New crash study.

[swbarnett]

If you dont believe that it also explains a lot.

Ask an astronaut that has successfully returned to earth from a shuttle mission how big the mess was. After all, 28,000 kph is a mighty speed. The mess surely must be as big?


Mate, ALL things in life tend to subtleties that are obviously beyond your comprehension.

[pritch]

What we dont know is how many of those riders have been schooled in the speeds/lines they were taking.

What Ienatch says, and his book is considered authoritative, is that in many instances the riders were not riding a line at all, or if they were they had abandoned it. They sat the bike up, pointed it straight ahead, and hit the brakes, or in some cases hit the rear brake only, instead of trying to ride around the corner.

These were not hugely competent riders, rather the opposite.

More recently there were more US Marines dying in motorcycle accidents than in Iraq. They came home with a years worth of money they had been unable to spend and bought a bike. No experience, no skill, no helmet, no restictions on what they could buy, and the result was a high casualty rate.

In this country you can't ride without a helmet, you aren't supposed to ride a big bike straight away, but there are still people with little experience and limited skill some of whom may fail to make it round the bend.

[pritch]

OK I don't have Ienatch's book but I recalled this which is still available. Some of you will have seen it before, some maybe not. It is worth a read, even as a refresher.

http://www.motorcyclistonline.com/pace

[trufflebutter]

''A guy who said all his riding mates who were better than him were now in the cemetery''

In whatever context that was said, he could not have been more wrong.

[pritch]

That line is one put out by the Police/NZTA/ACC and it would be based on actual crash data which you seem to be quite happy to ignore and it would take an actual crash happening to you before you take notice maybe.

You shouldn't get sucked in so easily by blatant propaganda. The NZ Police have focussed almost entirely on speed with an occasional nod to drink driving. In Britain where it seems much more detailed records are kept, speed ranks seventh as cause of accidents. It's felt that figure is artificially high because not all accidents are attended by specialist traffic police and the general duties cops too readily attribute the accident to excessive speed. (Which has a familiar ring?)

Your "actual crash data" comment is highly suspect.

As has been mentioned before there are three main approaches to road safety:
Education (which you seem determined to ignore)
Engineering and
Enforcement

Two of those cost money, one of them rakes it in. No prizes for guessing where the emphasis is. It's about dollars not data.

[Ulsterkiwi]

No unlike you I am quite content to stick to limits where I know I may have a chance if shit happens. I can remember 2 quotes I read some years back, one was on here that was from a guy who said all his riding mates who were better than him were now in the cemetery and another was a media comment from a guy whoes friend died on a group ride (possibly trying to keep up) and his friend said his mate was a good rider too. So just because you are a good rider even having been though a riding school it is no guarantee you will live longer than non riding schooled riders. Something to ponder over eh.

Read the book, you might learn something that helps you deal with the shit when it happens.

Again you seem to invoke a logic and meaning in what people say that just isn't there. You perpetuate the idea that Roadcraft is about telling people to push the limits, to take a particular line and that riding schools want people to crash. You say this is down to blind belief in a book that tells people to up the pace in a corner. I invite you to read the book and find out the truth of the matter for yourself and you somehow manage to twist that to me having a need to ignore advisory speeds marked on corners??????????????????

I ponder my skills and abilities every time I ride, I accept that I will always have something to learn, I try to take every opportunity to improve myself and my riding. I am not interested in being faster or "better" than anyone else, I want to be the best rider I can be to give myself a) the most enjoyment from my riding and b)give myself the best chance possible to survive what the road might throw my way.
All the above being the case I can neither a)ever consider my riding skills as a finished product nor b) be assured that I will never crash. I will however have taken all reasonable steps to minimise risk.

But hey, you already know it all and no amount of posts by me or anyone else will change that so fill your boots.

[R650R]

Nitpick, but you need to compare like with like. The change in visibility is a full car length for the car's front corner to be just visible in the two scenarios, so use 4m for your calculation. That'll give you about 0.3 seconds, so starting to be a useful difference.

No its not a full car length, its a bonnet at best in the longest gap image.

[Ocean1]

an article in AA magazine that was generally all about the pros and cons of being a returning rider.

Oh dearie me, are you really that gullible?

[Ulsterkiwi]

But you cant argue with physics and neither can a riding school that promotes faster cornering lines than what the sign says if there is one on a bend. In the AA article I read there was a comment from a tow truck driver who said he picks up more bikes from bends than any other part of a road. I cant see any reason why he would make that up not unlike the police who you think go by made up data.
The truth perhaps hurts some on here and they do their darn best to try and discredit it because a particular riding school or book author "knows better".

What part of the "book does not say that" do you not understand? Read it for yourself then tell me where the book says up the pace around corners.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[onearmedbandit]

In the AA article I read there was a comment from a tow truck driver who said he picks up more bikes from bends than any other part of a road.
.

Sounds like he works for Captain Fucking Obvious Tow Service.

[Viking01]

No less gullible than the poster/s on here that have read words to the effect you must "Up the pace" when riding bends in their instruction book on how to ride. I would believe the tow truck driver over any theorists who have written a manual. Even the diagrams posted on cornering yesterday by a poster are really no more than based on an ideal theoretical situation. The real world is sadly not like that

What is this "must up the pace" ? Is it reading or comprehension you have a problem with ? I haven't read anything in this thread to date that says you "must" up your pace (other than your comments).

Regarding the diagrams on riding lines that were posted yesterday, well, what specific aspect of them do you disagree with ?

I personally don't have any issues with either the forces diagrams that Gremlin posted, or the riding lines diagrams. They are perfectly clear and understandable. What aspect of them are you having problems with ?

Based on "an ideal theoretical situation" ? Well, is that a surprise for you ? In trying to work out the dynamics of a motorcycles behaviour in a turn, I'm sure they did start with some theoretical models - and then went and tested them out in the real world. And then started to promote them (via Road Craft) because they were found to be useful.

Cheers

[Berries]

(possibly trying to keep up)

CASSINA BINGO!

Where do I get my prize?

[pritch]

No less gullible than the poster/s on here that have read words to the effect you must "Up the pace" when riding bends in their instruction book on how to ride.

Nobody said that. It seems when you read something you don't read what's written, you try to find something that supports your own "unusual" views.

What Ienatch was saying, and part of it is mentioned in that piece "The Pace", anybody with a right arm can ride fast on a straight. It is more satisfying to up the pace on a winding road. He warns against going fast enough to get in trouble, and there is no "must" involved. He even describes the measures they take to ensure nobody is "under pressure to keep up".

I have said it before, you should not be commenting on riding skill related matters, you seem to have absolutely no concept of what is required.

[Ulsterkiwi]

Your question about the book is better aimed at poster Pritch who has read it and came away with the impression that "upping the pace" on bends was the way to go. As I said if you try "upping the pace" on some of our twisty tourist routes down south the likelyhood of coming to grief is quite high with so many drivers not being able to stick to their side of the centre line. Maybe ride some twisty busy roads then if you want to learn something new.

Pritch was talking about a different book. I am talking about Roadcraft. You are the only one reading this thread not able to work that out.
Again, read it. I would love to hear what part of the book tells you to up the pace in the corners.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Akzle]

I have been riding since 1976 and if I did not know how to ride I would not be alive today now would I?

we call that a "fluke", defined as "luck, not skill"

I have also never crashed due to my own fault.

but you've crashed SO MUCH...

and refuse to undergo professional evaluation, even when it wont cost you anything. (except what little dignity you may have)