Poll: Learner speed restriction change?

[BiK3RChiK]

It seems to me that 70km/hr is too slow on the open road... What do you all think? Should the speed be changed or not? What should it be changed to? 90km/hr or 100km/hr?

Your thoughts please...

M

[Owl]

Open road speed limit should be 100kph for restricted riders IMHO.

[BASS-TREBLE]

Say it would be changed to 100km/h,
Then the 'staged license' system will have to be changed a little bit too because whats the difference between Learners and Restricted after the learners limit went up to 100???

Make the restricted limit 120km/h???

[BiK3RChiK]

Say it would be changed to 100km/h,
Then the 'staged license' system will have to be changed a little bit too because whats the difference between Learners and Restricted after the learners limit went up to 100???

Make the restricted limit 120km/h???

You have a point, but 70km/hr on the open road is a fools game IMO.. Some idiot in a suit must've had a brain fart!!

[FROSTY]

Definitely NOT. A learners licence is just that. Its a licence to learn to ride.
Its an opertunity to learn the basic skills required to move that piece of machinery.
People seem to loose sight of this.

If a person is too lazy to sit their restricted licence and stays on a learners for years hey its a self inflicted problem.

[hellnback]

Nah, I agree that 70km on the motorway can feel a bit hairy at times, but when just learning on the country roads 70km is plenty.

[Ralph]

Yep I think it should be changed to 100km, The only time I ever did 70km was going for my restricted and that was only because the officer was behind me and he didn't care, they're a little more anal about it now I believe.

I think I'd be right in saying that most of us never followed that rule on our learners.

Shore it's the only difference between Learners and restricted but that could be changed to maybe being allowed to carry pillions on a restricted. Not sure if thats part of it at the moment after all it's been a while since I last looked at the road code :o

[richiewendt]

Any numbnut can ride 100Kph in a straight line after a few attempts riding. City riding is far more dangerous I reckon for a new rider. Unless they decide to go to raglan or cooks beach and push the limits a bit! Increase restricted cc rating to 400 though.

[FROSTY]

Nah, I agree that 70km on the motorway can feel a bit hairy at times, .
Why would a person on L plates be riding on the motorway?
I do have isssues with our nanna state dont get me wrong here.
Common sense tells you that a person with very limited experience is unlikely to react to a dangerous situation propperly
Keeping their speed down to 70 means reduced collateral damage if they get it wrong.
Putting them in heavy traffic at 100km/h is just asking fro trouble

[hellnback]

Why would a person on L plates be riding on the motorway?

Easiest way out of town?? Need to cross the harbour bridge??

And I agree with you that 70km is a good restriction for learner riders, I was just saying that the motorway is a daunting place for leaners.

[sunhuntin]

70k is suicide... i did it the first time i went out of town and very nearly didnt make it back due to cagers tail gating. after that, i went out on my local, quiet open roads and learned out there. did my first 100k on the long straight. from there, no looking back at 70k.

if learner cagers can do 100k, so should learner bikers. many cage drivers dont realise what the learner speed is.

[Jantar]

Why do so many of you assume that ALL learners are young, and live in cities. I know of a person who started to learn riding at the age of 40 so he could travel to work by motorcycle instead of car. The only road available between where he lives at Cromwell and his work near Alexandra is on the open highway through the Cromwell Gorge. Travelling that road at 70 kmh is not only dangerous, its just plain stupid. So he travelled at 100 kmh.

Now he has moved through the graduated licence system and recently upgraded from a GZ250 to a GSF500. He finds the larger bike much safer to ride on the open road so in those circumstances, not only was the speed safer at a 100, but the bike size is better once through all parts of the system.

[Tank]

Its a hard question - and I guess that there is no easy answer that fits all.

The upshot is that riding on the open road (and a lot of people HAVE to do so) at 70 on NZ roads with NZ drivers IS dangerous.

Try going north to the Puhoi pub for a ride. Stick at 70kms on all the open roads and see how much traffic is stuck behind you. You will probably have a car right up your ass and at least one idiot do something stupid simply to get past the trail of cars.

It puts you as the learner in danger, and under additional stress (because you are being tailgated and probably looking more in your mirrors instead of concentration on the next corner) and poses a greater risk to other drivers than the additional 30kmph on the road.

LTNZ have told me that they DO NOT want learners on the open road at 70 and thats why you can get exemption from the restricted period and go for your full immediately.

So my vote is for the 100 km - but with double points and fine for going over it!

[NOMIS]

The should let restricted riders be able to own a 600cc bike to or at least a 400cc

[Mikkel]

I think they should remove the entire concept of a speed restriction altogether. There would be things that would be better:

1. A multiplier on demerit points received depending upon what level of the graduated license system you're on (e.g. x3 for learners, x2 for restricted and x1 for full).
and/or
2. Accumulation of "penalty points" for road offenses which would push back the date where you could sit your test for the next level.


Open road speed limit should be 100kph for restricted riders IMHO.

There is no speed restrictions on the restricted license - only the ccm and pillion restriction.


Why would a person on L plates be riding on the motorway?
I do have isssues with our nanna state dont get me wrong here.
Common sense tells you that a person with very limited experience is unlikely to react to a dangerous situation propperly
Keeping their speed down to 70 means reduced collateral damage if they get it wrong.
Putting them in heavy traffic at 100km/h is just asking fro trouble

Again, people are different here and learn at different rates. I'd been happy sitting my full license after 2 months.

If you had proper road user instruction and training as a part of the process of getting a license this would resolve that issue. If you actually had to pass a proper competence test instead of the laughable basic handling test you wouldn't have to worry about that.


Its a hard question - and I guess that there is no easy answer that fits all.

There is - implementing a proper road user licensing system!


It puts you as the learner in danger, and under additional stress (because you are being tailgated and probably looking more in your mirrors instead of concentration on the next corner) and poses a greater risk to other drivers than the additional 30kmph on the road.

...and it causes road rage - not good!


LTNZ have told me that they DO NOT want learners on the open road at 70 and thats why you can get exemption from the restricted period and go for your full immediately.

How is that going to change anything? I mean, there's no speed restriction on the restricted license.

What they should do instead is to excempt everyone who holds a full license in another category from the learners period. If you have your road craft sorted I think that the restrictions on 6R are pretty spot on for learning how to ride a bike - no pillion, no larger than 250 ccm - you're can't ride something that'll take your head off if you blink, and if you fuck up at least you won't be carrying a passenger.


So my vote is for the 100 km - but with double points and fine for going over it!

As written above - this makes more sense.

[Toaster]

Definitely NOT. A learners licence is just that. Its a licence to learn to ride.
Its an opertunity to learn the basic skills required to move that piece of machinery.
People seem to loose sight of this.

If a person is too lazy to sit their restricted licence and stays on a learners for years hey its a self inflicted problem.

Exactly right, well said.


It seems to me that 70km/hr is too slow on the open road... What do you all think? Should the speed be changed or not? What should it be changed to? 90km/hr or 100km/hr?

Your thoughts please...

M

The point is that Learner bikers are no supposed to be on the open road - they want you to get your skills up enough over the time you are a learner before you graduate to riding in 100km/h zones.

[Jantar]

....The point is that Learner bikers are no supposed to be on the open road - they want you to get your skills up enough over the time you are a learner before you graduate to riding in 100km/h zones.

I have seen this mentioned on kiwibiker a few times now. Where is written in the rules or in any official policy? And how is anyone living in a rural area supposed to learn?

[FROSTY]

Why do so many of you assume that ALL learners are young, and live in cities.
I assume that all people on L plates--Ie with learner licences are just that LEARNERS. Thats irrespective of age race sex or creed.
The purpose of a learner licence is to frigging LEARN to ride.
I couldn't agree more that the road you refer to is too dangerous to travel at 70km/h --in that case WTF is he doing riding it on a L plate?
An inexperienced rider on a dangerous bit of road hmm

[FROSTY]

I have seen this mentioned on kiwibiker a few times now. Where is written in the rules or in any official policy? And how is anyone living in a rural area supposed to learn?
Rural area SHOULD mean more quiet roads available to practice.

[Mikkel]

I assume that all people on L plates--Ie with learner licences are just that LEARNERS. Thats irrespective of age race sex or creed.
The purpose of a learner licence is to frigging LEARN to ride.
I couldn't agree more that the road you refer to is too dangerous to travel at 70km/h --in that case WTF is he doing riding it on a L plate?
An inexperienced rider on a dangerous bit of road hmm

So can I extrapolate from what you're saying is and assume that you stopped learning when you took your L-plate off?

I surely hope that isn't correct...

It doesn't matter whether you've ridden dirtbikes since you were 4 or if you've never touched a motor- and/or bicycle before your 15th birthday - you both still go on the learners period with the same restrictions and duration.

You haven't ever touched a motorcycle and take it up at the tender age of 50 - are you likely to learn as fast as a 15 year old? The answer - generally - is no, but you still get your full faster. Yes, you can hope that you'd be more mature and have some on-road experience to help you, but that is not necessarily the case.

The learners license is too easy to get - fact!
The learners restrictions are in many cases ridiculous - fact!

There is an easy fix, but it's going to make a license much more expensive to obtain and it'll cost a significant amount of money to implement: Proper road user licensing.

[Horse]

I assume that all people on L plates--Ie with learner licences are just that LEARNERS. Thats irrespective of age race sex or creed.
The purpose of a learner licence is to frigging LEARN to ride.
I'm 38. I grew up riding farm bikes. I don't pretend that there aren't things I need to learn about riding on the road, which is why I ride as much as work etc permits. But the basics of riding a motorbike (including, OMG, counter-steering) I learned 20 years ago.

I got my license at the start of December - nearly 3 months down, 3 more to go. I've done 3000km since getting my license, the majority of it on the open road. I really don't think there's a hell of a lot more I can learn from pootling around Palmerston North at 50km/h, although I deliberately ride in busy shopping traffic on a Saturday morning for the experience.

Riding at 70km/h on the open road is suicide IMO, so I don't do it. Even in a supposedly provincial area like the Manawatu - we have more traffic than you'd expect.

Not everyone on a Learner is learning to ride.

BTW, I haven't considered going for an exemption or accelerated progression to full because I doubt that I'd qualify. I'm 5'11" - my bike's a bit on the small side, but it's fairly big for a 250, and fits me fairly comforably. I don't need the bike to get to or from work, I have a work vehicle for that, so I can't claim some essential commute that I have to bike.

[Jantar]

... I couldn't agree more that the road you refer to is too dangerous to travel at 70km/h --in that case WTF is he doing riding it on a L plate?
An inexperienced rider on a dangerous bit of road hmm

It isn't dangerous if you travel at the same speed as other traffic.

[Weaver]

Definitely NOT. A learners licence is just that. Its a licence to learn to ride.
Its an opertunity to learn the basic skills required to move that piece of machinery.
People seem to loose sight of this.

If a person is too lazy to sit their restricted licence and stays on a learners for years hey its a self inflicted problem.

Have you heard of a thing called self control? If your a learner and don't feel comfortable at a 100kph then ride a little slower. Fuck, old people do it all the time.
If your under the age of 25 then you have to have your learners for 6 months. Thats a pretty long time to not go out onto the open road. Infact its fucken stupid.

[Jantar]

Rural area SHOULD mean more quiet roads available to practice. Not in Central Otago, and certainly not in the Alexandra - Cromwell - Queenstown area.

[Blossom]

Definitely NOT. A learners licence is just that. Its a licence to learn to ride.
Its an opertunity to learn the basic skills required to move that piece of machinery.
People seem to loose sight of this.


What he said.
Perhaps the solution is in the exemptions. If a learners licence is "to learn to ride" then maybe the question should be about the licence exemption not the speed. If someone 'needs' to ride on the motorway and can prove it (get to work etc)then they should be able to get an exemption. Like the guys who get one for bike size etc.
But I shudder to think of a 15yr old newbie 2 days after getting their learners barrelling out onto SH1 and being able/allowed and feeling the pressure from the traffic to do 100k. First white line on a corner in the rain you would be picking them and God knows who else off the road.
Yes I know this doesnt apply to us oldies who are finally getting round to getting our licence, but I am under the belief that most new bike licences are going to young men. Young men who at 15/17 think they are bullet proof and invinsible.:2guns:
Yes I know the mummy in me is rearing its head again. :whistle:

[Mikkel]

If your under the age of 25 then you have to have your learners for 6 months. Thats a pretty long time to not go out onto the open road. Infact its fucken stupid.

Ehh, it's 12 months if you're under 25... 6 if you're above.

[FROSTY]

The learners license is too easy to get - fact!
The learners restrictions are in many cases ridiculous - fact!
I couldn't disagree more --what you are saying is your personal OPINION.
You are missing the point totally -and I repeat-a Learner bike licence is a licence to learn the basic riding skills required to ride safely on our roads.
You are not required to demonstrate competence because you in theory have none.
Once you have sat and obtained a RESTRICTED licence you have demonstrated that you have sufficient skills to ride competantly enough to tackle 100km/h roads
In the same way as a Learner car licence is INTENDED as a licence to learn to drive a car.
Muddying the waters by saying --ohh I spose you stop learning etc is just that -throwing mud up

[Weaver]

Ehh, it's 12 months if you're under 25... 6 if you're above.

For people under the age of 25, its 6 months on learners and 12 months on restricted (providing you do a defensive riding course).

[Jantar]

...and I repeat-a Learner bike licence is a licence to learn the basic riding skills required to ride safely on our roads....

I know its many years since I got my licence off the back of a weatbix packet, but I do believe that it is now neccessary to pass a basic skills handling test before getting a learners licence.

[Weaver]

You are missing the point totally -and I repeat-a Learner bike licence is a licence to learn the basic riding skills required to ride safely on our roads.
You are not required to demonstrate competence because you in theory have none.
Once you have sat and obtained a RESTRICTED licence you have demonstrated that you have sufficient skills to ride competantly enough to tackle 100km/h roads
In the same way as a Learner car licence is INTENDED as a licence to learn to drive a car.


Your learners is to familiarise yourself with riding.
The basic handling course is where you learn the
basic riding skills required to ride safely on our roads.
To get your basic handling you have to demonstrate competence.
Once you have sat and obtained a RESTRICTED licence you have demonstrated that you are a little more experienced and are on your way to being able to ride without conditions.

[BiK3RChiK]

Why would a person on L plates be riding on the motorway?
I do have isssues with our nanna state dont get me wrong here.
Common sense tells you that a person with very limited experience is unlikely to react to a dangerous situation propperly
Keeping their speed down to 70 means reduced collateral damage if they get it wrong.
Putting them in heavy traffic at 100km/h is just asking fro trouble

Probably, but there are more places to ride than the motorway... NZ is made up of many 100k zones besides Auckland Motorway! Try going from small town NZ to larger town/city NZ at 70km/hr in a 100k zone and see how you like it...

Not every noob gets on the bike and immediately goes at 100km/hr. Usually they build up to it as their confidence improves. I concede that there are some idiots out there though.

M

[Mikkel]

For people under the age of 25, its 6 months on learners and 12 months on restricted (providing you do a defensive riding course).

We're both partially right:

Info is here (http://www.landtransport.govt.nz/factsheets/28.html).

Under 25:

6 months on learners
18 months on restricted - can be reduced to 12 months by doing the course.

Over 25:

6 months on learners
6 months on restricted - can be reduced to 3 months by doing the course.

[FROSTY]

Try going from small town NZ to larger town/city NZ at 70km/hr in a 100k zone and see how you like it...M
THATS EXACTLY THE POINT -- you shouldn't be doing so !!!
The whole intent was for you to be out practicing your riding skills

Theres exceptions to every rule of course-- Sam Smiths a perfect example-can he ride--DUU or a MX rider who's decided to come over to a road bike after years
BUT theres where I think the change BACK in time is needed
You used to be able to accelerate your licence process if you went to a riding school (coca cola was the most famous) could demonstrate competence as a rider then you got your licence after 3 months instead of 6

[Ixion]

I think what you have to remember is that the GDLS was built around cars. And people learning to drive cars. Motorcycles, as always were an after thought.

Now, a learner in a car is almost certainly young. We do get older people learning to ride bikes. But very few car learners will not be teenagers - it does happen but percentage wise it's tiny.

So the law makers assume that learner = teenager.

Secondly, a car learner is supposed to always have an older supervisor in the car. Which means several things

Firstly, car learners, because they can only go out with a supervisor, don't get the hours in that learner riders do. So, six months minimum may be (as some have suggested) unduely long for a 6L, where the learner rider is out every day riding. But it's probably reasonable for the car learner, who probably only gets to practice once or twice a week for an hour or so.

Secondly , the supervisor will be able to make a call on when the learner is sufficiently ready to tackle motorways, open road. No-one would take a car learner onto the motorway on their first lesson! But the bike learner has no such supervisor to say "not yet". So when the law makers did turn their attention to bikes, and realised that it was impossible to have a supervisor, they imposed the 70kph limit, to try to prevent the new rider heading onto the Auckland motorway on day 1.

Thirdly, the psychological effect of the learner licence is quite different for bikes and cars. When a new rider gets his/her 6L, it's access to the wheels of freedom. No supervisor means that the 6L wants (and expects) to be able to use his/her new bike as transport. He wants to go everywhere on it. The car learner though, it's just a process to go through. The 1L doesn't really provide any new freedom, you are still tied to Mum or Dad, they have to come with you (I know, some people ignore the supervisor thing. Let's assume we are talking folk who obey the law.) And, Mum and dad being along, the 1L driver isn't going to be out at nights (Mum and Dad want to watch TV). Or heading out to far flung towns.

And , realistically, the system is ALWAYS going to be built around the car learner. Just pray they don't bring in some requirement to have professional instruction. For bikes that would be a real PITA.

Some have commented on the basic handling skills test. I don';t see that as an indication of any competance at riding on the public road. The BHS test is in a car park, it just establishes that the person can use the controls. They still have zero skills at actually riding in traffic (not true for those who already have a cage licence - but as I said, the lawmakers start with the teenage car learner) .

Nobody is ever happy with restrictions. We've seen in this thread , people arguing that 6R should allow 600cc. An R6 after six months. Hmm.

Every novice, after the first few weeks, feels sure that they have the whole thing sussed. And, indeed, when I started out, there were no restrictions. And I knew a lot of novice riders died because their bikes exceeded their skills, too. The GDLS does its best to save such folk from themselves. By and large, it probably works fairly well. And the restrictions (irksome though they may be) are still quite relaxed compared to many countries.

[FROSTY]

Have you heard of a thing called self control? If your a learner and don't feel comfortable at a 100kph then ride a little slower. Fuck, old people do it all the time.
If your under the age of 25 then you have to have your learners for 6 months. Thats a pretty long time to not go out onto the open road. Infact its fucken stupid.
Dude I think its a matter of personal prospective.
For you on a 250 chomping at the bit to ride --it sucks.
For me --burried way to many freinds. seen too many learner rider accidents -I kinda work the law of averages

[Mikkel]

Frosty, have you considered for just a moment that what might be needed is a change of attitude.

That perhaps busy city traffic is not the best place to learn how to ride a motorcycle?

That the development that caused a need to introduce a graded licensing system with at least a couple of tests etc didn't stop when those measures were implemented?
That today the amount of traffic on the roads is too high to use it as a classroom?
That today the amount of traffic imposes a higher demand upon the individual roaduser and that the licensing system is inadequate?

And surely, you can not argue that going 100 km/h on an empty road is more dangerous than riding 50 km/h in rush-hour traffic?

[FROSTY]

Mikkel-You keep missing the point--a learner licence rider shouldn't be in rush hour traffic any more than they should be on the open road at 100km/h
If you use the time on a learner licence to practice your riding skills rather than being out thinking the little blue bit of plastic is a right to ride anywhere anytime ...

[Mikkel]

Mikkel-You keep missing the point--a learner licence rider shouldn't be in rush hour traffic any more than they should be on the open road at 100km/h
If you use the time on a learner licence to practice your riding skills rather than being out thinking the little blue bit of plastic is a right to ride anywhere anytime ...

And you're missing the point that a 6L will be used for commuting in the city and riding on the open road - and that there's no reason it shouldn't.

I do however think we both agree on one thing: Learning is important and should be handled in a safe and controlled environment.

You're saying however that the restrictions on the learners are if anything too lenient and that all people on a learners license are effectively muppets who doesn't know the first thing about what they're doing.

I'm saying that some of the restrictions on the learners and restricted licenses are bullshit and the problem is to be found in how you obtain the license. That there's a valid case for putting proper rider/driver training in place before you let people loose on the public roads.

Seriously, I can be fined $400 and 25 demerit point for riding my bike safely between 10 pm and 5 am. However, if I am in my car it's perfectly alright - how idiotic is that?

NZ apparently has some trouble with it's road statistics compared to similar countries. I dare say that the driver/rider education/licensing system doesn't work very well!

[BiK3RChiK]

THATS EXACTLY THE POINT -- you shouldn't be doing so !!!
The whole intent was for you to be out practicing your riding skills



Umm... dood! Can't practice my skills if I can't get out on the road now, can I? I live in Edgecumbe!!! How am I going to show the testing officer in Whakatane I have the adequate skills necessary to get my Restricted when the time comes if I don't go out on the open road? Or do you think I'll get enough skills just riding around the half a dozen streets here? Because I don't think so!! There aren't even any round-a-bouts! Whakatane is full of them! But to get there I have a 15 to 20min ride on the open road!!! :bash:


M

[Soul.Trader]

Is it just me, or is it painfully obvious that Frosty is a Dorklander with very little perspective of the REST OF THE COUNTRY?

[Ixion]

No . What he is saying , is that an L licence is a licence to LEARN, not to RIDE.

You , and all L riders, want to be off and away on your new freedom wheels. It's natural. You want to ride here, ride there, go wherever you wish.

But --- that's NOT the view of the people who wrote the law. They see the 6L learner in the same light as the 1L learner. The L licence is not intended for transportation. The car learner, they say, is not able to whizz off wherever and whenever he wishes. Not should the learner rider.

The fact that the 70kph limit would prevent a learner from being able to get from A to B, because open road or motorway intervenes, would not sway the lawmakers. They would reply "That is exactly what it is intended to do. Let the learner first learn to ride. Then, and only then, they may take to the highways"

I don't necessarily say that philosophy is right. But, like Mr Frosty, I've seen too many novices hospitalised or buried not to see some strength in the argument.

[BiK3RChiK]

Well, perhaps that is the case in some instances. But how then does someone in say Ohaupo, Egmont Village, Patea, Te Teko, Kawakawa, Kaeo or some other small village in good ol' NZ learn to ride then? There are many places on main roads with 100km/hr zones that people with L-Plates ride because that is where they live. How are they going to 'learn' if they can't go out on the open road, when the open road is right at their gate and they have a 1/4 acre section with trees, a garden, sheds etc,etc? Not everyone on a Class 6 L-Plate licence lives in Auckland or the suburbs!

M

[Mikkel]

I don't necessarily say that philosophy is right. But, like Mr Frosty, I've seen too many novices hospitalised or buried not to see some strength in the argument.

Well, riddle me this. If they managed to enforce the L-period in the way you describe it... How many people do you think would bother about getting a bike license in the first place? :Pokey:

Edit: Oh and it goes without saying - not bother getting a license, get a litre bike, no insurance and then go out and learn like that...

[Ixion]

Well, perhaps that is the case in some instances. But how then does someone in say Ohaupo, Egmont Village, Patea, Te Teko, Kawakawa, Kaeo or some other small village in good ol' NZ learn to ride then? There are many places on main roads with 100km/hr zones that people with L-Plates ride because that is where they live. How are they going to 'learn' if they can't go out on the open road, when the open road is right at their gate and they have a 1/4 acre section with trees, a garden, sheds etc,etc? Not everyone lives in Auckland!

M

But they can indeed go out on the open road. There is nothing forbids that. And if they live in a small village it would seem very probable that there are a good many little trafficed roads very close by, where a learner pootling along at 70 would not be at any risk. Indeed on many such roads the majority of traffic does not much exceed 70 kph.

[BiK3RChiK]

But they can indeed go out on the open road. There is nothing forbids that. And if they live in a small village it would seem very probable that there are a good many little trafficed roads very close by, where a learner pootling along at 70 would not be at any risk. Indeed on many such roads the majority of traffic does not much exceed 70 kph.

Hahaha... Seems you don't get out much! Come to the Bay of Plenty mate and see just how busy our roads are!! You try 'pootling along at 70'!:shutup:

M

[sunhuntin]

Mikkel-You keep missing the point--a learner licence rider shouldn't be in rush hour traffic any more than they should be on the open road at 100km/h
If you use the time on a learner licence to practice your riding skills rather than being out thinking the little blue bit of plastic is a right to ride anywhere anytime ...

how exactly then is one meant to gain experience? one needs to do to gain experience. when i took my girlfriend pillion, dad said "you need experience to carry a pillion" he didnt have an answer for "how do i get experience without doing?"

as you can tell by my crappy l plate, it did many thousands of k with me before i could be arsed getting my restricted. im nearing 30,000k travelled, and may even be higher than that. i rode at 70k once and nearly got run over due to tail gaters. after that, its at whatever the posted speed is. as said, i was watching my mirrors more than the road ahead. after that, also as already said, i took my nearby open roads and rode there, hard out. but inbetween, i was also doing wangas to turakina weekly, and also went part way up the paraparas, simply cos the nearby road didnt have enough challenges [no traffic or corners etc]

if a learner lives in, say, bulls or sanson and has to go to palmy or wangas for their job, how are they meant to get there? i sure as hell wouldnt advocate they stay at 70k when they do the road daily. [and lets say the motorbike is their only form of transport.]

[Ixion]

how exactly then is one meant to gain experience? one needs to do to gain experience. when i took my girlfriend pillion, dad said "you need experience to carry a pillion" he didnt have an answer for "how do i get experience without doing?"



That would apply whatever the licence status. What the law intends, is that a motorcyclist should not start acquiring that experience (of taking a pillion) whilst they are still inexperinced at basic riding. Learn to RIDE first. Then (once the full class 6 be obtained) learn to pillion.



if a learner lives in, say, bulls or sanson and has to go to palmy or wangas for their job, how are they meant to get there? i sure as hell wouldnt advocate they stay at 70k when they do the road daily. [and lets say the motorbike is their only form of transport.]

You might equally ask how a person is to get to palmy or wangas if they have no licence at all ? The simple fact is that a learner licence is not intended to facilitate such trips. You say "the motorbike is their only form of transport". But, if they have only an L licence, the motorbike is NOT a form of transport. It is a means of tuition.

A car learner could equally complain that he or she needs to get to Parmy or Wangas, and they cannot because of the irksome requirement to have a supervisor along . So, on that basis , would you agree that the requirement for a car learner to have a qualified driver in the car should be abolished.

The simple answer to your question is that the person in question must wait until they have a 6R. The 6L is a licence to Learn. The 6R a licence to Ride

[Mikkel]

Now I feel enlightened. I shall from here on out not ride my motorcycle just learn on my motorcycle until I can indeed get the ticket to competence that is the 6R...

I feel like a beer... a tui perhaps.

[YLWDUC]

if a learner lives in, say, bulls or sanson and has to go to palmy or wangas for their job, how are they meant to get there? i sure as hell wouldnt advocate they stay at 70k when they do the road daily. [and lets say the motorbike is their only form of transport.]

Agreed, its ridiculous that in most of New Zealand the 70km/hr limit is more dangerous than the 100. There is always the exemption form (and $25) to fill in at the testing station. I for one have no sympathy for the people who have done the time on the learners but haven't bothered to sit the R.

The 70km/hr limit on learners means that legally they shouldn't be on the motorway or highway at all. I'm not saying that thats fair, but if a motorvehicle is travelling at more than 20km/hr under the speed limit, they can be ticketed for careless driving or obstructing traffic.

Which still does nothing to solve the crappy licensing and 250cc regulations. Lets become the 8th State of Australia so we can have a more sensible "power to weight" limit instead of the 250cc. Though all the hoons would have to say goodbye to their NSR/ZXR/RGV/CBR 250 rice rockets.

[BiK3RChiK]

Now I feel enlightened. I shall from here on out not ride my motorcycle just learn on my motorcycle until I can indeed get the ticket to competence that is the 6R...

I feel like a beer... a tui perhaps.

Yeah, crack one open for me too, mate! I feel like a tui too...:apint:

M

[Horse]

I think someone's going to have to explain to me how I'm going to learn to ride at highway speeds without ever leaving the 50km/h zone.

Note: "wait till you've got your 6R" isn't the answer, apparently R is for riding, not learning.

And in a city like Palmy, you're not going to learn much about going around corners on a motorbike inside city limits.

[BIHB@0610]

How much is the fine for riding over 70km/h with your learner's licence? I know the exemption can be applied for if you regularly ride on the open road - I for one will be applying soon! If I don't get it, I think my personal safety is worth risking a fine for.

[Mikkel]

Yeah, crack one open for me too, mate! I feel like a tui too...:apint:

M

Coming right up... :apint: Cheers big ears! :drinkup: :drinknsin


How much is the fine for riding over 70km/h with your learner's licence? I know the exemption can be applied for if you regularly ride on the open road - I for one will be applying soon! If I don't get it, I think my personal safety is worth risking a fine for.

$400 and 25 demerits for violating a license restriction... that's for each restriction you break mind you!

And you're probably not likely to get an exemption unless you can prove that you need it for work or some such.

Otherwise I would have applied - but commuting through Chch is probably not a good enough reason.

[FROSTY]

Ohh gosh people --Im so sorry Ill explain. I got my licence via the OLD graduated system--not a lot unlike the current system.
I lived in a megatropolis called Thames.(population 6000)
So I guess Im not qualified to really discuss the process of getting a licence in small towns.:bleh:

[FROSTY]

I think someone's going to have to explain to me how I'm going to learn to ride at highway speeds without ever leaving the 50km/h zone.

Note: "wait till you've got your 6R" isn't the answer, apparently R is for riding, not learning.

And in a city like Palmy, you're not going to learn much about going around corners on a motorbike inside city limits.
Its very much like racing--First of all develop the SKILLS then increase the speed.

[Hitcher]

Having been a *learner* in the past five years and living in a major metropolitan area, my comments are based on (bitter) personal experience.

The open-road speed limit for learners should be exactly the same as all road users. There is no arbitrary speed restriction for learner car drivers. Anything less is dangerous for the riders in question, particularly when learners are required to brand the rear of their bikes with L plates. If people want to learn to ride at lower speeds, then they should avoid the open road until they feel sufficiently confident/competent.

The 10:00pm curfew should also be removed. Riding after that time is no more dangerous than before, and the night gets no darker.

Apart from that, the only other change I'd make to learner rider regulations is to replace the arbitrary engine size limitation (a nonsense when 250cc two-strokes are kosher) to the LAM system favoured by some Australian states.

[BiK3RChiK]

I can see what Frosty and Ixion are saying. If someone (and I'd have to say here probably most)on their 6L needs to 'learn' to ride first, then the 100k zone is not for them. And I'm not advocating that they hop on a bike and go straight up to 100km/hr! 'It aint a target!' remember... Hell! There was a guy on my BHS course who almost dropped the bike because he locked up the front brake and was so scared of the bike he was physically shaking!! I'm shocked he got a certificate! He obviously had very little idea about how to ride a bike.

What I am saying is that IF the learner is an experienced-ish rider and has had their car licence for say 10 years, then why shouldn't they be allowed to travel on the open road up to at least 90km/hr? I've had my car licence for almost 25 years, and have ridden bikes from the age of about 12 on our family farm. I should have gone for my licence when they handed them out of the weetbix packet, but there you go, I didn't! Now I want my full licence. But to get there, I have to go through all this other BS as do other riders in similar positions.

The arguments posted above have raised some very good points and have definitely made me think about the stupid licencing system in this country. I can see why they have made it like it is, but IMO, they need to add a different licence category or something for more experienced riders....

M

[FROSTY]

Ive been thinking a lot about this today.
Learner licence -nahh cant change my mind about the whole its a licence to learn not a licence to go out doing what you want to --as such the time restrictions make sense and the speed limit makes sense BUT
There should be NO qualifying time before you can sit a restricted licence.
In other words if you can demonstrate you have the riding skills needed to ride a bike competantly then why should you be stopped doing so?
Mind you I'm also an advocate for the whole HP as oposed to CC restriction too.
That would make bike pricing more reasonable for a learner removing the insanely inflated pricing thats on 250's
In my opinion a GS500/goose350/gb400/gpz500/etc is a heck of a lot more inteligent learner bike than a prillia 250 or a RGV250 etc

[BiK3RChiK]

Ive been thinking a lot about this today.
Learner licence -nahh cant change my mind about the whole its a licence to learn not a licence to go out doing what you want to --as such the time restrictions make sense and the speed limit makes sense BUT
There should be NO qualifying time before you can sit a restricted licence.
In other words if you can demonstrate you have the riding skills needed to ride a bike competantly then why should you be stopped doing so?
Mind you I'm also an advocate for the whole HP as oposed to CC restriction too.
That would make bike pricing more reasonable for a learner removing the insanely inflated pricing thats on 250's
In my opinion a GS500/goose350/gb400/gpz500/etc is a heck of a lot more inteligent learner bike than a prillia 250 or a RGV250 etc

Sounds like a good idea to me! DH says I'd pass easily!!! Don't know anything about the HP v CC thing (mostly because I don't know the HP of bikes) so if it counted my bike out, then I'd say leave it as it is... but, if it was a goer, then hey! I'm open to change!!!! :msn-wink::lol:

[Mom]

Why would a person on L plates be riding on the motorway?
I do have isssues with our nanna state dont get me wrong here.
Common sense tells you that a person with very limited experience is unlikely to react to a dangerous situation propperly
Keeping their speed down to 70 means reduced collateral damage if they get it wrong.
Putting them in heavy traffic at 100km/h is just asking fro trouble

As it has already been mentioned some of us do not have the choice. We live 500m from a 100kph zone, and could not ride anywhere without hitting the open roads up here. I agree with you though about learners needing to take one step at a time, but there are far too many variables to make a blanket call. I would strongly support an increase of the current cap.

I have been TEC on rides where we had a bloke who could/would not go faster than 70kph on the open road, I was terrified the whole way. It was simply dangerous! Even on the motorway early Sunday morning (read no traffic to speak of) this guy still puttered along with me acting as buffer against the traffic that seriously wanted to engage in kinky sex with my bike.

[Mikkel]

Ive been thinking a lot about this today.
Learner licence -nahh cant change my mind about the whole its a licence to learn not a licence to go out doing what you want to --as such the time restrictions make sense and the speed limit makes sense BUT
There should be NO qualifying time before you can sit a restricted licence.
In other words if you can demonstrate you have the riding skills needed to ride a bike competantly then why should you be stopped doing so?
Mind you I'm also an advocate for the whole HP as oposed to CC restriction too.
That would make bike pricing more reasonable for a learner removing the insanely inflated pricing thats on 250's
In my opinion a GS500/goose350/gb400/gpz500/etc is a heck of a lot more inteligent learner bike than a prillia 250 or a RGV250 etc

Ah well - that is something I can agree with, mostly at least. Make the tests for R and F difficult enough that you could say - go for your test when you want. If you pass, you pass and it's all good. If you never develop good enough skills to get the F license you'll never be allowed to ride an insanely fast bike...

However, as far as the power restrictions go. I'm one of the hoons on a fast 250 ccm - it's still not as fast as our car and you'd be allowed to drive that on your 1L... Dunno about the high strung 250 2-strokes - but the ZXR250 has been a lovely learners bike. It's fast enough not to be dull - but you have to really crank it up before it delivers anything. Riding it at low revs it's very docile and easy to manage. It's fairly light and agile and a lot of fun. IMHO you learn faster when you're having fun. So I would be very much opposed to banning them for learners. You could however introduce a hp limitation based on age of the licensee, e.g.:

15-18: <25 hps
18-20: <30 hps
20-25: <40 hps
25-?: Anything that is 250 ccm or less.

And then I think you could up the ccm restriction to 400 ccm for 6R while keeping these hp-limits in place. Just a thought.

[roy.nz]

Hell yeay it should be changed because you become more of a hazard riding at 70.It should be 100.:rockon:

[TKDSKIP]

The new biker on a leaner licence should most certainly have restrictions place on what they ride (hp instead of cc rating). But 70km/h is dangerous in certain situations, how can you be allowed on the motorway legally with your new leaner licence at this speed. I believe that the BHS test should incorperate a speed test (how fast does a GN125 go). Not simply "are you happy putting along in second gear at idle" but can you really handle a motorbike up to 250cc in real world situations. These would include travel at a safe speed for your enviroment which most certainly isnt 70km/h on the open road.

[Zuki Bandit]

It really dosent stress me out to much. Im not planning to stay on my learners longer than I have to.

[Toaster]

I have seen this mentioned on kiwibiker a few times now. Where is written in the rules or in any official policy? And how is anyone living in a rural area supposed to learn?

Quite simple, people have to work with the rules, not against them. That's where using ones brain and getting creative comes into the equation. And if you can't take back roads (like I did) then you need to ride in the 100km/h zones with great care (great care... now that's a novel approach to motorcycling).

[justsomeguy]

The rule was designed to keep learners off motorways until they had 6 months experience.

Simple.

I think the old farts can apply sooner, can't remember the details.

[xwhatsit]

I really don't understand why 100kph on the Northern Motorway is any more dangerous than 50kph (rather, 60kph) in rush-hour Newmarket?

The hours restrictions are silly, too. After 10pm is when I far prefer to be riding; no traffic, better vision (no distractions, just clear white lines and cat's eyes).

You can't treat the 6L as a `licence to learn' thingie (as 1L) so long as it takes 6 months to get past it. Nobody can take that seriously.

I've noticed most of the Biker Killed threads around here seem to be people on GSXR1000s and other similar weapons.

[justsomeguy]

I've noticed most of the Biker Killed threads around here seem to be people on GSXR1000s and other similar weapons.

Uhmm, I'm a bit slow, what's the connection between gixxer thou's and newbies doing 70kmph again?

[FROSTY]

Heres an ammendment to propose to the powers that be.
A person on a LEARNER licence shall travel at the perscribed speed of 70km/h and on roads appropriate to that speed. Should there be NO alternative road they shall be permitted to travel at 100km/h untill they can return to a road speed appropriate.

[CookMySock]

Heres an ammendment to propose to the powers that be.
A person on a LEARNER licence shall travel at the perscribed speed of 70km/h and on roads appropriate to that speed. Should there be NO alternative road they shall be permitted to travel at 100km/h untill they can return to a road speed appropriate.I agree. But you can see what is going to happen here ay ? This will be open to all sorts of legal spanner-swinging so folks can get up to 100k and stay there. Remembering one of your earlier points (was it yours?), newbies who are prepared to go to these lengths to ride at 100k are probably ready to do so, and those who are not ready will strongly avoid it.

For me, the most mind-bending part of the transition to a larger sport bike and open road speeds, was getting the bike laid hard over in a corner and not getting a fright. Getting a fright meant picking the bike up and quickly running out of road - fatal on a lefthand bend in traffic.

DB

[Hitcher]

Heres an ammendment to propose to the powers that be.
A person on a LEARNER licence shall travel at the perscribed speed of 70km/h and on roads appropriate to that speed. Should there be NO alternative road they shall be permitted to travel at 100km/h untill they can return to a road speed appropriate.

That's no different to saying that a learner shall travel at the posted speed limit for any stretch of road.

[Robbo]

Frosty, Tank and Hitcher all make very good and valid points on this issue and although they differ i agree with them. Travelling 30km/h below the road speed can lead to some dangerous situations with the cages as they will tail gate you and just push past you which can run you off the road altogether.
On the other side, a Learner licence is just that, a temporary licence to enable you to develop your skills and then hit the highways as per normal.
Perhaps a solution to this would be a compulsive and very comprehensive rider training course that once you have passed this then you can go out safely onto the roads without the current speed restrictions. Having said that, we never should stop the learning or knowledge process regardless of our age or experience.

[Hitcher]

There are some dangerous assumptions implicit in the current regulations relating to learner riders.

One is that having gained completed a learn to ride course and gained the necessary documentation to get a learner license, that the person concerned is competent to ride a 250cc motorcycle on the open road. Learn to ride courses are not that. They are basic handling skills courses. There's a big difference, as we discovered five years ago. Mrs H had never ridden a motorcycle prior to attending this course. Location of levers and their coordinated function was something that the instructor expected people to have a working knowledge of. The *instructor* wasn't interested in providing this level of coaching. I ran alongside Mrs H explaining things to her until such time as she was able to move off, change gears and come to a stop again. Two hours later she had a certificate enabling her to ride on the open road. I needed CPR.

[xwhatsit]

Uhmm, I'm a bit slow, what's the connection between gixxer thou's and newbies doing 70kmph again?

Where's all the threads about guys on L-plates doing 140kph over embankments?

No, the L-plate guys do stuff like grab the front brake on a patch of diesel around town. Or run into a car-door when a cager pulls out in front of them, and they haven't learned how to dodge yet. Doing 100kph on a straight bit of motorway is one of the safest situations you can be in when you're starting to ride. I used to dread everything leading up to Gillies Ave on my morning commute, but once on there, I was happy as Larry.

[sunhuntin]

There are some dangerous assumptions implicit in the current regulations relating to learner riders.

One is that having gained completed a learn to ride course and gained the necessary documentation to get a learner license, that the person concerned is competent to ride a 250cc motorcycle on the open road. Learn to ride courses are not that. They are basic handling skills courses. There's a big difference, as we discovered five years ago. Mrs H had never ridden a motorcycle prior to attending this course. Location of levers and their coordinated function was something that the instructor expected people to have a working knowledge of. The *instructor* wasn't interested in providing this level of coaching. I ran alongside Mrs H explaining things to her until such time as she was able to move off, change gears and come to a stop again. Two hours later she had a certificate enabling her to ride on the open road. I needed CPR.

before i got my BHS, i was riding around a rugby paddock. dad taught me everything i needed to know as far as gears and levers etc. so i had some level of understanding before i even went for the license... blow going for it without even knowing how do something like change a gear.

[Robbo]

There are some dangerous assumptions implicit in the current regulations relating to learner riders.

One is that having gained completed a learn to ride course and gained the necessary documentation to get a learner license, that the person concerned is competent to ride a 250cc motorcycle on the open road. Learn to ride courses are not that. They are basic handling skills courses. There's a big difference, as we discovered five years ago. Mrs H had never ridden a motorcycle prior to attending this course. Location of levers and their coordinated function was something that the instructor expected people to have a working knowledge of. The *instructor* wasn't interested in providing this level of coaching. I ran alongside Mrs H explaining things to her until such time as she was able to move off, change gears and come to a stop again. Two hours later she had a certificate enabling her to ride on the open road. I needed CPR.

Yes, i agree, the current courses do not appear to offer the skills necessary to cover the situation that i was referring to earlier. The whole course would need to be restructured and run by highly skilled and competant tutors or it would still be useless.
This is where a Govt Dept could make itself usefull for once as it relates directly to many deaths and injuries on our roads each year. Currently they only seem to be using our roads as a means to collect revenue from and don't really give a damn about the road toll.

[CookMySock]

I really don't understand why 100kph on the Northern Motorway is any more dangerous than 50kph (rather, 60kph) in rush-hour Newmarket?Agree - it isnt dangerous. What is dangerous is doing it on a road where there is the occasional tighter corner, and running it out of road coz they dont have the balls or the skills to use that angle of lean.


The hours restrictions are silly, too. After 10pm is when I far prefer to be riding; no traffic, better vision (no distractions, just clear white lines and cat's eyes).That is a statistics thing.. many young people are killed on the roads during these hours, and the easiest way to tackle this from a legislative point of view is to ban it. Perhaps old farts could be exempt from this as they are too trashed by 10pm to do anything except fuck..

DB

[xwhatsit]

Agree - it isnt dangerous. What is dangerous is doing it on a road where there is the occasional tighter corner, and running it out of road coz they dont have the balls or the skills to use that angle of lean.

And that's an issue whether you're coming into a marked 65kph corner at 100kph, or whether you're coming into a marked 45kph corner at 70kph. Hell, you come across corners like that in 50kph zones from time to time.

I'd be interested in seeing those statistics on driving/riding at night -- not being combative or anything, just would like to see what they have to say. I feel much safer on the roads at night, personally, and so do a lot of others I know.

Personally I've always suspected that the 10pm thing is to do with four young idiots packed into a car leaving from a party (or `chilling' or `going for a cruise'). That sort of atmosphere doesn't lead to sensible driving. On a bike, we don't have that sort of situation.

[CookMySock]

And that's an issue whether you're coming into a marked 65kph corner at 100kph, or whether you're coming into a marked 45kph corner at 70kph. Hell, you come across corners like that in 50kph zones from time to time.I mean, 100km/hr corners on open road that your average cager would nip through without thinking.. A learner on a little 250cc bike going at 100k through these is non-trivial, and will run out of road for sure. 100k cornering is a completely different animal to 70k cornering, and as people have observed 100 clicks in a straight line feels perfectly trivial because it is. All is not what it seems.


I'd be interested in seeing those statistics on driving/riding at night -- not being combative or anything, just would like to see what they have to say. I feel much safer on the roads at night, personally, and so do a lot of others I know.certainly. well I do not mean to present them as fact - that is just my understanding of them. I could not quote you my source.


Personally I've always suspected that the 10pm thing is to do with four young idiots packed into a car leaving from a party (or `chilling' or `going for a cruise'). That sort of atmosphere doesn't lead to sensible driving. On a bike, we don't have that sort of situation.*we* don't - agreed. But in the scenario you mention the peer pressure is enormous to pull their (or their dads) shiny new bike outa the shed and show how big their dick is. Now we have a problem.

DB

[Ixion]

..
Personally I've always suspected that the 10pm thing is to do with four young idiots packed into a car leaving from a party (or `chilling' or `going for a cruise'). That sort of atmosphere doesn't lead to sensible driving. On a bike, we don't have that sort of situation.

Yes. That is exactly where it came from. Remember, all the GDLS rules were written for cars, then motorcycles applied as an afterthought (when someone suddenly realised that a motorcycle learner couldn't have a supervisor).

Statistics showed that numbers young people involved in serious crashes were disproportionately high at night . Not necessarily higher absolute number so f crashes , but more youffs and but high in relation to average traffic volumes. So, figured the wise Grey Sheeple, night time must be dangerous.

Of course, noone replied (Grey Sheeple being what they are), "Hey, maybe young drivers are out more at night, cos it's the only time they have. And at night they have their mates along ".

And of course , young drivers = learners/restricted drivers (well, in cars it's more or les true). So the obvious fix was a curfew for L and R drivers 9and riders) . Oh, and forbid them to take passengers. Sorted.

So we have the absurd situation that a 50 year old 6R rider, who has maybe been driving for 35 years, must be home tucked up in bed by 10pm

[steveb64]

Bah - this discussion is pointless - the way the damn LTSA is going, with their creeping rollback of speed limits (a la 80k Karangahake Gorge, and now Dome Valley), it won't be that much longer and we'll be back to a blanket 80kph limit on ALL 'open' roads. :mad:

BUT - I also know what those who have been tailgated by arse cage drivers, when they're doing tail end charlie duties for some slower riders, are talking about... :angry2: Fucktards that were doing it to me and the missus were only about 5 minutes away from getting a 12" crescent through the side drivers window... ...or their friggin windscreen... :angry2::angry2: Luckily for all, they gave up, once I managed to coax the missus to wring the black twisty thing a bit harder - at least she was on a full licence, but then we were doing more than 70 kph too...

[motorbyclist]

ok, i'm not reading all these posts but here's my opinion:

the current system is as near to perfect as it is going to be.

a LEARNER licence is for LEARNING. after 6 months you should know how to stop properly so you then prove it and get your restricted. it's only 6 months - toughen up. the idea is that you don't take the motorway - remember alot of learners don't have a car licence so are learning the road rules at the same time

as for increasing the cc rating. again bad idea. the 2 stroke 250cc bikes are bad enough. if you have nil experience, riding a 400 isn't going to help. plus once you increase the limit for learners, the 400s will bloody well double in market value. good if you own one, not good if you're looking to buy one.

an improvement would be resticting 2 strokes to 150cc

another change they could do is recognising that you may already have a car licence; so if you've already got your car full, clearly you know how to give way etc so maybe only do the bike learner for 3 months, and vice versa

[Manxman]

:Pokey:
I voted for 100kph, but after much internal debate would like to change my vote to....100mph.
:rolleyes:

70kph is positively fuppin dangerous on some roads (esp motorways, which everyone should be entitled to use) and - along with L plates - attracts fuptards like flies to cowsh*t.

I started off commuting to Wgn from Fitby on SH1. That's a trip where you only go at 70kph for the first km - or less - then your survival instinct kicks in and you say to yerself "fup this for a game of fuppin soldiers. I don't care if I get pulled over by the fuzz (figuratively speaking), at least I'm still gonna be in one piece". 100kph, and no more, is the go after that.