Poll: Learner speed restriction change?

[sunhuntin]

Mikkel-You keep missing the point--a learner licence rider shouldn't be in rush hour traffic any more than they should be on the open road at 100km/h
If you use the time on a learner licence to practice your riding skills rather than being out thinking the little blue bit of plastic is a right to ride anywhere anytime ...

how exactly then is one meant to gain experience? one needs to do to gain experience. when i took my girlfriend pillion, dad said "you need experience to carry a pillion" he didnt have an answer for "how do i get experience without doing?"

as you can tell by my crappy l plate, it did many thousands of k with me before i could be arsed getting my restricted. im nearing 30,000k travelled, and may even be higher than that. i rode at 70k once and nearly got run over due to tail gaters. after that, its at whatever the posted speed is. as said, i was watching my mirrors more than the road ahead. after that, also as already said, i took my nearby open roads and rode there, hard out. but inbetween, i was also doing wangas to turakina weekly, and also went part way up the paraparas, simply cos the nearby road didnt have enough challenges [no traffic or corners etc]

if a learner lives in, say, bulls or sanson and has to go to palmy or wangas for their job, how are they meant to get there? i sure as hell wouldnt advocate they stay at 70k when they do the road daily. [and lets say the motorbike is their only form of transport.]

[Ixion]

how exactly then is one meant to gain experience? one needs to do to gain experience. when i took my girlfriend pillion, dad said "you need experience to carry a pillion" he didnt have an answer for "how do i get experience without doing?"

That would apply whatever the licence status. What the law intends, is that a motorcyclist should not start acquiring that experience (of taking a pillion) whilst they are still inexperinced at basic riding. Learn to RIDE first. Then (once the full class 6 be obtained) learn to pillion.

if a learner lives in, say, bulls or sanson and has to go to palmy or wangas for their job, how are they meant to get there? i sure as hell wouldnt advocate they stay at 70k when they do the road daily. [and lets say the motorbike is their only form of transport.]

You might equally ask how a person is to get to palmy or wangas if they have no licence at all ? The simple fact is that a learner licence is not intended to facilitate such trips. You say "the motorbike is their only form of transport". But, if they have only an L licence, the motorbike is NOT a form of transport. It is a means of tuition.

A car learner could equally complain that he or she needs to get to Parmy or Wangas, and they cannot because of the irksome requirement to have a supervisor along . So, on that basis , would you agree that the requirement for a car learner to have a qualified driver in the car should be abolished.

The simple answer to your question is that the person in question must wait until they have a 6R. The 6L is a licence to Learn. The 6R a licence to Ride

[Mikkel]

Now I feel enlightened. I shall from here on out not ride my motorcycle just learn on my motorcycle until I can indeed get the ticket to competence that is the 6R...

I feel like a beer... a tui perhaps.

[YLWDUC]

if a learner lives in, say, bulls or sanson and has to go to palmy or wangas for their job, how are they meant to get there? i sure as hell wouldnt advocate they stay at 70k when they do the road daily. [and lets say the motorbike is their only form of transport.]

Agreed, its ridiculous that in most of New Zealand the 70km/hr limit is more dangerous than the 100. There is always the exemption form (and $25) to fill in at the testing station. I for one have no sympathy for the people who have done the time on the learners but haven't bothered to sit the R.

The 70km/hr limit on learners means that legally they shouldn't be on the motorway or highway at all. I'm not saying that thats fair, but if a motorvehicle is travelling at more than 20km/hr under the speed limit, they can be ticketed for careless driving or obstructing traffic.

Which still does nothing to solve the crappy licensing and 250cc regulations. Lets become the 8th State of Australia so we can have a more sensible "power to weight" limit instead of the 250cc. Though all the hoons would have to say goodbye to their NSR/ZXR/RGV/CBR 250 rice rockets.

[BiK3RChiK]

Now I feel enlightened. I shall from here on out not ride my motorcycle just learn on my motorcycle until I can indeed get the ticket to competence that is the 6R...

I feel like a beer... a tui perhaps.

Yeah, crack one open for me too, mate! I feel like a tui too...

M

[Horse]

I think someone's going to have to explain to me how I'm going to learn to ride at highway speeds without ever leaving the 50km/h zone.

Note: "wait till you've got your 6R" isn't the answer, apparently R is for riding, not learning.

And in a city like Palmy, you're not going to learn much about going around corners on a motorbike inside city limits.

[BIHB@0610]

How much is the fine for riding over 70km/h with your learner's licence? I know the exemption can be applied for if you regularly ride on the open road - I for one will be applying soon! If I don't get it, I think my personal safety is worth risking a fine for.

[Mikkel]

Yeah, crack one open for me too, mate! I feel like a tui too...

M

Coming right up... Cheers big ears!

How much is the fine for riding over 70km/h with your learner's licence? I know the exemption can be applied for if you regularly ride on the open road - I for one will be applying soon! If I don't get it, I think my personal safety is worth risking a fine for.

$400 and 25 demerits for violating a license restriction... that's for each restriction you break mind you!

And you're probably not likely to get an exemption unless you can prove that you need it for work or some such.

Otherwise I would have applied - but commuting through Chch is probably not a good enough reason.

[FROSTY:Me]

Ohh gosh people --Im so sorry Ill explain. I got my licence via the OLD graduated system--not a lot unlike the current system.
I lived in a megatropolis called Thames.(population 6000)
So I guess Im not qualified to really discuss the process of getting a licence in small towns.

[FROSTY:Me]

I think someone's going to have to explain to me how I'm going to learn to ride at highway speeds without ever leaving the 50km/h zone.

Note: "wait till you've got your 6R" isn't the answer, apparently R is for riding, not learning.

And in a city like Palmy, you're not going to learn much about going around corners on a motorbike inside city limits.

Its very much like racing--First of all develop the SKILLS then increase the speed.

[Hitcher]

Having been a *learner* in the past five years and living in a major metropolitan area, my comments are based on (bitter) personal experience.

The open-road speed limit for learners should be exactly the same as all road users. There is no arbitrary speed restriction for learner car drivers. Anything less is dangerous for the riders in question, particularly when learners are required to brand the rear of their bikes with L plates. If people want to learn to ride at lower speeds, then they should avoid the open road until they feel sufficiently confident/competent.

The 10:00pm curfew should also be removed. Riding after that time is no more dangerous than before, and the night gets no darker.

Apart from that, the only other change I'd make to learner rider regulations is to replace the arbitrary engine size limitation (a nonsense when 250cc two-strokes are kosher) to the LAM system favoured by some Australian states.

[BiK3RChiK]

I can see what Frosty and Ixion are saying. If someone (and I'd have to say here probably most)on their 6L needs to 'learn' to ride first, then the 100k zone is not for them. And I'm not advocating that they hop on a bike and go straight up to 100km/hr! 'It aint a target!' remember... Hell! There was a guy on my BHS course who almost dropped the bike because he locked up the front brake and was so scared of the bike he was physically shaking!! I'm shocked he got a certificate! He obviously had very little idea about how to ride a bike.

What I am saying is that IF the learner is an experienced-ish rider and has had their car licence for say 10 years, then why shouldn't they be allowed to travel on the open road up to at least 90km/hr? I've had my car licence for almost 25 years, and have ridden bikes from the age of about 12 on our family farm. I should have gone for my licence when they handed them out of the weetbix packet, but there you go, I didn't! Now I want my full licence. But to get there, I have to go through all this other BS as do other riders in similar positions.

The arguments posted above have raised some very good points and have definitely made me think about the stupid licencing system in this country. I can see why they have made it like it is, but IMO, they need to add a different licence category or something for more experienced riders....

M

[FROSTY:Me]

Ive been thinking a lot about this today.
Learner licence -nahh cant change my mind about the whole its a licence to learn not a licence to go out doing what you want to --as such the time restrictions make sense and the speed limit makes sense BUT
There should be NO qualifying time before you can sit a restricted licence.
In other words if you can demonstrate you have the riding skills needed to ride a bike competantly then why should you be stopped doing so?
Mind you I'm also an advocate for the whole HP as oposed to CC restriction too.
That would make bike pricing more reasonable for a learner removing the insanely inflated pricing thats on 250's
In my opinion a GS500/goose350/gb400/gpz500/etc is a heck of a lot more inteligent learner bike than a prillia 250 or a RGV250 etc

[BiK3RChiK]

Ive been thinking a lot about this today.
Learner licence -nahh cant change my mind about the whole its a licence to learn not a licence to go out doing what you want to --as such the time restrictions make sense and the speed limit makes sense BUT
There should be NO qualifying time before you can sit a restricted licence.
In other words if you can demonstrate you have the riding skills needed to ride a bike competantly then why should you be stopped doing so?
Mind you I'm also an advocate for the whole HP as oposed to CC restriction too.
That would make bike pricing more reasonable for a learner removing the insanely inflated pricing thats on 250's
In my opinion a GS500/goose350/gb400/gpz500/etc is a heck of a lot more inteligent learner bike than a prillia 250 or a RGV250 etc

Sounds like a good idea to me! DH says I'd pass easily!!! Don't know anything about the HP v CC thing (mostly because I don't know the HP of bikes) so if it counted my bike out, then I'd say leave it as it is... but, if it was a goer, then hey! I'm open to change!!!!

[Mom]

Why would a person on L plates be riding on the motorway?
I do have isssues with our nanna state dont get me wrong here.
Common sense tells you that a person with very limited experience is unlikely to react to a dangerous situation propperly
Keeping their speed down to 70 means reduced collateral damage if they get it wrong.
Putting them in heavy traffic at 100km/h is just asking fro trouble

As it has already been mentioned some of us do not have the choice. We live 500m from a 100kph zone, and could not ride anywhere without hitting the open roads up here. I agree with you though about learners needing to take one step at a time, but there are far too many variables to make a blanket call. I would strongly support an increase of the current cap.

I have been TEC on rides where we had a bloke who could/would not go faster than 70kph on the open road, I was terrified the whole way. It was simply dangerous! Even on the motorway early Sunday morning (read no traffic to speak of) this guy still puttered along with me acting as buffer against the traffic that seriously wanted to engage in kinky sex with my bike.