FYI - MOTO NZ impending RFP

[oneofsix]

We have fluro vests in the cupboard. Wifey used to wear hers mostly for at night only because she didn't have any reflective stuff at the back of her jacket. She has a pink mohawk on her helmet, a pink jacket, and a vest...I witnessed on 3 occasions people pulling out in front of her. 1 was looking directly at her. But she was riding as all bikers have too, so knew every time what useless drivers will do. Like has been said, if every bike as fluro, people will stop seeing it. Simple fact.

You wanna be seen, let's throw on bike specific flashers. Green and blue I say.

If they introduce fluros, does that mean that if a bike gets hit from "didn't see you" muppets, does that mean they can get their licence cancelled because they shouldn't be driving? Only fair isn't it?

God, it pisses me off when the majority of NZ thinks the best way to fix the deaths/accidents on the road is to introduce more shit. For fuck sake - start fucken educating better! Introduce 5 yearly resits for all I care, but for god sakes, we need to stop testing just on road rules and start testing on being courteous to fellow road users.

its not just do you know them it is will you follow the rules. Can be done with computer sims. Have to sit the sim test every license renewal, instead of just the dodgy eye test. An advantage of using sims is the candidate isn't as aware of the testers presence and so more likely to 'drive' normally, it is amazing how the idiots can do it right when someone with authority is present. They are also one off set up and no waiting on a tester being on site or available.

[swbarnett]

I just think all those riders that wear all black and think they are ghost rider are gonna look f'n funny with there orange glow vest.

Indeed.

As one of those riders in all black* (well, I would be if I could afford to replace a perfectly good helmet). I would have to agree. That's one of the reasons (but by no means the only one) I won't wear one, even if it does become legally mandatory.

In all the road riding I did I never had a single car pull out in front of me or even come close because you could actually see me.

I have the same on my current ride - All black (except for silver scoop and whiteish graphic helmet). Every time I've had an issue with someone not seeing me it's been when I've been behind them or to the side (travelling in the same direction), never coming up to an intersection.



*Although I don't think I'm ghost rider

[DangerMice]

They will probably decide to differentiate riders from road workers etc by making riders wear day-glo pink, rather than yellow/green/orange

[swbarnett]

They will probably decide to differentiate riders from road workers etc by making riders wear day-glo pink, rather than yellow/green/orange

All the more reason to refuse to wear one.

You don't see black cars on the road wearing day-glo pink stripes.

[jasonu]

They 'flicker' - bit like those red/white ones you see on treadlies.
Illegal on powered vehicles.

It is used here, mandatory in some states. An on coming bike with the modulated headlight is almost totally impossible NOT to see as the affect on your eyes is actually really annoying.

[blackdog]

They will probably decide to differentiate riders from road workers etc by making riders wear day-glo pink, rather than yellow/green/orange

You will find that for all road workers the mandatory colour is orange. Green/Yellow is generally reserved for emergency services or other non-road related applications (construction for example).

[Berries]

Weird isn't it. You used to wear yellow on the roads and to me it stuck out like dogs balls. I can't easily differentiate orange from the background due to being quite badly colour blind. Even with cones it is the stripe I see first, if they have one.

Well, that'll be my excuse for knocking down someone on the stop/go paddle.

[blackdog]

Weird isn't it. You used to wear yellow on the roads and to me it stuck out like dogs balls. I can't easily differentiate orange from the background due to being quite badly colour blind. Even with cones it is the stripe I see first, if they have one.

Well, that'll be my excuse for knocking down someone on the stop/go paddle.

Mine is so covered in oil, grease and dirt that any hi-vis properties it once had have long since disappeared. I'd be happy to wear it over my bike jacket if it was mandatory, looks more like an oilskin vest anyway.

[Pseudonym]

Have any of you stopped to think on why else we aren’t being seen?
Drivers are blind, yea true but it can’t always be that or the perceived threat reasoning on why we get hit.

Rider position will have a bit to do with it, we all know cars have blind spots so why do so many riders sit in them?

At T intersections where you’re going straight through but the car in front is turning left with a car waiting to turn right into your lane from the joining road, how many times do you just throttle off and end up sitting off the cars right rear quarter totally hidden from the waiting car?

On country roads riding in the staggered formation with our lights on like the good law abiding bikers that we are, at a quick glance we look like an approaching car further away.
Two lights but closer together… It’s a car at 500 meters not two bikes at 150 meters.

Lights on coming out of the sun in the morning or evening and we have filled our silhouette.
Not that you can turn them off on 90% of bikes, and sun strike may over power the shadow regardless.

Of the four above, where will the vest help?
And with the light on, wouldn’t that over-ride the vest anyway?

If you are happy wearing one then sweet, but to make it mandatory?
Will that make us at fault regardless if we’re not wearing them?
And if that’s the case will the other party be liable for all costs if we are?
We can’t sue, but can the ACC if we have toed the line?
Would the chance of a $20,000+ medical bill put us in the “threat” category?

[swbarnett]

Have any of you stopped to think on why else we aren’t being seen?
Drivers are blind, yea true but it can’t always be that or the perceived threat reasoning on why we get hit.

Hear, hear!

Except for one ten year period I've been riding daily in Auckland traffic since 1983 and the only time I have been even tapped by a car it was totally my fault.

Rider position will have a bit to do with it, we all know cars have blind spots so why do so many riders sit in them?

At T intersections where you’re going straight through but the car in front is turning left with a car waiting to turn right into your lane from the joining road, how many times do you just throttle off and end up sitting off the cars right rear quarter totally hidden from the waiting car?

I will often weave when approaching intersections - first to put myself in the best position be seen and, second, to put myself as far as is practible away from driver. This has the added affect that I am moving perpindicular to the driver's line of sight.

On country roads riding in the staggered formation with our lights on like the good law abiding bikers that we are, at a quick glance we look like an approaching car further away.
Two lights but closer together… It’s a car at 500 meters not two bikes at 150 meters.

This also holds true for dual-headlight bikes. Mine had two headlights but the parking light sits between and above them and makes it clear I'm not a car.

Lights on coming out of the sun in the morning or evening and we have filled our silhouette.
Not that you can turn them off on 90% of bikes, and sun strike may over power the shadow regardless.

Another time when weaving can be advantagous.

Of the four above, where will the vest help?
And with the light on, wouldn’t that over-ride the vest anyway?

Not to mention my fairing in front and Givi top box in the rear.

Once again, training is the answer. Not more draconian applicaion of legislation with no respect for individual responsibility.

[Swoop]

For fuck sake - start fucken educating better!

That is the soulution, as we know, but NZ will persist with the "licence in every cornflakes packet" approach that has been used for years.

Having recently having to go through this process twice within a month (renewal and then adding another class) it didn't surprise me that there was no sort of testing process whatsoever, but it certainly is another form of tax grab.

[pete376403]

I wonder what the stats are on cop bikes that have been taken out by smidsys?

[swbarnett]

I wonder what the stats are on cop bikes that have been taken out by smidsys?

From what I understand they don't because drivers see them, if only subconsciously, as a threat.

[Gremlin]

From what I understand they don't because drivers see them, if only subconsciously, as a threat.

Nope, I've heard of two cops hit by cars. One was sideswiped, the driver didn't even realise they'd brushed against the bike (luckily he wasn't taken out) until the bike was behind with flashing blue and reds. Another was taken out I think, by a smidsy lane changing.

Oh, and this one time, there was a tree, but it didn't like bikers I hear.

[pete376403]

From what I understand they don't because drivers see them, if only subconsciously, as a threat.

My old GS1100GK has a biggish barn door fairing, panniers and top box, and the two (fairly large) front indicators have dual filament bulbs, like a stop/tail light, so they are on all the time as running lights.
The whole thing tends to appear, at first glance, like a cop bike, plus I tend to use a plain white helmet.
I did notice cars would move over a bit when I approached from behind. Threat perception?

They sure dont do that when I'm on the KLR.