The experts speak yet again

**philmc** · 3rd March 2014, 16:45

Interesting post.Especially when listening to talkback and you get no it all experts saying the answer is simply govern the bikes to only go 100kph .

**trustme** · 3rd March 2014, 16:59

Originally Posted by Katman

That's very true. But when you throw in the fact that a 1980 GS10000 and a 2014 GSXR1000 are two very different bikes and the 2014 version can be doing twice the speed that the older one could reach between two close corners, things get even uglier.

\

Not so sure there is a connect , the road toll generally is going down, modern cars would leave the old cars for dead performance wise as would the modern bike , modern cars are a lot safer , as are modern bikes. There was no ABS, traction control, tyres were crap , brakes were crap, suspension was crap, most bikes had garbage handling , we got into just as much trouble then as we do now.

**Akzle** · 3rd March 2014, 16:59

Originally Posted by trustme

By general consensus we are a country of crap drivers, If that is the case why would we be great riders. The statistics, whether this is a blip or not, tend to suggest we ride about as well as we drive.
Just sayin

thankfully, ive never been a statistic.

**RDJ** · 3rd March 2014, 17:06

Originally Posted by f2dz

No need to get bitter about it. How do you think young people feel every time there's a huge stink about them being young/inexperienced/reckless when it comes to driving cars? If you're not one of the riders he's referring to then who cares?

Wot 'e said.

**Voltaire** · 3rd March 2014, 17:32

C'mon ..its the Herald, an Auckland paper....must be crap, written by latte swilling apartment dwellers.

Side note, was at HD doing some CSS training and there was a 'Pensioner" ( his word) with a BMW S1000 track bike....180 HP he said. Good thing it had 'rain mode' too.

**Scubbo** · 3rd March 2014, 18:01

my old man trail rode for years since before I was born, he stopped after getting back on a bike for one more ride after getting over a crash which took out his knee. It took the crash for him to realize his reaction time had slowed and to admit that he was feeling the push to keep up with the younger riders for fear he'd be alone in the middle between the main group and the new riders. getting old is a bitch, you can't ride like you used to, even if you think you can...

**ellipsis** · 3rd March 2014, 19:21

...all of the important things relate to physics...if you could wrap your head around physics when it was taught at 4th or 5th form, future decisions on your life and position in the cosmos could be realised...I never got past 3rd form but if I had I would have been into physics...but I didn't, I got a job and bought a motorbike...around about the time that my schoolmates who stayed at school were learning the theories of physics, I was out being a spacecadet having the laws of physics applied and after a lot of fails, I had to realise that I had transcended the laws of physics, which had the consequence of another broken bone or shredded jeans and fucked paisley shirt...a knowledge of physics as it relates to a moving object and its occupation of a volatile and fragile space in time and reality is probably a prerequisite to being able to even apply for a licence to ride or drive an inertianally dangerous mass on a road...but being able to spell 'physics' and only get one letter wrong is as close as it get's to being in the zone of proficiency these days... bring back, NO...

**Magnum Noel** · 3rd March 2014, 19:51

Originally Posted by trustme

By general consensus we are a country of crap drivers, If that is the case why would we be great riders. The statistics, whether this is a blip or not, tend to suggest we ride about as well as we drive.
Just sayin

In a nut-shell

**Ocean1** · 3rd March 2014, 20:12

And still nobody's checked the numbers to discover that all those "born again" riders are in fact the lowest accident demographic.

Yes there's a hump in that age for accidents, but nowhere near the size of the hump representing the number of those old riders.

The crashingest age is, (and always has been) the under 20's, and the older they get from there the fewer crashes they have.

**trustme** · 3rd March 2014, 20:37

' Born again ' is one of those glib sound bites like ' speed kills ' . It grabs attention , nobody said it's reality.

**breakaway** · 3rd March 2014, 22:21

Originally Posted by Ocean1

And still nobody's checked the numbers to discover that all those "born again" riders are in fact the lowest accident demographic.

Yes there's a hump in that age for accidents, but nowhere near the size of the hump representing the number of those old riders.

The crashingest age is, (and always has been) the under 20's, and the older they get from there the fewer crashes they have.

Maybe back in the 80s -- but now it appears that the trend has changed and its the 40+ riders that are crashing the most:

Source http://www.transport.govt.nz/researc...clecrashfacts/

**Ocean1** · 3rd March 2014, 22:59

Originally Posted by breakaway

Maybe back in the 80s -- but now it appears that the trend has changed and its the 40+ riders that are crashing the most:

Yes. Scary numbers courtesy of NZTA. The obvious bias sorta highlights their obvious agenda, don't it?

Now make the age brackets the same size and correct it for numbers in each age group riding and show us the graph again.

**Tazz** · 3rd March 2014, 23:14

Originally Posted by Ocean1

Yes. Scary numbers courtesy of NZTA. The obvious bias sorta highlights their obvious agenda, don't it?

Now make the age brackets the same size and correct it for numbers in each age group riding and show us the graph again.

I'd say. What bloody monkey put that together!