everything, be it shortening the licence time or derestricting LAMS bikes, despite the fact that these things came into being for logical reasons such as less dead motorcyclists in their first couple of years of riding.

Makes you wonder if it's all a symptom of too much time cheating at video games, and thinking it's possible to do the same in real life..........

I'd say its Youthful eagerness rather than anything else.

As for cheating and Video games, I think you would be hard pressed to demonstrate that.....

[Ender EnZed]

Another complained his son was failed without driving because the kid turned up for the test with bare feet.


I know some states in the US have laws about driving barefoot but I've never heard anything about it being a rule, even if totally unenforced, in NZ. Seems a bit off to fail someone for breaking a rule that doesn't exist.

[Akzle]

I know some states in the US have laws about driving barefoot but I've never heard anything about it being a rule, even if totally unenforced, in NZ. Seems a bit off to fail someone for breaking a rule that doesn't exist.

"suitable enclosed footwear" i believe is the directive. No high heels, ie.

Fucken stupid rule really. So i ignore it, with all the rest of them.

[pritch]

Seems a bit off to fail someone for breaking a rule that doesn't exist.

I guess they would say that in bare feet you aren't in full control of the vehicle and I would tend to agree. Jandals are not suitable either.

That particular kid was failed twice before he even got to sit in the car with the examiner, but I bet he thought he was a shit hot driver.

[Tazz]

You lot are missing the whole point! What I'm saying is, The law should be changed to allow a transition period to bigger bikes during the restricted license period. Car owners can drive any bloody thing they like with a restricted license. SHEESH! Nah, Not saying anymore. I'll get kicked off here if I do.

The whole license system IS a transition period from lower powered bikes to higher powered ones...


http://aleadersinspiration.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/stupid-questions.jpg

:bleh:

If you want it sooner, there are ways to shorten it that there never were in the past. There is also the option involving an airline ticket.

I don't agree with the whole system, particularly the time of day you're not supposed to be on the road, but it is what it is.

[J.A.W.]

Buy a 650 CC LAMS bike.
*cough*derestrict it*cough*
Take test on full power 650
Pass full licence test with virtually no mistakes.
Buy Hayabusa.

Not that I did this of course.


& did your tester run down his LAMS approved list to verify anything..
..& then check that your machine was, compliant/restricted? Of course not..

I also did the old MOT Western Springs 8 week training course to qualify for a full licence sooner, back in the `70s..
I showed up on a different borrowed machine each week.. & passed the final (MOT bike cop followed you around),
on a mate's Norton Dominator 88 ( although back then, a 250cc limit had been - fairly recently - imposed)..

The copper's only comment on the Norton was an approving.. "Those Nortons are a quality bike."

I had been riding around on P's on a Triumph 500, but most cops - like now, didn't have a clue, & didn't really care..

I suppose the computer age & checking of rego details may have changed this a bit, but when was the last
time a cop actually checked your bike's VIN against the rego plate?

[Moi]

The whole license system IS a transition period from smaller bikes to bigger ones...

Bigger ones like this (https://www.flickr.com/photos/reisverhalen/3879081470)? :innocent:

[Tazz]

Bigger ones like this (https://www.flickr.com/photos/reisverhalen/3879081470)? :innocent:

Nailed it! Can't wait till I can put on my big boy pants and punt half a ton around :D

[TheDemonLord]

& did your tester run down his LAMS approved list to verify anything..
..& then check that your machine was, compliant/restricted? Of course not..

The Rego said it was still restricted.

The only way to tell would've been if they had checked a particular wire to the ECU or put it on a Dyno

The tester did check the bike was the LAMS approved variant and checked the Rego.

[Ender EnZed]

I guess they would say that in bare feet you aren't in full control of the vehicle and I would tend to agree. Jandals are not suitable either.

That particular kid was failed twice before he even got to sit in the car with the examiner, but I bet he thought he was a shit hot driver.

Wearing jandals while driving is definitely a bit daft, especially when it takes about a second to take them off once you're in the car. But I've never known anyone to put on a pair of driving shoes when getting in the car if they happen to have been wearing jandals.

I wouldn't try to take a driving test in barefeet for much the same reason I wouldn't turn up shirtless, but I don't think it's really an issue in any vaguely modern car.

[J.A.W.]

The Rego said it was still restricted.

The only way to tell would've been if they had checked a particular wire to the ECU or put it on a Dyno.

Ah, bullshit.. all that was required to check - would've been ordering you to do a rolling burnout - as a mandatory part of the test..L.O.L...

[Akzle]

I guess they would say that in bare feet you aren't in full control of the vehicle and I would tend to agree. Jandals are not suitable either.


i fail to see how.

Jandals though. But i usually just take the jandals off and jam them under the pedals then barefoot it.

[rastuscat]

Maybe it's been mentioned. Can't be arsed reading the whole thread.

When you pass a CBTA assessment you dont get issued with a higher class licence. You get a certificate saying you've passed the assessment. You still have to take that and your existing licence to a driver licensing agent i.e. VTNZ, AA etc.


So passing the assessment means you're still on the license you rocked up on.

Just sayin

[FlangMasterJ]

I think you need to stop thinking ..........

Basically until they have completed and passed the test they are not legally permitted to ride a non LAMs approved bike. Very simple.

Are you understanding this OP? It can't get any clearer.

[RGVforme]

And after the restricted test they don't need a supervisor. Are you really that thick? Take someone with you = Simple.

PS: I don't give a Rats Arse if you are a moderator on this site, I'm not talking about Learners here. I'm talking about full licence.:(

The starter of this s**t fight left shortly after this little snarl.Prob got told to go to bed by his mum.Lol starts a thread about Learners then claims hes not talking about learners Wtf.Im calling Troll on this one.

[Ender EnZed]

Just sayin

Well off topic from the start of this nonsesne thread, but, in light of some the posts in #22 - #32 re:driving without shoes; have you ever dealt with barefoot drivers in your time? Is there anything you could have hypothetically charged someone with? Any situation in which you actually felt the need to act on an individual's barefootedness?

[MarkH]

as a current 6r holder I would rather see a system in place that allowed me to "speed up" the year wait by actually taking lessons from an instructor. im not entirely sure what the value of the year is? you rock up to a tennis court or the likes, spin around on a 125/250 for 12min then answer 30 questions that are laughable at best and your off, go get yourself a 660cc bike and take to the road, week later do your restricted and then.....nothing, just ride around for a year or more likely until the end of summer and then a few good days every now and then until the next test.
would it not be of more value to follow an almost car route where you take lessons and then when you and the instructor are happy you sit your full? at least this way rather than riding like a saint for 30min one time you can actually receive some tuition and learn a bit of roadcraft along the way.
I have taken 2x1hr rides since passing my restricted to gain some feedback on my road position, speed through corners, hazard observation and a general measure of my ability. I don't see how 12months or 3 makes any difference. the bronze ACC course (if anyone ever comes to taranaki to do 1) could the successful completion of this not be a measure of ability and count towards a reduction in the 12month period. it all seems rather arbitrary.

just my noob outlook as it were.

I'd have to agree with this - the 1 year thing seems extremely arbitrary.
One rider might only ride 10 hours in a year, another rider might ride 10 hours in a slow week, both would have to wait a year to sit their full license.
There should be a way to cut it back a lot, maybe 3 months - maybe some very thorough evaluation of rider ability to certify that the rider is ready to sit their 6f license?

[scumdog]

"suitable enclosed footwear" i believe is the directive. No high heels, ie.

Fucken stupid rule really. So i ignore it, with all the rest of them.


Ah, so you DO wear your high-heels when driving??;)

[nzspokes]

https://www.facebook.com/GearUpMag/videos/987522261280101/

[caseye]

Pity the OP hasn't stuck around to see what everyone else has said.
Pity they have no common sense and can't see the need for a graduated stepping up of licences until you are legally allowed to ride an unrestricted, any size motorcycle.

[varminter]

Maybe it's been mentioned. Can't be arsed reading the whole thread.

When you pass a CBTA assessment you dont get issued with a higher class licence. You get a certificate saying you've passed the assessment. You still have to take that and your existing licence to a driver licensing agent i.e. VTNZ, AA etc.


So passing the assessment means you're still on the license you rocked up on.

Just sayin

If you're going to be sensible we'll have to ban you.

[rastuscat]

If you're going to be sensible we'll have to ban you.

It's an odd habit of mine

[GrayWolf]

Thank you, Maybe motorcyclists can transition into bigger bikes through the restricted period if they changed the law is what I'm saying.


as a current 6r holder I would rather see a system in place that allowed me to "speed up" the year wait by actually taking lessons from an instructor. im not entirely sure what the value of the year is? you rock up to a tennis court or the likes, spin around on a 125/250 for 12min then answer 30 questions that are laughable at best and your off, go get yourself a 660cc bike and take to the road, week later do your restricted and then.....nothing, just ride around for a year or more likely until the end of summer and then a few good days every now and then until the next test.
would it not be of more value to follow an almost car route where you take lessons and then when you and the instructor are happy you sit your full? at least this way rather than riding like a saint for 30min one time you can actually receive some tuition and learn a bit of roadcraft along the way.
I have taken 2x1hr rides since passing my restricted to gain some feedback on my road position, speed through corners, hazard observation and a general measure of my ability. I don't see how 12months or 3 makes any difference. the bronze ACC course (if anyone ever comes to taranaki to do 1) could the successful completion of this not be a measure of ability and count towards a reduction in the 12month period. it all seems rather arbitrary.

just my noob outlook as it were.

WTF, seriously you two, the law has just allowed learners to ride a 660cc. The cry before was 'fartbox 250's' now already it's 'fartbox 650's'. :weird:
The year etc is about EXPERIENCE! ACC rider, etc cannot give you the experience of riding in high gusty cross winds, heavy rain, cold conditions where you need to consider ice etc.
There are many of us still left who as noob's survived {somehow} the days of buy it, Looney plate it, ride it out the dealer door, and fuck off down the road.
Instead of bleating it isnt fair, accept if anything, it is done to protect you, and make sure {hopefully} you are ready to progress.... Or even better lets bring in the European 'stepped' licence, so you need to 'test' to shift up above each CC bracket???
The biggest difference between a car and bike..... a mistake in a car usually only results in some bent metal

[Moi]

... Or even better lets bring in the European 'stepped' licence, so you need to 'test' to shift up above each CC bracket...

It seems to work quite well in Europe... perhaps we should try it here as well... [we seem to be very keen on European things - cars, bikes, kitchen appliances, etc]

[JayDNZ]

I got my learners 6 months ago, straight onto a KLR650 and very happy, love LAMS!! System makes perfect sense to my mind, other than the 10pm curfew thing, that's weird.

Can't see any issue with driving a car barefoot... BUT, turning up for your test barefoot, WTF LOL!!

[FJRider]

And after the restricted test they don't need a supervisor.

They have to pass the test(s) first.

Some have been known to fail them ...

[Moi]

They have to pass the test(s) first.

Some have been known to fail them ...

How could you say such a thing - and shatter their "dreams"...

[deerworrier]

WTF, seriously you two, the law has just allowed learners to ride a 660cc. The cry before was 'fartbox 250's' now already it's 'fartbox 650's'. :weird:
The year etc is about EXPERIENCE! ACC rider, etc cannot give you the experience of riding in high gusty cross winds, heavy rain, cold conditions where you need to consider ice etc.
There are many of us still left who as noob's survived {somehow} the days of buy it, Looney plate it, ride it out the dealer door, and fuck off down the road.
Instead of bleating it isnt fair, accept if anything, it is done to protect you, and make sure {hopefully} you are ready to progress.... Or even better lets bring in the European 'stepped' licence, so you need to 'test' to shift up above each CC bracket???
The biggest difference between a car and bike..... a mistake in a car usually only results in some bent metal

so the assumption the system makes is that everyone who gets their 6R head out in all conditions and situations to gain the "experience". at no point did I decry the use of the 660, my statement was regarding the lack of any advancement beyond that for 12months. when I go to do my test will the examiner select a day where he can evaluate my abilities in the conditions you list as needed experience or will I simply pootle around in from of him doing mirror checks and watching my speed? and after I have done my 6F I can buy whatever the hell I want and then fuck off down the road, quite possible no more experienced than when I passed my 6F. I am actually doing around 10-12 hours a week minimum and long rides on the weekend with mates who give me good pointers and I go out with the CBTA instructor when I can so that when I do pass my 6F in 12 fucking months I am actually as prepared for the road as I can be. thanks for well considered reply and please don't lump me in with the idiot OP, I feel my response was somewhat more considered and nothing more than an observation on my experience thus far and with no bleating as I see it, but hey, why consider when you can just hit full drama mode.

[Tazz]

so the assumption the system makes is that everyone who gets their 6R head out in all conditions and situations to gain the "experience". at no point did I decry the use of the 660, my statement was regarding the lack of any advancement beyond that for 12months. when I go to do my test will the examiner select a day where he can evaluate my abilities in the conditions you list as needed experience or will I simply pootle around in from of him doing mirror checks and watching my speed? and after I have done my 6F I can buy whatever the hell I want and then fuck off down the road, quite possible no more experienced than when I passed my 6F. I am actually doing around 10-12 hours a week minimum and long rides on the weekend with mates who give me good pointers and I go out with the CBTA instructor when I can so that when I do pass my 6F in 12 fucking months I am actually as prepared for the road as I can be. thanks for well considered reply and please don't lump me in with the idiot OP, I feel my response was somewhat more considered and nothing more than an observation on my experience thus far and with no bleating as I see it, but hey, why consider when you can just hit full drama mode.

12 months is not a long time to wait. When you're young (sub 20ish) it SEEMS like a long time, but it really isn't.

I'd hate to think how many more fucktards would slip through the cracks if they made it any easier/shorter.

Even with your 12 hours a week for a year is still SFA in the grand scheme of your driving life.

[deerworrier]

again, its not the waiting I am questioning its the value of the wait? I would like to see and this is from someone in their 12month wait, is a system of continuous assessment whereby I would reach the end of my 12 month with some serious experience and tuition. take the high wind/heavy rain scenario, which do you believe is best....1. 12month wait and hope the individual decides to take his/her bike out in conditions completely alien to them in the hope of figuring it out and not doing themselves an injury(beause its not in the 6F assemssment). or 2. a lesson or 2 with instructor fall on appalling weather condition days and instructor says "we are going anyway, it is good experience and I can guide you through the do's and don'ts"? the statement I made was a simple hypothetical idea, one where rather than just disappearing for 12months and magically becoming an experienced rider you actually had to put in the hours and be taught/learn the roadcraft so many folks wax lyrical to needing. im not for one moment suggesting that I should be allowed a bigger bike in the year. no im actually very happy with my 660 "fartbox" thank you, im simply suggesting that on its own the year means nothing and if people want to see true and actual change then a system of continuous assessment and training should be looked at. if an individual manages to get through the assessment quicker than 12 months great but it was not the main point of my comment.

and while I appreciate the under 20 comments, im afraid those days are very, very far behind me.

[Tazz]

again, its not the waiting I am questioning its the value of the wait? I would like to see and this is from someone in their 12month wait, is a system of continuous assessment whereby I would reach the end of my 12 month with some serious experience and tuition. take the high wind/heavy rain scenario, which do you believe is best....1. 12month wait and hope the individual decides to take his/her bike out in conditions completely alien to them in the hope of figuring it out and not doing themselves an injury(beause its not in the 6F assemssment). or 2. a lesson or 2 with instructor fall on appalling weather condition days and instructor says "we are going anyway, it is good experience and I can guide you through the do's and don'ts"? the statement I made was a simple hypothetical idea, one where rather than just disappearing for 12months and magically becoming an experienced rider you actually had to put in the hours and be taught/learn the roadcraft so many folks wax lyrical to needing. im not for one moment suggesting that I should be allowed a bigger bike in the year. no im actually very happy with my 660 "fartbox" thank you, im simply suggesting that on its own the year means nothing and if people want to see true and actual change then a system of continuous assessment and training should be looked at. if an individual manages to get through the assessment quicker than 12 months great but it was not the main point of my comment.

and while I appreciate the under 20 comments, im afraid those days are very, very far behind me.

I am also decently north of 20 and in the LAMS system, but will go well over all the time limits because I'm lazy and I do what I want anyway :laugh:

For the experience, personally I see it as my own personal responsibility to ensure I get it (even after you have your full. There is always room for improvement) and the testing is just ticking the required bureaucratic boxes to avoid getting fines.

Accelerating through with lessons etc would be cool, and probably turn out better riders but unless it was enforced it is a little pointless because often the people who who most benefit from that sort of thing are the last to actively seek it themselves.
The flip side to that is also lessons don't work for everyone. Some people are better finding their own way or learning from others around them rather than under the pressure of an instructor/assessor.

At the end of the day, while the system is not perfect it is not exactly horribly flawed either. The CBTA is a great step in the right direction I think. You are aware it is 18 months for those that choose the old path? To me the CBTA is already a 6 months short cut which covers some of your points above via stricter testing/assessment.

[Moi]

again, its not the waiting ... very, very far behind me.

What you are suggesting and describing is not too dissimilar to what motorcyclists and drivers are required to do within the "EU System".

I applaud you for taking the initiative to progress your skills, something I fear many younger persons would not see as necessary. Perhaps age does have an advantage - we recognise more clearly our limitations and try to do something about it - we become more thinking road users.

I'd hazard a guess that you'd also like to see some form of mentoring / tuition / lessons / assessment / evaluation within the 6R period that is more structured than the present Bronze / Silver and Gold programme, not that there is anything inherently wrong with the Bronze etc programme. What we have, as stated above is not perfect, but it is what we have to live with and accept that the "powers-to-be" are only likely to increase the "number of hoops' to jump through than lessen them. Unless the authorities are prepared to make it mandatory to undertake continuous upskilling then we, as motorcyclists and motorists, need to be prepared to accept that responsibility ourselves. I'd be pleased to see ACC spend some of the levies gathered to further extend the existing programmes, however I am also well aware of the horse and the water trough scenario.

[JimO]

For a start, try getting insurance on a bike you are not licenced to ride. Do you think all people sitting the full test should do it on a 1200?

BTW car licences will be changing soon to restrict motor size.
i have just bought a 2ltr car would that be ok for a learner.........it puts out 197kw

[MarkH]

ACC rider, etc cannot give you the experience of riding in high gusty cross winds, heavy rain, cold conditions where you need to consider ice etc.

Ahh, but what about the 'fair weather rider' that gets a bike but only rides it on the weekends when it is a nice day? After a year that rider could have less than 40 hours riding experience.
Then there is the keen rider that rides daily and goes on longer rides on the weekends, after 3 months that person could have over 120 hours of riding experience.
The 12 months thing really is rather arbitrary, I'd rather see more exhaustive testing but also more flexibility on the length of time before getting the full license.

I would agree that the current system is better than what we used to have back when I got my license, but I think we could do better again.

[Tazz]

Ahh, but what about the 'fair weather rider' that gets a bike but only rides it on the weekends when it is a nice day? After a year that rider could have less than 40 hours riding experience.
Then there is the keen rider that rides daily and goes on longer rides on the weekends, after 3 months that person could have over 120 hours of riding experience.
The 12 months thing really is rather arbitrary, I'd rather see more exhaustive testing but also more flexibility on the length of time before getting the full license.

I would agree that the current system is better than what we used to have back when I got my license, but I think we could do better again.

What about natural ability? If that fair weather rider had greater natural ability then the 40 vs 120 is redundant. Someone could need 400 hours to be on par with anothers 40.

[nzspokes]

i have just bought a 2ltr car would that be ok for a learner.........it puts out 197kw

Nice, my 3.8 doesnt get that. Then again I dont care about my cars HP figures.

[JimO]

Nice, my 3.8 doesnt get that. Then again I dont care about my cars HP figures.
of course you dont thats why you have a old commonwhore

[nzspokes]

of course you dont thats why you have a old commonwhore

Common cars are good. Easy to get parts. Being a wagon it hauls the tribe to camping etc well. As long as it can keep up with the flow of traffic Im happy with the power. Can gate the dogs off in the back and it tows the trailer well for track days. Works for us.

[Ender EnZed]

i have just bought a 2ltr car would that be ok for a learner.........it puts out 197kw

It'll be fine as long as it doesn't have a turbo or any "fast" letters tagged on after the name.

[MarkH]

What about natural ability? If that fair weather rider had greater natural ability then the 40 vs 120 is redundant. Someone could need 400 hours to be on par with anothers 40.

Well surely that's where the exhaustive testing comes in, if the rider can demonstrate the required confidence & ability then they move up in license - why does it matter if they had their 6r for 3 months or 12 months?

[Ender EnZed]

Well surely that's where the exhaustive testing comes in, if the rider can demonstrate the required confidence & ability then they move up in license - why does it matter if they had their 6r for 3 months or 12 months?

Plenty of people would be able to pass the full test after 3 months on a 6L, let alone 6R. That doesn't necessarily mean that those same people wouldn't be better off waiting a bit longer before being officially let loose on the fastest thing they can afford.

[JimO]

Common cars are good. Easy to get parts. Being a wagon it hauls the tribe to camping etc well. As long as it can keep up with the flow of traffic Im happy with the power. Can gate the dogs off in the back and it tows the trailer well for track days. Works for us.
i use a new 4x4hilux for that

[nzspokes]

i use a new 4x4hilux for that

Which will depreciate more than the value of the Commodore in the first year.

[JimO]

Which will depreciate more than the value of the Commodore in the first year.
dont care, i get a new one every 3 years

[GrayWolf]

Well surely that's where the exhaustive testing comes in, if the rider can demonstrate the required confidence & ability then they move up in license - why does it matter if they had their 6r for 3 months or 12 months?


so the assumption the system makes is that everyone who gets their 6R head out in all conditions and situations to gain the "experience". at no point did I decry the use of the 660, my statement was regarding the lack of any advancement beyond that for 12months. when I go to do my test will the examiner select a day where he can evaluate my abilities in the conditions you list as needed experience or will I simply pootle around in from of him doing mirror checks and watching my speed? and after I have done my 6F I can buy whatever the hell I want and then fuck off down the road, quite possible no more experienced than when I passed my 6F. I am actually doing around 10-12 hours a week minimum and long rides on the weekend with mates who give me good pointers and I go out with the CBTA instructor when I can so that when I do pass my 6F in 12 fucking months I am actually as prepared for the road as I can be. thanks for well considered reply and please don't lump me in with the idiot OP, I feel my response was somewhat more considered and nothing more than an observation on my experience thus far and with no bleating as I see it, but hey, why consider when you can just hit full drama mode.

I would suggest it comes down to the 'most workable' system. it may have it's flaws, and may have area's it can improve in, but, it's a workable and liveable system. Hell's teeth, learners no longer have the 70kph limit, have 660cc bikes available.. these are bikes DR/XT/DL etc that ARE ridden by many full licence holders....
Why the hell are learners in such a rush? These '660' bikes are as powerful and as fast as the fastest bikes available in the 1960/70's but with better brakes, tyres etc. The one thing that has NOT advanced is the homo sapien at the throttle.
I've ridden all my adult life as main transport, will have topped 1mill Km's, and I know there are a few on here who would top my life mileage by quite a bit. Funnily enough, we are the ones who are usually saying 'cool it' for the rush to 'big bikes'.
You are right that there is no definite a rider will go out all weathers, or indeed, be nothing more than a sunday rider. There are those who will commute etc and do reasonable hours/distances.
To use your 'training example' there was a short time ago a thread posted by a VERY new rider, who had years of car experience, was doing track days {another huge debate point for skill acquisition}. Was already 'commenting' a sports 250 was too slow and wanted a 600cc track bike,,, he then dropped it {250}and said others commented they were waiting for that to happen as he was pushing it so hard. I was 'decried' by a few here for saying 'slow down'.... simply put he was pushing the bike hard before he had acquired the skills, feel and understanding of taking a motorcycle right to the edge. He admitted he was probably trying to run before he could walk... and thats the point of the year i would suggest, allow a breathing space to gain experience and feel.
You may be the exception to the rule as a learner and get yourself trained, assessed etc, but 95% will not do that, and they need to factor in the worst denominator.

[Tazz]

Well surely that's where the exhaustive testing comes in, if the rider can demonstrate the required confidence & ability then they move up in license - why does it matter if they had their 6r for 3 months or 12 months?

So lets take a look at what you'd have to go through in Germany with their tiered system, which I believe is similar to other European countries in the area.

AFAICR it is age restricted about $3000 NZD in cost for a minimum amount of supervised hours?, first aid course and theory tests AND that 12 months that we have to do, well they have to do 2 years. For that 2 years, <25kW.

Fuck that.

CBTA would have you through the whole system quicker than that one tier. Actually with CBTA you can be though to your full in just over 12 months total now and all people doing those tests are encouraged to have lessons/multiple lessons beforehand.

[FJRider]

my statement was regarding the lack of any advancement beyond that for 12months.

There is nothing that replicates or can replace (or improve on) the time spent ... and experience ... gained by actually riding on the roads.

Training in controlled situations ... end with controlled results.

Confidence in your own (believed) abilities is a good thing ... too often it results in overconfidence. Usually discovered after (during ??) an emergency maneuver on a public road or highway ... caused by an event/action that you thought could not happen (to you) ... or you would see coming.

[Paul in NZ]

If you rode a LAMS bike to its full potential in a licence test you would fail... You would have to ride a non LAMS bike at less than LAMS potential to pass so I don't see the point...

[Moi]

If you rode a LAMS bike to its full potential in a licence test you would fail... You would have to ride a non LAMS bike at less than LAMS potential to pass so I don't see the point...

Why?

10 chars...

[rambaldi]

Why?

10 chars...

They frown at you getting an elbow down during the tests but only because they are jealous they can't keep up.

[TheDemonLord]

There is nothing that replicates or can replace (or improve on) the time spent ... and experience ... gained by actually riding on the roads.

Training in controlled situations ... end with controlled results.

Can I get you to clarify this statement?

Are you saying the doing say skills training off of the Road isn't useful? or are you saying that training can help with trained responses?

[RGVforme]

I would suggest it comes down to the 'most workable' system. it may have it's flaws, and may have area's it can improve in, but, it's a workable and liveable system. Hell's teeth, learners no longer have the 70kph limit, have 660cc bikes available.. these are bikes DR/XT/DL etc that ARE ridden by many full licence holders....
Why the hell are learners in such a rush? These '660' bikes are as powerful and as fast as the fastest bikes available in the 1960/70's but with better brakes, tyres etc. The one thing that has NOT advanced is the homo sapien at the throttle.
I've ridden all my adult life as main transport, will have topped 1mill Km's, and I know there are a few on here who would top my life mileage by quite a bit. Funnily enough, we are the ones who are usually saying 'cool it' for the rush to 'big bikes'.
You are right that there is no definite a rider will go out all weathers, or indeed, be nothing more than a sunday rider. There are those who will commute etc and do reasonable hours/distances.
To use your 'training example' there was a short time ago a thread posted by a VERY new rider, who had years of car experience, was doing track days {another huge debate point for skill acquisition}. Was already 'commenting' a sports 250 was too slow and wanted a 600cc track bike,,, he then dropped it {250}and said others commented they were waiting for that to happen as he was pushing it so hard. I was 'decried' by a few here for saying 'slow down'.... simply put he was pushing the bike hard before he had acquired the skills, feel and understanding of taking a motorcycle right to the edge. He admitted he was probably trying to run before he could walk... and thats the point of the year i would suggest, allow a breathing space to gain experience and feel.
You may be the exception to the rule as a learner and get yourself trained, assessed etc, but 95% will not do that, and they need to factor in the worst denominator.

I did this very thing.Waited until the lams laws were changed bought a DR650 and plan to take my time learning to ride a bike I plan to own until it falls apart(By all accounts this may be some time).I don't get caught up in the Mana bashing fact I have a L plate on my bike at the ripe old age of 39 and understand that exp comes with time(ive been on my 6L since 18) and agree whats the rush now you can get a good cc powered bike that you can grow into instead of step onto on your way past.This and the fact that riding a 250 on the road was at the best of times a very scary event.If you want a rocket ship hit the racetrack where the fines are less the corners are padded and everybody is going the same way.

[FJRider]

Can I get you to clarify this statement?

Are you saying the doing say skills training off of the Road isn't useful? or are you saying that training can help with trained responses?

I said nothing replicates ... or can replace time spent on the road.

Skills training courses can help you practice common and regular problems you can encounter on the road. And I might add ... this "practice" is done in a relatively safe environment. (try to practice emergency stops on the motorway in the rush hour and let me know how you got on)

Some things are not taught during these "Skills Training Courses" ... (where did you learn to lane split .. ??)

"Trained Responses" are good ... but the real test is when you do it for real. NO amount of practice will prepare you for the real deal incident ... or the thoughts and feelings that go through your mind at the time.

[TheDemonLord]

I said nothing replicates ... or can replace time spent on the road.

Skills training courses can help you practice common and regular problems you can encounter on the road. And I might add ... this "practice" is done in a relatively safe environment. (try to practice emergency stops on the motorway in the rush hour and let me know how you got on)

Some things are not taught during these "Skills Training Courses" ... (where did you learn to lane split .. ??)

"Trained Responses" are good ... but the real test is when you do it for real. NO amount of practice will prepare you for the real deal incident ... or the thoughts and feelings that go through your mind at the time.

I think there is much to be discussed here - for starters the phrase (and practice used by numerous institutions) 'The more you sweat in practice, the Less you bleed in combat' (or the numerous variants of it)

No Amount of practice prepares you for the real deal? There is a nugget of truth in that, I'll concede but I think you are vastly overstating that nugget of truth - were your position the correct one, then things like NASS, Advanced Rider courses, ACC funded schemes, our tiered licensing system wouldn't make any difference to riders, and I'd probably be dead.

There is a time and a place to put skills learned in a safe environment into the real world - which could be considered taking ones riding from 50% skilled (from practicing in the controlled environment) to 75% skilled (practice plus real world experiance) as opposed to going from 0 - 75% and hoping people make it alive to the 75% mark.

Sure the Real world is ultimately were we ride and were our skills are honed, and most importantly - where they matter - but training gives us the tools so that when we get to the real world, we already know enough to hopefully not twat ourselves while we hone our skills.

[FJRider]

I think there is much to be discussed here - for starters the phrase (and practice used by numerous institutions) 'The more you sweat in practice, the Less you bleed in combat' (or the numerous variants of it)

Think ... if you don't bleed in practice ... you're not practicing hard enough. Blood on the tarmac is never a pretty sight though .. and I try to avoid leaving any myself ...


No Amount of practice prepares you for the real deal? There is a nugget of truth in that, I'll concede but I think you are vastly overstating that nugget of truth - were your position the correct one, then things like NASS, Advanced Rider courses, ACC funded schemes, our tiered licensing system wouldn't make any difference to riders, and I'd probably be dead.

Time spent on a firing range will NEVER prepare you for the time ... when the targets start shooting back.

Knowing how to use the weapons you have ... does help though.


There are many on this site that had NO tiered licensing system when they started riding ... on machines that handled a dam sight worse than the ones in the last 20 years. With NO "training" from the people you stated above. They managed to stay alive ... why couldn't you .. ???


There is a time and a place to put skills learned in a safe environment into the real world - which could be considered taking ones riding from 50% skilled (from practicing in the controlled environment) to 75% skilled (practice plus real world experiance) as opposed to going from 0 - 75% and hoping people make it alive to the 75% mark.

On any given training course ... at any time ... not all course participants finish with the same level of ability.

What they retain in their head for/during future incidents ... will vary too.

Rider ability will never scored by the number (or type) of training courses you've attended. To retain skills ... continual practice is needed. The ability to remember the content of a course you did three years ago ... is limited to a select few. Are you one of the few ..??


Sure the Real world is ultimately were we ride and were our skills are honed, and most importantly - where they matter - but training gives us the tools so that when we get to the real world, we already know enough to hopefully not twat ourselves while we hone our skills.

See above ... But in the real world ... situations WILL arise that will never be discussed on any training course.

[pritch]

It'll be fine as long as it doesn't have a turbo or any "fast" letters tagged on after the name.

Two turbos? Nice for overtaking, but not as nice as the bike. :devil2:

[FJRider]

It'll be fine as long as it doesn't have a turbo or any "fast" letters tagged on after the name.

I shudder to think what the Hyosung GT650RRR will cost to insure when it comes out ... :shifty:

[Gremlin]

I shudder to think what the Hyosung GT650RRR will cost to insure when it comes out ... :shifty:
I remember a mate being fine with a GSXR600, but not a ZX6R, so I'm thinking the higher the letter the worse it is. So a ZX6R is pretty bad, but a ZZR600, you're clearly going to die, as it's got 2x Z, whereas the other only has 1x Z and 1x X. Further, a GSXR is only marginally more dangerous than a GN, very close together...

OP, good idea. Let's follow Europe right? When you have your full, you still can't ride anything and don't have open access to any motorcycle. You have to complete more courses (or more time - not sure on details) before you're allowed open slather.

I'm thinking that would go down like a cup of cold sick... ;)

[nzspokes]

I did this very thing.Waited until the lams laws were changed bought a DR650 and plan to take my time learning to ride a bike I plan to own until it falls apart(By all accounts this may be some time).I don't get caught up in the Mana bashing fact I have a L plate on my bike at the ripe old age of 39 and understand that exp comes with time(ive been on my 6L since 18) and agree whats the rush now you can get a good cc powered bike that you can grow into instead of step onto on your way past.This and the fact that riding a 250 on the road was at the best of times a very scary event.If you want a rocket ship hit the racetrack where the fines are less the corners are padded and everybody is going the same way.

You sure you still have a valid licence now the new L system allows you a max of 5 years?

[Duncan74]

As someone on a restricted at the moment, then I can just imagine the thoughts going throug my mind if I was to be walking up to take my CBTA 6R on a 'busa I'd never ridden before . I suppose the ACC people would be happy. My logic for that slightly counter intuative statment is that I would expect 80% of people would find some way to bin it in the first 100 yards, and so whilst there may be some casualties, then the rest would never be brave enough to go near a bike again. Happy ACC.....

However, forgetting the initial proposal as expressed on page 1, there is a logic to that 'progressive' approach that I do agree with. Problem is how to define it to restrict those that would benefit from some nanny state intervention, but not impeed those that don't. Time based rules are blunt instraments. Since buying my LAMS bike 8 days ago then I've ridden 2000km, including the coromandel, done a bronze ride forever course and will be touring the north island just after new year. Someone else could have easily not managed 2000km of open road riding in the year they've had their 6R.

I'm old enough to know that getting some hyper bike would increase the chances of me getting value for money from my life assurance policies. True, if I splashed the cash on a multistrada or equivalent with all the toys, then the gadgets may save me in some cases, more than someone on a 1995 250 with no ABS and skinny tyres. But even with all that wizardry, inexperience would still have me in the wrong position on a bend, travelling at pace into the melted tar, and chances are that all things eing equal, then accross the population of learner bikers more power will equal higher speed which equals more accidents and worse outcomes. Not saying that everyone would go faster, or everyone would crash / unintentionally dismount , but there will be enough to do to warrant the retention of the current system.

[swbarnett]

higher speed which equals more accidents
Bullshit
.

[TheDemonLord]

So I wanted to pick apart some of the things in this comment.


Think ... if you don't bleed in practice ... you're not practicing hard enough. Blood on the tarmac is never a pretty sight though .. and I try to avoid leaving any myself ...

Some would say so - but the principle remains.


Time spent on a firing range will NEVER prepare you for the time ... when the targets start shooting back.

Knowing how to use the weapons you have ... does help though.

You somewhat prove my point entirely - Certainly a Firing range is a world apart from someone trying to kill you - but as you say, Knowing how to use your weapon helps.


There are many on this site that had NO tiered licensing system when they started riding ... on machines that handled a dam sight worse than the ones in the last 20 years. With NO "training" from the people you stated above. They managed to stay alive ... why couldn't you .. ???

This is where I want to get into the meat of it:

Of those people - how many still have all the people with them that they started out riding with? How many have been lost through the years? Sure Machines might have handles worse 20 years ago, but was there 200 Bhp rocket ships 20 years ago? The ZZ-R1100 (which I believe was the fastest bike in 1995) has 145 HP.

However the Anecdotal evidence about old Bikers who have lost friends aside - where it really gets interesting is when we compare NZ (with our Tiered MC licence system) with say the US (where one can get a licence, then hop on a Litre bike of your choice and ride away/highside it into a pole)

For the US - the Motorcycle death rate in 2013 was 1.34 per 100,000 people. (sources availible if you want to check my maths), for NZ in 2014 the Death rate was 0.94 per 100,000 people. Now there are numerous factors I CBF trying to control for - but overall we have a very similar make up of Riders (Harleys and real Motorcyclists) and riding cultures - a difference of nearly 30% more people die in the US than NZ - and that is with NZ's 'unacceptable road toll', our 3rd world roads (at times), NZ drivers and our Tourist drivers.

30% lower between a country with a tiered system and one without.

Now sure - I'll concede there are people that learnt without a tiered system or riding courses or alike and are perfectly safe riders now, But these people tend to be the exception rather than the rule.

As for why couldn't I stay alive without the systems in place? in a short answer - having my small off taught me a great deal about the depths of my ignorance and the lack of riding skill. This hard lesson prompted me to take action to correct these faults - to the point where I am comfy pootling my 'Busa to work come wind, rain or shine on the full power setting, 5 days a week.




On any given training course ... at any time ... not all course participants finish with the same level of ability.

What they retain in their head for/during future incidents ... will vary too.

Absolutely Some people will go to a course and learn nothing - because they already have excellent habits and skills (see above for reference to these exceptional riders), others will learn nothing because they lack the mental capacity to learn or are blinded by arrogance/pride.

But for the rest - they will find faults in their riding and be given the tools to correct these faults. Tools which one day could be the difference between a sphinter tightening near-miss and death. Tools which can be learned on the test course


Rider ability will never scored by the number (or type) of training courses you've attended. To retain skills ... continual practice is needed. The ability to remember the content of a course you did three years ago ... is limited to a select few. Are you one of the few ..??

See above ... But in the real world ... situations WILL arise that will never be discussed on any training course.

I agree about continual practice - but that is premised on the skills being learnt in the first place - which is entirely the point I am making - you seem to be downplaying the value of training and continued training - I am saying that good training on the whole results in better riders. Better riders who when presented with a situation that wasn't discussed in a training course might have enough skills and knowledge to apply a variant or an improvisation of what they already know and have learned - which could be the difference between Life and Death.

As an anology - Buddy Rich (arguably the greatest drummer of all time) famously never practiced, he played Live every night and every performance - Some riders are like Buddy, they swing a leg over and are immediately in tune with the Machine.

The rest of us mere mortals have to practice to become better, and first we learn on a practice pad, then we apply it to the full Drum set, then we apply it live, with band in front of an Audience.

[RGVforme]

You sure you still have a valid licence now the new L system allows you a max of 5 years?

Bit of a story of blind luck there so grab your popcorn buddy lol..My licence expired in early 2013 and when I renewed it came back with my 6L still on it(A blue colour).

I also thought the 6L was done since I was a tadpole when I sat it and had heard the new 5 year limit was looming in 2014.So I asked and was given a print out from the AA which I still have per chance.It states

"The new 5 year time limit will apply to all new licences obtained after the 1 of December 2014 and to those existing learner and restricted licence holders when their licence is renewed"

Having a 2T motorbike smoke huffing habit I struggled with this info so I asked what this ment to my little blue card and was told that because I had renewed it before Dec 2014 the 5 year limit would not take effect until it expires again in 2023 when my existing learner licence is to be renewed.

An anomaly caused by my lazy butt not bothering to follow through on the process.The very reason the new 5 year thing was being put into effect.Ive seen other blue learner licences and they are different to my own as it states my 6l expires in 2023 in the panel on the back.
Ive asked around and have not yet found another bloke or lady in the same weird loophole.But hey im not complaining.:woohoo:.
Rode when I was young gave it up for family reasons got back into it now life allows me to A born again learner Haha.

Onto it observant bunch on here I might have to stay.

[GrayWolf]

So I wanted to pick apart some of the things in this comment


This is where I want to get into the meat of it:

Of those people - how many still have all the people with them that they started out riding with? How many have been lost through the years? Sure Machines might have handles worse 20 years ago, but was there 200 Bhp rocket ships 20 years ago? The ZZ-R1100 (which I believe was the fastest bike in 1995) has 145 HP.

However the Anecdotal evidence about old Bikers who have lost friends aside - where it really gets interesting is when we compare NZ (with our Tiered MC licence system) with say the US (where one can get a licence, then hop on a Litre bike of your choice and ride away/highside it into a pole)



As for why couldn't I stay alive without the systems in place? in a short answer - having my small off taught me a great deal about the depths of my ignorance and the lack of riding skill. This hard lesson prompted me to take action to correct these faults - to the point where I am comfy pootling my 'Busa to work come wind, rain or shine on the full power setting, 5 days a week.

Absolutely Some people will go to a course and learn nothing - because they already have excellent habits and skills (see above for reference to these exceptional riders), others will learn nothing because they lack the mental capacity to learn or are blinded by arrogance/pride.

But for the rest - they will find faults in their riding and be given the tools to correct these faults. Tools which one day could be the difference between a sphinter tightening near-miss and death. Tools which can be learned on the test course

I agree about continual practice - but that is premised on the skills being learnt in the first place - which is entirely the point I am making - you seem to be downplaying the value of training and continued training - I am saying that good training on the whole results in better riders. Better riders who when presented with a situation that wasn't discussed in a training course might have enough skills and knowledge to apply a variant or an improvisation of what they already know and have learned - which could be the difference between Life and Death.

.

As one of those 'no training' riders who survived, and yes I lost a 'few' friends, mates, acquaintances along the way. Your reference to bikes of 20yrs ago is actually a bit 'misguided'.. I own a ZZR1100 and its a good handling, well mannered bike. The bikes we often refer to are 30+ yr's old now.
I recently gave to a 'deserving' and know they will look after it, an FJ1200. THAT was the watershed bike for handling {perimeter frame} in the early 1980's for Japanese high performance bikes. If you ever get a chance to ride a good condition FJ11/12 'in anger' it will shock you how 'poorly' it handles. It doesnt actually handle too badly, but thin forks, old style suspension, old style brakes, very heavy, long... it requires RIDING round corners. A modern litre sprotbike handles like a 'Tron bike' in comparison. ZZR's are the second generation 'uber tourer' still heavy, alloy 'beam frame' better suspension, better brakes {and they dont stop THAT quickly} 20 or so more BHP, higher revving. A superior bike to the FJ in a lot of ways, except for the loss of 'low down grunt'.
Those 'old bikes' we often comment on, Z1000's, XS1100's, CB900's, GS{X} 1000/11000 of the 1980's... common to Japanese building, the engines simply 'overpowered' the frames, much poorer tyre technology, poor brakes { in the wet, squeeze and pray}, frames that FLEXED, and you could feel it, forks that 'flexed' under heavy braking, often swingarms were questionable as to rigidity.... suspension components were certainly inferior to what you get today, Ask old riders about Honda's FVQ {fade very quickly} rear shocks...... These bikes literally have to be 'manhandled' to get them round corners with any semblance of speed.
Your 200bhp 'rocketships' that you comment were not around then, have the benefit of at LEAST double the frame/fork/tyre/suspension technology to match the increased power, AT LEAST double....... and you also now have traction control, slipper clutches, variable valve timing, superior tyres.......
more than balances out the extra performance 'risk', when compared to those 'old bikes'.

[RGVforme]

As one of those 'no training' riders who survived, and yes I lost a 'few' friends, mates, acquaintances along the way. Your reference to bikes of 20yrs ago is actually a bit 'misguided'.. I own a ZZR1100 and its a good handling, well mannered bike. The bikes we often refer to are 30+ yr's old now.
I recently gave to a 'deserving' and know they will look after it, an FJ1200. THAT was the watershed bike for handling {perimeter frame} in the early 1980's for Japanese high performance bikes. If you ever get a chance to ride a good condition FJ11/12 'in anger' it will shock you how 'poorly' it handles. It doesnt actually handle too badly, but thin forks, old style suspension, old style brakes, very heavy, long... it requires RIDING round corners. A modern litre sprotbike handles like a 'Tron bike' in comparison. ZZR's are the second generation 'uber tourer' still heavy, alloy 'beam frame' better suspension, better brakes {and they dont stop THAT quickly} 20 or so more BHP, higher revving. A superior bike to the FJ in a lot of ways, except for the loss of 'low down grunt'.
Those 'old bikes' we often comment on, Z1000's, XS1100's, CB900's, GS{X} 1000/11000 of the 1980's... common to Japanese building, the engines simply 'overpowered' the frames, much poorer tyre technology, poor brakes { in the wet, squeeze and pray}, frames that FLEXED, and you could feel it, forks that 'flexed' under heavy braking, often swingarms were questionable as to rigidity.... suspension components were certainly inferior to what you get today, Ask old riders about Honda's FVQ {fade very quickly} rear shocks...... These bikes literally have to be 'manhandled' to get them round corners with any semblance of speed.
Your 200bhp 'rocketships' that you comment were not around then, have the benefit of at LEAST double the frame/fork/tyre/suspension technology to match the increased power, AT LEAST double....... and you also now have traction control, slipper clutches, variable valve timing, superior tyres.......
more than balances out the extra performance 'risk', when compared to those 'old bikes'.

I kind of agree but look at the old rider new bike tech thing like this.Drive an old ford escort in the 80s still a pretty good car back then but still bugger all suspension heaps of body roll small brakes retread tyres into a corner too fast.Remember that 'Oh shit' feeling you learnt to get when the car told you it was at its limit?.Now drive a modern escort better suspension ABS less bodyroll better rubber into the same corner now.It takes a lot more speed before that 'Oh shit' feeling kicks in I think giving the driver less time and more speed to scrub off to recover.Same car make same person driving different better tech.

If a born again bike rider with slower reactions is riding on learnt instinct and skill based on old tech bikes and is waiting for that 'Oh shit' feeling before tipping it in it may come far too late if at all to do anything about it.The warning signs he or she is used to using from their skillset have gone.Add to the the stupid large gray hairy balled mindset of "Ive been riding for 40 years" and "Its just a 600 like the ole impulse" the ingredients for an off are starting to add up.

Even with little advancement in motorcycle tech in the last 20 years or less if the mindset of the rider is not matched to the age and style bike they are riding and the environment they are riding in it does not matter how old the bike is perhaps.

:drinkup:

[Duncan74]

Bullshit
.

Thanks ;-)

However, your last quote in your signature seems to suggest you agree with what I was trying to state. If you look at the full bit of my post that you quoted, then I suggested that some people would have an increased risk. As we're focussing on less experienced riders here (not ful license / just passed full) then I would respectfully suggesst that it would be fair to suggesst those riders (myself included) have a lower level of competence at this stage in our riding careers. And so, given the unforgiving nature of incompetence then something that reduces the risk of that incompetence has to be helpful. In this context then it's about giving more time to react to events. This includes the tyre hitting a bit of slippery tar, a gust of side wind mid corner, a pot hole on the road and the decision as to where to steer, etc.

Note that I'm not taking about any changes to posted speed limits applying, that's a different kettle of fish. I'm talking about power / acceleration.

[swbarnett]

Thanks ;-)

However, your last quote in your signature seems to suggest you agree with what I was trying to state. If you look at the full bit of my post that you quoted, then I suggested that some people would have an increased risk. As we're focussing on less experienced riders here (not ful license / just passed full) then I would respectfully suggesst that it would be fair to suggesst those riders (myself included) have a lower level of competence at this stage in our riding careers. And so, given the unforgiving nature of incompetence then something that reduces the risk of that incompetence has to be helpful. In this context then it's about giving more time to react to events. This includes the tyre hitting a bit of slippery tar, a gust of side wind mid corner, a pot hole on the road and the decision as to where to steer, etc.

Note that I'm not taking about any changes to posted speed limits applying, that's a different kettle of fish. I'm talking about power / acceleration.
Fair enough. I did take that bit a bit out of context.

[TheDemonLord]

As one of those 'no training' riders who survived, and yes I lost a 'few' friends, mates, acquaintances along the way. Your reference to bikes of 20yrs ago is actually a bit 'misguided'.. I own a ZZR1100 and its a good handling, well mannered bike. The bikes we often refer to are 30+ yr's old now.
I recently gave to a 'deserving' and know they will look after it, an FJ1200. THAT was the watershed bike for handling {perimeter frame} in the early 1980's for Japanese high performance bikes. If you ever get a chance to ride a good condition FJ11/12 'in anger' it will shock you how 'poorly' it handles. It doesnt actually handle too badly, but thin forks, old style suspension, old style brakes, very heavy, long... it requires RIDING round corners. A modern litre sprotbike handles like a 'Tron bike' in comparison. ZZR's are the second generation 'uber tourer' still heavy, alloy 'beam frame' better suspension, better brakes {and they dont stop THAT quickly} 20 or so more BHP, higher revving. A superior bike to the FJ in a lot of ways, except for the loss of 'low down grunt'.
Those 'old bikes' we often comment on, Z1000's, XS1100's, CB900's, GS{X} 1000/11000 of the 1980's... common to Japanese building, the engines simply 'overpowered' the frames, much poorer tyre technology, poor brakes { in the wet, squeeze and pray}, frames that FLEXED, and you could feel it, forks that 'flexed' under heavy braking, often swingarms were questionable as to rigidity.... suspension components were certainly inferior to what you get today, Ask old riders about Honda's FVQ {fade very quickly} rear shocks...... These bikes literally have to be 'manhandled' to get them round corners with any semblance of speed.
Your 200bhp 'rocketships' that you comment were not around then, have the benefit of at LEAST double the frame/fork/tyre/suspension technology to match the increased power, AT LEAST double....... and you also now have traction control, slipper clutches, variable valve timing, superior tyres.......
more than balances out the extra performance 'risk', when compared to those 'old bikes'.

Fair points - I haven't ridden anything older than a 95 - however in my defence - I wasn't the one who brought up 20 year old bikes, so I was rather taking that on face value.

A question to you however (feel free to not answer) - Do you think that some of those that you lost would still be here had they gone through a tiered system or if the plethora of advanced riding/training courses availible now were around when they were riding?

[FJRider]

Fair points - I haven't ridden anything older than a 95 - however in my defence - I wasn't the one who brought up 20 year old bikes, so I was rather taking that on face value.

There are many on KB that will rregard 20 year old bikes as "Modern" ... ride a 50's .. 60's or 70's model. Any model bike of THAT era. 20 year old bikes can (sort of) handle ...


A question to you however (feel free to not answer) - Do you think that some of those that you lost would still be here had they gone through a tiered system or if the plethora of advanced riding/training courses availible now were around when they were riding?

Of at least eight friends I had that died riding a motorcycle ... six were the result of a car drivers error (failing to give way/stop) .. A head on with an overtaking car .. swerved to avoid an approaching car on a blind corner. One was caused by a passenger in a car tossing a newspaper out the window ... and it wrapped itself around his helmet.
Youthful exuberance caused at least one.

Two were riders pissed in charge ... not unheard of nowdays either ...

I'm unaware of any training course that would have saved them. (Bar on on CPR)

[Ender EnZed]

Of at least eight friends I had that died riding a motorcycle ... six were the result of a car drivers error (failing to give way/stop) ...

I'm unaware of any training course that would have saved them.

I'm no expert on this matter, but I'm fairly confident that a primary focus of almost/literally every motorcycle training course is dealing with car drivers that fail to give way.

[TheDemonLord]

I'm no expert on this matter, but I'm fairly confident that a primary focus of almost/literally every motorcycle training course is dealing with car drivers that fail to give way.

Pretty much my point.

However I will add that this is all hypothetical as one can never prove or disprove this.

[GrayWolf]

I kind of agree but look at the old rider new bike tech thing like this.Drive an old ford escort in the 80s still a pretty good car back then but still bugger all suspension heaps of body roll small brakes retread tyres into a corner too fast.Remember that 'Oh shit' feeling you learnt to get when the car told you it was at its limit?.Now drive a modern escort better suspension ABS less bodyroll better rubber into the same corner now.It takes a lot more speed before that 'Oh shit' feeling kicks in I think giving the driver less time and more speed to scrub off to recover.Same car make same person driving different better tech.

If a born again bike rider with slower reactions is riding on learnt instinct and skill based on old tech bikes and is waiting for that 'Oh shit' feeling before tipping it in it may come far too late if at all to do anything about it.The warning signs he or she is used to using from their skillset have gone.Add to the the stupid large gray hairy balled mindset of "Ive been riding for 40 years" and "Its just a 600 like the ole impulse" the ingredients for an off are starting to add up.

Even with little advancement in motorcycle tech in the last 20 years or less if the mindset of the rider is not matched to the age and style bike they are riding and the environment they are riding in it does not matter how old the bike is perhaps.

:drinkup:

I would agree wholeheartedly with your observation about old riders returning, hence why they are the 'risk group'. Taking out the electronic aids, I think the biggest difference would be {using your escort analagy} the vastly improved suspension would even at the point of the tyres letting go, would still keep the body a lot more stable, allowing a better chance of recovery. You also have better tyres, you would not believe what the 'best' then were like.
the mindset does need to match the equipment, and often it doesnt.