New learner rules- will they reduce crashes?

[Ixion]

I guess everyone has cottoned on now to the fact that the rules for 6L and 6R licences are shortly going to change. Quiet a lot.

The salient points, for anyone who's been in a cave for the last couple of days


250cc limit is scrapped, and learner s will be able to ride any bike up to 660cc PROVIDED it's on the approved list.
70kph limit scrapped
Over 25 restricted period increased to 12 months
And a few other bits

Now, by and large , this is all good from the learners point of view. And I see quite a few already sizing up R6s and the like

BUT-- the idea was actually to make things safer, to reduce the rate of motorcyclist crashes, fatalities and injuries.

So, wodda y' reckon? Will it work? Will the new rules mean fewer noobie crashes ?

Will they work at all? One big problem I see, at present the rule is pretty simple. 6L, 6R, under 250cc.

Now, it's under 660cc. Yes, the actual MODEL is supposed to be on an approved list, which won't include CBR600s and ZXR600s and the like. But d' y' really reckon y' typical boi-racer wanna-get-a-moddaboike type is going to figure that out? All he'll see (and all his mates will tell him) is that he's allowed a 600 bike. And that R6 is 600 , right?

So unless the cops are a LOT tougher on policing the restrictions (very unlikely) , I reckon it will come down to a free for all less than 660cc. Which in practice, means pretty much any sprots bike.

Admittedly, it may not make so much difference, cos those types are probably riding R6s on their 6L already anyway (for a little while, anyway)

So , wodda y' reckon.

Going to make it better, fewer crashes

No difference

Or is this going to be the biggest thing ever for Gene-O-Kleen ("Evolution you can see")

[Headbanger]

My gut tells me no.

Actually it tells me to feed it, but after that it says no.

[breakaway]

No. Putting noobies on more powerful bikes will just mean more crashes and injuries.

IMHO, 600ccs are is WAY too much for a learner to handle. The IL4s anyway.

[James Deuce]

You forgot the "No Change" option. I think the intentions behind the reg changes are not only good but reasonably well informed, and the larger selection of motorcycles available to learners will make motorcycles a valid transport option as opposed to a hobby. However the training dished out to every driver/rider in this country will still be inadequate.

The road toll and the accident rate isn't going anywhere until you have to actually work and learn to get your license.

[Headbanger]

You forgot the "No Change" option. I think the intentions behind the reg changes are not only good but reasonably well informed, and the larger selection of motorcycles available to learners will make motorcycles a valid transport option as opposed to a hobby, the training dished out to every driver/rider in this country will still be inadequate.

The road toll and the accident rate isn't going anywhere until you have to actually work and learn to get your license.


My thoughts exactly, except when I wrote them down they were gibberish, so I made a joke about my gut instead.

Anyway, I concur.

[Ixion]

You forgot the "No Change" option. I think the intentions behind the reg changes are not only good but reasonably well informed, and the larger selection of motorcycles available to learners will make motorcycles a valid transport option as opposed to a hobby, the training dished out to every driver/rider in this country will still be inadequate.

The road toll and the accident rate isn't going anywhere until you have to actually work and learn to get your license.

No, i didn't. Option 2. Whatever they ride, it'll stay the same.

Which is my pick. The 250cc restriction is sufficiently avoided (legally or otherwise) that I doubt it's actually going to make much odds. But , if it does have any effect, I think it'll be detrimental in terms of statistics. But , as you note, good in terms of motorcycling overall.

I think there are probably quite a few people who think about getting a bike to ride to work and so on, try a 250 and decide "No, that's not going to work". If they can get a GS500 or XT600 or such, they'll be happy. probably stick with it permanently.

So at least we may get away from the "Woot I got my full now I dump the 250 and get a 1000cc".

Perhaps the saddest thing about the whole initiative is that it shows how little the sheeple really understand about what is needed to reduce the motorcycle road toll. Fiddling with the learner restrictions isn't going to be what does that.

[DingoZ]

Can't say that I am all that thrilled with the new changes. Hopefully, and all going according to plan I will be on my full before these changes come into effect.

I for one would not relish the thought of being over 25 (and having several, several years of road experience under my belt without an accident), and having a limitation placed on me for 2 years, regardless of whether it is meant to increase my experience or reduce the risk of an injury or accident.....

Competency based assesments yes, good idea..

Compulsory rider training, yes another good idea..

With more tougher riding exams in order to meet the criteria. Get rid of the simple ride around the block and turn here and turn there. Do a u turn and hey presto you got your license....

Scrapping of the 70km per hour limit, yes, 50/50 as it is a double edged sword.... Some say dangerous and some don't agree. If you can perform an emergency braking manouver from 100km's per hour safely, knock yourself out. (More rider training on this on the BHS courses)

Me personally I think hell yes scrap the 70km limitation...

After reading most of the threads from "Newbies" about near misses, and lost the front end going around roundabouts and the multiple threads about Binning it and so forth, and all of these are on the 250cc or below rated bikes at the moment. Shows IMO that the accidents that are happening now may very well increase. A 250cc bike is to a certain degree more forgiving than say a 600cc bike. The acceleration is much less direct (sharp), the braking is much less direct, the power to weight ratio is most certainly less.


There is nothing wrong with the current system. Except for the sub standard criteria for meeting the riding tests.

6L's on them for 12 months if under 25.... 6l's on them for 6 months if over 25 with competency based assesment.

6R's on them for 6 months without rider training courses, if over 25. Or 3 months if over 25 and completion of rider training and advanced rider training courses.
6R's on them for 12 months if under 25, and completion of advanced rider training course before 6F.

You want the bigger bike. Prove through rider competency courses and assessments that you can handle it. Or stay on a 250cc through the process and garner the experience that way...


(Hope the above made sense).....

[James Deuce]

IMHO, 600ccs are is WAY too much for a learner to handle. Then again maybe they won't put GSXR600s on the approved list.

It isn't about cc rating it's about power to weight ratios. An Aprilia Pegaso trail would make an excellent learner bike IMO. An unrestricted Aprilia SVX550 would not and wouldn't make it past the power to weight ratio criteria in unrestricted form.

There's a lot of really interesting stuff on the NSW LAMS list of motorcycles, none of them particularly threatening, but the diversity of options is huge. In terms of new 250s at the moment it's a thrashed to death 15-20 year old sportsbike, a Chinese copy of what used to be a good learner bike with a manufacturer approved copy of their brand on it, Hyosung's improving offerings, Kawasaki's re-modeled GPX250, or a bunch of comparatively expensive Dual Purpose bikes.

[James Deuce]

No, i didn't. Option 2. Whatever they ride, it'll stay the same.



But the "n00bs" are under represented in the accident stakes. They aren't the problem, it's the out of practice BABs that are doing the crashing and have been for the last 15 years. Usually by themselves.

[Motu]

They will finally be able to have the bike their ego demands - and their ego says they know how to handle it.I can't see the figures coming down personally.

[Usarka]

Better for motorcycling on the whole but i fear it wont make a fly's twat of a difference to safety. i hope i'm wrong.

its not what you ride its how you ride.

[Ixion]

But the "n00bs" are under represented in the accident stakes. They aren't the problem, it's the out of practice BABs that are doing the crashing and have been for the last 15 years. Usually by themselves.

Possibly so. But the new proposals specifically target 'noobs' (though Harry did mention in passing the 'had a licence for 20 years , but haven't ridden for 19 , reckon I'll get a GSXR1000' problem - without any solution) . No change at all for BABs. So at the moment we are only considering the novice rider.

[Donor]

Not a lick of difference will new rules make.

With the possible exception of the 70km/h one being scrapped.

At the very least, I will now no longer want to throttle n00bs and plonkers who love to get all emo about how 70km/h is so dangerous that they feel compelled to take their L plates off because it makes car drivers want to kill them on sight, as well as summon aliens to probe their bottoms with cold steel implements...

In fact there's a whole new side question!

Will the scrapping of the 70km/h rule increase the number of n00bs using L plates due to lack of cop out and excuses?

Inquiring minds want to know...

[pritch]

That list of approved bikes was a real nostalgia trip: AJS, BSA B50SS, even a Panther 650. It would likely be beyond the attention span of many modern yoof to even start most of those.

Then again it isn't like you can duck down to the local dealer and buy a Panther 650. I've been riding bikes off and on since 1959 and I've even never seen one in the flesh...

[Ixion]

I saw a couple . even got to start one. Surprisingly easy by big single standards. VERY heavy flywheel , so long as you did the routine properly it just rolled over TDC easy as

EDIT: I have NEVER seen a Rudge-Whitworth (different bike to the Rudge) . Gawd knows what old crusty wrote the list. I'd really like to see his gargre though.

[NighthawkNZ]

IMHO, 600ccs are is WAY too much for a learner to handle.

LS 650 Single Savage... too much power... :?????


The IL4s anyway.
Many are but not all... imho

[Mikkel]

Lacking judgement can get you killed on a push-bike!

I don't think the statistics are going to change measurably because of the new bike restrictions for 6L and 6R.

The restrictions haven't prevented people from taking big and fast bikes on the public road while still on their 6L and 6R. And I am sad to see that a lot of bikers do not actively condemn that practice. Having recently purchase a big and fairly powerful sportsbike I was actively encouraged by several members on this forum to HTFU and ride it from Napier to Chch on my recently acquired 6R (17th this month).

Again, compulsory 3rd party insurance would be a much more efficient way of bringing the road toll down!

Ultimately Jim2 is absolutely right - until you have to actually learn something and display a reasonable amount of aptitude in order to get your license things are probably not going to change much.

Also, as Ursaka said - it's not what you ride, it's how you ride it. :yes:

[Rogue]

I think the HP/ weight ratio is a good start. As already stated it will have to be strickly :Police:. It will open a larger field of motorcycle , large trial/adventure bikes and mid size cruiser's that new riders are presently not able to obtain :2thumbsup (if they keep within the law) :doh:
I do wonder if there will be more accidents off road if learners go for the bigger trail/adventure type of motorcycle :doctor:
It should give the inexperienced rider the skill they need when they get a bigger more powerfull bike. Man I wouldn't like to be on a DR 650 at 200km.

[MaxB]

Like others on this thread I dont think it will make much difference to the stats. It will make some difference to the riders who can get a feel of a big bike while learning. If you could still get one a BMW R65, Pegaso or XJ650 etc. would make quite good first tourers but what are the odds of finding a good one?

I think NZ needs a proper organised rider training system well above the standard we have now, maybe even a graduated system based on merit not age. Possibly have a 2 year probation period between licences which is reduced to a year if you remain accident free. In other places this has been proven to reduce accidenty rates.

We have to decide what type of bikers we want to be, highly trained like Japan or Germany with low accident rates or will we end up like a free for all like Vietnam.

[howdamnhard]

Only the scrapping of the 70km/hr rule makes any sense.Yes being able to choose from a greater selection of bikes is great except bikes with a bigger power to weight ratio will be less forgiving initially to the beginner.Better riding training and stricter tests will be the only thing that will bring down the number of crashes but thats harder to implement .So instead making the relatively simple to implement new rules will placate the masses without achieving anything.

[SPman]

Then again it isn't like you can duck down to the local dealer and buy a Panther 650. I've been riding bikes off and on since 1959 and I've even never seen one in the flesh...
Used to be a couple around Uni, 70-71......

[RiderInBlack]

Well at least this will make the 250's come down ta a realistic price. When is this law change supposed ta come in? My partner is looking a starting and this will make a huge difference in the price of the bikes we would be looking at to start her on.

[scumdog]

Wellllll.....it SHOULD make all the KB 6L & 6R Whinger Brigade ecstatic - but I know that's a pipe dream, give 'em an inch and they'll want a mile.

[Swoop]

Gene-O-Kleen sales are quite safe.


How about Harry organises a learning system, not just a testing system?

[Usarka]

How about Harry organises a learning system, not just a testing system?

:nono: we'll have none of that training here! training encourages people to ride/drive faster didn't you know.......

[Swoop]

:nono: we'll have none of that training here! training encourages people to ride/drive faster didn't you know.......
Yeah. It might also achieve what the politicians want - less road accidents or injuries.

Once that is solved, they can work on the roading gangs that fail to create a safe environment... sweeping up the excess gravel after performing roadworks, perhaps?
Using the warning signs that alert motorists to the fact that they are working on the side of the road... like yesterday when I came around a corner at speed, leant over, "oh how nice, a road gang cleaning the side of the road". If they didn't like the antics then they can simply use the signage they were provided with and which was sitting on thew back of their truck.[/rant]

[Ocean1]

Once that is solved, they can work on the roading gangs that fail to create a safe environment... sweeping up the excess gravel after performing roadworks, perhaps?

Ah, now... an uncle used to be with the old MOW, was in charge of roading for all of the south island. He used to visit us up north, he'd see roadworks up here and mutter and shake his head. One of the things that upset him was the tactic of using general traffic to compact any new metal. Apparently the approved “correct” procedure saw one of those big rubber tyred rollers stomp all the new aggregate into the surface and any loose stuff was then swept clear before the road was re-opened.

Doubt you'll ever get it done properly nowadays unless the scope of works specifies such a procedure, contractors will always cut cost where possible. Still, I've complained about tar on me paint before and been successful in having the contractor clean my car several times. Once had a team of 4 cleaning about 40 employees cars in the company car park when they re-sealed the road outside, took them 2 days. Time for a wee complaint campaign blitz?

[Blue Babe]

When do the new rules come into play? Personally as a newby I'll probably stick to the 250cc or maybe look at a 400cc. I'm Not a big girl so will need something I can handle:rolleyes:. When cc rating goes up the bikes generally get bigger too.

[Horse]

At the very least, I will now no longer want to throttle n00bs and plonkers who love to get all emo about how 70km/h is so dangerous that they feel compelled to take their L plates off because it makes car drivers want to kill them on sight, as well as summon aliens to probe their bottoms with cold steel implements...
Really? I just ride at 100km/h with the L plate on. Seems much simpler.

[breakaway]

Also everyone should get rid of their overpriced 250s RIGHT NOW :third:

[sil3nt]

Is a list available? Im guessing its going to be similar if not the same to the australian one here http://www.rta.nsw.gov.au/licensing/tests/motorcycleridertrainingscheme/motorcyclesnoviceriders.html

Also when are these changes coming in and what does it mean for those who are riding 250s that might be in the exclusion list?

I just read on a website this is part of a strategy for 2010! Bit far off to be getting excited over.

[YellowDog]

I past my test in the UK in 1986 and it was really easy. I just rode around the block a couple of times and an on-foot examiner jumped out for me to do an Emergency stop. It seemed easier to pass than to fail.

Anyway, I rode on and off over the years and then in 2004, I decided to buy a 650cc bike. Due to me not ever sending off my pass certificate, I found that as I no longer had a valid licence and had to do another test. I did a 3 day Direct Access course and it was very tough. The observations and manoeuvres you need to demonstrate to pass were tough and very strict. It was very challenging and my point is that anyone like me, who passed in the 1980s, will have no idea of the skills required and are not likely to have picked up the safety essentials. I didn’t and I considered myself to be confident and pretty experienced.

So I am definitely in favour of strict ‘life saving’ motorcycle standards. I am just not sure that the new laws will do anything to improve standards and safety.

[Badjelly]

As usual, I voted before looking at the poll results and now I see only 2 people agree with me! And I'm beginning to waver :no:

I think the rules (all of them, not just the change to LAMS) will result in a small, beneficial effect on nooby crash rates, but probably too small to actually detect with statistical analyses. How's that for a testable prediction?

[BevanPT]

Given the statistics show 70+% of accidents are not the motorcyclists fault, why isn't Harry "incompetent" Dunyhoven fiddling with car licence restrictions!!

Improving driver/rider education/training is the only solution that will make a difference.

[Blue Babe]

Given the statistics show 70+% of accidents are not the motorcyclists fault, why isn't Harry "incompetent" Dunyhoven fiddling with car licence restrictions!!

Improving driver/rider education/training is the only solution that will make a difference.
Personally, I think the driving age of 15yrs is way too young for some of the kids here in NZ. They have No road sense what so ever. My daughter has just got her restricted today & I'm worrying myself sick about it all, as she will be driving down to Auckland on Thursday. I wasn't half as bad with my son. In the Uk the driving age was/is 17yrs old. I don't particularly think the Uk's system is better, as I like the idea the kids have to be restricted for a time, as this means they do actually do some learning.

[scumdog]

I did a 3 day Direct Access course and it was very tough. The observations and manoeuvres you need to demonstrate to pass were tough and very strict. It was very challenging and my point is that anyone like me, who passed in the 1980s, will have no idea of the skills required and are not likely to have picked up the safety essentials. I didn’t and I considered myself to be confident and pretty experienced.

So I am definitely in favour of strict ‘life saving’ motorcycle standards. I am just not sure that the new laws will do anything to improve standards and safety.


So how much did the Direct Access course cost??

I believe a lot would want a rider education course to be part of the licence system - up until they find out the $$$ it costs.

Would y'all be happy to end up paying $350 for the course, testing and licence??:wait:

[Badjelly]

Given the statistics show 70+% of accidents are not the motorcyclists fault, why isn't Harry "incompetent" Dunyhoven fiddling with car licence restrictions!!

Two points:

As stated elsewhere on this thread [sorry, not on this thread, but in another one], the figure of 70% is an underestimate.
Even in accidents which are "someone else's fault", a safer rider can almost always do something to minimise or avoid injuries

[Edbear]

Given the statistics show 70+% of accidents are not the motorcyclists fault, why isn't Harry "incompetent" Dunyhoven fiddling with car licence restrictions!!

Improving driver/rider education/training is the only solution that will make a difference.

It's proven that TV advertising does work, so more ads re: using your eyes when driving would be a start, but you're right, driver training is key, however having said that, it is a lot to do with immigrants who arne't used to NZ conditions and incompetents who think they can do anything else but concentrate on the road while behind trhe wheel!


So how much did the Direct Access course cost??

I believe a lot would want a rider education course to be part of the licence system - up until they find out the $$$ it costs.

Would y'all be happy to end up paying $350 for the course, testing and licence??:wait:

You make a good point about cost. A bigger problem I think, though, is the fact that laws only work for the law-abiding. Notice the number of unreg. unWoF'd, unsafe/illegal cars with unlicenced/disqualified, drunk/drugged, uninsured drivers represented in accident statistics? There are a number of KB'rs who freely admit to blatantly ignoring the law re: licencing...

[James Deuce]

Would y'all be happy to end up paying $350 for the course, testing and licence??:wait:
Excellent idea, but I'd like to see it cost $3500 so that we can exclude those poor people.

[Blue Babe]

Excellent idea, but I'd like to see it cost $3500 so that we can exclude those poor people.
:Oi:But What about those poor people who are actually sensible & want to learn.

[James Deuce]

Why, let them eat Brioche of course.

[Mikkel]

Well, licenses in NZ are ridiculously cheap compared to places where there is a proper learning and testing system in place.

I can't see how increasing the quality and reducing the quantity of road-users would negatively impact upon anything important.

I agree that 15 is too young! Many places you can not get a car or motorcycle license until you turn 18 - you can get a moped/scooter license when you turn 15.


:Oi:But What about those poor people who are actually sensible & want to learn.

BURN THEM!

[Coyote]

I have the highest crash record of anyone I know relative to time spent on a bike (prove me wrong if you want to get your jollies over being more of a dumbarse). Thing is, none of my incidents were ever reported. That alone makes the statistics wrong if only by a few percent and making youth even more 'under represented'.

The youth go home bruised with one foot dragging on the ground and proceed to fix their cheap, non-full cover bike with zip-ties. The older folks call up the insurance company to get the scratches buffed out and a new helmet and incident is recorded by LTNZ.

And now I've got my full, I continue to crash (accidents, not me being an idiot). I've got full cover too but I know the cost of fixing versus no more no claims bonus just isn't worth it. Think I'll be bumping down to third party now it's depreciated below the 2k mark.


Another note: Compulsory training is good. However I can see it just being another way the AA swindle us e.g. Defensive Driving Course price increasing every few months as they try to find the limit.


My VFR isn't going to become as a 'learners bike' is it? It'll loose all it's street cred! And it's not suitable... cough :whistle:

[Edbear]

...And now I've got my full, I continue to crash...


Ummm! Why...?:mellow:

[crazybigal]

have they given a date for these changes?

[Swoop]

Would y'all be happy to end up paying $350 for the course, testing and licence??:wait:
Quite honestly I think that is a bargain.
A decent training course as well as the licence. Compare that to the cost of driving lessons that are paid for by the hour and you still have the test on top of that.
How long would the course run for? 2-3 days, a week?

[sinfull]

Would y'all be happy to end up paying $350 for the course, testing and licence??:wait:

After having just gone through the system with my partner doing her learners , i think you'll find you dont get much change out of $350 these days anyway, with the BHS, test costs,etc !~ A a full on riding skills, safety course should be brought in I recon screw the cost !
Question would be how would ya go about it with an older person, who's had their licence for umteen years but hasnt ridden and all of a sudden has no dependants, mortgage etc, goes out buys him/herself a machine that will be the envy of all his/her mates. Only to blow it in the first week or so and out ride their ability
I recon thats where the over 30 fatallity stats would be evolving from ! Though i think the changes are great, i dont believe the stats will change much.

[terbang]

So how much did the Direct Access course cost??

I believe a lot would want a rider education course to be part of the licence system - up until they find out the $$$ it costs.

Would y'all be happy to end up paying $350 for the course, testing and licence??:wait:

A private pilots license, for recreation only, costs close to fifteen grand to do the prescribed training. Not a bad way to weed out the dick heads who seem to be hell bent on killing themselves in whatever the drive/ride.

[Coyote]

Ummm! Why...?:mellow:
Edited it a second before you asked.

On the VFR I was braking for an intersection at a mellow pace since it was wet. As I was going over the STOP painted on the ground, the front end gave way. Though I've learnt to try keep upright on paint when I can (can't help it sometimes, they pour paint all over the show), I don't think of it as a noob mistake and more just misfortune. Unlike on my old learners bike where my incidents were me going too fast on a road I know well and know I shouldn't be going so fast.

[YellowDog]

So how much did the Direct Access course cost??

I believe a lot would want a rider education course to be part of the licence system - up until they find out the $$$ it costs.

Would y'all be happy to end up paying $350 for the course, testing and licence??:wait:
I think it was 5 days and not 3 like I said. It cost about $1200, to be able to pass a test for a bike over 600cc and covered basic, intermediate and a full test at the end. They also encourage you to do an advanced course after riding for 6 months. IMO - money well spent, but then I was already an experienced rider (or so I thought).

[Edbear]

Edited it a second before you asked.

On the VFR I was braking for an intersection at a mellow pace since it was wet. As I was going over the STOP painted on the ground, the front end gave way. Though I've learnt to try keep upright on paint when I can (can't help it sometimes, they pour paint all over the show), I don't think of it as a noob mistake and more just misfortune. Unlike on my old learners bike where my incidents were me going too fast on a road I know well and know I shouldn't be going so fast.


Fairynuff!! Been there, done that! Sucks!

[scumdog]

Quite honestly I think that is a bargain.
A decent training course as well as the licence. Compare that to the cost of driving lessons that are paid for by the hour and you still have the test on top of that.
How long would the course run for? 2-3 days, a week?

The $350 was a 'plucked-out-of-the-air' figure to emphasise there would be a cost invloved - just for those who think they will get the course as part of a $100 package - incliding licence.

[Usarka]

Meh i'm all for learner riders/drivers having to get a job and save some money before being able to afford getting a bike/car. We're always going on about personal responsibility etc..... :whistle:


mind a one off $350 will be peanuts for most under 19's compared to insurance costs once compulsory 3rd party is introduced.

[vifferman]

On the VFR I was braking for an intersection at a mellow pace since it was wet. As I was going over the STOP painted on the ground, the front end gave way. I don't think of it as a noob mistake and more just misfortune.
Well, that is a noob mistake. A more experienced rider would've made sure they'd lined up their tyres so as to be between the letters painted on the road, and in the wet would avoid riding over or braking on painted road markings as much as possible. Even though the road markings are supposed to be non-slip paint, in practice they're actually either ornery paint, or so coated with road spooge that the paint type doesn't matter: they're slippery.

[Horse]

Question would be how would ya go about it with an older person, who's had their licence for umteen years but hasnt ridden and all of a sudden has no dependants, mortgage etc, goes out buys him/herself a machine that will be the envy of all his/her mates. Only to blow it in the first week or so and out ride their ability
I recon thats where the over 30 fatallity stats would be evolving from !

If that's an accurate representation of the problem (and I have no idea if it is), then wouldn't the solution be some kind of compentency-based system with a programme of regular rider evaluations. eg a rider test every 2 years or summat to retain your license? I wonder how popular that would be?

[sinfull]

I wonder how popular that would be?

Eeeeeeek !!!

Scary part is, i have every licence availible, but havent read a road code for 25 yrs ! A riding test wouldn't worry me, but a theory would !
Truth be known, i was one of said older fella's who had had a break from riding for 14 yrs and had only ridden cruisers, so the triple was a whole new experience (feel i'm still learning after near a yr and 40 k !! Bring on taupo track day)

[Coyote]

Well, that is a noob mistake. A more experienced rider would've made sure they'd lined up their tyres so as to be between the letters painted on the road, and in the wet would avoid riding over or braking on painted road markings as much as possible. Even though the road markings are supposed to be non-slip paint, in practice they're actually either ornery paint, or so coated with road spooge that the paint type doesn't matter: they're slippery.
So I'm still a noob even though the AA has given me a full licence? Interesting... :laugh:

I have learnt to keep more upright and take the line with less paint, but since this incident I've realised just how much paint is out there and how some of it is unavoidable. Even on corners e.g. left turns at motorway lights. If you slow down for them you'll quickly get a 4x4 up your arse honking too.

[Ocean1]

Meh i'm all for learner riders/drivers having to get a job and save some money before being able to afford getting a bike/car. We're always going on about personal responsibility etc..... :whistle:


mind a one off $350 will be peanuts for most under 19's compared to insurance costs once compulsory 3rd party is introduced.

Yup, far too easy. Might have been appropriate when you elderly gents got yer ticket <_<, what with maybe 10% of the traffic and a serious piece of machinery having about 40hp...

Fact is changing environment and vehicle density means the actual riding/driving standards required to negotiate our roads safely have skyrocketed in the last couple of decades, and the regulatory framework for licencing is nowhere near comprehensive enough.

If a higher standard of competence were required to get a licence and a modicum of compliance to the rules to keep it there'd be much less carnage. Problem is... the nippers need to get to school/work too, public transport is a touchy subject for her majesty’s fiscal managers, what's the voting age again?

[vifferman]

So I'm still a noob even though the AA has given me a full licence?
Yup. It's good to have the attitude that there's a lot of stuff still to learn, and a lot of practice required.

[Romeo]

<!--

Whatever, not ever scooter rider is a retard, but the vast majority have no understanding of the dangers involved. I've never seen a scooter rider riding in what I would consider a safe amount of gear (lid, jacket, gloves, good shoes).

Before you freakin' flame me, tell me this.

WHEN WAS THE LAST TIME YOU SAW A SCOOTER RIDER IN FULL GEAR.



-->
How come scooters aren't included in any of the new legislation!

I was digging through the facts this morning, and it tucked away on one of the factsheets was a fact that whilst sub-125's are under represented in fatalities, they're grossly over represented in "minor" injuries. All of these "minor" injuries get totalled into the governments "casualties of motorcycling" tally. Which they then use to help target a different category of road users.

It's ridiculously easy to get a scooter, and ridiculously easy to get injured on one - so why is there no fuss about scooters and why are all the problems that arise from scootards being unfairly heaped upon motorcyclists!

THEY MAKE NO DISTINCTION BETWEEN SUB-50cc's and MOTORCYCLES, whilst they are two completely different categories of road user!


A totally unrelated yet werid fact:
30% of learner/restricted riders killed were riding bikes which were above the 250cc limit. So you can imagine that there's a subgroup of atleast 30% of learner/restricted riders who don't/won't care about the new laws at all.

[vifferman]

<!--

Whatever, not ever scooter rider is a retard, but the vast majority have no understanding of the dangers involved. I've never seen a scooter rider riding in what I would consider a safe amount of gear (lid, jacket, gloves, good shoes).

Before you freakin' flame me, tell me this.

WHEN WAS THE LAST TIME YOU SAW A SCOOTER RIDER IN FULL GEAR.



-->
THEY MAKE NO DISTINCTION BETWEEN SUB-50cc's and MOTORCYCLES, whilst they are two completely different categories of road user!
That's a worrying factoid.
I believe a lot of scooterists treat a scooter as a glorified bicycle, and have a correspondingly lax attitude to the business of getting about on one. They don't wear proper safety gear (I've seen scooterists wearing shorts, tank-top and no footwear at all!), and are far too casual about riding them. They're probably the ones boosting the injury statistics.

That reminds me: on the weekend, I saw a guy on a crusier [sic] on Glenfield Road, wearing a lovely pair of those plastic slip-on sandal things, in dark pink / red.:blink: Obviously not riding the bike for the image...

[Blue Babe]

That's a worrying factoid.
I believe a lot of scooterists treat a scooter as a glorified bicycle, and have a correspondingly lax attitude to the business of getting about on one. They don't wear proper safety gear (I've seen scooterists wearing shorts, tank-top and no footwear at all!), and are far too casual about riding them. They're probably the ones boosting the injury statistics.
It's not just the scooterist's, there's are an aweful lot of bikers riding around town, just wearing T-shirt, shorts & jandals. Even more with out their gloves. Sometimes see the rider with helmet & jacket on, but No gloves, wearing shorts & if you are lucky trainers. Why is it law to wear a helmet, but nothing is said about the rest of the body??:eek:

[cooneyr]

I think the new rules will make things worse. I started on a Suzi DR250 djebel which I sold about Nov 05 and am now on a DR650. As I understand it there about 10hp difference between the bikes (low 30's and low 40's respectively) but the 650 gets off its arse much much better (relative terms here). The point is that the DR650 has a lot more torque, hence accelerates faster. This means that when riding in windies etc you have to be careful about giving it a handful less you end up at the next corner way way to soon (if you are unprepared)

The point is the 250 felt tame compared to the 650 in the same way that I'd expect a Suzuki GSX250 does to a Aprilla RS250. Its all about power curves. I'm guessing that current lams list but with a limit of 400cc would be a much better idea. This way you get rid of the 250 smokers with their peaky power curves and get rid of the 650's with their torque. This obviously leaves a few reasonably fast machines but they will hopefully be nice and benign i.e. learner friendly.

I do think that loosing the 70kph restriction is a good idea though. Speed differential is just asking for trouble and how many people take any notice of it anyway?

Cheers R

[Coyote]

Yup. It's good to have the attitude that there's a lot of stuff still to learn, and a lot of practice required.
I know I have plenty to learn, for instance I can't do a wheelie on my VFR above 20cm high and other hooligan tricks. Though I must be at intermediate level rather than a noob by now, surely.


Hopefully the XR650R doesn't become learner legal cause I'm going to be annoyed I couldn't of had one during my learner times whereas everyone else can. The rest of the bikes I'm not so fussed.

[mark247]

WTF it says on the NZ herald site ( http://www.nzherald.co.nz/section/1/story.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10500855 ) that

* Restricting the use of powerful motorcycles by novice riders. Learner and restricted motorcycle licence holders would only be able to ride motorcycles which did not exceed a power-to-weight ratio of 150 kilowatts a tonne and were not too physically large for the rider.

So this 660cc rule seems stupid.

My VFR400 is 60hp, and weighs 165kg dry, so ill use 180kg.

1000kg / 180 kg = 5.55.
60hp X 5.55 = 333hp per tonne
333hp = 248kw.

That's WAYYY over the 150 kiwowatts a tonne.

[mark247]

a GN250 is 124kw per tonne, thats getting close to the limit. am i doing this wrong???

[mstriumph]

..........Perhaps the saddest thing about the whole initiative is that it shows how little the sheeple really understand about what is needed to reduce the motorcycle road toll. Fiddling with the learner restrictions isn't going to be what does that.
did they actually liaise with any motorcycle groups before coming up with this?

[Timati]

Doesn't make sense to me to allow learners to ride a 660cc bike but disallow them from riding a 2 stroke 250CC like the Suzuki RGV250 unless I am completely mistaken about it???

BTW when do the proposed regulations come into play seeing that I know a couple of people wanting to sit for their learners?

[sunhuntin]

Better for motorcycling on the whole but i fear it wont make a fly's twat of a difference to safety. i hope i'm wrong.

its not what you ride its how you ride.

agreed. when it comes those who are learning or getting back in the saddle after however long, its the ones who are already safety concious that these new rules will make a difference too. they will be the ones smart enough not to buy an r6 just cos its under 660cc.
personally, i felt safer on the 500 virago than i do on the 250, and i feel safer on the 250 virago than i did on either gn250s. the 500 had superior overtaking speed against all the other bikes, but, in saying that, the 500 did teach me skills for overtaking on a smaller bike.
only reason i sold the 500 was cos i couldnt legally ride it, and didnt have time to ride two bikes. but, i can borrow it any time i like, which is a bonus.

coyote... i almost always slow down well before the paint, and line up so im going around it... i dont give a rats whos up my exhaust honking. when it comes between them being held up, or me ending up on the road with a hot exhaust on my leg, they can damn well wait. same for any situation where its raining, like taking corners etc. ive never once had a drop in the rain, though i have had the back step out once or twice, enough to scare but nothing else.

edit: reguarding scooterists, would someone please get it through their thick skulls that wearing a helmet with the chinstraps flapping is pointless? i told the boys over the road from my work id knock their heads together if i saw that again, but i dont have time to tell every dimwit that comes in.

[mattian]

Does anybody know when exactly these laws will come into effect? is there a fixed date?

[Ixion]

No exact date has been fixed. There is a process that has to be followed before the changes can be gazetted. Which does involve (nominal) public consultation.

Word is "later this year".

It usually takes about 4 to 6 months . But can vary a good deal .

[Ripperjon]

I may be a sceptical bastard, (in fact, i am sceptical but technically not a bastard so there's a false statement right off the bat) but, i think these new rules are just a way of cutting the cost of all the applications for exemptions that LTNZ have to trawl through.
The rules are so lame and so easy to argue against their credibility that anyone can give an argument for an exemption. The new rules will lessen their workload and costs.
If they are really working towards safer riding then it wouldn't be so easy to get a licence. Riding round a few cones and answering some ridiculously easy questions that are mostly not getting at core riding skills is not testing anyones real ability to handle a motorcycle safely.
I'm currently looking into some rider training cos no matter how capable i think i am there will always be something that can be taught to me to improve my skills and my safety as a by-product.
The ridiculous thing is how hard it is to get that training. I started a thread about how it's impossible to get lessons in my area from a certified school and i think it's unbelievable.
If there is noone in any given area willing to provide lessons and / or training commercially then it should be LTNZ or the Police who are responsible for providing it.
Shit, even just one hour every month where anyone willing to learn can turn up and get at least the basics of riding demonstrated would be better than nothing.
If i didn't have a computer, i wouldn't even know what countersteering was! Imagine that.

[Rev DJ]

... had a quick chat to a policy guy I know at LTNZ and they are leaning heavily towards the power/weight calculation. They would then provide a list of "suitable" bikes for learner or restricted riders, that is, bikes that are "rated" at less than or equal to 150kw/tonne. The 660cc limit is on the back burner... GN250's for everybody then :lol:
Cheers DJ

[mark247]

i think these new rules are just a way of cutting the cost of all the applications for exemptions that LTNZ have to trawl through.


It costs $21 to apply for an exemption, and all i get from that is a piece of paper and someones time to read my letter. I bet they are making a profit from that!:pinch:

[Rosie]

... had a quick chat to a policy guy I know at LTNZ and they are leaning heavily towards the power/weight calculation. They would then provide a list of "suitable" bikes for learner or restricted riders, that is, bikes that are "rated" at less than or equal to 150kw/tonne.

Differing methods for measuring/calculating dry weights could make this interesting. Some manufacturers claim dry weights that are crazily low, and some claim more realistic everything-but-the-fuel weights.
Manufacturers with more honest weights will have more powerful bikes get onto the list.

Everyone will be learning to ride on KTMs :devil2:

[Ripperjon]

It costs $21 to apply for an exemption, and all i get from that is a piece of paper and someones time to read my letter. I bet they are making a profit from that!:pinch:

By the time a decision is made on your application and it has been sent to their regional offices it will have been read by at least a couple of people. Staff need to be paid to process that stuff. I don't think 21 bucks is unreasonable. They're probably making a loss when you factor in office time spent on each app.
I think the 21 bucks might be inclusive of reissuing a new licence with the altered conditions too.
Either way, i doubt they are breaking even realistically.

[NOMIS]

I guess everyone has cottoned on now to the fact that the rules for 6L and 6R licences are shortly going to change. Quiet a lot.

The salient points, for anyone who's been in a cave for the last couple of days


250cc limit is scrapped, and learner s will be able to ride any bike up to 660cc PROVIDED it's on the approved list.
70kph limit scrapped
Over 25 restricted period increased to 12 months
And a few other bits

Now, by and large , this is all good from the learners point of view. And I see quite a few already sizing up R6s and the like

BUT-- the idea was actually to make things safer, to reduce the rate of motorcyclist crashes, fatalities and injuries.

So, wodda y' reckon? Will it work? Will the new rules mean fewer noobie crashes ?

Will they work at all? One big problem I see, at present the rule is pretty simple. 6L, 6R, under 250cc.

Now, it's under 660cc. Yes, the actual MODEL is supposed to be on an approved list, which won't include CBR600s and ZXR600s and the like. But d' y' really reckon y' typical boi-racer wanna-get-a-moddaboike type is going to figure that out? All he'll see (and all his mates will tell him) is that he's allowed a 600 bike. And that R6 is 600 , right?

So unless the cops are a LOT tougher on policing the restrictions (very unlikely) , I reckon it will come down to a free for all less than 660cc. Which in practice, means pretty much any sprots bike.

Admittedly, it may not make so much difference, cos those types are probably riding R6s on their 6L already anyway (for a little while, anyway)

So , wodda y' reckon.

Going to make it better, fewer crashes

No difference

Or is this going to be the biggest thing ever for Gene-O-Kleen ("Evolution you can see")

Put it this way my next bike is definatly a R6 i love em,
but i dont think this law is any good maybe they should change it yes.
but have someone with some experince make the decision not some fatso in government who doesnt no shit.
I agree with the 70kmph limit this is bullshit, and dangerous.
I dont agree with learners getting 600cc bikes, but! i think a restricted licence holder should be alowed to have more of a free choice after completeing somesort of riding course. And the newlaw states 150kw/tonne my lil hornet is over this so does that mean my bike is out lawed? I really think someone who knows something about bikes should be working on this law along side the governement.
At the moment I feel like I have enough experience to ride something thats a tad faster than my Hornet. However I do not feel like Im good enough for a R6
maybe a bit more experiance on a bigger bike and I would but where can i safely do that?

[James Deuce]

Pu
At the moment I feel like I have enough experience to ride something thats a tad faster than my Hornet. However I do not feel like Im good enough for a R6
maybe a bit more experiance on a bigger bike and I would but where can i safely do that?
I've known a few people like that. Stew used to swap their "slow as, piece of shit" 250 for his TL1000 and then demonstrate the maxim "it's not what you ride, it's how you ride it" to very good effect.