Car vs. Bike crashes and injuries etc.

[Ragingrob]

You notice and hear about a lot more injuries and fatalities with bikers right and it scares you. Yet the other day when we all heard about the fatal crash with the biker and the truck, on that same day a father and daughter died in a car that crashed into a tractor!

Yes motorbikes are dangerous and we should be very careful etc, but there are so many car crashes even fatal ones each week now that they are barely mentioned in the news or anything! Yet I'm sure most if not all cage drivers do not feel any fear when they step into their car.

Almost all drink driving crashes and deaths are car crashes, due to us bikers knowing that even 2 or less drinks causes a massive reduction in riding ability. Car accidents usually involve a few if not several injuries or deaths as opposed to the typical biker crash involving one.

I just wonder whether biking is actually as dangerous and "death-defying" as it's made out to be, just because we have a biker forum we hear about each and every crash and because the news makes a big deal of it. When in reality WAY more people are hurt in cars but it's just not aired cause it happens so often!

I would love some basic statistics in terms of fatal crash rates based on the number of people killed in proportion with the number of bikes/cars on the road, but I'm too lazy to go through the ltsa stats which I find too hard/boring to read through the lines... Gimme a bar graph which each bar is already scaled in terms of proportion of bikes etc outta all road users! Would be interesting to see what the verdict is.

:sunny:

EDIT : Check down for some stats.... although how these stats are perceived could vary depending what the surveys are based on.

[Nagash]

Just personal opinion but it does make alot of sense that Motorbike accidents are more fatal than car accidents.

We have virtually zero protection from impact, (Leather's not gonna make a car crashing into you any less painful) we tend to drive faster or take bigger risks, if we do get in an accident there's a high chance the cager didn't even see us so didn't even attempt to slow down. We're alot more out in the open really..

I reckon motorbike accidents are reported more because they're usually alot more serious than, for example, whip lash from a seat belt. Also, there's a hell of alot more cars than motorbikes but I get where you're coming from with the percentage thing, could be interesting but I reckon the percentage of accidents will be higher for cars because basically everyone drives a car. The skilled and the unskilled.

I think it takes a level of passion to drive a motorbike and therefore are interested in improving your skills, maybe not but I know that I make the effort to improve my riding skills. (gotta turn up to more AWNR's..)

So yeah.. under all that rambling my point is that I reckon, in personal opinion, motorbike accidents are more fatal than car accidents. And more cars crash in ratio to motorbikes.

Cheers,

[Ragingrob]

Yeah definitely the ratio of deaths per crashes are higher for bikers as I guess in reality it doesn't take all that much compared with the protection of a car. And there are thousand of "crashes" each week in cars which involve just a tiny collision maybe a few dents here and there.

It's hard to word what stats I'd be after lol but I'll try, hmmm, the number of fatal crashes (actually number of fatalities) for cars and for bikes in proportion to what percentage of road users they take up. Since some car accidents cause anywhere between 1 and I dunno maybe 5 deaths, I think the stats would be pretty interesting!

[Badjelly]

I would love some basic statistics in terms of fatal crash rates based on the number of people killed in proportion with the number of bikes/cars on the road, but I'm too lazy to go through the ltsa stats which I find too hard/boring to read through the lines... Gimme a bar graph which each bar is already scaled in terms of proportion of bikes etc outta all road users! Would be interesting to see what the verdict is.

I waited a bit before replying because I was hoping that there would be no replies at all.

For heavens sake, you lazy bugger, stop asking other people to draw you bar graphs and, if you actually want to make a difference, get off your bum and analyse the stats yourself.

[Ragingrob]

Hmmm well here's some stats but doesn't relate in percentage of road users, I'll see what I could find. Just thought I'd start up the thread anyway in case someone had the stats :)

WHAT THE HELL I SPACED IT ALL OUT BUT IT DOESN'T WANNA, sorry!

Casualty Types (fatal)
2005 2006 2007
Drivers 202 192 201
Passengers 123 107 118
Motor Cycle Riders 34 35 37
Motor Cycle Pillions 3 3 4
Pedestrians 31 44 46
Pedal Cyclists 12 9 12
Other - 3 4
Unknown - - -
TOTAL 405 393 422

Apparently we make up 2% of the road users in NZ, I'm not sure how much cars make up...


My brain's dead after 4 months holiday anyway :sleep:

[Ragingrob]

Here's an interested study in the UK

http://www.statistics.gov.uk/STATBASE/Expodata/Spreadsheets/D4031.xls

Motorbikes consist of 17% of deaths, whereas cars consist of 50%.

Again it's hard to judge due to not knowing the car to bike ratio on the road.

[AllanB]

Well said Nagash.

I ride my bike faster and take higher risks on it than in my car.

I won't touch alcohol at all when on the bike, but I restrict myself to a couple of drinks max with a meal over an evening when in the car.


What would be most interresting is stats for:
A. rider at fault motorcycle accidents (shit fucked up that corner!).
B. second party at fault motorcycle accidents (ie hit by a car).

[Badjelly]

...get off your bum and analyse the stats yourself.
Taking my own advice...

Are you aware of this Ragingrob?

http://www.transport.govt.nz/assets/NewPDFs/Motorcycle-Crash-Factsheet-July-07.pdf

It starts with



The New Zealand Travel Survey indicates that, on average, the risk of being involved in a fatal or injury crash is more than 14 times higher for a motorcyclist as for a car driver over the same distance travelled.

and I would presume that, once in a fatal or injury crash, a motocyclist's chance of serious injury or death would be higher than a car occupant's.

[MacD]

I would love some basic statistics in terms of fatal crash rates based on the number of people killed in proportion with the number of bikes/cars on the road, but I'm too lazy to go through the ltsa stats which I find too hard/boring to read through the lines... Gimme a bar graph which each bar is already scaled in terms of proportion of bikes etc outta all road users! Would be interesting to see what the verdict is.

:sunny:

All this is available at the Ministry of Transport Research site (http://www.transport.govt.nz/research-index/).

The MoT even produce a Motorcycle-specific Crash Statistics (http://www.transport.govt.nz/assets/NewPDFs/Motorcycle-Crash-Factsheet-July-07.pdf)publication.

The usual figure given is that motorcyclists are around 14 times more likely to be involved in an injury or fatal accident than a car driver for the same distance travelled.

Motorcycling is a risky passtime. Understanding the risks is one of the best things you can do for your own self-preservation.

In 2006, 38 motorcyclists were killed. That's one every 9.5 days on average. It's not surprising we see newspaper reports or RIP threads on KB as often as we do.

(edit: Beaten to it by BadJelly!)

[Ragingrob]

A fatal or injury crash? What's an injury? Dropping the bike on your foot? Low siding and getting a sore bum? And it's only related to a car driver too, what about the 4 passengers that die at the same time.

Not arguing with you, lol just stats in general is pretty bullshit anyway, there's no right or wrong answer and it all depends on how every little survey is conducted etc.

[MSTRS]

What would be most interresting is stats for:
A. rider at fault motorcycle accidents (shit fucked up that corner!).
B. second party at fault motorcycle accidents (ie hit by a car).

There is a thread somewhere on here (a Katman one, I think) that gives those stats...
Basically, IIRC m/c at fault entirely was around the 35% mark, the rest was varying degrees of shared responsibility...although around half of those were no fault of the biker, but s/he could have done something to avoid the collision.

[Ragingrob]

All this is available at the Ministry of Transport Research site (http://www.transport.govt.nz/research-index/).

The MoT even produce a Motorcycle-specific Crash Statistcs (http://www.transport.govt.nz/assets/NewPDFs/Motorcycle-Crash-Factsheet-July-07.pdf)publication.

The usual figure given is that motorcyclists are around 14 times more likely to be involved in an injury or fatal accident than a car driver for the same distance travelled.

Motorcycling is a risky pastime. Understanding the risks is one of the best things you can do for your own self-preservation.

In 2006, 38 motorcyclists were killed. That's one every 9.5 days on average. It's not surprising we see newspaper reports or RIP threads on KB as often as we do.

(edit: Beaten to it by BadJelly!)


Damn it lol the stats pages keep "not respoding" on my comp and freeze up...

How many drivers were killed? Surely it's average to one every 2 days or so!

[Badjelly]

Not arguing with you, lol just stats in general is pretty bullshit anyway, there's no right or wrong answer and it all depends on how every little survey is conducted etc.

So why did you start the thread?

And I'm curious, in what way do you think "In 2006, 38 motorcyclists were killed" is pretty bullshit, there's no right or wrong answer and it all depends...?

[Ragingrob]

So why did you start the thread?

And I'm curious, in what way do you think "In 2006, 38 motorcyclists were killed" is pretty bullshit, there's no right or wrong answer and it all depends...?

No I'm talking about the stats which are in terms of "injuries", what defines and injury? And in saying that it's only in terms of the actual car driver, not including passengers who die too. I'm looking for stats which involve how many deaths of motorcyclists in ratio with deaths of car occupants, all in ratio of how many cars and bikes in terms of road users.

[Ragingrob]

Taking my own advice...

Are you aware of this Ragingrob?

http://www.transport.govt.nz/assets/NewPDFs/Motorcycle-Crash-Factsheet-July-07.pdf

It starts with


and I would presume that, once in a fatal or injury crash, a motocyclist's chance of serious injury or death would be higher than a car occupant's.

You say occupants when it's only talking about the driver... This is where stats go wrong.

[Badjelly]

No I'm talking about the stats which are in terms of "injuries", what defines and injury?
No, you said

stats in general is pretty bullshit anyway,
so why should anyone bother looking for the stats you can't be bothered looking for?

And here was I thinking my first response was a bit rude!

[Ixion]

Statistical figures on injuries are slewed, though, because so often when a bike goes down, some well meaning bystander will call an ambo." OMG there's a motorbike crashed he's in a hundred peices come quick". Whereas of course, two cars crash with no or minor injuries, no-one takes much notice.

Ambo rolls up, finds biker morosely trying to kick his bent bike straight enough to ride (or, kick the idiot of had him off). Biker either not injured or minor scratch. Wouldn't even go to the doctor if he'd been in a car. But, the ambo guys , being professional, want to check him out. Which they do, and that makes him a statistic.

And NO-ONE has been able to get a definative answer on the issue of off road and farm bike accidents shoing up in the motorcycle figures. I suspect they do, but can't prove it.

[Ragingrob]

No, you said

so why should anyone bother looking for the stats you can't be bothered looking for?

And here was I thinking my first response was a bit rude!

Well sorry mate but top statisticians will tell you that nothing is definite in their answers ok? Even "38 motorcyclists killed in 2006", is this on road, does it include scooters, farm bikes, trikes, quads? How do you know they're even crashes? Maybe some were heart attacks but they just happened to be riding?

You tell me Badjelly.

[Ragingrob]

All this is available at the Ministry of Transport Research site (http://www.transport.govt.nz/research-index/).

The MoT even produce a Motorcycle-specific Crash Statistcs (http://www.transport.govt.nz/assets/NewPDFs/Motorcycle-Crash-Factsheet-July-07.pdf)publication.

The usual figure given is that motorcyclists are around 14 times more likely to be involved in an injury or fatal accident than a car driver for the same distance travelled.

Motorcycling is a risky pastime. Understanding the risks is one of the best things you can do for your own self-preservation.

In 2006, 38 motorcyclists were killed. That's one every 9.5 days on average. It's not surprising we see newspaper reports or RIP threads on KB as often as we do.

(edit: Beaten to it by BadJelly!)


Twice as many people were murdered in 2006 (63) than biker fatalities, with another 34 people who tried to be killed (attempted homicide). There were 4,116 grevious assaults on people and 17,729 serious assaults.

I'm just trying to put this all in perspective with the theme that maybe motorcycling isn't really THAT dangerous in the scheme of things. If you just look at the stats then we are TWICE as likely to be MURDERED in NZ than to die in a motorbike crash! And 575 TIMES more likely to be at least seriously assaulted than to die in a crash!

I'm just throwing the idea out there that motorcycling isn't any more dangerous (if not less) than just living life in NZ around murderers and the such.

[Badjelly]

Twice as many people were murdered in 2006 (63) than biker fatalities, with another 34 people who tried to be killed (attempted homicide). There were 4,116 grevious assaults on people and 17,729 serious assaults.

I'm just trying to put this all in perspective with the theme that maybe motorcycling isn't really THAT dangerous in the scheme of things. If you just look at the stats then we are TWICE as likely to be MURDERED in NZ than to die in a motorbike crash! And 575 TIMES more likely to be at least seriously assaulted than to die in a crash!

I'm just throwing the idea out there that motorcycling isn't any more dangerous (if not less) than just living life in NZ around murderers and the such.

Well sorry mate but top statisticians will tell you that nothing is definite in their answers ok?

[Ragingrob]

Well sorry mate but top statisticians will tell you that nothing is definite in their answers ok?

Ah but you see it's the other way around now. Even if every little injury and type of bike is counted, we're still twice as likely to be murdered.

A murder is a murder, a biker death is a biker death, stats do not say whether it's only road bikes or what, but even if it's every bike in NZ I'm still right in saying we're more likely to be murdered than to die in a crash.

[Badjelly]

A murder is a murder, a biker death is a biker death, stats do not say whether it's only road bikes or what, but even if it's every bike in NZ I'm still right in saying we're more likely to be murdered than to die in a crash.

What I'm objecting to is your cynicism about statistics, which I think is a cop-out. You ask, casually, about statistics and then dismiss them, casually. You're not going to get anywhere useful with that approach. Of course statistics have limitations, but then why start a discussion about statistics?

I could argue that some of the murders are might be misclassified, as might some of the motorbike fatalities. But yes, I agree that on average a member of the NZ population is more likely to be murdered than die in a motorbike accident.

On the other hand, I think that I am much more likely to die in a motorbike crash than be murdered, because: a) I ride a motorbike; b) I'm not in any of the groups at high risk for being murdered (young male, woman with abusive partner, etc). What I choose to do about this situation is up to me.

[Ixion]

You are not properly defining your populations.

The number of motorcycle deaths must be considered as a percentage of the total number of motorcyclists. Not the population of the country as a whole *(maybe motorcyclists and pillions).

That is avery very hard number to determine, but it's way less than the population of the country

Logically, anyone can be the victim of murder. But you can only be killed riding a motorcycle if you ride a motorcycle.

But I agree with you that the damgerousness of motorcycling is over stated by the layman.

[Ragingrob]

What I'm objecting to is your cynicism about statistics, which I think is a cop-out. You ask, casually, about statistics and then dismiss them, casually. You're not going to get anywhere useful with that approach. Of course statistics have limitations, but then why start a discussion about statistics?

I could argue that some of the murders are might be misclassified, as might some of the motorbike fatalities. But yes, I agree that on average a member of the NZ population is more likely to be murdered than die in a motorbike accident.

On the other hand, I think that I am much more likely to die in a motorbike crash than be murdered, because: a) I ride a motorbike; b) I'm not in any of the groups at high risk for being murdered (young male, woman with abusive partner, etc). What I choose to do about this situation is up to me.


Many people in the world ask for real life, well written statistics based on very well conducted surveys or experiments. Yet the statistics that gets thrown at them are either rubbish or yeah kinda there but not quite.

I don't think there's a problem in my asking for some reasonable stats but not fully agreeing with some given due to wording and methods of survey.

You told me to get off my lazy ass and search for the stats I'm after... Well pretty obviously there are no results that suit what my topic is after. There are results that are close, but have offputting factors such as "the driver of the car" and "motorbikes", results that don't specify what I'm after.


:done:

[Ragingrob]

You are not properly defining your populations.

The number of motorcycle deaths must be considered as a percentage of the total number of motorcyclists. Not the population of the country as a whole *(maybe motorcyclists and pillions).

That is avery very hard number to determine, but it's way less than the population of the country

Logically, anyone can be the victim of murder. But you can only be killed riding a motorcycle if you ride a motorcycle.

But I agree with you that the damgerousness of motorcycling is over stated by the layman.


It's exactly results like these that I'm after, but can not find! You'd think all crash statistics should be proportional (ie motorcycle deaths as a ratio of motorcyclist as the percentage of road users, compared to car occupant deaths as a ratio of cars as the percentage of road users. With motorcycles being defined as road-registered as to not include farm accidents, and not including scooters.

Then and only then may we have a fair representation of how much more dangerous motorcycling is compared to sitting in a car.

Gosh, I was only just interested after all!

Just a bit sick of all this "biking is dangerous" mentality that the general public have, when even things like work related accidents occur just as often... At least we're enjoying our passion huh :rockon:

[Badjelly]

Yeah :done:

[Ixion]

It's exactly results like these that I'm after, but can not find! You'd think all crash statistics should be proportional (ie motorcycle deaths as a ratio of motorcyclist as the percentage of road users, compared to car occupant deaths as a ratio of cars as the percentage of road users. With motorcycles being defined as road-registered as to not include farm accidents, and not including scooters.

Then and only then may we have a fair representation of how much more dangerous motorcycling is compared to sitting in a car.

Gosh, I was only just interested after all!

Just a bit sick of all this "biking is dangerous" mentality that the general public have, when even things like work related accidents occur just as often... At least we're enjoying our passion huh :rockon:

Not possible.

There is no legal definitioon of a scooter. nearest you could go is to exclude mopeds (though the justification for such exclusion seems debateable)

And we have no reliable figure for how many motorcyclists there are on the road.

We know how many people have a class 6x licence, but many (most ?) of those are people who got a bike licence years and years ago and haven't ridden for years and years (like Helen Clark).

And we know how many registered motorcycles there are, but we don't know how many people have more than one (though you'd think that the PTB could work that one out .)

[FROSTY]

And NO-ONE has been able to get a definative answer on the issue of off road and farm bike accidents shoing up in the motorcycle figures. I suspect they do, but can't prove it.
Dude I can tell you for a FACT my accident. ---Sports injury not on public roads was concidered to be a MOTORCYCLE accident

[avgas]

Breathing is dangerous, but its one of those damned if you do, damned if you dont.
If you stop breathing you die, if you keep breathing you could inhale poisonous gasses. I take the same approach to riding.
When you have a big crash and have the big choice - you will understand. I will respect what ever choice you make as well. I have many friends that have stopped riding.
To fear riding is to fear death itself.

[swbarnett]

You'd think all crash statistics should be proportional (ie motorcycle deaths as a ratio of motorcyclist as the percentage of road users, compared to car occupant deaths as a ratio of cars as the percentage of road users.
Even this would be wildly misleading. What is needed is deaths per km travelled or perhaps deaths per unit of riding time.

[Mike748]

I haven't researched this so I'm prepared to be corrected but over xmas weren't there about 15 deaths by drowning in only 3 weeks?
I also have some other random and unconfirmed stats from don't know where stuck in my head like.
1 in 4 will get cancer and
1 in 300 will die during elective surgery.

I agree motorcycling is a dangerous activity and it would be nice to have it put into a real perspective. ..... I doubt however that it will ever happen.

[dipshit]

Basically, IIRC m/c at fault entirely was around the 35% mark, the rest was varying degrees of shared responsibility...although around half of those were no fault of the biker, but s/he could have done something to avoid the collision.

Single vehicle, rider at fault... 26%

Multi vehicle, primary responsibility... 26%

(these first two = 52% rider at fault)

Multi vehicle, partial responsibility... 7%

Multi vehicle, no rider fault identified... 38%

Single vehicle, no rider fault identified... 3%

www.transport.govt.nz/assets/NewPDFs/Motorcycle-Crash-Factsheet-July-07.pdf

[Macstar]

My own personal stats/observations:

I have witnessed 17 on-road motorcycle bins in 2.5 years (gave up counting the track bins and besides that's not relevant to the point I am about to make).

I have also stumbled across 2 motorcycle deaths not long after they occured, the most recent being last Saturday.

ALL OF THESE BINS (except the two deaths which I cannot comment on as I did not see them) WERE THE MOTORCYCLISTS FAULT I.E. RIDING BEYOND ABILITIES, SPEED, NOT PAYING ATTENTION, INADEQUATE FOLLOWING DISTANCES ETC. I have never witnessed an accident that was caused by another motorist on the road (other than a fellow biker that was guilty of the previously mentioned crimes).

Miraculously, none of the riders in these 17 bins were seriously injured i.e. bruises and scrapes was about the worst to occur, however several of these bikes have been written off and others probably should also have been...

Draw your own conclusions, but my two cents: If you don't want to see this many bins then avoid the ATNR and riding with learners. In fact, you're probably safer riding on your own with no one else to compete with or distract you - but that's not fun:(

[EnzoYug]

Never binned whilst riding by myself. It's group riding and city riding that'll kill you.
But I still believe that had I not been in a bad mood I would have got home fine and not woken up days later in Auck Central.

The rider is the only person who can be truly responsible* for a crash. After all if you're not willing to take responsibility for your own life - don't get on a bike.
Still - dangerous is what makes it fun eh?


*before anyone starts on me there is a difference between responsibility and blame / fault.

[James Deuce]

*before anyone starts on me there is a difference between responsibility and blame / fault.

Good luck with that. I think I have had about 12, no 13, new arseholes ripped for me for trying to communicate that distinction.

[Hillbilly]

A mate of mine absolutely hates riding up the F3 to our place. The F3 is the main freeway north from Sydney, though Newcastle up to Queensland. Although it's signposted at 110km/hr the flow of traffic on average is between 130km/hr and 145km/hr. The slow traffic moves at 120km/hr. My mate hates how the crazy Aussie cagers "crowd around him". They trat the F3 like a racetrack, with the same mentality. Biggest surprise? Tons of truck chrashes (major ones) and car chashes, but no bike accidents.

[madbikeboy]

I used to work with the CEO of the LTSA, trucks are massively over-represented in in accidents - I can't remember the exact numbers, but trucks make up under 10% of the national fleet, yet a significant proportion of fatal and injury accidents involve trucks (26% from memory).

This is where it gets hazy - if you look at the hours / km spent on the road by trucks, then that proportionate number looks less outrageous.

So, then we look at bikes. Very small proportion of the national fleet, fewer hours (especially if you consider weekend warriors), but 38 deaths last year. Massive over-representation.

Someone wrote the stat of 14 times more likely to be killed or injured - and intuitively, that makes sense.

Okay, so facts and bullshit aside, the real question here should be - how do we as a community reduce the number of fatalities and injuries?

I'd make the following observations:
- Training - we have godawful driver and rider training in this country. Take a look at Germany for an example of training.

- Attitude: As kiwi's, we're indestructable, aggressive, arrogant, and defensive of our patch of tarmac. Perhaps there might be an issue with that?

- Roads - everyone points at our poor quality of roads. I'd point to our poor decision making about speed and conditions

- Group mentality - I've made the point before about KB group rides, but there is a general concensus that there is a danger factor in these rides

- Poor support for new riders - we provide our new riders with bad advice about stepping up to new bikes. How often have we seen posts debating moving from a 250 to an SV1000 or similar. Macho advice without humility.

I don't like Katman popping up every two seconds and telling us we're all going to die - but if you decode what he is saying, he is saying that we as a group need to adjust our attitudes.

Now, I'm no saint. I approach my bike with humility and respect. It's fast enough - and to be honest, so is a 600. If I abuse my 1000cc bike, I'll die, it's that simple.

So, in conclusion - instead of picking lint out of navels about how the stats are made up, lets work out as a group how to reduce the number of injuries and deaths. I believe we can change with better attitudes, training, support, and advice.

Apologies to Georgie, I can't seem to help getting involved in the politics, I start to read some of the BS, and I find myself typing a response...

[Katman]

As Macstar pointed out, the stats that dipshit posted would look a whoooole lot worse if all motorcycle accidents were included. There must be countless that don't even make it on to public record.

[Katman]

I don't like Katman popping up every two seconds and telling us we're all going to die - but if you decode what he is saying, he is saying that we as a group need to adjust our attitudes.


:laugh: Only just noticed this part of your post. The rest I thought was absolutely spot on.

(I don't ever recall saying what you've quoted me as saying though).:blink:

[swbarnett]

So, then we look at bikes. Very small proportion of the national fleet, fewer hours (especially if you consider weekend warriors), but 38 deaths last year. Massive over-representation.
How many bikes are used to commute etc.? The hours may not be that low? Does anyone know where I could get hold of km figures for bikes?

[dipshit]

Even "38 motorcyclists killed in 2006", is this on road, does it include scooters, farm bikes, trikes, quads?


Looking at accidents by engine size give some clues. After all, how many scooters or farm bikes are over 500cc.

www.transport.govt.nz/assets/NewPDFs/Motorcycle-Crash-Factsheet-July-07.pdf

"A higher proportion of crashes involving large bikes (500ccs or bigger) result in death rather than injury - riders of large motorcycles make up 29 percent of all casualties but 41 percent of deaths. This is, at least partly, a result of riding patterns. Small motorcycles and scooters tend to be used for ‘around-town’ riding, where speeds are low, whereas large bikes spend a much greater proportion of time on the open road and travelling at higher speeds. For bikes 500cc or bigger, over half (56%) of all reported injury crashes are on the open road. This compares to only 8 percent for small bikes with an engine size under 125 cc and nearly a third (32%) for bikes with engine sizes of 125 – 499cc."

[James Deuce]

I haven't researched this so I'm prepared to be corrected but over xmas weren't there about 15 deaths by drowning in only 3 weeks?

And one yesterday that made me cry.

[BOGAR]

Twice as many people were murdered in 2006 (63) than biker fatalities, with another 34 people who tried to be killed (attempted homicide). There were 4,116 grievous assaults on people and 17,729 serious assaults.

I'm just trying to put this all in perspective with the theme that maybe motorcycling isn't really THAT dangerous in the scheme of things. If you just look at the stats then we are TWICE as likely to be MURDERED in NZ than to die in a motorbike crash! And 575 TIMES more likely to be at least seriously assaulted than to die in a crash!

I'm just throwing the idea out there that motorcycling isn't any more dangerous (if not less) than just living life in NZ around murderers and the such.

Thats a good point. I plan to keep on trying to improve but makes me slightly less worried about some of this hearsay.

[dipshit]

Thats a good point. I plan to keep on trying to improve but makes me slightly less worried about some of this hearsay.

That would have been relative only if everybody in New Zealand road motorcycles as well.

Imagine for example, if only 10 people in New Zealand flew hand gliders and 5 of them crashed and died a year. You could say only 5 hand glider's died in New Zealand last year... and that's about the same amount of people to get struck by lightning!

When in reality it is a 50% mortality rate per year. (for the people involved in the activity)

So you cannot conclude that you have as much chance of getting killed by lightning than having an accident flying hand gliders.

[madbikeboy]

:laugh: Only just noticed this part of your post. The rest I thought was absolutely spot on.

(I don't ever recall saying what you've quoted me as saying though).:blink:

Katman, nothing but respect for you buddy!

[Badjelly]

I also have some other random and unconfirmed stats from don't know where stuck in my head like.
1 in 4 will get cancer and
1 in 300 will die during elective surgery.
I agree motorcycling is a dangerous activity and it would be nice to have it put into a real perspective. ..... I doubt however that it will ever happen.

1 in 1 will die(*), so riding a motorbike is really not all that risky.

(*) That's an unconfirmed statistic, of course.

[Ixion]

1 in 1 will die(*), so riding a motorbike is really not all that risky.

(*) That's an unconfirmed statistic, of course.
Not quite . One Cartaphilus spoils the purity of your statistics.

[avgas]

ALL OF THESE BINS (except the two deaths which I cannot comment on as I did not see them) WERE THE MOTORCYCLISTS FAULT I.E. RIDING BEYOND ABILITIES, SPEED, NOT PAYING ATTENTION, INADEQUATE FOLLOWING DISTANCES ETC.
Must have not seen my crash then - it was awesome.
I couldn't have planned a better one....
But the other driver seemed to be able to.

[Badjelly]

Not quite . One Cartaphilus spoils the purity of your statistics.

And a Google search for Cartaphilus leads to:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wandering_Jew

There you go: I knew if I followed this thread long enough I would eventually encounter something interesting.

[Ocean1]

Ah, found it.

'Merkin, and old, and possibly irrelevant, but interesting...

http://www.nsc.org/lrs/statinfo/odds.htm

[Ixion]

Proves what I've always said about WhiteVanMan

[James Deuce]

Not quite . One Cartaphilus spoils the purity of your statistics.

Which reminds me: I haven't read Canticle for Leibowitz for 20 years.

Must get a copy.