Learner restrictions

[Motu]

Learners have restrictions - capacity,speed,hours,pillions etc....but it wasn't always that way.Us old farts were able to go out and ride any bike we liked,without a helmet too! Go in and plonk down a deposit on the fastest bike in the shop,learners license that cost 50 cents in your pocket,out on the road the same day.Trouble is we were killing ourselves left right and center,something had to be done - so we ended up with the present learner system.

We were young and stupid - not so the young people of today,they have a higher education,smart and sophisticated....do they need to be led on a string like this? Is the current system out of touch? is it a good thing? what alternatives? power to weight? more intense rider education? What are your ideas on what needs to be done...or not.

[Slingshot]

I'm on my L plate still, and...

I think the engine size restriction is a good one...I wish I could get a bigger bike now...but it's probably a good thing that I can't. I took a mates 750 gixxer out for a blat, OMG it was fast!!! I don't need that kinda power, I'd rather push my 250 as hard as I can and master that before moving up.

The hour restriction is a pain, I'm 27 and I now have a curfew again :baby:

The L-Plate has never been attached and won't be until I sit the restricted test...it'll then be promptly removed and won't be reattached until my full test.

The 70Kph IMHO is simply dangerous, other road users expect traffic to be traveling at 100Kph and most probably expect bikes to be going faster still, if I ever get pinged I'll quite happily pay the fine (well I won't be that happy).

When I first started riding I only rode 1-up, now I'm quite happy carrying a pillion, I've gone for a frang over the takas with my wife on the back and had a great time...sure the stopping takes a little longer and cornering feels different but you have to get used to it at some stage. I've even got away have the wife on the back when I got pulled over for speeding..."she's aloud on the back cause she's my wife" I couldn't believe that line worked :msn-wink:

Maybe it's because I'm getting old :eek: but the rules are a bit of a pain. Although thinking back to when I was 15, if I had got a bike back then these rules would have helped keep me alive.

[ching_ching]

Hey Motu,

Referring to my post reply to BatCerbs thread on him sitting his full licence soon I said that I'm also a member of a Canadian bike site and the number of posts from a lot of young fullas wanting to know if getting an R6 as a beginners bike is OK is quite overwhelming. Looks is a big decision factor and it sounds like they are more wanting the other member's OK to go ahead with getting that R6. They say that they'll just plod around the block for a couple of months. Yeh... in a pig's eye bro. In Canada they aren't restricted to a 250. And they have heaps of accidents... yep, young fullas on sports sickles.

I enjoyed my probie time on the 250 and yep, as soon as I got my Learners, that L plate came right off until I sat my Restricted. Lucky they don't ask us to have an L plate on our helmets. (Hope LTSA isn't reading this).

I personally found the graduation system adequate, giving me time to skill up, get in tune with bike and get some basic experience that only time can give and with adequate horsepower. The only thing I might change is the curfew buzz. When I had my 250s and on my probie period I was also working shiftwork and the bike was my only form of transport. What did I do? Well I still went to work. Also the 70kph speed limit, not always possible amongst heavy traffic, got to go with the flow.

the ching

[fpsware]

I've had my learners license for about 10 years now. I rode actively for nearly 2 - 3 years. Untill about 2 years ago I hadn't been on a bike since then. When I decided to get back into riding I was looking at bikes between 400 - 750 cc. The bike I actually ended up buying was a Suzuki FXR 150, and I can honestly say that bike saved my life. Becasue if I did get a 400 or something equally as grunty I have no doubt I would have killed myself by now.

I needed to take those small steps to get (back) into riding. In myself I felt like I could handle a faster bike, mostly because I had been riding before. But there had been so many times over the last 2 years that I am sure I would have killed myself with that kind of power. Now I'm riding a Kawasaki ZXR 400 and I am very comfortable doing so. I also believe I'm more patient on the 400 than I was on the 150. On the 150 I tried to pass everything I could, I would sit on the ass of anything I could catch just waiting for an opportunity to pass them. Hey it was only a 150 cc and with a top speed of around 130 - 140Km/hr if I wasn't on their ass I didn't have a show of passing them.

If at the time I had a 400 I would not have thought twice about trying to pass anything and everything when and where I could. And its that power that would have killed me. Now, I know I have the power when I need it. I don't sit on anyones ass, and I'm more than patient to wait for the SAFE passing opportunity. But if there is a time when I just want to scream past the old lady in front of me doing 90Km/hr then I know I have the power to do so.

I think the graduated licensing system is a must. I think the 70Km/hr rule is dangerous, sometimes you really need to go with the flow of traffic. The L plate is just a target for all the dick heads out there. I believe the CC rating rule is the key.

By the way, I'm still on my learner license even though I'm riding a 400 cc bike and I am most certainly riding outside my restriction hours. I've been pulled over once for doing 119Km/hr (in a 100 zone) and I got a ticket for being 49Km/hr over the speed limit but nothing was said about the cc rating.

[Jackrat]

I'm not to sure about the current system,But I do think a power to wheight
system would be better.I certainly don't think a 16-20 yr old male of today is any less crazy than I was at that age.I used to nick my older sisters boy friends Commando while they were at the pictures when I was 16,apart from the hiding I got(bloody small towns huh!!)I wasn't breaking the law because I
had a licence.Now I think,What if it had been a ZXR1100 :eek5:
Yeah,What we have is better than nothing.Times change but young folk stay the same.

[James Deuce]

I'd prefer a power to ratio system for learner bikes.

I like the graduated system EXCEPT for the 70km/h limit. It should go until car drivers have to do the same and there are special lanes for them (i.e. forever). I wish someone at the LTSA would grow some balls and commission a study on how many people have been killed directly by obeying the 70k limit.

The L plate needs to go. It's a target for the aggressive looneys.

OT: I'd like jail sentences for offenders who are at proven fault in an accident causing death or serious injury.

[LB]

Generally I think today's system is better except for the 70kph limit - bloody dangerous. I also think a power-to-weight or HP limit would be better than a 250 limit. Also I think the curfew rule is tough - lots of young people work shiftwork. (a few "excepts" there!!)

[k14]

If you work you can get an exemption pretty easily for the curfew from the ltsa.

I reckon the learners system is pretty good. I am on my restricted licence now, got it august last year. When i was on my learners i didnt obey the 70kph rule, too dangerous and i only put an L plate on for my restricted test. I've never ridden a bike outside my restrictions and i think the 250 limit is good.

I dont think a power to weight law should be bought in. It is too hard to police and if it was bought in what differences would it make?? Maybe stop he NSR, RG and RS250's being ridden by learners. But hardly any learners ride these anyway.

Why do you guys think a power to weight law is better?

[erik]

I'm on my learners. I haven't ridden on the motorway yet, I'm taking things easy. But I have to agree with other people about the 70km/h limit being dangerous, it seems to take away a big advantage of a motorcycle over a pushbike, of being able to keep up with traffic. Riding a pushbike doesn't feel safe to me, being caught between the curb/gutter and the traffic flow, and hoping that other road users will see you and pass you.
Other than that, the licencing system seems ok to me.

[MikeL]

Some of us old farts got our bike licence so long ago we can't even remember what the rules were. I know there was no cc limitation, but as for L-plate, speed restriction and so on, don't remember any of that.
I think a graduated licensing system is a good idea but would have some reservations about some of the restrictions. The 70 kph limit seems to me to be downright dangerous, but from what I've gathered it's largely ignored anyway. As for L-platers being a target for drivers, I can't say I've noticed
but again you see comparatively few bikes with the plate anyway so it's hard to say. The curfew is O.K. but there should be provision for exemption e.g. for shift workers. My main objection is to the 250cc limit which (like many rules and regulations in this country) seems to have been adopted because it is in theory simple, straightforward and easy to enforce, simple enough in fact even for Mr Plod to understand and apply. The fact that a 250cc 2-stroke race bike is learner legal is an awkward anomaly which is dealt with by ignoring it. In the U.K. the equivalent regulation is a hp restriction (33hp) which is much more sensible, although a more complicated matter technically. But I imagine our powers that be rejected that approach because enforcement would be too difficult and expensive (Mr Plod would have to be given some more advanced training rather than just being taught where to look for a number).
This of course is pure speculation on my part and if anyone knows the real story I'd be happy to be corrected and will apologize for maligning our overworked, under-resourced enforcement and regulatory authorities.
:p

[riffer]

In the U.K. the equivalent regulation is a hp restriction (33hp) which is much more sensible
This was always one of my bugbears when on a learners. I had a CB350, and was always getting hassled by the local coppers about it. Mind you, they never once gave me a ticket for it as they all knew me - the joys of growing up in the Hutt. :2thumbsup

Anyway, my CB350 pushed out at best 30hp, and all my mates had 250 elsies (RD250LC's for you young fellas) or VT250's which used to blow me into the weeds.

[MikeL]

oops repeated post

[matthewt]

Replacing the curfew with a lower tolorance for drinking might be better. From memory that was what the curfew was trying to do (ie, no driving/riding during party hours for the young ones).

I'd go for the power/weight ratio being better as well. I mean it's OK to ride a RS250 (which would kill most bikes from 20 years ago) but not an old gb400 which would be fine as a learners bike.

[wkid_one]

Yeah - Britian does have it right when looking at the HP of the bikes not just the cc rating also.

Some of the larger bikes would be ideal to learn on.

[Draco]

I have to agree with you guys about 70k being downright dangerous. When i was learning on my RG150 i foolishly displayed my L plate and nearly got pushed in the ditch several times. I wised up fast, ditched the L plate, stopped keeping left and rode at 100k with the rest of the traffic.

It would be good to be able to buy the bike you want (eg fireblade or whatever your choice of weapon) with the intention of keeping it right through your licence process and have it restricted while learning, but it's just so hard to enforce as you say.

As for the 250restriction getting ignored, i havent been that lucky. I've actually had a cop chase me, pull me over, do the whole licence/rego/warrent thing, when i asked why he pulled me over his excuse was he was checking to see if i had exceeded the 250 limit on a learners (i was fully licenced, not speeding and had no L plate). And they say they don't pick on us???!!!!

[Hitcher]

The curfew is a hang-over for boy-racers in cars, rather than bikers. The road is no more dangerous at 11:00pm than it is at 9:00pm.

[georgedubyabush]

Yeah, ditch the cc limit, but only for me OK.

What about no cc restriction for 25yrs plus? It makes sense to restrict young people. Thinking back to my stupid actions in cars when I was school age I have no doubt I'd've been a gonner if i'd had a bike back then. I'm sure there are exceptions to 25+ maturity levels, but It'd be an improvement I reckon. It might get a few older unlicenced riders legal too that wouldnt be otherwise.

[Ms Piggy]

I'm on my learners and I do wear my L plate - I guess for me it's kind of a way that I hope other drivers and riders will give me a little bit of an allowance for taking off slowly or stalling - which happens to me occasionally! :o

Because I actually only started riding when I bought my bike in December it made sense to me - except (as everyone has said) the stupid 70kms speed restriction and I don't mind the curfew b/c I'm such a novice rider.

I have been out on the M/Way a couple of times and just go at 100kms. I mean really if we are supposed to be learning I think the speed restriction is lame, the general non-riding public don't know that 70kms is the limit on the Learners License (I didn't until I started checking it out) so they get peeved. I guess the logic is that the faster you are allowed to go the faster you are likely to try & go and I suppose the LTSA always have to look at the worst case scenario.

From previous discussions I've had with riders on this topic my understanding is that :Police: are pretty lenient.

[Racer X]

Why do you guys put yourselves down? I bought a VFR400 for my first bike and a 750 a few months later. But it could have been a R1 or GSXR1000 and I'd still be here today just by not doing stupid things. I respect the people in America who are always buying 600's or Litre bikes to learn on. Keeping this in mind though I actually do believe the 250cc limit is all right, but only for the Learners. Restricted should be unlimited.
Oh, I don't ride with L-Plates either, I ride with F-Plates
F being fake :devil2: :whistle:

[Ms Piggy]

I dont think a power to weight law should be bought in. It is too hard to police and if it was bought in what differences would it make?? Maybe stop he NSR, RG and RS250's being ridden by learners. But hardly any learners ride these anyway.

Why do you guys think a power to weight law is better?

Can someone explain to me what the power to weight ratio is?

p.s I think only being allowed to go up to a 250cc on your Learners is a good thing - maybe if someone has been riding for years and has a lot of riding experieince they would find it frustrating but at the moment I wouldn't want to go any higher.

[matthewt]

Can someone explain to me what the power to weight ratio is?

To go fast you need two main things, 1) more power and 2) less weight.

A 100kg bike with 20hp means that each HP is pushing 5kg's. Now a 200kg bike with 100HP means each HP is only pushing 2kg's. The more power and less weight of the bike then the better the power/weight ratio and the faster it can go.

The reason this is better than a 250cc limit is because an RS250 from Aprillia has a damm good power/weight ratio and it would probably keep up with many 400cc/600cc bikes (thus making a farce of the whole idea behind the 250cc limit). On the other hand there are plenty of 400cc bikes which aren't very powerful and therefore would make good learner bikes (ie, not enough power so bad power/weight ratio).

Make sense ??

[matthewt]

To go fast you need two main things, 1) more power and 2) less weight.

This ratio is why even modest bikes tend to be faster than most cars. The cars don't make that much power and weigh A LOT more than bikes.

[Ms Piggy]

To go fast you need two main things, 1) more power and 2) less weight.

A 100kg bike with 20hp means that each HP is pushing 5kg's. Now a 200kg bike with 100HP means each HP is only pushing 2kg's. The more power and less weight of the bike then the better the power/weight ratio and the faster it can go.

The reason this is better than a 250cc limit is because an RS250 from Aprillia has a damm good power/weight ratio and it would probably keep up with many 400cc/600cc bikes (thus making a farce of the whole idea behind the 250cc limit). On the other hand there are plenty of 400cc bikes which aren't very powerful and therefore would make good learner bikes (ie, not enough power so bad power/weight ratio).

Make sense ??

Yup! Clear as mud! :bleh: Nah - makes good sense. Thanks :yes:

[riffer]

The more power and less weight of the bike then the better the power/weight ratio and the faster it can go.
Or an even better way to say it, is that the combination of high power and low weight gives you greater ACCELERATION.

I imagine this is where a lot of learners can get in trouble, more so than top speed, which is becoming more and more academic with HP on the prowl nearly everywhere.

Sure, you can get in trouble doing 130 around a corner which is signposted at 85, but a learner is more likely to get in trouble by accelerating faster than they can manouevre their bike.

I know this was the case for me when I started riding...

[MikeL]

Yes it's the acceleration which is the problem which is why a hp restriction makes more sense than a cc limit. The top speed capability is a bit academic and from my reading of overseas forums (Beginner Bikes is a good one) it seems that inexperienced riders are just as likely to get into trouble on powerful bikes below the speed limit as above it.
I reckon my CB-1 (400cc) would be a better bike for a beginner than some 250s. I think generally 400-500cc bikes are undervalued here because of the 250 requirement, after which most riders want to go straight for a 600 at least.

[Hitcher]

New South Wales has recently introduced a "power to weight" learner approved motorcycle regime. This includes (at one extreme) the Kawasaki 1500 Meanstreak, and a whole bunch of 600cc bikes, like the Ducati Monster.

[franco]

New South Wales has recently introduced a "power to weight" learner approved motorcycle regime. This includes (at one extreme) the Kawasaki 1500 Meanstreak, and a whole bunch of 600cc bikes, like the Ducati Monster.


I remember seeing a similar ozzy list of approved learner bikes. I think it also included the Harley Davidson Fatboy. Wow, a $30K learner bike. That's like the Merc and Beemer you see from time to time displaying L-plates in their windows...

[marty]

i ride with a guy on a ealry 90's CBR1000 quite often. although the max speed on the CBR is about 40k higher than mine, the accelleration time from 100 to 200 is about the same - he's twice as heavy as me, but doesn't have twice the horsepower.

of course the aprilia makes a lot more noise when it's doing it......

[wkid_one]

This ratio is why even modest bikes tend to be faster than most cars. The cars don't make that much power and weigh A LOT more than bikes. And lose a shit load of their power before it even gets to the ground thru their drive train!

Plus - cars have a higher weight - therefore higher inertia. This then leads in to acceleration.

Because a bike weighs less - it needs less energy (kw) to get it moving - therefore coupled with improved power to weight ratios - bikes get off the mark way quicker as there is less inertia to overcome.

And - friction is reduced with the ground as the bikes only have 2 wheels (not four or more) meaning EVEN LESS power is needed to get the bike moving.

It all adds up to the fact that with a better power to weight, less inertia and less frictions - bikes are quicker than cars in general terms.

Hence the whole E=MC2 discussion. If you reduce the mass, you need less energy to keep the equation balanced.

[Hitcher]

Hence the whole E=MC2 discussion. If you reduce the mass, you need less energy to keep the equation balanced.


I think you mean F=mA, not E=mC2

[k14]

Yeah, just quietly, quantum physics has nothing to do with motorbikes being faster than cars. Inertia doesnt have much to do with it either.

There is more inertia in the cars wheels than a bikes wheels, cause it has twice as many, but this has little to do with the reason why bikes are faster than cars.

The reason motorbikes are faster than cars is simply the fact that cars weigh around 1000-1600kg (in general) most bikes weigh about 1/10th of this. But they have between 1/5 (around) to the same amount of power as some cars. Thus they are alot faster.