When people die on quad bikes, what kills them? Is it head injuries?

**skippa1** · 17th May 2014, 07:18

I was driving home last night, was between Patea and Waverley, and a older gentleman was riding a quad on the road in a 100km/hr zone(I am guessing between farm gates) with a small child sitting in front of him. The child would have been no older than 3, neither were wearing any safety gear. He was going pretty much balls to the wall and it didn't look stable. The Fuel tanker in front of me gave him a blast on the horn and had to brake as the quad wasn't holding a consistent line. The farmer flicked him the bird.

you can't help stupid. Maybe $15k fine might force him to think safety.

**Berries** · 17th May 2014, 07:28

Originally Posted by bogan

I can certainly recal seeing a distinction on a form, and have talked about it with a guy who does CAS stuff back when the ACC levy thingo was in full swing. But the specific search term to find said info escapes me atm.

In your NZTA/CAS data the bike should be classed as Other, not a Motorbike. But the info will only be there if it crashes on the road, for instance it crashed while crossing the road between paddocks. If it was in his paddock the data won't exist with NZTA/CAS, you'd have to try Workplace NZ or whatever OSH are called this week.

No idea what the ACC data look like. And this takes us right back to the ACC levy thing and their base information. When the MOT or NZTA quote figures of the number of motorcycle injuries then it does not include quad bikes off road, or motocross bikes. ACC? Who knows. If scott411 is right then they are separate as long as the person filling in the form was truthful - apparently a lot of facial injures received in a "car crash" in some areas though are actually caused by not cooking the man his eggs so the distinction between farm bike and road bike may not be all that clear.

**HenryDorsetCase** · 17th May 2014, 13:16

Originally Posted by Milts

Not about to jump into the politics of the fine, because I'm not sure what my opinion is on that.

However re stats: A large proportion of the injuries are head injuries.

ATV (quad bike) injuries in New Zealand children: their extent and severity / New Zealand Medical Journal, 2009

Quad bike injuries in Waikato, New Zealand: an institutional review from 2007-2011. / Australia and New Zealand Journal of Surgery, 2013

Surgeons call for tighter regulation of quad bikes / Media release, Royal Australasian College of Surgeons, 2011

Whoever posted and said "this isn't a motorbike thing, its a workplace safety thing, and if he was doing doughnuts in a forklift* the business would be fined at the same level" put it into the proper perspective for me.

*bloody good fun by the way.

**Oakie** · 17th May 2014, 15:44

Originally Posted by HenryDorsetCase

Whoever posted and said "this isn't a motorbike thing, its a workplace safety thing, and if he was doing doughnuts in a forklift* the business would be fined at the same level" put it into the proper perspective for me. .

Yup. Spot on.
Just a point ... part of the thread title is "what kills them". Remember this issue is not just about people who hit the jackpoint and die ... it's the much larger group who have accidents and finish up with long term injuries. While the OP is probably right that the majority of fatalities will be crush injuries ... there'll be many more who survive but with the legacy of an ongoing injury. Helmets on!

**Grumph** · 17th May 2014, 16:22

Originally Posted by Oakie

Yup. Spot on.
Just a point ... part of the thread title is "what kills them". Remember this issue is not just about people who hit the jackpoint and die ... it's the much larger group who have accidents and finish up with long term injuries. While the OP is probably right that the majority of fatalities will be crush injuries ... there'll be many more who survive but with the legacy of an ongoing injury. Helmets on!

Um, anecdotal evidence from the guys i know with long term injuries and disabilities from quad accidents suggests that crush injuries may actually be preponderant....it's only a small sample of course....but one of those on top of you hurts - even if it doesn't kill.

**GavinB** · 17th May 2014, 19:57

For what it's worth, and possibly a wee bit tangential to the OP...

The costs are driven by surviving with a Traumatic Brain Injury or Spinal Cord Injury (or multiple amputations, serious burns etc).

Strictly speaking, when we kill ourselves is relatively cheap.

And the earlier post re the Accounts (Motor Vehicle vs Work) was correct including about beaches etc.

Gavin

**Asher** · 17th May 2014, 22:29

Ive never crashed a quad but ive ridden them a fair bit. I would have thought most of the injuries from crashing one would be a crushing injuring. I feel it would be unlikely that someone would get very hurt falling from quad but rather the quad falling onto them. There is plenty of exposed steel bar on quads to make a mess of your head/chest if one was to roll on to you.

As for mandatory helmets; those ag-hats are pretty bloody useless.

**Winston001** · 18th May 2014, 05:46

Originally Posted by Moto-Dynamix

Farmers wash there cow shed floor every milking, but the bike gets a wash when it goes to the shop every 6 months or so, they really are ignorent they do not look after there work tools

True but understandable. When I was a lad we seldom washed the tractor or the farm bike. It seemed pointless because it would be out in the mud/dust again next morning. We did go around with the grease gun occasionally.

4 wheelers are low to the ground cleaning isn't easy. A simple solution would be a raised platform beside a hose - ride up - 30 secs wash underneath - ride off.

**Winston001** · 18th May 2014, 05:47

Whatever happened to roll-over frames on quads? I thought they were going to be made compulsory.

**Ocean1** · 18th May 2014, 08:33

Originally Posted by Winston001

Whatever happened to roll-over frames on quads? I thought they were going to be made compulsory.

The Kiwi one? http://tvnz.co.nz/national-news/nz-i...-video-5331956

Or the Aussie one? http://www.quadbar.com.au/

The squashy one actually looks useful, I still wouldn't like to see them made compulsory. Unless it was an "either / or helmet" deal.

And then, you'd have to get it past the bike manufacturer's warrantee issue, which simply wouldn't happen.

**Grumph** · 18th May 2014, 09:33

Originally Posted by Winston001

Whatever happened to roll-over frames on quads? I thought they were going to be made compulsory.

Not feasible unless you combine them with belts and arm restraints. Even more crush injuries when an unrestrained rider is under a rolled quad.....

**SPman** · 18th May 2014, 12:32

Originally Posted by Ocean1

I see DOC are ditching all quads from their land and replacing them with those wee Suzuki jeeps.

I'd venture to suggest that quads are safer than the tractors/ag bikes they replaced. Which were safert than the horses....

So, where's the evidence that wee Suzuki jeeps will be any safer? The same place as the evidence that helmets on quads in mud at walking pace save lives?

Fk'n panzy-arsed fukwits.

And I bet those 3 wheel abominations killed/injured more than the rest put together.....

**avgas** · 18th May 2014, 14:19

Mountain Lions. Big Nasty Mountain Lions.

**Ocean1** · 18th May 2014, 14:28

Originally Posted by SPman

And I bet those 3 wheel abominations killed/injured more than the rest put together.....

They had a habit, (when you put a foot down) of climbing up your leg and completely fucking your knee.

Apart from that they were an excellent device.