Petition for removal of L plate and 70km/hr limit????

[bobsmith]

Hi all, after browing this site for a while and having had my learners for about a month, I'm beginning to come to terms with the fact that having to disply L plate and obey 70km/hr rule really really !*%^# sucks.

I wonder if anyone in the past has tried to start a petition against that, and how sucessful they were.... If not, can anyone advise me exactly what is involved in starting a petition like this?

[Fishy]

Load of crap really, I reckon probably only about 10% of learners actually stick to those rules anyway. Get rid of them both. Do learner car drivers have to stick to under 70kph?

[ZeroIndex]

Well... I'm about to go for my Learner's today, and although it would be nice to not have any signs pointing to my Learner-ness once I'm on the road, keeping the L plate (until the biker feels they have suffiecient skill that they don't need it) is good, cause a car just "might" be a little more cautious around them...

That stupid 100km/h and the 10pm - 5am thing has gotta go!

[Hitcher]

I have been told that cops ignore L-plate bearing bikes that move with the traffic at 100kmh.

Expecting a small at-risk vehicle to travel 30kmh slower than other traffic on the open road is a nonsense.

Based on personal experience, displaying an L plate is highly dangerous. It incenses some road users to all sorts of dumb shit -- my best experience was an imbecile in a Holden Clubsport who insisted on following me with about a 200mm gap between us while tooting his horn. When I got an opportunity I lane split a couple of vehicles between us. At which stage lather could be observed seaping out around his doors.

[Monsterbishi]

Yeah, and while we're at it lets allow cellphones to be used in cars because I can drive and talk without crashing.

Oh yeah, since we're doing away with the 70kph limit, lets ditch the 250cc limit too, learners will be fine on litre-bikes.

Learners are exactly that, learning, just because it didn't happen to you doesn't mean it won't happen to other people, the 70kph rule is there so that when ppl are getting to know bikes, they don't go doing something like over-reacting to a dog crossing the road and punching the rear brake hard, arsing off and generally causing strife.

L plates - nothing wrong with 'em, I'd rather be behind a biker knowing he's new to the game and give him a bit more room, than be following at 2 seconds and have to get all crossed up avoiding him when he screws up.

[enigma51]

The idea behind the rule is to make others aware of learners and the speed is to allow the learner to come to terms with riding a bike etc.

The thing I think we petition about is if bike have a cc restriction cars should too!

[Monsterbishi]

The idea behind the rule is to make others aware of learners and the speed is to allow the learner to come to terms with riding a bike etc.

The thing I think we petition about is if bike have a cc restriction cars should too!

Or follow the way parts of Australia do it, and have a power:weight limit.

[Ixion]

Why then are car learners not restricted to 70 whilst they are getting to grips with driving a car. ? And car drivers have not had to do a Basic Handling Test forst, so would be MORE in need of such protection than bikers. I cannot justify both the bike learner restrictions AND the BHT. Either would be justifiable in absence of the other, but if the BHT is doing what it is supposed to, then the learner restrictions are unjustifiable.

[Monsterbishi]

Why then are car learners not restricted to 70 whilst they are getting to grips with driving a car. ? And car drivers have not had to do a Basic Handling Test forst, so would be MORE in need of such protection than bikers. I cannot justify both the bike learner restrictions AND the BHT. Either would be justifiable in absence of the other, but if the BHT is doing what it is supposed to, then the learner restrictions are unjustifiable.

Basic Handling test for bikes = pointless - doesn't prove jack and almost anyone can pass it.

If a bike learner arses off a bike at 70+kph - they're toast, helmet aside - 90% of learners don't have any protective gear, if they survive it's gonna be fun fun fun picking the gravel out what's left of their skin.

If a car learner puts their car through a fence/into a tree, over a kerb at 70+kph - they're gonna end up a whole lot better off, such is the inherant benefit of cages, they only have one brake pedal that has a front bias, so can't screw that up, they have more brakes and traction at hand too.

Summary point is - bikes are more dangerous than cars, it's why we pay higher ACC premiums and why many medics despise them.

[bugjuice]

I think the L plate is a good idea, shows that the person could be prone to a mistake or two, so keep the distance. It's a shame in practice, that seldom happens.

I am, however fully against the 70kph rule. It's dangerous, stupid, and an extremely pointless exercise.

The other rules such as time restrictions, CC rating and no pillion, I also agree with.. fwiw

[Ixion]

Basic Handling test for bikes = pointless - doesn't prove jack and almost anyone can pass it.

If a bike learner arses off a bike at 70+kph - they're toast, helmet aside - 90% of learners don't have any protective gear, if they survive it's gonna be fun fun fun picking the gravel out what's left of their skin.

If a car learner puts their car through a fence/into a tree, over a kerb at 70+kph - they're gonna end up a whole lot better off, such is the inherant benefit of cages, they only have one brake pedal that has a front bias, so can't screw that up, they have more brakes and traction at hand too.

Summary point is - bikes are more dangerous than cars, it's why we pay higher ACC premiums and why many medics despise them.

If the BHT is pointless then abolish it - but I doubt those who framed the law intended it to be pointless, so the duplication betwixt that and the learner restrictions still stands - one could equally argue the 70kph rule is pointless since few obey it.

I observe that most learners who post here do indeed have a concern about suitable gear, and are often more anal about it than experienced riders - familiarity no doubt breeding contempt.

And whilst a learner in a car may be better protected from the fruits of their own error, the pedestrian, cyclist, or biker whom they take out in the process will not be. So that argument is lacking , the learner car driver is actually far MORE dangerous than the learner biker, the former has charge of a vehicle weighing a ton or more and is a danger to everybody , the latter by and large only to himself.

[Postie]

Learners are exactly that, learning, just because it didn't happen to you doesn't mean it won't happen to other people, the 70kph rule is there so that when ppl are getting to know bikes, they don't go doing something like over-reacting to a dog crossing the road and punching the rear brake hard, arsing off and generally causing strife.

L plates - nothing wrong with 'em, I'd rather be behind a biker knowing he's new to the game and give him a bit more room, than be following at 2 seconds and have to get all crossed up avoiding him when he screws up.

I haven't seen anybody lose control of their bike by using too much rear brake; I’ve seen it from too much front brake but not the back.

Plus if you are following someone too closely, regardless if they are a learner or not and you hit them if they fuck up, then you were following too closely and have no one to blame but yourself. Then again if you are following someone closely, you probably know that rider and their riding style, hence you would presumably know what license they have and if they are safe to follow closely.

[SwanTiger]

Hmm, I think the rules are there for a reason however they only prove worthwhile for a select group of riders. People with more experience should be given the opportunity to progress with their license faster so that they can remove the speed and L plate restrictions.

Maybe a 'Learner Exemption' where by the rider has completed an intermediate handling course (at their expense) that proves they are capable of 70kmph + speeds and can navigate traffic and the roads safely.

For those on scooters, or riders with little confidence, they should be stuck under 70kmph and with an L plate. This will usually encourage them to keep off the open road or motorways and confine them to cities and suburbs. That makes sense.

And personally, I can't imagine a petition emphasising the above being effective at all. A discussion could be invoked by I doubt that the Government would do anything, there will always be an opposition side who will come out with all sorts of statistics and bullshit to prevent such a thing happening.

Point being, know why you are breaking the law when you decide not to ride under 70kmph and use an L plate and explain to the police officer why. I intend on doing an couple of extra riding courses to prove my riding ability on a piece of paper and have these ready to present to any officer that challenges why I have no L plate or am exceeding 70kmph.

Then it will be up to them to use descretion as to whether or not I am really posing a safety risk to myself and other motorist as opposed to "just breaking the law". Maybe others should consider doing the same, as it gives you more weight than a line of "Its gay" or "I feel its too dangerous".

"I have completed several courses that enable me to comfortably navigate traffic and open roads exceeding 70kmph, here are my certificates, I do this because it is my opinion that riding obeying such laws as 70kmph may compromise my own safety and other road users".

Any cops want to opinion on what they'd do presented with that explanation?

[bugjuice]

Learners are exactly that, learning, just because it didn't happen to you doesn't mean it won't happen to other people, the 70kph rule is there so that when ppl are getting to know bikes, they don't go doing something like over-reacting to a dog crossing the road and punching the rear brake hard, arsing off and generally causing strife.
who's riding at 70+ in residential areas anyway? (legally)
you could be driving a car in the same circumstance and still fuck up, like skid off into a lamp post or someone's house.

Ride/drive to the situation

[MSTRS]

What Buggy said. In theory it's all good (the intent) but in practice, it's a dangerous crock. In saying that tho, I think the 'L' plate should stay. No pillion should stay. The cc thing is a hard one - easier to leave alone. Do away with the 70kph.
And what is with the 10pm thing? I never understood that one.

[Postie]

the rule i have the most problem with is the time retrictions. I have held a full drivers license for years and have experienced many different driving situations including ones between 10pm and 5am, yet on a R motor bike license i am still not allowed to ride between these hours. Why? anyone have one reason that is even close to making sense in this circumstance?

[Sniper]

Bad Idea to petition it. Just go with the flow, its only 6 months.

[phoenixgtr]

the rule i have the most problem with is the time retrictions. I have held a full drivers license for years and have experienced many different driving situations including ones between 10pm and 5am, yet on a R motor bike license i am still not allowed to ride between these hours. Why? anyone have one reason that is even close to making sense in this circumstance?

Thats exactly how I feel. I've been driving a car for almost a decade, at all hours, yet I can't ride my bike after 10pm. It's crap.

I think the trouble is that different learners have different levels of ability, experience (when it comes to traffic, conditions etc.) and confidence. In a perfect world the restrictions on learners should be relative to those factors, however, that would be a very expensive system

[Rosie]

I think the theory behind it all is good...

Learning to control your bike, and learning how traffic operates when you don't have anyone sitting next to you helping you out, is probably better done at lower speeds until you get the hang of it all.

Between 10pm and 5am a lot of people sleep. When you are still learning to ride a bike, you are more likely to make mistakes if you are tired. And motorbikes aren't the easiest things to see in the dark, especially if you are learning and likely to do random things.

An L plate warns other drivers that you may take a bit more time to do things, may stall at the traffic lights etc. Theoretically this will make people more understanding.

Of course, like any rule, there will be exceptions, but I think you have to draw the line somewhere, and encourage learners to ride in conditions that are suitable for their level of experience. Riding at 70 on the open road is a bit of a death wish, so I'm avoiding main highways until I am more comfortable on the bike (and of course, traffic on main highways doesn't always travel at 100km/h, I drive at 110 along SH 5 and hold everyone up as a result)

When I was learning to drive a car, you could halve the period of time on your learners licence if you took lessons through a driving school (I see they no longer do that though). I found driving lessons to be really helpful, and having something similar on the bike would be great. I think the learner licence period is a bit irrelevent, either you have the skills and pass the test, or you keep learning for a bit longer. Suggesting that 6 months is the minimum time it would take someone to come to terms with their bike, and be able to control it at 70+ km/h seems a bit excessive.

As something of an aside: How do people who don't drive find learning on a bike? I found learning to drive and getting the hang of traffic confusing as hell, and can't imagine trying to figure out the whole traffic thing, and the controls on the bike without someone there helping you out (as you do in a car).

Of course I've only been on my learners for 2 weeks. In 22 weeks time I will probably be heartily sick of it all, and be cursing the LTSA.

[bugjuice]

well, yeah.. may be some exemptions, but then once you start bending the rules for one and not the other, things start to get a bit messy..

Can't always have one rule for one, and another for the others.. Altho I do understand what you mean about the curfew.

[avrflr]

After taking a riding test, I was berated by the testing officer for doing 70kph on the motorway. He said I was putting myself in danger by riding that slowly and I agree with him. I never rode (or drove) with an L-plate when I was a learner - I think they are pointless. A bit like the baby on board sign in the back window: "I was going to crash into you, but seeing you have a baby on board, I won't." Yeah right. On a bike, whether you are learning or not, you might as well be invisible to cage drivers and it pays to assume you are. Unless you have a 2x2m L-plate with flashing LEDs - now that might help.

[ManDownUnder]

70kph is an inconvenience and is too restrictive in terms of road use (no motorwyas/open roads etc)

The L plate is handy... I tend to look out for them and know to treat them with kid gloves...

MDU

[Wolf]

Why then are car learners not restricted to 70 whilst they are getting to grips with driving a car. ? And car drivers have not had to do a Basic Handling Test forst, so would be MORE in need of such protection than bikers. I cannot justify both the bike learner restrictions AND the BHT. Either would be justifiable in absence of the other, but if the BHT is doing what it is supposed to, then the learner restrictions are unjustifiable.
I'm with you on this. Fair enough having the 70km/h restriction - ostensibly to keep newbies "safely" within city limits (prior to the towns having 80kmph zones) and off the motorways - back when you answered a few questions and were allowed to practise on the roads... You only got a riding test when you felt you were ready to go for your provisional.

However, you have to be able to demonstrate a degree of proficiency before you get a learners licence these days and even remote, laid-back bucolic locations like Te Awamutu/Kihikihi have an 80km/h zone so the 70km/h restriction should go.

The restriction on driving hours is crap and I personally subscribe to the cynical theory someone posted re it being because the old farts who make the rules are jealous of those young enough to go out and have fun.

The L plate can go unless the powers that be can demonstrate that there are more people who treat it with consideration for the newbs than those who treat it as a target and object of derision.

I've said for ages we should grab the Aussie power-weight restrictions and their list of "approved learner bikes" - our country is legendary for pinching every other bugger's legislation and it would make a pleasant change to pinch something intelligent that actually works rather than something that the country concerned is in the act of repealing because it was not working...

[Wolf]

Unless you have a 2x2m L-plate with flashing LEDs - now that might help.
No way you'd get moving into a head wind with that on the back of a 250 and you'd be done for more than just exceeding 70km/h if you had a decent tail-wind...

[Flatcap]

Summary point is - bikes are more dangerous than cars, it's why we pay higher ACC premiums and why many medics despise them.

As I understand it, bikes are just as dangerous as cars unless you crash, and most collisions are caused by the incompetence of cagers. Nevertheless the crash is recorded as a 'motorcycle accident' regardless of fault = increased acc for us. Bloody cagers should pay for the mahem they cause

[JWALKER]

yeah, definatly don't agree with 70km part,

[Postie]

well, yeah.. may be some exemptions, but then once you start bending the rules for one and not the other, things start to get a bit messy..

Can't always have one rule for one, and another for the others.. Altho I do understand what you mean about the curfew.
thats easy, i always have my full drivers licence and my restricted motorbike licece in my wallet, i can show the polite copper that i have a full drivers licence hense i am able to controll my motor bike in the same mannor at 10:01pm as i was at 9.59pm aswell as i am to drive a car at these hours and all the hours inbetween. Plus i'm 23 and don't need old slag Clark telling me when i have to go home.

[spudchucka]

I've got no problem with the L plate but the speed restriction is stupid. People tailgate at 100 kph but at 70 kph they are just about inserting themselves into your exhaust, which isn't a healthy situation for a learner motorcyclist. Its better to have all traffic flowing at a steady 100 kph. The benefits of which I believe have been demonstrated in the raising of trucks open road speed limit from 80 - 90 kph. Trucks now travel around 95ish most of the time, which allows other traffic to flow at a reasonable pace and reduces the number of frustrated drivers who are willing to overtake dangerously.

[slopster]

Personally I think that a learner should be able to advance to his restricted as soon as he is ready to do the test. Ride around for a month or so at a 70kmh with an L plate and then get your restricted.

Personally when I was on my learners I never stuck to 70kmh or had an L plate and never had a problem with the law.

[Hitcher]

thats easy, i always have my full drivers licence and my restricted motorbike licece in my wallet, i can show the polite copper that i have a full drivers licence hense i am able to controll my motor bike in the same mannor at 10:01pm as i was at 9.59pm aswell as i am to drive a car at these hours and all the hours inbetween. Plus i'm 23 and don't need old slag Clark telling me when i have to go home.
Go directly to jail, if the cop who apprehends you does a license check. It is illegal to carry two licenses, as you describe. And the cop will probably be totally indifferent as to which mannor you're in, as that doesn't affect his jurisdiction.

[MSTRS]

Between 10pm and 5am a lot of people sleep. When you are still learning to ride a bike, you are more likely to make mistakes if you are tired. And motorbikes aren't the easiest things to see in the dark, especially if you are learning and likely to do random things.
And how do you rationalise this for those that work nightshifts?? The darkness angle doesn't fly either, since the cutoff time is the same all year round. Summer full dark say 9.30pm. Winter full dark say 5.30pm.

An L plate warns other drivers that you may take a bit more time to do things, may stall at the traffic lights etc. Theoretically this will make people more understanding.
That's the theory - gives fair warning etc but the pathologically blind or stupid will always be a problem

Of course I've only been on my learners for 2 weeks. In 22 weeks time I will probably be heartily sick of it all, and be cursing the LTSA.
You will...

[Lou Girardin]

The BHT is exactly that. It simply ensures that you can operate a bike before you're allowed in traffic.
The L plate was introduced so that other drivers realise that they are learners and treat them with tolerance and courtesy.:rofl:
The 70 km/h limit may have made some sense when the limit was 80, now it presents too great a differential to be safe.
It probably is time for a review. But then you have the probability of the LTNZ stuffing it all up.

[Postie]

how is it illigal to carry a full drivers licence and a r motorcycle lisence??

[Hitcher]

how is it illigal to carry a full drivers licence and a r motorcycle lisence??
You are only allowed one licence. When you were issued with your learner licence you should have been asked to surrender your previous full licence. If you have a restricted motorcycle licence it will state the other classes of licence you hold. It will be yellow, and have a code that says something like "1, 6R" at the bottom. Any green licence you may have once held is made invalid once you get issued a blue or yellow one. Presenting an invalid licence is an illegal act. Code 5b on your licence is the version control number.

[Ixion]

Go directly to jail, if the cop who apprehends you does a license check. It is illegal to carry two licenses, as you describe. And the cop will probably be totally indifferent as to which mannor you're in, as that doesn't affect his jurisdiction.

I do not believe that it is illegal. The "old" licence will be invalid, so if you present it to a cop and he checks it, he will come back and say "Your licence is no longer valid" - whereupon you'll need to give him the "new" one.

Incidentally I have heard several cases of this (IMHO stupid) practice causing no end of problems for people trying to rent a car overseas. Turnip up to the rental desk and give them your licence with "learner" plastered all over it and see how far you get. And pointing to the , to them incomprehensible, 1, 6L bit ain't going to get you any further. It is a genuine problem, caused once again by the stupidity of the bureaucrats , who as usual don't give a stuff. Why CAN'T you have a separate licence for each stage? Fair enough to just list the classes if you're at the same stage on each ( so the guy with classes 1 2 3 4 5 6 doesn't need to carry 6 licences ) , but a learner licence is NOT the same thing as a full licence.

[Ixion]

.. Presenting an invalid licence is an illegal act. .

Citation please .

[bugjuice]

You are only allowed one licence. When you were issued with your learner licence you should have been asked to surrender your previous full licence. If you have a restricted motorcycle licence it will state the other classes of licence you hold. It will be yellow, and have a code that says something like "1, 6R" at the bottom. Any green licence you may have once held is made invalid once you get issued a blue or yellow one. Presenting an invalid licence is an illegal act. Code 5b on your licence is the version control number.
and the fact he's on a 400..??

[Postie]

You are only allowed one licence. When you were issued with your learner licence you should have been asked to surrender your previous full licence. If you have a restricted motorcycle licence it will state the other classes of licence you hold. It will be yellow, and have a code that says something like "1, 6R" at the bottom. Any green licence you may have once held is made invalid once you get issued a blue or yellow one. Presenting an invalid licence is an illegal act. Code 5b on your licence is the version control number.
they never asked me to submit my full drivers licence when i got my bike licence 3 years ago and i have presented my drivers licence when i was stopped in my car about 4 months ago and no questioned were asked and it was and still is valid. so ho0w do you explain that?

[Hitcher]

they never asked me to submit my full drivers licence and i have presented it when i was stopped in my car about 4 months ago and no questioned were asked and it was and still is valid. so ho0w do you explain that?
The fact that you presented an invalid licence (which by definition it must be) and got away with it does not validate that licence. The only valid licence you have is your yellow one. This will still state that you have a full licence for a car, so you are doing yourself no favours by using your old invalid green licence. Of course you can still use it as you have indicated. But don't come moaning here if you get busted for doing this.

[Hitcher]

I do not believe that it is illegal. The "old" licence will be invalid, so if you present it to a cop and he checks it, he will come back and say "Your licence is no longer valid" - whereupon you'll need to give him the "new" one.
I'm not disagreeing with you or defending LTNZ's licencing policies. I'm just telling you how it is.

Having had to lose a green licence to get a blue, then yellow and, eventually, a green one again, I agree that this is a stupid system. It makes more sense to get a green licence with "6L" or "6R" printed on it. I raised this with LTNZ at the time.

And when I get a moment I shall produce the references that support my assertion about the illegality of presenting an invalid licence.

[Postie]

But don't come moaning here if you get busted for doing this.

Yes dad.......

but seriously, i would never have thought that it would be illigal but i also would have thought that since i was issued demerit points for doing 100 over the harbour bridge and the cop took my licence to check, that he might have said something to this effect. I'm not saying your wrong, i'm just saying that i have presented my full drivers licence and i am not in jail.

[Hitcher]

Yes dad.......

but seriously, i would never have thought that it would be illigal but i also would have thought that since i was issued demerit points for doing 100 over the harbour bridge and the cop took my licence to check, that he might have said something to this effect. I'm not saying your wrong, i'm just saying that i have presented my full drivers licence and i am not in jail.
And I'm saying you're lucky. Be warned.

[Rosie]

I didn't get a blue licence when I got my class 2 learners last year. Which made me all the more surprised when I got my blue licence this time. I got a class 4 learners at the same time as my motorbike licence, so I'll be interested to see what colour subsequent licences are (4L blue + 6R yellow = green?)

The AA took my licence off me and cut it up when I did my learners test. Maybe they are aware of the multiple licence trick.

And as far as the illegality of the old licence, I imagine if you gave the cop your old licence, he figures out that it's not valid, and you say "ha, ha, nearly had you, here's the real one" they wouldn't shrug and say "oh well, it's not illegal" and leave you to go on your merry way.

http://www.legislation.govt.nz probably has something to say on the matter.

[marty]

the 70 limit for bikes is probably there as car learners are supposed to have a licenced driver in the car with them at all times, and as a learner you're not allowed to carry a pillion, so it's a 'happy' medium i guess, between not having to be supervised, and being safe during the initial learning period.

[Sketchy_Racer]

I feel that all the rules regarding L plates are fine.

You are a learner. You get a L plate. Simple.

But the 70KPH limit is a little silly. Exspially when a bike is ones only means of transport to commute to town and back each day.

And

There should be a Way that you can reduce your time on your Learners but proving that you are not a learner..

For me example.

I have Raced bikes for the 4 years on road. I would like to believe that i can ride as well or better that your average joe blog street rider.

But i am classed as a learner on road cause they dont know my history with bikes.

Confusing but can you see my point??

cheers,

-RG

[Lazy7]

you have to remember one thing.

if a learner on a bike gets silly and asses off, he is most likely only going to hurt himself.

if a learner in a car gets silly and 'asses off' there is a much higher chance he will hurt other people as well.

i'm into performance cars and i can tell you some of these young kids that given evo's by their parents for their 16th birthdays are a serious hazard on the road. even an experienced driver can get surprised by how quickly stuff happens in a car that will do 0-100 in 4.5 seconds from the factory.

i think the L plates put an unneccesary stress on the learner rider to perform on the roads. if they bugger it up, they are subject to ridacule and contempt and that level of embarresment makes you do stupid things... like forgetting to indicate, or not looking where you are going.

i think the 70km an hour thing on the open road is also stupid because aucklanders in general will be doing 40-50km's faster than you on the open road so will be approaching you a lot faster than they expect to and thats dangerous as well.

i definitely think there needs to be some safety regulations and i personally think the 250limit is a one is good one. i've never understood the time limits though... would have thought it would be more dangerous to ride at peak hour traffic at 9 in the morning!

a possible idea would be to have the tests for restricted and full licences a lot harder, and more expensive, but allow people to take them when ever they wanted... so you could do them all in a week if you'd like, but they were brutal to pass and twice the price so you knew you had to be on your game to get past them.

a mate of mine recently got his motorcycle licence in france and it was incredibly difficult. there was also a standdown period of 6 weeks for a resit if he failed. but there was only 1 test.

[froggyfrenchman]

What Buggy said. In theory it's all good (the intent) but in practice, it's a dangerous crock. In saying that tho, I think the 'L' plate should stay. No pillion should stay. The cc thing is a hard one - easier to leave alone. Do away with the 70kph.
And what is with the 10pm thing? I never understood that one.

im with you, with the exception of the cc restriction. change that to a horsepower cap. Think about it... on a restricted licence, i can ride a cbr250rr or a rgv250, but im not allowed near my 1951 triumph with a top speed of bout 85km!

[Wolf]

im with you, with the exception of the cc restriction. change that to a horsepower cap. Think about it... on a restricted licence, i can ride a cbr250rr or a rgv250, but im not allowed near my 1951 triumph with a top speed of bout 85km!
We've argued this point until the cows come home. There are tons of bikes that are weaker than modern 250s and there are a few 250s that are just insanely fast or powerful. The list that the Aussies use actually looks sensible - it bans a few 250s and allows a fair few 650s but our moronic politicians think implementing such a thing here would be "too difficult to police" despite the Aussies managing to do so quite well.

[Streetwise]

Bikes may be more dangerous in the hands of some. But with experience and knowledge riders do adapt and realise that there own safety is in there hands. A wrong decision may hurt for a long long time. As for the basic handling Skills Assessment you do have a point, I know why they have the course but it does lack the realism of the road. A car park will never be the same as the Wellington motorway at 5pm or for that matter any road,

[Nicksta]

My $0.02....
Keep the 250cc restriction, ditch the 70km/hr rule, keep the plate, keep the 10pm rule for learners licence.... it is dangerous to go slower than the reccommended limit and the flow of traffic.... the 10pm rule is good as tiredness effects you when your a noobie... restricted should not have it though... L plate does inform people of your newness to riding... even though i think it makes cages drive stupid around you....
Ps. I do believe Cages should also have restrictions on engine horsepower: non turbo, 1.5L and less...

[Back Fire]

My $0.02....
Keep the 250cc restriction, ditch the 70km/hr rule, keep the plate, keep the 10pm rule for learners licence.... it is dangerous to go slower than the reccommended limit and the flow of traffic.... the 10pm rule is good as tiredness effects you when your a noobie... restricted should not have it though... L plate does inform people of your newness to riding... even though i think it makes cages drive stupid around you....
Ps. I do believe Cages should also have restrictions on engine horsepower: non turbo, 1.5L and less...

word

10 characters

[muzz]

Get rid of the 70 kph rule, keep the L plate, restrict bikes to a horse power rating eg :40 hp not a cc rating. This allows bigger poeple to get a bike that they can be more comfortable on and stop newbies getting on high performance 250's. I believe Cages should also have restrictions on engine horsepower. Keep the riding courses i think that they do benefit all riders,yes even the more experienced ones who think they know it all. Compulsary track days would be good, must do one every two years min.

[ajturbo]

it is not the speed .. but the lack of experance.....:slap: :beer:

[ajturbo]

Get rid of the 70 kph rule, keep the L plate, restrict bikes to a horse power rating eg :40 hp not a cc rating. This allows bigger poeple to get a bike that they can be more comfortable on and stop newbies getting on high performance 250's. I believe Cages should also have restrictions on engine horsepower. Keep the riding courses i think that they do benefit all riders,yes even the more experienced ones who think they know it all. Compulsary track days would be good, must do one every two years min.

now you are on the right track!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[pzkpfw]

How about an "E" plate for "Elderly drivers", so when we see them we can excuse them their mistakes, and cut them some slack (the way people should treat the "L" platers).

We'd tell them it was "E" for "Experienced".

Cheers,

[Hitcher]

And a W plate for Wankers:

For doing no more than 95kmh in the right-hand lanes of dual carriageways and motorways
For never using their indicators to inform other motorists of their intention to change lanes or turn
For texting whilst driving
For having "baby on board" danglers in their rear windows
For travelling at 90kmh on the open road, except for where there are passing lanes, when they accelerate to 120kmh
For fitting "performance exhausts" to automatic cars that then moo like a wildebeast on heat
For generally getting on my wick.

[Wolf]

And a W plate for Wankers:
No need, they already have vehicles that come prelabelled in Spanish: "Pajero" :dodge:

[ZeroIndex]

And a W plate for Wankers:

For doing no more than 95kmh in the right-hand lanes of dual carriageways and motorways
For never using their indicators to inform other motorists of their intention to change lanes or turn
For texting whilst driving
For having "baby on board" danglers in their rear windows
For travelling at 90kmh on the open road, except for where there are passing lanes, when they accelerate to 120kmh
For fitting "performance exhausts" to automatic cars that then moo like a wildebeast on heat
For generally getting on my wick.

HAHAHAHA, that's good... they should consider that one...

[scumdog]

I didn't get a blue licence when I got my class 2 learners last year. Which made me all the more surprised when I got my blue licence this time. I got a class 4 learners at the same time as my motorbike licence, so I'll be interested to see what colour subsequent licences are (4L blue + 6R yellow = green?)

The AA took my licence off me and cut it up when I did my learners test. Maybe they are aware of the multiple licence trick.

And as far as the illegality of the old licence, I imagine if you gave the cop your old licence, he figures out that it's not valid, and you say "ha, ha, nearly had you, here's the real one" they wouldn't shrug and say "oh well, it's not illegal" and leave you to go on your merry way.

http://www.legislation.govt.nz probably has something to say on the matter.

Or say "I'll keep your old one, see you later"

[scumdog]

Get rid of the 70 kph rule, keep the L plate, restrict bikes to a horse power rating eg :40 hp not a cc rating. This allows bigger poeple to get a bike that they can be more comfortable on and stop newbies getting on high performance 250's. I believe Cages should also have restrictions on engine horsepower. Keep the riding courses i think that they do benefit all riders,yes even the more experienced ones who think they know it all. Compulsary track days would be good, must do one every two years min.

And who, pray, is going to pay to have all this checked?? And how often??

[scumdog]

you have to remember one thing.

if a learner on a bike gets silly and asses off, he is most likely only going to hurt himself.

if a learner in a car gets silly and 'asses off' there is a much higher chance he will hurt other people as well.



But even at a low speed the biker is more likely to hurt himself, especailly as 'most' learners don't buy any protective gear.

The rest I agree.

[muzz]

And who, pray, is going to pay to have all this checked?? And how often??
Who pays now?
You can drive a moped on a car licence as long as it is under 2kw not all 50cc scooters are under that some are higher, so the same rule would apply to bikes up to say 40hp. It would have to work on the factory spec's.
Don't computers do all the checking anyway.

[MSTRS]

Who pays now?
You can drive a moped on a car licence as long as it is under 2kw not all 50cc scooters are under that some are higher, so the same rule would apply to bikes up to say 40hp. It would have to work on the factory spec's.
Don't computers do all the checking anyway.
But how do you check that?? We all know that 250's vary wildly in their power outputs & that many/most can be resleeved/barrelled to increase the capacity, but a HP rating is just impossible to oversee. Look what Burt Munro did with his old Indian - his special magic took a bike capable of 80kph and turned it into a fire-breathing monster capable of over 300kph.
Better to leave the cc thing in place, although perhaps remove certain models ie NSR250, RVG250 etc

[muzz]

But how do you check that?? We all know that 250's vary wildly in their power outputs & that many/most can be resleeved/barrelled to increase the capacity, but a HP rating is just impossible to oversee. Look what Burt Munro did with his old Indian - his special magic took a bike capable of 80kph and turned it into a fire-breathing monster capable of over 300kph.
Better to leave the cc thing in place, although perhaps remove certain models ie NSR250, RVG250 etc


Ok I see your point, Hard one to police. :scratch: If you are a learner the bike you are riding has to be dinotuned and engine sealed and certified. Lower the horsepower to 30hp to allow for after market air filters and exhausts mods. The police cant really tell whats going on with engines anyway. I know of one chap who put a 400cc engine in his 250 frame and kept it registered as 250 the only way to tell is to check engine No's and they dont do that unless you give them a reason. There will always be someone out there who will push the limits. :yes: How can they stop people speeding?

[MSTRS]

The police cant really tell whats going on with engines anyway.
Most can't at least.

I know of one chap who put a 400cc engine in his 250 frame and kept it registered as 250 the only way to tell is to check engine No's and they dont do that unless you give them a reason. There will always be someone out there who will push the limits. :yes:
There will always be some who aint happy with any restrictions

How can they stop people speeding?
Realistically you can't. Even my wife's 250 cruiser will do 150kph (although not with her in control)<_<

[Flatcap]

The bottom line on all of this is that if you get rid of the L-plate and the speed restriction, you get rid of the whole learner stage as those are the only differences between Learners and Restricted licences. I think the L-plate is a good motivator to do the Restricted practical test asap. Without the humiliation of an L-plate folk would stay on learners forever and those with no skills beyond the Basic Riding test would never be weeded out

[scumdog]

Without the humiliation of an L-plate folk would stay on learners forever and those with no skills beyond the Basic Riding test would never be weeded out

Never figured out this 'humiliation' thing, must be an immature persons thing??

Would take a shit-load more than an "L" plate to humiliate me these days.

[Wolf]

And who, pray, is going to pay to have all this checked?? And how often??
How do the cops currently deal with the question of which 50cc bike requires a bike licence and which only needs a learner cage licence? Is there something on the rego sticker or are they expected to memorise every nutless bike on the market? Or do they have to radio Comms and say "can you look up that fucking list and tell me if this dickhead is allowed to ride a '74 Nifty 50 on a cage licence?"

Go back to the good ol' days of printing a different coloured rego sticker (and ensuring it is prominently displayed) for those bikes that are suitable for learners - it worked fine in the old days with the different stickers for learner/provisional and full licence holders. Hell, if Lou managed to comprehend it, anyone can! (pt)

The rego issuing authorities all have computers that tell them if the vehicle has a current WoF, it can certainly tell them if it's an approved make/model for a learner.

Surely coloured regos issued by the appropriate authority - Pink = "Nutless PoS requiring only a Cage Licence", Green = "Suitable for Learner/Restricted Licence" and Blue = "Full Licence Required" - would be easier to spot at the roadside. If the bugger is obeying the road rules, well and good. If pulled over for misbehaving or a spot check it would be a matter of looking at the colour of the sticker, ensuring it has the right details for that bike (that is one good thing about the new rego stickers, it's pointless stealing them now) and confirming the rider has the appropriate class of licence.

If coloured regos are a prob, a code on the rego sticker (POS, LRN or FUL) should be all that's required.

I had initially thought in terms of going back to the old way - learner and restricted licence holders having to get and display "learner/restricted" class labels - but that would cause probs with people of different licence classes wanting to share bikes (parent and child) and be yet another target for inconsiderate twats. It would probably be better and easier (rego authority staff not having to ask "Do you want a Learner Label or Full, Sir? Did you want fries with that?") if the labels printed out in the appropriate colour or with the appropriate code by default to show the minimum licence requirement. If the rider has a full licence on a Learner level bike: no harm, no foul. If the rider does not have sufficient licence for the bike: lecture and revenue collecting time!

As to paying for the actual categorising, the Aussies have already done that, just browse to their public site where they list acceptable learner level bikes and select-copy-paste the info. I volunteer to personally interface that information with the New Zealand vehicle registration system and put the appropriate flags on the bikes deemed suitable for learners for the super-low price of a brand new road-legal DR400 or DR650.

That way we keep the young'uns off pocket cruise missiles, give 'em a wider selection of bikes to learn on, because the field seems to be getting narrower these days, and keep it simple for the cop on the streets because all (s)he has to do is look at the rego and licence and ensure there's no discrepancy - "Suzuki LS650 on a Learner Licence - no prob! You with the RGV250, you'd better have a full licence in your wallet..."

Getting rid of the stupid curfew would cost nothing and save the cops having to licence-check people riding around at night and newbie or restricted riders who work shifts or go out to the late session of the movies won't be inconvenienced. Newbies of the "night owl" persuasion can ride around the streets at three in the morning when there're fewer other vehicles around and get their road skills up a bit before mixing it with rush-hour traffic and stressed-out soccer-moms in Remuera tractors.

The "L" plate would cost nothing to lose and would make the learners less of a target. As to the "it's to let people know thay might do something silly" argument - fully licensed people do silly crap without warning all the time and we're expected to cope with it. For some, their stupidity and bad driving/riding practices are ingrained from years of not doing it right, and they aren't required to have a large label (like Hitcher's suggested W plate) to say "I still don't have a fucking clue of the road rules or how to indicate before turning". And there're no convenient warning labels for "I don't give a fuck, I'm going to slowly pull out against the red light and if you hit our car my bros'll get out and stomp your fucking head so you'd better stop arsehole."

We never had L plates in my day, the sharks had to look for the coloured rego sticker and know what colours the R and M stickers were for the current period. Only bikers, cops and sharks knew the colour code because it never occured to cagers that there was a code. Somehow we survived not having people afford us "extra consideration" for our newbie or provisional status. We also didn't have wankers specifically target us for being newbies. The wankers just had to make do with targetting us for being on bikes.

People operating vehicles - newbs and experienced people alike - are going to do unexpected or dickheaded things and I personally don't think the newbs cock up significantly more than the fuckwits, drunks, arrogant arseholes, testosterone fueled hoons, stressed or distracted commuters or just plain tired folk.

Speed restriction? the 70km/h limit never kept us off the "open road", some broke their licence conditions to stay with the flow, some obeyed the restrictions and put themselves at risk. They've increased the maximum speed for trucks and cars towing trailers so that they are less of a hazard on the open road so why not put the top speed up to 90 or remove the restriction altogether. Short of requiring newbs to stay within the "safety" ( :killingme :killingme :killingme ) of the city limits and putting a fucking great fluoro marker (which they will ditch anyway) on them so that they can be spotted if they stray outside, there is no way to stop learners from riding on the open roads and 'twould be safer an they were travelling at the same speed as everyone else.

My personal take is that they would be safer at 100km/h on a quiet open road than they would be at 50km/h in a crowded street where they are more likely to have some dick pull out in front of them or arse-end them or wind up in the midst of a pile-up.

[Ixion]

Ok I see your point, Hard one to police. :scratch: If you are a learner the bike you are riding has to be dinotuned and engine sealed and certified. Lower the horsepower to 30hp to allow for after market air filters and exhausts mods. The police cant really tell whats going on with engines anyway. I know of one chap who put a 400cc engine in his 250 frame and kept it registered as 250 the only way to tell is to check engine No's and they dont do that unless you give them a reason. There will always be someone out there who will push the limits. :yes: How can they stop people speeding?


Sure people could tune their engiens for more power. But ther would only be a few that were legal before and illegal after. And the same problem applies now to the 250cc rule. Apart from complete engine swaps there's quite a lot of bikes can be overbored or have different barrels fitted. That's totally impossible for anyone but an expert to tell without an engine strip down. F'instance, the barrel and piston of a TT350 yammy will fit (almost) straight on Ratty (a 250) . Prolly need the bigger carb, and maybe zorst, but no harder than most hot-ups.

[Flatcap]

Never figured out this 'humiliation' thing, must be an immature persons thing??

Would take a shit-load more than an "L" plate to humiliate me these days.


Perhaps humiliation is too strong a word, however you would have to agree the old L-Plate isn't an ideal accessory for your bike. (although Jap scooterists seem to think so for some reason)

[Ixion]

I agree with Mr Wolf .

A point about the 70kph limit. Many people infer that the reason for it is to keep learners off the open road/motorways. I do not think this is a valid deduction. If that had been the intentioon of the legislators, they could have simply said so. The condition could have been " You are not permitted to ride on any road with a permanent speed limit of more than 70kph". They didn't so we cannot assume that was their intention. We must assume that for some strange reason they thought that 70kph was safer than 100kph.

And the new rego stickers didn't stop some prat stealing my GT750 one! I thought I'd had a senior moment when I noticed the expired sticker (luckily, before a cop did ) and forgotten to reregister it - went to the Post Office to do so and they said "But it is already licensed ?". And kindly gave me a replacement for free.

[muzz]

Wolf : well said, I think that all makes sence.:niceone:
And I'm buggered if I know how they know what 50 is legal or not.

[Wolf]

Never figured out this 'humiliation' thing, must be an immature persons thing??

Would take a shit-load more than an "L" plate to humiliate me these days.
If they truly were humiliated by the L plate, they just wouldn't display one - so long as they don't act like dicks or get caught in a spot check, who's gonna know? As it is they're ditching the L-plate so they can breach the curfew and travel at 100km/h without sticking out like a white man in Harlem and trading on the fact that the cops aren't psychic.

[muzz]

Sure people could tune their engiens for more power. But ther would only be a few that were legal before and illegal after. And the same problem applies now to the 250cc rule. Apart from complete engine swaps there's quite a lot of bikes can be overbored or have different barrels fitted. That's totally impossible for anyone but an expert to tell without an engine strip down. F'instance, the barrel and piston of a TT350 yammy will fit (almost) straight on Ratty (a 250) . Prolly need the bigger carb, and maybe zorst, but no harder than most hot-ups.


If the bike was dinotuned , sealed , the hotting up you suggest would be hard to do with out braking the seal.

[Ixion]

The bottom line on all of this is that if you get rid of the L-plate and the speed restriction, you get rid of the whole learner stage as those are the only differences between Learners and Restricted licences. I think the L-plate is a good motivator to do the Restricted practical test asap. Without the humiliation of an L-plate folk would stay on learners forever and those with no skills beyond the Basic Riding test would never be weeded out

Easy answer to that one, have a maximum period you can stay on at each stage (I think they do this in the UK). Make it, say, a year on learners - within that time you must take the next stage, or your licence lapses and you can't start over again for (say) 3 months.

Also deals with the folk that get a learners/restricted but never upgrade cos they are incompetant (surprising number like that !)

[Ixion]

If the bike was dinotuned , sealed , the hotting up you suggest would be hard to do with out braking the seal.
What if the bike breaks and needs fixing ?

[willy_01]

i agree there has to be laws conserning learners, but i feel that every one breaks them. as i learner id never travel at 70kms because A its a pain in the ass and B i reckon its dangerous. As for the 250cc restriction in my case its just stupid im a big fella, 120kgs (yes yes i ate all the pies) and a 250cc bike was gut less piece of crap on open roads, so ive now upgraded to a old vf1000, soo much safer, stops faster, handles better and can keep up with traffic better ect. As for the L plate yep i had one but it fell off about a 6 months ago, cant be bothered getting another one. I reckon the best way for new bikers to become old bikers ie not kill themselves is to have a good 'off' on a low powered bike, i had one and it works like an in built speed limiter. now i know my limits, on any bike. But there has to be laws i guess, just sucks that to enjoy my hobby im constantly running the risk of getting a ticket!

[Ivan]

Ok I have proved it The L PLATE is a target to most drivers they get all stupid and think they are hot shot and blast past you or undertake around a bridge for all things. The day I went for my car restricted I had the L PLATE on and everyone passed me and did dangerous shit got to Masterton and sat my restricted took the L PLATE off and drive home and knowone passed me whats going on here? Simple everyone trys to be cool

[Wolf]

Sure people could tune their engiens for more power. But ther would only be a few that were legal before and illegal after. And the same problem applies now to the 250cc rule. Apart from complete engine swaps there's quite a lot of bikes can be overbored or have different barrels fitted. That's totally impossible for anyone but an expert to tell without an engine strip down. F'instance, the barrel and piston of a TT350 yammy will fit (almost) straight on Ratty (a 250) . Prolly need the bigger carb, and maybe zorst, but no harder than most hot-ups.
Hondacmx450 had the head off a 250 when he was looking at my GSX and showed me exactly how thick the sleeve is (let's just say "bullet proof") and how far you need to bore it out to go up various sizes - plenty of room to bore the bastard out and the engine numbers would still match. Carbs are just a matter of re-jetting, I think. A couple of days off the road and a few hundred dollars and "Get fucked 250cc restriction!"

A co-worker of mine was into racing Vespas - he told me a lot of the mods you can do to a 2-stroke engine to increase power and speed: reworked exhaust system with carefully designed expansion chambers, mods to the bore and pistons etc. His Vespa was capable of insane, illegal speeds but looked like it couldn't make the open road limit. He used to have a radar detector on it and would throttle off when he got pinged. The cops would be looking at all the cars going past trying to work out who had been speeding but they never looked twice at the little Vespa buzzing along below the speed limit...

There are always ways around restrictions for those with the time, money and inclination to do so but the majority of the people are going to buy their bikes, go through the stages of their licences and either trade up or decide they love the bike as it is and keep it until they've polished off the third application of chrome.

And really, what value is the 250 restriction when you can buy an NSR or RGV that accelerate harder and go faster than some 650s? (the Aussie site will tell you precisely which 650s - they're on the approved list, the NSR and RGV aren't). There are bigger bikes on that "acceptable" list that, even if fully worked, still would not keep up with a stock RGV350 or NSR250 such as newbies can buy now.

If a total newb wants a dangerous vehicle that will most likely take him to the grave right now if he fails to respect it and exercise common sense, he currently has a few totally legal options. The RG250 Gamma comes stock standard with the sort of mods that that co-worker had done to his Vespa - it's a prime example of a "worked" 2-stroke.

Not all total newbs are young, dumb and full of cum, many I've met are quite responsible and I know those who have made up their own minds that they will start off on tamer 250s before racing out and buying an NSR. Frankly, I don't see why such intelligent people shouldn't be riding around on 400s and 650s of lowish power but greater comfort, stability and (to my mind) safety.

[willy_01]

"If a total newb wants a dangerous vehicle that will most likely take him to the grave right now if he fails to respect it and exercise common sense, he currently has a few totally legal options. The RG250 Gamma comes stock standard with the sort of mods that that co-worker had done to his Vespa - it's a prime example of a "worked" 2-stroke." QUOTE WOLF


haha, they arent THAT bad, my rg was my first motor bike =, was pretty sweet to learn on. i reckon it comes down heaps to the individual, more than the bike & its power. But your right some 250 will 'buck you off' a lot easier than bigger 'lazier' 4 stroke bikes

[magg]

isnt the limit 80kms/h?

[Hitcher]

isnt the limit 80kms/h?
And which "limit" is that? The L-plate limit is 70kmh.

There needs to be an amnesty system for people who don't know their Road Code to surrender their licences and become passengers...

[Wolf]

haha, they arent THAT bad, my rg was my first motor bike =, was pretty sweet to learn on. i reckon it comes down heaps to the individual, more than the bike & its power. But your right some 250 will 'buck you off' a lot easier than bigger 'lazier' 4 stroke bikes
A lot of smaller bikes I've noticed have pissy narrow tyres that slide in the dry let alone the wet, small wheels that are thrown out of whack mounting the layer of paint on the road markings let alone a pot hole and the brakes are an afterthought. The bigger-engined bikes tend to be better made - the tyres are wider and the wheels are more substantial and the brakes are better. They accelerate, decelerate and brake a lot more predictably and smoothly than some of the smaller bikes I've ridden. I'd rather see one of those larger bikes - like my old LS400 - in the hands of a newb than my old "safe" RX125.

On a dry road on the RX a panicked tread on the brakes had the arse end fish-tailing all over the road. On a dry road on the LS a solid hard braking stopped the bike quickly with no sideways movement at all. On damp grass on the LS deliberately slamming on the rear brake did not cause fish tailing - I had to deliberately thrown my weight to the side to get it to skid sideways under braking.

As to the power issues, the RG is not an untameable demon and is reputedly easy to control under most circumstances but it does have a powerband that could land an inexperienced rider fully "in it" under adverse conditions. If asked whether I'd rather see a person make a panicked twist of the throttle on an RG250 or my old LS400, I'd have to say the 400 - it does not have the sudden responsiveness of the RG, nor the power nor the top end. But we're not talking general riding here, we're talking an inexperienced person making a tactical blunder that I'd rather see them live to learn from.

I do not think RGs and NSRs are overly dangerous bikes or that LS650s are "safe", but I am mindful of some of my own panicked reactions (face it, riding a motorcycle is not intuitive, we train ourselves to do what we do and by and large we train ourselves so well it feels like we were born doing it) when learning and there were times when my little RX125 commuter was more dangerous than an LS650 or 400 would have been under similar circumstances with the same panicky rider. Other times, the greater power of the 400/650 might have been more potentially dangerous but OTOH I probably would not have felt inclined to be horsing around on a 400 or 650 and the situation may not have occured.

A horse power restriction would make more sense than a straight 250cc restriction even if they turned around and said "fuck it, we've been letting newbs ride RGVs and NSRs for years we might as well make that the cut-off point!" - because the increased number of models that a HP restriction would allow wld make for a better scope for new riders to find a bike that fits and suits them and that in itself is bound to increase safety.

Saying "it doesn't matter how tall you are, you can ride a Yamahozuki DRXL250 which has a nice tall frame for riders your size" just doesn't fucking cut it for me (not that that has ever been my problem, I'm a short-arse) because you've got to find the bugger and be able to afford it. The only bikes you can find in your price range are a nearly new GN125, an old GT250 and an old but still good LS650, the latter of which is the only bike you can sit on without bruising your knees on the underside of your helmet or hunching over like Quasimodo's less-fortunate brother. In Australia you could buy the LS650, here you may not.

[willy_01]

"A lot of smaller bikes I've noticed have pissy narrow tyres that slide in the dry let alone the wet, small wheels that are thrown out of whack mounting the layer of paint on the road markings let alone a pot hole and the brakes are an afterthought."

I Cant agree with you more! my rg's rear tire was only about 25mm wider than my push bikes:shit:
That caused most of my 'oh bugger' moments just down changing before roundabouts stop signs ect, would fish tail like a mofo if you tenced up.

Wolf has raised a great point maybe learners bikes need to have super wide tires? would this help?

Got to make you wonder are some of these laws causing more crashes than they are intending to avoid.

[Wolf]

"my rg's rear tire was only about 25mm wider than my push bikes:shit:
But on the plus side you could shave with it if you ran out of blades...

I've maintained for years that some of the smaller bikes should be left to experienced riders who're better able to cope with the machine's quirks and foibles.

There are a couple of bikes from my early days that I'd not ride now as an experienced rider because they were frankly shit and I have the option of far better machines. If I had to ride one (for whatever reason) I'd be cautious, mindful that in many ways it is inferior (safety-wise) to the more recent bikes I've ridden.

Would I let my kids have some of the bikes I learned on as "training bikes"? No fucking way, and I intend for my kids to have had ten years' experience riding bikes by the time they turn 15.

[muzz]

What if the bike breaks and needs fixing ?


Take it back to get retuned and sealed. Who pays : you do dont be so hard on the little beast :laugh: Sorry I dont have all the answers but wolf is on track.

[Wolf]

Take it back to get retuned and sealed. Who pays : you do dont be so hard on the little beast :laugh: Sorry I dont have all the answers but wolf is on track.
Thanks.

I think adding a dynotest and sealing the engine would add too much complexity to the system - and it'd have to be retroactive on all the eligible bikes currently on NZ roads which would mean all would have to be inspected and complianced, dyno'ed and sealed at someone's expense.

Currently, as has been pointed out, there is nothing stopping you from taking a 250cc two-stroke, boring it out to 400, doing a bit of port and polishing (except on the inlet that needs a bit of roughening to help the fuel and air mix better), higher compression pistons, getting custom pipes with expansion chambers tuned for the engine etc etc until your old dunger is the equivalent of an RGV400 and riding it on a learners licence - except the money and the inclination to do so.

I think our roads are fairly safe from such things, however. If there is one, the bugger is riding it so damned "sensibly" he might as well have saved his money or spent it on a course to shorten his learner period because it's not plastered all over the news: "Crappy old 250 seen exceeding 250kph in high-speed chase".

Personally I don't think people are on their learner or restricted licences long enough for them to worry about working the engines of their bikes to exceed the specs. If it's just a matter of swapping an engine and praying that no one looks too closely at the engine number, they might (if they had access to a cheap enough larger engine) but the expense of turning a low powered bike into something that would exceed the specs significantly is going to be a turn off - especially with the prospect of a full licence and the consequential ability to spend that money on a bigger, cooler bike not too far away.

The Aussie system seems to go by factory defaults - whether they got the data from the manufacturers or tested a representative sample of imported bikes I don't know, but they just say "LS650 is OK". Funnily enough, it's smaller, weaker sister, the LS400, was not on the list when I last looked. Possibly because they don't have that model over there.

[MSTRS]

"A lot of smaller bikes I've noticed have pissy narrow tyres that slide in the dry let alone the wet, small wheels that are thrown out of whack mounting the layer of paint on the road markings let alone a pot hole and the brakes are an afterthought."

I Cant agree with you more! my rg's rear tire was only about 25mm wider than my push bikes:shit:
That caused most of my 'oh bugger' moments just down changing before roundabouts stop signs ect, would fish tail like a mofo if you tenced up.

Wolf has raised a great point maybe learners bikes need to have super wide tires? would this help?

Got to make you wonder are some of these laws causing more crashes than they are intending to avoid.
Nope - don't agree with that. Narrow tyres give better control on little, light bikes. The problem comes when those narrow tyres are of crap construction/materials, but cheap of course. Young Master Hoon-in-his-head thinks "I'll show those big bikes a thing or two" and then "OH SHIIIIIT".
Sorry guys - bigger is NOT better. Good compound tyres that fit the rim are the best, regardless of what you ride.

[Ixion]

Take it back to get retuned and sealed. Who pays : you do dont be so hard on the little beast :laugh: Sorry I dont have all the answers but wolf is on track.

No way. I do all me own maintainence (well, most of it) No way is some bureaucunt gonna seal me out of me own egnine.

[Ixion]

He is right. I have lost track of how often I've said it.

On bikes smaller tyres give better handling and control than big ones. Yes I KNOW! It's not like that with cages! It's not a blurdy cage, OK!

Think about it. What is the primary objective of suspension design in a cage - to keep the wheels vertical and flat on the road. Right? Right ? And would that be a good thing on bikes ? No id wouldn't, would it? Would it ? Well, would it ? Bikes, that rely totally on their wheels NOT being flat and vertical ? Right?

So if the suspension objectives are totally opposed doesn't that suggest that maybe the tyres might need to follow a different paradigm too?

Too many newbies want to make their bikes work like cages cos they're still cagers at heart.

[speights_bud]

As a 'learner rider' for almost the past 6 months now i have had about 7,000 km's of interesting riding.

For starters, as a new 'learner rider', riding was not new to me. (started pretty early on being on a farm with no quad bikes).
From day one i have flagged the 70km/hr rule. mainly because after thinking i should try it out i was damn near run off the road by two decent sized logging trucks passing me on corners.
So for the last 5 1/2 months i have been travelling at 100k's with 99% no problem, with the L-plate displayed. This included a fairly well paced ride(for a 250<_< ) from Napier->taupo->Taumarunui->New plymouth and return via Wanganui->Palmerston nth->Napier.

However... upon visiting the girlfriends parents on wednesday afternoon whilst scooting past a slow accelerating cage mr Plod appeared from behind an oncoming station wagon. upon looking up after glancing at the speedo i saw him flick his lights on. :argh:

Now he pulled me over and commented on my speed (which we both knew to be 120km/h). This put me 50km/h over my legal 'learner limit'. It must have been my lucky day, he talked about how far over this put me and how he could potentially take my licence off of me. Now he did say that it was good to see i had the L-plate on and then further said that he would give me a warning on the learner speed limit factor(After checking that everything else was legal and proper, ie bike size etc). Booking me for 20km/h over the limit.
Before letting me go he told me that i would be travelling at 70km/h and to the left of the road letting people past me an that they would say,Quote: "He's a great guy." And at that he handed the ticket over, hopped in his car and carried on in the opposite direction.
By the time i got my helmet/gloves back on he was long gone and then i travelled at 100km towards home. After entering a 70km/h zone i decided to try once again to stay at that speed for the rest of the trip home. Usually about a 12 minute ride at 100km. Turned out once again to be a bad idea, almost got taken out by a truck and trailer unit going around the outside of me on a left hand corner:no: .

So my comments on the learner rules, Have everything set up right, ie, L-plate attached, 250cc, rego/warrent etc as the law states, but travel at a safe speed (100km/h where appropriate) and DON'T SPEED:blank:.

Last week i recieved in the mail a letter stating that my application for an exemption for the learner speed rule was declined as they felt it was more of a risk to the public. Despite my explanation of having ridden motorbikes for a number of years now, Explaining that i have ridden race/track days at speed with no problems and the danger of slow moving traffic on the Napier end of the Napier/Wairoa road.

"...your request has been declined. The desision to decline your application was made because i believe there would be a significant increase in the risk to safety if the exemption was granted." "...(learner licence restrictions) where implemented to ensure that novice motorcyclists gain as much experience as possible in the safest manner"

Off to get my restricted early march so these problems shouldn't worry me for too much longer...:headbang:

[Ixion]

,,,
This put me 50km/h over my legal 'learner limit'. It must have been my lucky day, he talked about how far over this put me and how he could potentially take my licence off of me.
,,


This is an interesting point. I have heard this said before (learner = 70kph limit, therefore 50 (now 40) kph over , 120kph , now 110kph = maybe loss of licence , like 140kph for a non learner). I have even said it myself.

But, on reflection, I am not sure it is so.

The new rule is , instant licence suspension for exceeding a permanent speed limit by 40 kph, or a temporary speed limit by 50 kph.

But, the 70 kph restriction on a learner IS NOT A SPEED LIMIT. There are strict rules that have to be followed about speed limits, they have to be gazetted etc.

The 70kph thing is a condition of licence , in effect "Regardless of the speed limit YOU, miserable being, may not travel at more than 70 kph".

So , I think the instant suspension thing does not apply (well, not until the "normal" 140kph). You may get done for Breach of condition , $400 and 25 demerits, I think, PLUS a 20kph excess speeding ticket.But not suspension for 120kph.

This is my own interpretation, I welcome clarification or correction from some of our site plod.

[Pathos]

Sensible riders will not exceed what they feel comfortable at (eg can read the road and brake well enough). It only takes a couple of months to be reasonably safe at 100kmph.

I only learnt how to read the corners properly and get out of a tight situation by reading the survival skills section. just today I took a corner faster than I was comfortable with and had the presence of mine to let the bike drop some more rather than stopping and braking into the curb.

I wouldn't have learnt that from riding around at 70k, education is always the answer.

[MSTRS]

Ixion - I'd disagree on the learner speed not being a 'limit'. I would describe the word 'limit' as meaning an imposed condition. Has this ever been tested in court as to it's application on the road???
Pathos - education is (not) the answer. It is important, but still only theory with regards to the individual learning. Couple it with experience and then you have the answer. Practice makes perfect. You are right about doing some things at speed tho....try the front brake in a corner at 30kph, then try it in the same corner at 100kph.....huge difference. (you will want to be veeery careful if you try this - no other traffic, plenty of 'runout' etc)

[Ixion]

"Speed limit" within the meaning of the law.The 70 kph is a limit ot your speed but a "speed limit" within the meaning of the Act is a legal thing . They have to be Gazetted I think.

[sunhuntin]

i have obeyed the 70k rule only a few times in my first almost year of riding...once on my first trip on the highway, and the second time coming into paeroa after having lights and twirly fingers flashed at me...mufti cop just up the road.
i have obeyed every other factor [ok, i broke the 10pm rule for a few weeks due to work, but got an exemption for it] i agree...the 70k rule is insane....on the highways, i travel at average 110k, 120 if im downhill, lol. and even then i still have cagers right up my exhaust pipe...tapping the brake seems to make them follow even closer....
i agree, the l plate does encourage fucked up behaviour from fellow motorists...even in town they sit way to close for my liking, forcing my speed and making me follow the car ahead way too close. i prefer a bit of space around me if possible. id be happy to do away with the l plate altogether, but cant see the powers that be agreeing to that anytime soon.
not that fond of the 10pm rule either. finished work at 9 tonight, took me a good 20 mins to get home due to being unable to see properly thanks to all the goddam headlights. i find 1am safer than almost any other time of day.

question....what would happen, if once im free of the l plate i were to attach a baby on board one in its place? im tempted to try it, just to see whether the cages back off somewhat or not.:dodge:

[Wolf]

question....what would happen, if once im free of the l plate i were to attach a baby on board one in its place? im tempted to try it, just to see whether the cages back off somewhat or not.:dodge:
One that says: "If you can read this I'm about to throw a spark plug at your windshield you moronic tailgating cock!" might have a bit more effect in making them back off - especially if you back it up with action...

A James Bond-style oil dispenser - aimed at about a 30 degree angle upwards rather than at the road - might be a bit more subtle and you can claim it was accidental. Don't forget to track across the lane so you get the whole windshield...

[thehollowmen]

If you ever need a good argument as to why learners (1L) should be on low powered cars and drive at limited speed, a fifteen year old driving a dodge ram 500 (8.2 L!!!!) just about hit me on the week end because he couldn't stop at an intersection in time. Only reason he didn't was because I saw him in the mirrors at the last minute and lanesplit.

[FROSTY]

Clearly im missing the point here. As I understand it a LEARNERS licence is just that an oppertunity to learn to ride a bike.
You aren't sopposed to be out on the open road. You are soposed to be practicing your riding skills.
My argument would be that the law should stay exactly as it is -if not reduced to 50km/h BUT that you should be allowed to sit your restricted licence as soon as you are able to pass the riding test rather than a 6 month waiting time.
the reality of life says that those that flout the law are still going to do so

[Wolf]

You aren't sopposed to be out on the open road. You are soposed to be practicing your riding skills.
On the open road you practise riding skills, in town you practise being run over by inconsiderate, or clinically oblivious, cocks in cars. Many of whom are apparently "learning" driving skills - in turbo charged wank-mobiles.

[Hitcher]

Clearly im missing the point here. As I understand it a LEARNERS licence is just that an oppertunity to learn to ride a bike.
You aren't sopposed to be out on the open road. You are soposed to be practicing your riding skills.
Bugger off. There was no way I was going to spend three months fannying around the block or driving backwards and forwards to the dairy "practicing" my riding whilst on a learner licence. The best way to learn to ride, surely, must be as much saddle time as possible in all riding conditions. Mrs H and I did 17,500km in the nine months we were on learner/restricted licences. Interestingly when we were doing our CBTA course, there were people there who had done less than 2,000km. One wonders what they knew about themselves and their riding.

[Ixion]

On reflection, I will go further. I do not think there should be *any* learner licence period for someone who has passed the BHT and has a licence for another class. The BHT should be proof that the person is sufficiently capable of actually riding the bike (if it is not, it is pointless and should itself be abolished or improved). And the holding of another licence is proof of at least some roadcraft. The restricted licence period will adapt that roadcraft to the specific requirements of bikes. If you have passed the BHT you know how to ride. If you are already driving on the road, you know the road rules. What more is wanted?

[Hitcher]

Mr Ixion, I agree to a point. That point is the adequacy of the BHT which I do not believe is sufficient to assess the competency of riders to ride on the open road. The major factor it fails to assess is confidence. Confidence, I believe, is directly related to saddle time.

[Wolf]

On reflection, I will go further. I do not think there should be *any* learner licence period for someone who has passed the BHT and has a licence for another class. The BHT should be proof that the person is sufficiently capable of actually riding the bike (if it is not, it is pointless and should itself be abolished or improved). And the holding of another licence is proof of at least some roadcraft. The restricted licence period will adapt that roadcraft to the specific requirements of bikes. If you have passed the BHT you know how to ride. If you are already driving on the road, you know the road rules. What more is wanted?
Right with you on that. I was fortunate enough to have got my cage licence back when such wisdom was recognised, before rampant idiocy and/or a desire to milk as much moolah out of people as possible prompted the law changes.

I had held my motorbike licence since I was 18 - no BHT, general road rules written test and 5 motorcycle-related oral questions for Learner, riding test on the road for Provisional, 1 year wait for full. When I went for my car licence I was 34 or so. Five oral questions with the focus on cars rather than motorcycles to get a learner licence then a road test to get a full car licence. The feeling was that since I already had a motorcycle licence I already knew and applied the road rules and because I was over 25 I was responsible enough to drive alone late at night once I had demonstrated my ability to control a car.

It's slightly different to what Mr Ixion has mooted but in keeping with it as there is no BHT for a car, you are expected to learn on the road with a fully licenced driver beside you.

I fully agree that if you have already demonstrated that your road skills are up to par in, say, car driving by having held a full licence in that category, the combination of that and the BHT should be sufficient to skip the learner stage altogether.

Likewise we should return to skipping the Restricted car licence for those who already hold a full motorcycle licence but without the silly "over 25" proviso - keep the learner licence so they can practice on the road under direct supervsion then progress directly to full once they have passed the practical driving test. By the time they have the skills to pass a rigorous on-road driving test, they should have sufficiently adapted their motorcycle road skills to the car.

None of this will happen so long as revenue collecting is at the heart of motor vehicle licensing. They make way too much money with the current system to give any of it away.

Deregulate the bastards and allow other licensing authorities to compete - "BHT only $10, Learner licence $20, Book NOW!"

[Wolf]

Mr Ixion, I agree to a point. That point is the adequacy of the BHT which I do not believe is sufficient to assess the competency of riders to ride on the open road. The major factor it fails to assess is confidence. Confidence, I believe, is directly related to saddle time.
The Restricted Licence would be the confidence building period as it is now.

Back in the day, learner period was literally that, you most likely coudn't ride or control a bike, you answered a few questions and then you went out to learn. Once you felt you had the handling down pat you went for a practical test and got the provisional - that didn't mean you had a lot of confidence under all situations, you still had stuff-all "saddle time" to fall back on.

[scumdog]

The fact that a youner person has 'acquired' a licence of any sort often give them confidence, sadly it is often elevated to 'overconfidence' with disasterous results.

They seem to be out of sight until they get the dreaded 'L' and then woohoo, they're everywhere and anything goes " 'cos I've got a licence"
Talking about car licences here.

[Wolf]

It's been a while since it was last posted so here (http://www.rta.nsw.gov.au/licensing/tests/motorcycleridertrainingscheme/motorcyclesnoviceriders.html)'s the New South Wales Approved List for novice riders.

They've specifically banned five 250s (including the RGV and the NSR) and allowed over 200 models between 251 and 660ccs - a lot more scope for the learner. I note the BMW F650GS is deemed a suitable learner bike and if you're too tall for one of those you probably won't have luck getting a car licence either...

[Ixion]

I also note from the same site


Mature age riders

If you are 30 years of age or older and hold, or are eligible to hold, a gold driver's licence you may proceed directly from a learner rider's licence to an unrestricted rider's licence, after passing the provisional test (and training if you live in a 'declared area').

While on your Learner Rider's licence you must observe the normal learner rider restrictions as stated in the Motorcycle Rider's Handbook, including the motorcycle engine capacity and power weight restriction.

If you are a mature age rider, you must still attend compulsory rider training, if available in your area. However, you may proceed to the pre-provisional level of rider training or, if you do not live in a 'declared area', the rider test, without having held your Learner Rider's licence for the normal period of three months.

It should be noted that regardless of eligibility for the mature age exemption, a rider must have held a rider's licence for at least 12 months before being permitted to carry a pillion passenger.

[thehollowmen]

As I understand it a LEARNERS licence is just that an oppertunity to learn to ride a bike.

Ahahahaha and considering the house I had was on a 100 km/h road where would I practice?

Then again, on that stretch of road we used to pick learner car drivers out of the frount hedge most saterday nights.

[skidMark]

all these people going on bout baby on board...

what they are actually for is not to say...drive more carefully around me...

but so if there is an accident ememrgency crews know to look for a baby it helps them know that there was a baby on board the vehicle...

they should actually be taken down when there is no baby in the vehicle....

an i say ditch the 70 kph ...keep the rest...

[thehollowmen]

they should actually be taken down when there is no baby in the vehicle....


There used to be a fine for that back in the day.

[FROSTY]

Hitcher--this is one subject Im really passionate about so this isn't aimed at you just responding to your question/statement.
A learner car licence by LAW (not reality) requires the learner driver to have a fully licenced driver accompany them at all times.
We as bikers simply because this is- well impossible, have the right to do a simple scratchy test wobble through some cones and go ride our 180km/h capable 250cc missile.
That to me is an issue.
Basicly yep cos we CAN we do and heaps of people on learners licences end up dead or crashing.
My problem is with a system that doesn't provide the training to catch people when they need it the most --their first 6 months of riding.
The training needs to be not just available but there needs to be a real incentive to take it.

[Hitcher]

Hitcher--this is one subject Im really passionate about so this isn't aimed at you just responding to your question/statement.
I too am passionate about this subject, being a comparatively recent addition to the biker ranks. I also think we may be in danger of violently agreeing with each other. My concern is about the adequacy of the various learn to ride courses and the "qualification" that is the basis for being able to rock up to your LTNZ-approved outlet and walk out with a class 6L licence. I believe that that bar is set way too low, with a result that some riders are out and about on the Queen's highways endangering themselves. But I also believe that on-road experience -- and lots of it -- in all possible conditions, is the best basis for developing some mastery of rider and machine.

[thehollowmen]

Ditto again

I strongly think that the entry bar should be a lot higher for both motorcycle and car licenses involving a "road school" type setting used overseas to build up schools, and that road usage should be considered a priviledge and not a right.

Then again, the other option might be to make compulsary third party insurance and a gestoppo type agency that chases down the guilty driver and extracts every cent, making drivers paranoid about hitting anybody. "An armed society is a polite society"

[Wolf]

The training needs to be not just available but there needs to be a real incentive to take it.
Like it being free! I would have signed up for a proper riding course when I was learning but I ended up enrolling in the School of Hard Knocks because it didn't have an entry fee.

I'm not saying I was too poor, but I did grow up thinking "Marked Down!" and "Half Price" were brand names...

[Hawkeye]

Why then are car learners not restricted to 70 whilst they are getting to grips with driving a car. ? And car drivers have not had to do a Basic Handling Test forst, so would be MORE in need of such protection than bikers. I cannot justify both the bike learner restrictions AND the BHT. Either would be justifiable in absence of the other, but if the BHT is doing what it is supposed to, then the learner restrictions are unjustifiable.

There are significant differences between learner Bikers and learner car drivers. A leaner bike rider is not allowed to carry passengers hence they are out there alone from day one. A car leaner is not allowed onto the road unless there is an experienced driver next to them. Having recently taught my son to drive a car, I pre-empt his mistakes before they happen. I can point out the hazzards before he gets to them. You don't get that luxury on a bike.
Having recently ridden a bike for the first time, I have no problems with having an L-plate on the back. I do find the 70 limit a pain as it took me twice as long to get to Wellington on the bike along the back roads than it does in the car on the Motorway. But there again. On a bike, everything happens just that little bit faster and the less experienced rider out there does not always have the skill level to avoid things.
I enjoyed doing the BHT as it gave me the basis skills before going out on the road. Now all I need to do is get my skill level up before I go out there and try to survive the madness of the motorway.

[thehollowmen]

A car leaner is not allowed onto the road unless there is an experienced driver next to them
So not only are they allowed to have passangers on their modeds / scooters, they're supposed to be able to have sidecars too?!??!?!

[FROSTY]

but to the origonal question.
L plate and 70km/h limit.
70k limit --yes needs to stay --WHY??
Because at 70k ya just might stand a shit show of surviving a crash -a crash you would likely have avoided with more experience.
70k gives you the chance to assess the situation and hopefully react correctly.

Th L plate well yea you are missing the point--its there to warn OTHER road users YOU might act in a errattic manner.
I can hear it now -all the chest beating and testosterone pumping --BUT It wont happen to me -Im too good a rider/Im too lucky--whatever -
HERES a reality check guys. If you are soposed to be on L plates then you DONT have the experience to react correctly to situations.
without decent rider training then at least make use of the system as it stands--use that 6 months to learn how to stop as fast as you can from 70.
Learn how to put your bike around corners.Work out the specific dangers to you at an intersection --and how to react to em.

[sefer]

Originally Posted by FROSTY
The training needs to be not just available but there needs to be a real incentive to take it.
Like it being free! I would have signed up for a proper riding course when I was learning but I ended up enrolling in the School of Hard Knocks because it didn't have an entry fee.



Intresting enough I was at the local driving school today and the instructor there was telling me that they are currently attempting to work out a deal with one of the insurance companies to supply 'free' advanced motorcycle training (based on the cbta courses). Of course this probably just means higher premiums from said company, but at least they are making an effort.

[Wolf]

attempting to work out a deal with one of the insurance companies to supply 'free' advanced motorcycle training (based on the cbta courses). Of course this probably just means higher premiums from said company, but at least they are making an effort.
The School of Hard Knocks didn't do a lot of good for my insurance premiums, either, and replacing bits of bike when I didn't have insurance wasn't good at all.

Said it had no entry fee, not that it was free! :laugh:

[kro]

Load of crap really, I reckon probably only about 10% of learners actually stick to those rules anyway. Get rid of them both. Do learner car drivers have to stick to under 70kph?

Absolutely agree, plus a newly licensed car driver can buy a 500hp Skyline, and plow it at 100kmh into a minivan 3 days later, and kill 7 people at once, whereas bike accidents typically munt the biker up, and everyone else stays intact (for the most part). So governmental whinings about ACC levies don't sit well with me at all.

The bike licensing system has been knee-jerk, and imbalanced since I started riding in 86, and for years previously.

[inlinefour]

If you actually think that the LTSA or whoever is likely to actually do what you want then your probably sadly mistaken. I suspect that the 70kph limit is to try to keep learners in built up areas (of course rural learners would be different) and the L plate is more of a convience for other road users and at times probably explains why learners are riding/driving in the way that they are. More to the point, everyone gets to go through thses conditions when they make their way through the liciencing system. I are not aware of it causing a problem and in fact it could do the opposite. I think that all new/squid riders need to accept that these are the conditions and live with it . Whats next, you guys think you should be allowed to ride over 250cc or something. In believe that the reasoning for having the conditions that are complained about are very valid and should stay just the way they are. Otherwise we might end up with more bike fatalities should it be changed as it takes time for a rider to become competent. :Pokey:
Oh and comparing riding a motorcycle to a cage is rather pointless as it takes more skill and brains to ride, any wanker can operate a cage :killingme:

[Streetwise]

So by your ruling ill sit on my learners for six months, The my restricted for 18months on my GN250, then ill get my full licence and go buy a 1700cc vtwin, is this a safe option or would a raise in the cc rating as your licence level increases a better idae,????

just a thought

[Hitcher]

It's not the size of the bike, it's how you choose to ride it.

[Streetwise]

tell that to a 17 year old.

[inlinefour]

tell that to a 17 year old.

And thats why the liciencing conditions system is a good idea...:blip:

[kickingzebra]

Hmm, My keenest memory, of actually trying to be a good citizen, and follow the rules of my learner license, coming back from a longish trip, going through a gorge, at 70, sitting close to the left, going around a right hander, and some W*****r in a hillman 2.5 litre just waltzes past as if I wasn't there... Pushing me into the gravel, and damn near oblivion. Ignored the rule from that day on, and followed the motto of go just a little bit faster than the general flow of traffic, that way people don't forget you exist, and you are more likely to be in control of your surroundings. I say keep the L plates, and the time restrictions, although maybe contract them a bit, 11 to 4. Fact is night riding is a whole new bag of chicks, and far more fatigueing than is day riding. Takes time to learn. But I wholeheartedly agree, the 70 kph speed limit, and motorcyclists riding in the gutter as a result is absolute nonsense.

Don't ride in the gutter guys, give yourselves room to move!! (sorry, pet hate!)

[Bandit Rider]

When I got my licence there was no "L" sticker for bikes, and no 70 km; and straight to full licence (a long time ago).

The "L" sticker is ridiculous, they gave up on it for cars in the 1970 because it was a waste of time, and brought it back - probably for the same reason.

A bike with an "L" plate doing 70 km on the motorway is dangerous - I wouldn't be doing it - too dangerous for me after a lot of years and kilometers. Even worse on a narrow road - I know from cycling - basically you need to be able to ride within about 10 cm of the edge of the seal and do it without flinching while an enormous truck with wheels as tall as you goes past about 10 cm on the other side. It's bad enough when you really know what you are doing - crazy for a learner.

Learning without killing yourself is a serious business - and we know a lot more about how to ride safely than we used to. I am all in favour of some serious training, so people do learn safely. "L" stickers and 70 km are not the answer.

[Skyryder]

Not much point in having learner plates other than to advertise all and sundry you are a beginner. Can understand when learning to drive a car with instructor but that's another issue.

Never have believed in the cc restriction either. I have always believed you learn on what you will use.

Skyryder

[DirtMad]

I think the whole system is far from perfect, but I have a problem with the 70km/hr limit. The L plate can cause bad attitudes, but thats life as a L rider. But the 70 limit is just rediculous :weird:

[Wolf]

It's not the size of the bike, it's how you choose to ride it.
I'm sure Great-Uncle Owen would agree with you - he learned at age 15 on gravel roads with no helmet on a 1340cc Harley.

You could, back then. Somehow people survived the experiences and became old buggers with years of experience. But, shhh, don't tell anyone, it runs counter to the current fallacy that we need to be wrapped in cotton wool to protect ourselves from ourselves.

Admittedly, there was a lot less traffic on the roads in those days.

[Streetwise]

hello all, Just a quick question, Had anyone actually had a ticket doing 100k with a learners licence.????

[skidMark]

what he said ^^^

[Wellyman]

It is for safety and should stay how it is for the safety of all road users in my opnion.
WM

[Streetwise]

How does a 70k rule make people safe.... Its a horrible feeling when you are doing 70 and cars are wizzing past at 100k, NOT SAFE AT ALL,

[Blairos]

I have mentioned this in other related threads...

The L-Plate is an "Idiot Magnet" and an experiment I conducted recently showed this...

With L-Plate on and at 70Km/h:
Got tailgated, tooted at, overtaken AND undertaken!:oi-grr: , cut off - all in one ride!

With L-plate on and up to 100Km/h:
Got tailgated (this is not pretty at 95k!), overtaken on corners and cut off straight after they did this

With no L-Plate:
Was pretty much left alone - didnt do anything stupid on my part, moved in traffic flow with more than usual following distances observed, several constabulary passed/followed - no action taken, at passing lanes got the "thankyou toot" from a couple of boy racers for me moving into the left-hand lane to allow anyone behind me past.

My view...
1. Scrap the L-Plate - it attracts too much unwanted attention from people who havent got anything better to do than bully some rider around. Either that, or make it smaller (and not so conspicuous as a result)
I have found they are one of the most difficult things to mount on the rear of a bike as well!

2. 70Km/h limit - I am of the opinion that part of your handling certificate should be some sort of "rating" based on ability - this would probably require a followup evaluation and extend this process a little, but IMHO, this would be worth it - 3 hours with an instructor cannot necessarily make a rider out someone, if this is the case, then a 70Km/h restriction be placed until they can prove to said instructor you are capable.

After this, the instructor can raise this to the limit he feels you are able to SAFELY ride at.

This serves another purpose of making the instructor more accountable, and from feedback I have seen/recieved over the standards of Instruction at some institutions, this may not be a bad thing.

I do not believe the chap who gave me my BHC would argue against my point here :msn-wink:

Just my 2c worth!

[mynameis]

Don't put them on, I never have and never will aye. Ride without it and probably stick to 100k's where you can lol ..:spudbooge

Once you've got them on you get "harrassed" on the roads. If you do get stopped make some crap up like 0oo0oh :Oops: it fell off lol.. but in a very convincing way.

Alvin

[Insanity_rules]

I agree with Blairos the L plate is an idiot magnet! I had it on straight after I got my licence and for a whole week I experienced almost every kind of idiot in a cage!

One noteable was a complete moron tailgating me down High St Lower Hutt. every so often hitting his horn, speeding up and slowing down behind me revving his engine and he nudged me at the giveway near McDonalds. I was doing about 60-65 K's and riding smoothly so I dont know what His problem was!

I ended up pulling over really shaken, Oh by the way look out for a tall dark haired guy driving a grey 88 Mirage Cyborg with 17 inch chrome's and a primered left front panel. If I ever meet him in a dark alley!

Got his plate and rang the traffic hotline, but havent heard anything.

L plate is gone, gone, gone................

Bike Licence should be competency based rather than a set time, run by riding schools and they should teach the skills you need. As for the 70 limit I've never done it, I think its downright dangerous.

[WarlockNZ]

the crazy thing is this ... no one is doing anything about this stupid law ... until now! ... i aim to petition parliment to have this law revised and have the 70k limit lifted ... we can get into the power to weight stuff later .. although i will admit that the NSW model is a whole lot better ... we have what we have .. here's what i need ... signatures .. thats it .. nothing more ... PM me and i'll send you the form .. get as many sig's as you can and post it back to me .. if enough of us actually get behind this we may be able to make a change. and to all of you who say "good luck" .. just sign the damn form .. yes it's only 6 months but i would rather newbies had the option to keep up with traffic on the motorway than be cage fodder... lets see if KB can get it together ... i'll look forward to sending out a shit load of forms.

[Beemer]

I'd be happy to support you but PLEASE, learn how to use commas instead of ... as it makes it very hard to read your posts!

Great idea though, the 70kph rule is stupid and dangerous, mostly because the majority of motorists other than motorcyclists are totally unaware it is the maximum speed limit allowable for a learner motorcyclist. I had no idea it existed until I learned to ride. No similar law for car drivers no matter what stage of their licence so the rules should be the same for all.

[WarlockNZ]

I'd be happy to support you but PLEASE, learn how to use commas instead of ... as it makes it very hard to read your posts!

Great idea though, the 70kph rule is stupid and dangerous, mostly because the majority of motorists other than motorcyclists are totally unaware it is the maximum speed limit allowable for a learner motorcyclist. I had no idea it existed until I learned to ride. No similar law for car drivers no matter what stage of their licence so the rules should be the same for all.

Thank you for your support, i have noticed, however, that you havn't sent me a PM.
Adding your support to the forum is all well and good, but unless KB members are willing to put pen to paper, nothing will get done.

I have a singature sheet ready to go, if anyone would like a copy of it, just drop me a PM your email address and i'll send you a copy.

[McJim]

I have no problem with wearing the L plate - the fact that other road users use it as a target is where my problem lies. I think some re-education of all road users should apply for safety's sake.

I firmly believe in one law for all and that no sub-set of the populace should be singled out for special treatment which is what the 70kph rule basically is. It takes motorcyclists and applies a different law for that section of the population than it doeas for the others.

I also think Learner motorcyclists should not be allowed on the motorway (should be like UK in this respect) and that the law should have stipulated that rather then this stupid 70kph law.

[Hawkeye]

I've recently completed my Restricted. Have been riding the bike for 8 months now, always had the plate on the back and generally stayed at the speed of the traffic, be that 70 - 100.
The thing that gets me is the time (10pm - 5am) restriction. I've been driving a cage for 30 odd year. I can drive anytime, day or night but the second I jump onto the bike, I'm restricted.
I can go and do a defensive course for a cage, which reduces the timeframe for the bike full down to 3 month. How the hell does doing a cage training course reduce the restricted time on a bike. If the course is to teach road use and situations, surely 30 years of cage driving with no accidents proves that I have that skill already.

[TLDV8]

I only read up to Page 2 :dodge: .......... but.... As far as the 70 kph limit.I got my motorcycle licence in 1977 and that limit was law then also.There is one major difference between then and now,someone remind me what the Open Road speed limit was until the 1980's ?

[Mr. Peanut]

The learner restrictions are there to justify paying another $100 to sit your restricted test.

[Skyryder]

I think the L plate is a usefull way to show other road users that's what you are. A learner. The 70k restriction is dangerouse and the fact that the HP tend to ignore this is an indication that this needs to be rectified.

On a more controversial note I have never been an advocate of cc restriction. It is far easier to get over confidant 'earlier' on a smaller cc rating than on a larger one.

Even from a 250cc and up into a larger cc rating there is again going to be another learning curve. Not just with the extra power but the weight of the bike, braking charecteristics etc.

To me it just seems to be safer if you learn on the bike that you want to ride.

Skyryder

[scumdog]

The learner restrictions are there to justify paying another $100 to sit your restricted test.

NOW you're learning!!!

Life is all about learning to cope with being screwed by faceless organisations.

[SwanTiger]

NOW you're learning!!!

Life is all about learning to cope with being screwed by faceless organisations.
Cope? I prefer to blow shit up, The Jackal and the IRA are my idols :innocent:

Then again this unique character Joachim Kroll has one of the best excuses for murder I have heard of in all my readings - it went something along the lines of 'I enjoy eating human meat, however it is rare and far too exspensive'.


<img src="http://www.crimelibrary.com/graphics/photos/serial_killers/weird/joachim_kroll/Joachim-Kroll(1)200.jpg">

In appearance and persona he resembles some of the seedy politicians we have in our Government. Perhaps they are very much alike? Mr. Kroll was borderline retarded though he managed to find a footing and walk through life alright. For a good number of years he evaded the Police.

So in summary, he was almost retarded, killed a number of woman and young girls, raped them and in some cases removed parts of their body for his own personal consumption.

Maybe to relate to our politicians and acheive results we must first understand the criminal mind and approach them as a murderus serial killing sexual predator with absoloutely no morals and retarded intelligence.

[SwanTiger]

If anyone is interested, Joachim was caught when he told a neighbour not to use one of the shared toliets in his building complex as it was blocked with "Guts". The neighbour went and checked it out, only to be disturbed by what he found and called the Police. The police came and determined it was human remains, clued onto Kroll and visited him at his residence. Went inside and guess what was for dinner - the little girl who lived in his street that he had killed and was cooking with veges, what wasn't needed ended up in the toilet.

He never denied anything and answered all of their questions. Also admitted to 14 other murders but couldn't be "sure" as he'd been killing most of his life.

[Wolf]

NOW you're learning!!!

Life is all about learning to cope with being screwed by faceless organisations.
Faceless? Faceless?

That's not the part of the anatomy I'd say they're lacking.

Look beond the face, bro, look byond the face.

Unless, of course, you were being subtle and were inferring from the lack of face that they are devoid of anything from the neck up...

[Wolf]

If anyone is interested, Joachim was caught
But was probably only given a 2-year sentence by an even more retarded Judge...

After all, he was very cooperative...

What do you call a lawyer with an IQ of 50?

"Your Honour."

[DingDong]

You dont have my support Bob... L plates let me know who to watch out for... If anyone chooses not to use an L plate thats their choice.

:dodge: dont hate:yes:

[TLDV8]

There is one major difference between then and now,someone remind me what the Open Road speed limit was until the 1980's ?

I guess this is just another BS thread considering the 120 people who voted for removing the speed restriction?........The 70 kmh restriction was set when the open road speed limit was 80 kmh so is out of date for the modern limit of 100kmh....... How about instead of the usual bleating,something is actually done to bring that to the attention of the LTSA etc. ???..... You can whine and sit on your hands,or you can atleast make an effort.No wonder this country is going the way it is.


I think the 70km/hr and L plate rule should be removed 43 21.61%
I think the 70km/hr rule should be removed 120 60.30%
I think the L plate fule should be removed 4 2.01%
I think the rules are fine as it is, now shut up and put up with it!!! 32 16.08%
Voters: 199.

[SwanTiger]

I guess this is just another BS thread considering the 120 people who voted for removing the speed restriction?........The 70 kmh restriction was set when the open road speed limit was 80 kmh so is out of date for the modern limit of 100kmh....... How about instead of the usual bleating,something is actually done to bring that to the attention of the LTSA etc. ???
Indeed.

As I mentioned in the Newbie Ride thread, I think that the speed restriction shouldn't be removed however it should be updated. 80 kmp/h or 90 kmp/h would be very reasonable considering most people will then exceed that by a further 9 kmp/h to fall within the tolerence limit.

80 kmp/h limit would be suitable, then people would hover around 90 kmp/h which is the average speed for most vehicles on the open road anyhow.

[TLDV8]

Indeed.

As I mentioned in the Newbie Ride thread, I think that the speed restriction shouldn't be removed however it should be updated. 80 kmp/h or 90 kmp/h would be very reasonable considering most people will then exceed that by a further 9 kmp/h to fall within the tolerence limit.

80 kmp/h limit would be suitable, then people would hover around 90 kmp/h which is the average speed for most vehicles on the open road anyhow.

Exactly,and the older members should have been onto the 10 kmh difference straight away..... Newbie's have the choice to stay away from the open road until they gain confidence.When they do elect to do so,being limited to a 30 kmh speed differential is asking for trouble if not creating a reason to not concentrate (Having to check your mirrors to avoid being run over from behind)......... I rode MX solid for a year before riding on the road so it was a fairly easy change over,either way if safety really is top of the list,the out of date speed restriction does not help...... imho

[Fub@r]

I voted to remove the 70kph rule, if there was an option to increase the limit I would've voted for that. They will never remove the rule at best they will increase it

[ZeroIndex]

I'm finished with my 'L' plate, and my plastic restricted licence arrived in the mail today.. um.. I never had a problem with no L plate or doing 100km (except on my Kinetic, which was a feat to get to 100km :p), but yeah, either obey it or don't.. it's the government.. and they don't change their mind often, unless it's to make more money for themselves..

[WarlockNZ]

I guess this is just another BS thread considering the 120 people who voted for removing the speed restriction?........The 70 kmh restriction was set when the open road speed limit was 80 kmh so is out of date for the modern limit of 100kmh....... How about instead of the usual bleating,something is actually done to bring that to the attention of the LTSA etc. ???..... You can whine and sit on your hands,or you can atleast make an effort.No wonder this country is going the way it is.

Oh Hello!! ... i'm putting a petition together, hows that for doing something about it. if you want to sign it, PM me and i'll send you the form.

[judecatmad]

The idea behind the rule is to make others aware of learners and the speed is to allow the learner to come to terms with riding a bike etc.

The thing I think we petition about is if bike have a cc restriction cars should too!

The thing about the 70kph rule is it forces a learner break the law to try and stay safe (ie. do 100kph). However, if they remove the 70kph rule from learners, it doesn't mean that you then HAVE to do 100kph if you're not comfortable....do whatever jolly speed you like to make sure you're safe (most people would say that going with the flow of traffic is 'safe' but if you're not comfortable with that then use common sense. If you're not comfortable at 100kph then you probably should be avoiding those roads until you are anyway. And that's not a legislation thing, that's a use-your-noggin thing). The speed limit is just that, it's an upper limit. So I do agree with the removal of the 70kph restriction for L-plate riders.

As discussed in another thread, the rule is actually in place to try and stop learners using motorways, without actually saying those words. And that's a totally different discussion (mostly around those in power not having enough balls....!).

Having to display an L-plate I totally agree with and I also agree with the restrictions on riding times - most learners have no concept of just how alert you need to be on a bike, and fatigue is most likely to kick in late night-very early morning.

The suggestion of a limit to cc rating for car learners? Totally with you on that one :)

[Fub@r]

As discussed in another thread, the rule is actually in place to try and stop learners using motorways,

But as someone pointed out earlier the 70kph rule was set when the motorway and open road speed was 80kph

[Skyryder]

"A lot of smaller bikes I've noticed have pissy narrow tyres that slide in the dry let alone the wet, small wheels that are thrown out of whack mounting the layer of paint on the road markings let alone a pot hole and the brakes are an afterthought."

I Cant agree with you more! my rg's rear tire was only about 25mm wider than my push bikes:shit:
That caused most of my 'oh bugger' moments just down changing before roundabouts stop signs ect, would fish tail like a mofo if you tenced up.

Wolf has raised a great point maybe learners bikes need to have super wide tires? would this help? No. (Skyryder)

Got to make you wonder are some of these laws causing more crashes than they are intending to avoid.

Just some of the reasons why you should learn on the bike you want to ride.

Skyryder

[Beemer]

Exactly,and the older members should have been onto the 10 kmh difference straight away..... Newbie's have the choice to stay away from the open road until they gain confidence.When they do elect to do so, being limited to a 30 kmh speed differential is asking for trouble if not creating a reason to not concentrate (Having to check your mirrors to avoid being run over from behind)......... I rode MX solid for a year before riding on the road so it was a fairly easy change over,either way if safety really is top of the list,the out of date speed restriction does not help...... imho

I don't agree with you there because depending on where said newbies live, they often don't have much choice about staying away from the open road if this is their only form of transport. I learned to ride in Lower Hutt so if I wanted to get to Upper Hutt, Porirua or Wellington, there was no way to do so without getting into 100kph zones. I was working in Johnsonville at the time so had to go along the Hutt motorway to get there, or go over Haywards. Even just going to Upper Hutt involved 100kph roads - you can get to Stokes Valley along the back roads but then (it may have been reduced to 80 by now, so many roads have been) it was 100kph to Silverstream. Riding along in the left lane at 70kph with a large truck up my jacksy was NOT an option!

And I'd be happy to sign a petition about the speed limit change, but I'm not sure about removing L-plates. It's more a case of making the rules consistent with all learners, whether they are in cars or on bikes.

[WarlockNZ]

I don't agree with you there because depending on where said newbies live, they often don't have much choice about staying away from the open road if this is their only form of transport. I learned to ride in Lower Hutt so if I wanted to get to Upper Hutt, Porirua or Wellington, there was no way to do so without getting into 100kph zones. I was working in Johnsonville at the time so had to go along the Hutt motorway to get there, or go over Haywards. Even just going to Upper Hutt involved 100kph roads - you can get to Stokes Valley along the back roads but then (it may have been reduced to 80 by now, so many roads have been) it was 100kph to Silverstream. Riding along in the left lane at 70kph with a large truck up my jacksy was NOT an option!

And I'd be happy to sign a petition about the speed limit change, but I'm not sure about removing L-plates. It's more a case of making the rules consistent with all learners, whether they are in cars or on bikes.

The petition im getting together is only with regard to the 70K limit, not the L plate, if your interested in signing, PM me and i'll send you the form. the morre people we can get to sign it the better ..i doubt we will get enough for a referendum, but at least we can try and do something about this stupid law.

[WarlockNZ]

Based on the lack of response i'm getting i'm going to assume that most of you guys who winge about the 70k limit are not interested in doing anything but that ... winging!.

Should any of you actually have an interest in, at least trying, to do something about this stupid law, you all know how to get hold of me. to date i have sent out forms to 4 people and i'm informed that we currently have upwards of 200 signatures. we need a whole lot more people. time to put your signatures where your mouths are.

[SwanTiger]

Based on the lack of response i'm getting i'm going to assume that most of you guys who winge about the 70k limit are not interested in doing anything but that ... winging!.

Should any of you actually have an interest in, at least trying, to do something about this stupid law, you all know how to get hold of me. to date i have sent out forms to 4 people and i'm informed that we currently have upwards of 200 signatures. we need a whole lot more people. time to put your signatures where your mouths are.

You're better off associating with BRONZ and using their established entity to acheive your desired goal.

People are more likely to support a voice than they are a piece of paper with signatures.

Also.

Getting angry at people and insulting them for their lack of support is pointless too, if you aren't getting attention with your petition then perhaps you need to change your approach to gain better results.

Here is an idea.

Why not make a pretty box, print out the forms and take them into every bike dealership you can find that will support your cause.

5 signatures per day x 5 dealerships x 6 working days x 4 weeks = 600 signatures in a month.

[Hawkeye]

Based on the lack of response i'm getting i'm going to assume that most of you guys who winge about the 70k limit are not interested in doing anything but that ... winging!.

Should any of you actually have an interest in, at least trying, to do something about this stupid law, you all know how to get hold of me. to date i have sent out forms to 4 people and i'm informed that we currently have upwards of 200 signatures. we need a whole lot more people. time to put your signatures where your mouths are.


The problem I see here is that there is only a 6 month window for winging. Whilst in the window, the winging happens. Once outside of the window, with restricted in hand, it is no longer an issue therefore the 'I'm alright Jack' mentality kicks in.

[WarlockNZ]

You're better off associating with BRONZ and using their established entity to acheive your desired goal.

People are more likely to support a voice than they are a piece of paper with signatures.

Also.

Getting angry at people and insulting them for their lack of support is pointless too, if you aren't getting attention with your petition then perhaps you need to change your approach to gain better results.

Here is an idea.

Why not make a pretty box, print out the forms and take them into every bike dealership you can find that will support your cause.

5 signatures per day x 5 dealerships x 6 working days x 4 weeks = 600 signatures in a month.

Already got that covered my friend :) ... it would seem to me that BRONZ have more important things to worry about than something as small as this and as for using an estiblished voice?? ... whats wrong with mine, i personally see something wrong with the current law and i'm excersing my democratic right to try and do something about it, it may only be one voice, but if people such as yourself (who i believe got pinged on thursday?) added your voice to mine, then i wouldn't be alone now would I ??. the typical kiwi attitude seems to prevail here... don't worry mate, she'll be right, someone else will short it out for me, well sorry mate ... that someone is me and i'm asking for your help. so i guess the balls in your court huh ... oh and by the way ... my offer to show at your court hearing still stands :)

[SwanTiger]

Already got that covered my friend :) ... it would seem to me that BRONZ have more important things to worry about than something as small as this and as for using an estiblished voice?? ... whats wrong with mine, i personally see something wrong with the current law and i'm excersing my democratic right to try and do something about it, it may only be one voice, but if people such as yourself (who i believe got pinged on thursday?) added your voice to mine, then i wouldn't be alone now would I ??. the typical kiwi attitude seems to prevail here... don't worry mate, she'll be right, someone else will short it out for me, well sorry mate ... that someone is me and i'm asking for your help. so i guess the balls in your court huh ... oh and by the way ... my offer to show at your court hearing still stands :)
I would've thought that BRONZ being the organisation they are would of jumped at the opportunity to support such an effort.

Yeah I got pinged on Thursday, however out dated laws and incompetent cow boy cops are two different things. You're welcome to come with me to Court, I'd apreciate the support.

I'll pledge my signature, however I don't have faith in a patition alone acheiving the desired result. So I'm keen to hear more about your ideas and goals.

[WarlockNZ]

I would've thought that BRONZ being the organisation they are would of jumped at the opportunity to support such an effort.

Yeah I got pinged on Thursday, however out dated laws and incompetent cow boy cops are two different things. You're welcome to come with me to Court, I'd apreciate the support.

I'll pledge my signature, however I don't have faith in a patition alone acheiving the desired result. So I'm keen to hear more about your ideas and goals.

I would love to approach them, however being a newbie, i wouldn't know where to start. my goal is simple, to present a petition to parliment to raise the current L plate speed limit, nothing more. i, and i'm sure most newbies, find the fact that we are moving targets at 70k a serious problem and this is the only way i know of to try and do something about it. if you have other oprions, i'd be more than happy to hear them. :)

[LilSel]

I would love to approach them, however being a newbie, i wouldn't know where to start. my goal is simple, to present a petition to parliment to raise the current L plate speed limit, nothing more. i, and i'm sure most newbies, find the fact that we are moving targets at 70k a serious problem and this is the only way i know of to try and do something about it. if you have other oprions, i'd be more than happy to hear them. :)

To get media attention how bout an impromtu 'boobs on bikes' event?? lol...
ya know... to support the cause... (70kph down the motorway??)...

Im in favour of a raise to the L plate limit, not abolishment of a limit and still to retain the L plates (same as with a car). Would be nice to see L plate car drivers limited to the same however (being that 80 or 90kph).

[WarlockNZ]

To get media attention how bout an impromtu 'boobs on bikes' event?? lol...
ya know... to support the cause... (70kph down the motorway??)...

Im in favour of a raise to the L plate limit, not abolishment of a limit and still to retain the L plates (same as with a car). Would be nice to see L plate car drivers limited to the same however (being that 80 or 90kph).

are you offering ??? ... i'm sure the boys would be more than happy to take you pillion, if you didn't want to ride your own bike .. HA HA

[LilSel]

are you offering ??? ... i'm sure the boys would be more than happy to take you pillion, if you didn't want to ride your own bike .. HA HA

LOL!!!!!! Ill lead on mine!! hahaha ;)

[Skyryder]

I would've thought that BRONZ being the organisation they are would of jumped at the opportunity to support such an effort.

I would have thought so too but instead they (BRONZ) seem to go after the popular issues (e.g.buslanes for bikes) in that this is where they will gather most support. It is ia fallacy to believe that numbers will win on the day. Not when it comes to changing Government policy and their minions the LTNZ. Numbers only allow the media to take notice of an 'event.' The media can and should be used as a tool to achive your objectives but if you have had no training in dealing with them pay someone to do it for you. Winning costs.

Whenever I have gone into bat for someone I have always asked myself two questions.
1 Can I win?
2 Am I right?

If the answer is yes to both I will go for it.

On the speed limitation on a restricted licence the answer is yes to both questions

There are safety issues here and this is the way it should be argued for a change.
Secondly there is no speed restriction for learners with vehicles so the speed restriction for bikes is one of disparity in law.

An infringment in this area could be argued for but again it costs and the sad thing about the law is that who has the most money usually wins.


Skyryder

[The Big J]

Warlock,

I think you should speak to the admins here, create a new thread (sticky) and separate your petition from the debate over law changes here. If you want support on the forum making an unequivocal statement of what you're doing will attract more people. Also getting the wording of what people are signing in bold at the top.

If you are serious about doing this you will need to have a strategy and commitment to follow this through maybe for 1-2 years. Alternatively you may be happy to publicise the issue and hope someone takes it from there. Be realistic that it's a long shot. You can change the law but you have to commit to doing work to do it.

I would suggest,
- you speak to your MP about gaining their support
- You look around for an advocacy group to ally yourself with. Ideally any citizen with signatures should be able to acheive change to legislation but the reality is a lobby group holds sway even if they just agree with you rather than lobby on your behalf.
- on this note I would try to canvas Transit, LTSA, AA for their possibly boneheaded opinions. Try the websites find out who the chief executive is and call them. At least you'll get a PA who can steer you to who deals with policy. Do NOT speak to anyone in a call centre. Those people are employed solely to frustrate and distract and stonewall callers so that people who make decisions can get on with their work.
- try to find any evidence of the (obvious in my opinion) danger of motorcyclists riding at 70km/h. If there are studies to show to LTSA to back you up you will get a better response than a standard 'interests of road safety' line

I am happy to sign your petition. Would be happy to support you further but am leaving the country. I'll discuss with people on the KB ride on Sunday. I am a bit hesitant to represent bikers when I've only been riding a bike 6 months and don't know hardly anyone else who rides a bike!

[The Pastor]

this is pointless.

The law is just like the law that makes your wear a helmet on a bicycle. No cops will pull a L plater over for doing 100 in a 100 zone.

L plates are fine but again they only come back to bite you if you are being a dickhead without one on.

Waste of time fixing somthing that isnt broken. Spend your time getting those cheese cutters installed in the propper way and not on the outside of bends(or somthing else that is important).

[placidfemme]

this is pointless.

Waste of time fixing somthing that isnt broken. Spend your time getting those cheese cutters installed in the propper way and not on the outside of bends(or somthing else that is important).

Agreed. I think the law on this is a pain in the ass, but it does help save lives for newbies... Look at the laws in the US, 16 year olds hooning around with little to no experience and training... thats why they are called "organ donors"

[The Pastor]

Agreed. I think the law on this is a pain in the ass, but it does help save lives for newbies... Look at the laws in the US, 16 year olds hooning around with little to no experience and training... thats why they are called "organ donors"

I'd go as far as to say its not a pain in the ass.

You have your learners for what? 6 months? 6 months of not getting pulled over for doing 100 in a 100 zone. BIG HASSLE.


Sure the law is wack and should be changed, but I don't see why we the taxpayers should PAY for them to debate it (I'd like to see how many people in parlament actually went through the graduated driver system + ride a bike) when infact the law isnt enforced anyways.

[TLDV8]

- try to find any evidence of the (obvious in my opinion) danger of motorcyclists riding at 70km/h. If there are studies to show to LTSA to back you up you will get a better response than a standard 'interests of road safety' line



From Page 11


The 70 kmh restriction was set when the open road speed limit was 80 kmh so is out of date for the modern limit of 100kmh...

For those not quite getting it since you may not have held a license or even been born then. In the 1980's the open road speed limit was 80 kmh,the restricted speed was set at 10 kmh less at 70 kmh for whatever reason.Fast forward over 20 years,the open road limit rises to 100 kmh with the restricted limit forgotten about ... Obviously if the LTSA is truely interested in safety they will do something about it quicktime.You don't need to be the sharpest tool in the shed to see the danger in a 30 kmh open road speed differential.

[The Big J]

Yeah big questions about whether it's worth the hassle, agreed.
I personally ride at 100 and make sure I don't go over 110. No problems.


Obviously if the LTSA is truely interested in safety they will do something about it quicktime.You don't need to be the sharpest tool in the shed to see the danger in a 30 kmh open road speed differential.

I'm sure the LTSA has no shortage of tools

[WarlockNZ]

The fact remains tho ... that if they want to .. the cops can pull you over for riding over 70K, It's all well and good to say that "no cop will pull you over for doing 100 in a 100 zone" .. but thats bull shit. If you display an L plate and you exceed 70K the police, can, will and have pulled people over, myself included.

Sure i got off with a warning, but thats not the point .. the point is that the Law is out of date with current road conditions and limits and should be changed. :done: now :beer:

[TLDV8]

I await the Minister's reply regarding the 70 kmh restriction.

[copperS100]

i agree on the 70km restriction as im a learner rider. i have to drive on the motoway evevryday to get to work and if im driving at that speed im more then likely to get run of the road or in a more likelier case drivers having a few harsh words to me as they pass so i always travel at the speed of the cars infront of me

[davereid]

Can L plate car drivers do 100km/hr ?

If they can, then this is just another anti-bike thing.

Some how the whole system seems to be setup to make a motorcycle very difficult to choose as your prefrred form of transport. Like if you want to use a bike for a decent commute, your forced to start on a 250, sell it buy a commuter. Losing $$$ all the way. But you can just buy the toybaru turbo-pop and your off to work.

[McJim]

I've worked it out - the Police want the revenue from speeding tickets so they need the casualty rates up on the roads to justify this - a learner motorcycle will only wipe himself out but a learner in a turbo-jap can take out 2 families in one moment of idiocy!

Therefore they put lots of barriers in the way of motorcycles to maintain the road death stats (via Jap import turbo ma balls and young brain donors) so they can tell the dumb arses in the public that they need all the cameras, radars and lasers to make all the money from fines.

All a bit obvious really.

[Disco Dan]

ok, my first 250cc bike i used to learn on i had an L plate with the thought that when i stalled it on a hill etc cars wouldnt get toooo upset. But after a nasty spill and almost a year of car driving ($$) Im back on another 250cc. No L plate this time and to be quite honest i did not even realise there was a 70kmph limit on my licence!

Im gasping awaiting some more $$ to upgrade to higher cc bike after 5-6 months.

I agree, Learners should be restricted to 250cc and 70kmph
Restricted license holders should be able to have upto around say 4-500cc and the 70k limit taken off.
Then Full holders... go for it ;)

[davereid]

I don't know if smaller bikes are necessarily safer.

Look at a learner legal Aprilia 250, or any of the gee whiz jappas. Good for 100 mph, rabid power bands, sharp brakes. Hard to argue that they are intrinsically safe !

Yet the little commuters may be worse. Can't keep up with traffic, particulary in a headwind, blown around terribly on a windy day.

My wifes on a learners licence, so just riding my scooter. But I know she would manage an 883 Harley perfectly. Easy power so hard to stall, immensly stable, low seat height. Also forgiving brakes- stop very well (BRM tested cruisers and found they stop as well or better than sportsbikes - at least for that first emergency stop.)

[TLDV8]

I await the Minister's reply regarding the 70 kmh restriction.


Six days later :zzzz:

[TLDV8]

I await the Minister's reply regarding the 70 kmh restriction.


Six days later :zzzz:

*
Shock Horror....


Dear Me

On behalf of the Hon Harry Duynhoven, Minister for Transport Safety, I
acknowledge your email of 28 September 2006 concerning the restricted
motorcycle licence speed limit.

You may expect a personal reply from the Minister in due course.

In the meantime, can you please provide me with your postal details, so
that the Minister's response can be posted to you?

Thank you.

Tania Ditchburn
Private Secretary
Office of Hon Harry Duynhoven
Minister for Transport Safety

Ph: (04) 471 9856
Fax: (04) 472 8052

[TLDV8]

I sent my postal details as requested plus another short email.
I have since received a reply so will wait with baited breathe for the ministers reply.


I have pointed out the flaw in the 70 kmh restriction from a safety view and reminded them that it dates back to the open road speed limit of 80 kmh.
As far as i am concerned they are now accountable in that it has been bought to their attention,you newbies who want change need to keep onto it.
You can sit around discussing things on an internet forum but it will do little.
You actually have to do something.

I will wait for the reply but have a hunch it will be political mumbo jumbo.
Remember this is a safety issue.

If you are going to do a petition.

Get a template of it done,email it to as many people who want it...... print it out and start door knocking for places to display it.

Power to the People and all that jazz.

[ManDownUnder]

For the record - Harry's a good guy. A hands on petrol head who was really into fixing up VWs and Porches (don't know how much time he has to do it now though).

Problem is he is bound by Aunty Helen's rules... like the rest of them. Expect a sympathetic answer, without many big promises.

[Hitcher]

I hope you're not expecting the "Minister" to have written the letter...

[SwanTiger]

I will be going to the next BRONZ meeting and joining up along with raising this topic, so if anyone else is keen to come along. BRONZ seems to have quite a few intelligent people who don't mind having their ears bashed with ideas.

[TLDV8]

Problem is he is bound by Aunty Helen's rules... like the rest of them. Expect a sympathetic answer, without many big promises.


True MDU.....but... I am of the opinion they do not even know about this 30 kmh difference.My reply will be that as the minister of safety he will need to be accountable for riders doing 70 kmh on open roads as they are directed too by law.Perhaps i will ask him if he would be prepared to be put in that position.
It is an archaic law that has slipped though a crack.
Edit... and yes i have seen him on TV,he seems like a good chap without the usual political spin.

Perhaps 100+ 250's on a Friday on a busy Wellington/Auckland motorway cruising at their legal 70 kmh might give them a wake up call.

I am all for L plates (when used for their intended purpose)

[ManDownUnder]

True MDU.....but... I am of the opinion they do not even know about this 30 kmh difference.My reply will be that as the minister of safety he will need to be accountable for riders doing 70 kmh on open roads as they are directed too by law.Perhaps i will ask him if he would be prepared to be put in that position.
It is an archaic law that has slipped though a crack.

Perhaps 100+ 250's on a Friday on a busy Wellington/Auckland motorway cruising at their legal 70 kmh might give them a wake up call.

I am all for L plates (when used for their intended purpose)

:niceone: :niceone: :niceone: :niceone:

[cornholio]

can I start by saying :crybaby:

on this mater I would agree that I would think twice before heading out onto the motorway going 70kph, this would mean I would basically have to sit in the left lane ( which would have to be the most dangerous for merging traffic and crazy right hand laners wanting to get off at the next off ramp and willing to cut you off to get there :chase: ) I have been driving my bike for just over a year and still need to go and sit my restricted so I have been cruzing to work everyday and have well come to terms with the handling of my bike, but joy joy yesturday I was stuck behind a black smoke belching bus for about half my trip home going about 35-40k as I came up to the only 2 lane island and saw the bus half move into the left lane I dropped a gear and zipped passed just as a cop was coming from the opposite direction this is the fun part, I was doing 82k as I passed the bus and was pinged by the officer, I had then dropped down to 55ish k's when 100m down the road the cop caught up to me.

Once I had pulled over and been given a ticket for $1100 bucks this is my opinion on the rest of the poll

L plate put it on and take it off when no longer a learner = $400 if off

don't do over 70k it cost you $400

as for the passing speed that was my fault for giving it to much gas :spanking:

6 months is not very long to have to wait to move on, don't be a dick like me and get a hefty ticket before christmas it's not fun - I have had a couple of bails which were from some kind car drivers wanting to play barricade when pulling out into streets and if it were not for my years of driving a car and respect of my new vehicle I could have come off a lot worse

[NighthawkNZ]

Im in two frames of mind on the 70km speed limit.... On one hand yes it is a hazard and a safety issue, on the open road, a newbie be forced to the side of the road being put in unsafe conditions, the shoulder of the road is not safe for even experienced riders let alone a learner, the shoulders of the road (open road) is not constructed as well, the tarmac can easily give way to the underlaying gravel etc etc... passing vechicles ie trucks don't give the room that they should especially with back wash... Also the law was for when the open road speed was 80kmph. the list goes on...

However, as a learner that is what you are suppose to be doing learning how to handle and control the bike safely, blah blah blah...

What needs to happen in reality (not that this ever will or is it in reality feasable) is that all new car drivers need to spend time on a bike... bike riders tend to see their surroundings better... mainly because the have too... having that experience behind them that passes over to when you get your car licence. Also we need to have better teaching all round, how to drive safely all round, from trucks, cars & motorcycles...

Truckers tend to forget about their backwash/wake, and now that they have increased the speed the backwash/wake will be worse... cage drivers generally just don't look... or look but don't see... motorcycles generally think that being quick and nimble means I can make that manouver when in reality you should have waited till that on coming car passed... remembering in each of these catergories there are the hoons that in reality shouldn't be on the road in my view and give both cage and bikers bad names to theother catergory.

I ride as if every other bugger on the road (including other bikers) is out to get me... and I'm still here 20 years later.

the other issues... L-Plate, time restrictions, no pillion, I have no issues with accept maybe certian 250cc bikes that are insanely fast and dangerous to a so called learner. At the end of the day it all comes down to education of everyone on the road... we have share it and be responible for our actions.

BRONZ
http://www.bronz.org.nz/index.htm

Ride Forever
http://www.rideforever.co.nz/

[9cents]

my $0.09 worth on the learner rules...

- 70km/h rule: Lose it. Dangerous and pointless. Many bikers don't live anywhere near 50km/h zones so don't tell me "stick to town"
- 250cc restriction: Keep it. Easy to police, no confusion, limits the learners ( dunno much about the aussie way but it sounds good, could always change to that )
- Time restriction: Lose it. Absolutely rediculous and pointless. Serves no safety and makes it hard for those of us who are nightowls.
- No pillions: Keep it. The last thing a learner needs is another thing to concetrate on and if he/she doesnt have profficient riding skills this is gonna be a worry. I know I definitely don't want to be carrying someone on the back of my bike at this stage.

...anyways time to go home. :scooter:

[Kinje]

I agree that the 70km/hr limit should go. Everybody knows that learners don't just stick to town, many use the open road. I think I used 70km/hr once, and thought this is crazy as trucks and cars sped past and I was getting dangerously close to the edge of the tarmac.

Learner riders need to be better educated about the need to manage their speed for the conditions, and to slow down to an appropriate speed BEFORE a corner so they can ride out of it. NOT have some ill-conceived and archaic blanket rule applied.

L-plates are OK. They signal to other drivers that this person is new to the road, and please show some courtesy. Riders don't wear L-plates because they don't want to be easily spotted breaking their 70km/hr rule.

250CC size limit, time and no pillion I agree with. I'm nearly eligable to go for my full, and I'm only just starting to contemplate a bigger bike, and I still don't want to carry a pillion.

Change only the 70km/hr rule

[TLDV8]

6/10/06


Dear Me

On behalf of the Hon Harry Duynhoven, Minister for Transport Safety, I
acknowledge your email of 28 September 2006 concerning the restricted
motorcycle licence speed limit.

You may expect a personal reply from the Minister in due course.

In the meantime, can you please provide me with your postal details, so
that the Minister's response can be posted to you?

Thank you.

Tania Ditchburn
Private Secretary
Office of Hon Harry Duynhoven
Minister for Transport Safety

Ph: (04) 471 9856
Fax: (04) 472 8052



I guess the Minister is hand delivering my letter by driving up in his Vee Dub,maybe i should have sent some gas money :laugh:
Still on the edge of my seat but no longer standing out by the letterbox

[vamr]

It probably is time for a review. But then you have the probability of the LTNZ stuffing it all up.

Aye, the '04's review of the transport laws for possible changes by 2010 proposed that the learners license age should be raised to 17 and bikes be restricted to 125cc (inline with "best international practises") for learners and restricted license holders. All while opening the motorbike related paragraph with a quick "bikes are just too dangerous".

[-J-]

Comming from another country where we have been through crap like this before, it doesn't work. We have some of the worst drivers and riders to be seen on the roads ever. The level of testing has dropped completly. They now allow Learners to travel at 100km/h have a blood alchol limit of 0.02 can drive on freeways (motorways?). They now also have to to a written, then 25 hrs on log book, then a practical, then a impact assessment test (no idea what that is). And they wonder why there are at least 5 casualties on perth roads alone every day.

[TLDV8]

I await the Minister's reply regarding the 70 kmh restriction.

:first: I was hoping for a reply something like.. I rang Helen immediately and she has rubberstamped your suggestion :laugh:...It was cool to get a reply either way.

[rwh]

:first: I was hoping for a reply something like.. I rang Helen immediately and she has rubberstamped your suggestion :laugh:...It was cool to get a reply either way.

Good stuff. Thanks for taking the time to do this.

Richard

[hamie1]

I'm in for a total removal (for me at least) BUT if you feel you need it no one should give you grief for using it! For some people it makes them feel secure. For me it makes me feel like a target. Each to their own I guess.

[WarlockNZ]

Ummm .. not sure if anybody else has noticed this, but the minister refers to a "restricted motorclycle license" .. correct me if i'm wrong, but the speed limit of 70kph is only for a Learners license.

Sound's to me like the Minister doesn't know what the fuck hes talking about.

[xwhatsit]

Still a pretty bloody good result though, no? I think that's probably the best you'd manage to get out of politicians.

@Warlock: I think when he says `holders of a restricted motorcycle licence' he means a holder of a licence which has restrictions placed on it; i.e. a learner's licence. At least that's the impression I got.

Not too bad, not too bad at all.

[WarlockNZ]

To all the people that i sent signature sheets too ... now's about the time to think about getting them back to me ... parliament goes into recess shortly and i would like to present the petition when they reconvene in the new year ... so if you have a petition sheet, start thinking about sending it back to me ... you have the address and if you don't .. PM me and i'll give it to you .

[samwp]

To all the people that i sent signature sheets too ... now's about the time to think about getting them back to me ... parliament goes into recess shortly and i would like to present the petition when they reconvene in the new year ... so if you have a petition sheet, start thinking about sending it back to me ... you have the address and if you don't .. PM me and i'll give it to you .

wait! I want to sign it. if anyone still has a sheet in the waikato-ish area I would like to sign it, good excuse for a ride too :D

[Waylander]

:first: I was hoping for a reply something like.. I rang Helen immediately and she has rubberstamped your suggestion :laugh:...It was cool to get a reply either way.
Is it just me or does anyone else read that first letter and expect them to drop the open road limit down to 70kmh rather than raising the restricted speed.

[EZAS]

I don't see how having a 250 rule is justified as there is a BIG difference betwen 2 and 4 stroke. the Power rule in Aussie is the best idea. My mate had an unmarked 600 and never got done for it even though he was pulled over sevral times.
Perhaps limit to a maximum of 60hp on a learners.

L plates don't do any harm to anyone, I'd stick an L-Plate on my bike if it didn't make you a blatant target.

70kmh is dangerous

My 2 cents worth.