Reading between the lines or wishful thinking? (rideforever.co.nz)

[Mr Skid]

Reading through some of the newer content on rideforver.co.nz and came across these two sections:

Cornering at safe speeds is easier to live with if you're riding a powerful bike, because acceleration helps regain cruising speed quickly once you're through. Low-powered bikes create the temptation to carry more corner speed than is necessary. If you've been travelling at high speeds along a straight section of road, slow down more than you think.

Currently, learner riders are limited to bikes with 250cc engine capacity. Most of these are low powered and quite small physically. You can also ride anything with an engine output of 1.8kW (50cc capacity) or less with just a car licence, as it is not legally considered a motorcycle. From there, engine sizes range up to a maximum of 2,300cc, the equivalent of a mid-sized car.

Larger riders should choose the biggest learner bike permitted. Past the novice stage, choosing the biggest bike you can comfortably support makes more sense: a big rider on a small bike will have a higher 'C of G' (centre of gravity) and hence more difficulty maintaining balance at low speeds than a smaller rider on a heavy bike. Got it?

Maybe I'm looking too closely at the semantics, and taking this out of context, but I find these comments interesting.

In the first quote it's acknowledged that bigger capacity bikes can afford to corner slower, and regain their speed afterwards. Most 250 riders would agree that they need to carry higher corner speed to keep pace with a larger bike.

In the second quote, they point out that most learner bikes are small and low powered. In light of the first quote I'd wonder if the author would have prefered to susbstitute 'under powered' for 'low powered'.

Finally, the other curiosity in there is the comment that "Currently, learner riders are limited to bikes with 250cc engine capacity." Seems superfluous to describe that as the current situaiton, unless there was the possibility that there would be changes in the future.

Thoughts?

[Ixion]

..
Finally, the other curiosity in there is the comment that "Currently, learner riders are limited to bikes with 250cc engine capacity." Seems superfluous to describe that as the current situaiton, unless there was the possibility that there would be changes in the future.

Thoughts?

Yep.There's rumours that soem want it REDUCED to 125cc (as in UK)

[justsomeguy]

Get a life.

[Coyote]

Yep.There's rumours that some want it REDUCED to 125cc (as in UK)

I've heard opposite that it might go to 400cc

[Flyingpony]

Originally Posted by http://www.rideforever.co.nz/ride_sm...cornering.html
Cornering at safe speeds is easier to live with if you're riding a powerful bike, because acceleration helps regain cruising speed quickly once you're through. Low-powered bikes create the temptation to carry more corner speed than is necessary.

I think it's all related to safe driving practices, experience, bike handling confidence and being prepared for the unexpected.

[Ixion]

I've heard opposite that it might go to 400cc

Hope you're right. Or that they're sensible enough (if they do change it) to go the Ozzie road and have an approved list. Their's goes to 650's

[Kickaha]

Most 250 riders would agree that they need to carry higher corner speed to keep pace with a larger bike.

Why do you need to keep pace?

[Mr Skid]

Hope you're right. Or that they're sensible enough (if they do change it) to go the Ozzie road and have an approved list. Their's goes to 650's

How long has the limit been set at 250cc? 30 years or so?

I understand the historical reasoning behind it, and also how it's becomming increasingly irrelvant- both due to the potential of 250cc sport bikes (which started over a decade ago) and the arms race in the 600cc-1000cc sports bike market (which makes the step up from a 15 year old 250cc sports bike to a new 1000cc sports bike rather large).

It's obvious that there is some interest in motorcycle safety in the ACC, else they wouldn't have spent the resources on the rideforever website. Although LTNZ would have the dominant position in any decision making about learner limits, I'd speculate (based upon the website) that ACC might be in favor of something other than gutless 250 singes, or highly strung 250 multis.

[thehollowmen]

How long has the limit been set at 250cc? 30 years or so?

I understand the historical reasoning behind it, and also how it's becomming increasingly irrelvant- both due to the potential of 250cc sport bikes (which started over a decade ago) and the arms race in the 600cc-1000cc sports bike market (which makes the step up from a 15 year old 250cc sports bike to a new 1000cc sports bike rather large).

It's obvious that there is some interest in motorcycle safety in the ACC, else they wouldn't have spent the resources on the rideforever website. Although LTNZ would have the dominant position in any decision making about learner limits, I'd speculate (based upon the website) that ACC might be in favor of something other than gutless 250 singes, or highly strung 250 multis.

Well said.
An 800cc cruiser would be safer than the aprilla 250. This is the last year they're making that one though.

[Mr Skid]

Why do you need to keep pace?

That's a good point, and one that's often missed in these discussions. Short answer is that you don't need to.

I think the point here is that on a less powerful bike speed is hard won, and as such people are less inclinded to want to give it up.
Thus committing to higher corner speeds, which increases the expectations placed upon the road and the bike.
Is it smart? Probably not. But it does happen.

[Skyryder]

I've always maintained the bigger the bike the safer it is. While the rideforever site does not say that directly I can not help but interpret their comments in this manner. A bin off at 70 k's on a 250 is no different than on a 650 or for that matter a 1200. Same goes for a bin off at 100 k's.
Speed is the common denominator not cc rating.

Skyryder

[Bonez]

Well said.
An 800cc cruiser would be safer than the aprilla 250. This is the last year they're making that one though.

Depends on your definition of safer. The aprilla 250 probably goes around tight corners safer than an 800cc cruiser...................

[Will]

I think that ACC may "relax" the 250 law so that "older" bikes can be ridden by learners. By that, I mean bikes like the old single BSA or Aeriel, or that sort of bike.

[Motu]

I think a low powered bike that encourages higher corner speeds also produces a better rider,rather than the high powered bike where the rider just squirts the straight bits between corners,they can go fast alright....but never need to stretch themselves like the poor guy on a low powered bike like Mr Skid rides,they learn the unforgiving nature of a big powerful bike rather quickly.The 250 learner rule is long overdue for an overhaul - power to weight is obvious....but not too much on the weight part,I don't think a heavy gutless bike is that great either.I'm just thankful I don't have to learn how to ride in this day and age - in my day we were born knowing how to ride....but not how to drive a computer.....

[Gremlin]

Most of these are low powered and quite small physically.

Small?? I know they are not huge, but I wouldn't call my ZZR small. As my dad remarked, at 6" 3, and 100kg, I don't dwarf the bike.

Some of the naked bikes such as the comet and ?hornet? haven't seemed that small either. But I can't wait to see if I'll be able to get an exemption when I have a restricted to get a bigger (size, not cc) bike...