Allan Kirk's at it again, this time its the older rider's fault!

[Motu]

I'm 41. I've been riding since age 12. I spent 12 years away from motorcycles (age 24-36). It took me a good year before I was comfortable giving the bike some stick. My last bike before I left biking was a 80HP 1986 GPZ750. My returning bike was a 105HP FZR750R. Imagine spending 20-30 years away and coming back to a bike with possibly 100 more horsepower. The statistics are telling us that a number of guys are having these problems and its returning bikers. The young ones crash because they're learning but the older ones have to re-learn to a certain extent.

We don't need to get into a pissing contest,but lets say my riding experience is considerable,and I've never stopped riding for any reason whatsoever.I'm quite happy to give the bikes I own considerable stick and push the envelope - but.....put me on a modern 1,000cc sports bike and I might be getting into some real ''oh shit'' situations.It's not age,and it's not experience,and it's not riding skill.

[riffer]

Shit no, I'm not trying to have a pissing contest. My point was that I struggled coming back after 12 years and when I left motorcycling I was riding fairly fast bikes.

Coming back from 30 years to a big bike has to be difficult. Those riders who've kept riding constantly have kept their skills.

[TimeOut]

Shit no, I'm not trying to have a pissing contest. My point was that I struggled coming back after 12 years and when I left motorcycling I was riding fairly fast bikes.

Coming back from 30 years to a big bike has to be difficult. Those riders who've kept riding constantly have kept their skills.

Would have to agree with you, I'm 48 it's been 30 years since I road a bike on the road, although I do ride them on the farm daily.
It's been fun but I'm only starting to feel comfortable after 12000km, still got a lot to learn.
I do think the older riders don't take the risks quite as much and tend to think of the consequences a bit more.

[Motu]

Coming back from 30 years to a big bike has to be difficult. Those riders who've kept riding constantly have kept their skills.

But I'm saying I have the skills - and they wouldn't be enough if I made the jump of double the capacity and double the HP.The difference is - I know I would be out of my depth.The same thing that makes the under 25's so prone to ''accidents'',is the same thing that gets the born agains into the statistics.

[riffer]

Interesting point Motu. I would have picked you as one who would have had the experience to show the necessary restraint.

Are you saying that even the most experienced and restrained also suffer from the same lapses of red-bloodedness?

I was thinking it would be something I'd eventually grow out of. Or is it that some bikes are just too much for nearly any rider?

Speaking of which, I'm taking the B-King out for a test ride tomorrow. That'll be a grand exercise in "it only goes as fast as you make it go son."

[The Stranger:Me]

Harley-Davidsons. All of which are more powerful than a TR6.

You sure about that?

[Ocean1]

The difference is - I know I would be out of my depth.

I take it you don't own a fookin' big sports bike because you think you'd succumb to the temptation? Or, as Riffer says, you think the majority of riders aren't skilled enough to own one?

I was thinking it would be something I'd eventually grow out of.

Yeah, me too. The main reason I never owned a big road bike until last year… May be still prone to the odd bout of exuberance but, (touch wood) I do choose the time and place better than perhaps I used to.

[Ixion]

Interesting point Motu. I would have picked you as one who would have had the experience to show the necessary restraint.

Are you saying that even the most experienced and restrained also suffer from the same lapses of red-bloodedness?

I was thinking it would be something I'd eventually grow out of. Or is it that some bikes are just too much for nearly any rider?

Speaking of which, I'm taking the B-King out for a test ride tomorrow. That'll be a grand exercise in "it only goes as fast as you make it go son."

Well, I have done the ancient rider 1000cc (semi) sprots bike thing. It's not a matter of restraint. Which is what I keep trying to tell the "I've been riding 3 months and smashed up my 250, I think I should get a 1000, I'm a really restrained rider" types.

In some ways I suspect a rider with a lot of experience on lower hp bikes is almost more at risk than a complete novice.

It's the difference between walking along a foot wide plank 3 foot off the ground. And walking along a 2 inch wide plank 300 foot off the ground. Same skills, experience helps, but you need to be aware that you've a shitload less room for error.

I think the biggest get into trouble factor with returning bikers is that modern bikes handle so well. The old wagons of the 70s (and 80s in most cases) handled like pigs. The frames flexed, the suspension was crap. But, they FELT so bad that you were actually unlikely to get into trouble. They frightened you off before it went critical.

Modern big bikes handle superbly in comparison. Right up to the point where they superbly throw you off into the ditch. You don't have the "Oh shit oh shit this feels really scarey, how I am going to get this beast round this corner" , to imbue you with caution.

But, also, how many of the crash statistics amongst older riders are really born agains, and how many never really were born before? Riders who have either never ridden , but think, in middle age, that a bike would make a great fashion statement. Or rode a Honda 50 to uni for a year, 30 years ago. I've been told, by one who claimed to know, that we would all be amazed if we knew the figures for the number of Harleys being ridden by people with no class 6 at all (obviously, have a cage licence). And equally amazed at the number of Harleys that are sold, and are back in the workshop for (usually not too major) repairs within the first couple of months.

[xwhatsit]

You sure about that?

Sure. 45hp, thereabouts -- if PaulInNZ was still around here he'd tell you about the single carb and different valves to give a lovely smooth linear controllable syrup of power; not so worried about top-end.

[MaxB]

Do not agree with the safetycrat. He is trying to link fading reflexes with an increase in crashes in older riders. As others have said I reckon its got more to do with years of experience and reaction times.

I bet if you adjust the stats against total hours on the bike you will find that a young rider with 5 years on bikes will have a similar risk to that of a born-again rider with say 3 years now and 2 years 20 years ago. Maybe there will be a bit of catching up of lost skills but I would say there would not be much in it.

[skidMark]

There are old motorcyclists? Didn't us young folk ban those because they kept holding us up?

Lady's and gentlemen...

I am the future of new zealand.

Deal with it.

[MSTRS:Me]

May be still prone to the odd bout of exuberance but, (touch wood) I do choose the time and place better than perhaps I used to.

As one old fart to another...I can relate.

[TimeOut]

Well, I have done the ancient rider 1000cc (semi) sprots bike thing. It's not a matter of restraint. Which is what I keep trying to tell the "I've been riding 3 months and smashed up my 250, I think I should get a 1000, I'm a really restrained rider" types.

In some ways I suspect a rider with a lot of experience on lower hp bikes is almost more at risk than a complete novice.

It's the difference between walking along a foot wide plank 3 foot off the ground. And walking along a 2 inch wide plank 300 foot off the ground. Same skills, experience helps, but you need to be aware that you've a shitload less room for error.

I think the biggest get into trouble factor with returning bikers is that modern bikes handle so well. The old wagons of the 70s (and 80s in most cases) handled like pigs. The frames flexed, the suspension was crap. But, they FELT so bad that you were actually unlikely to get into trouble. They frightened you off before it went critical.

Modern big bikes handle superbly in comparison. Right up to the point where they superbly throw you off into the ditch. You don't have the "Oh shit oh shit this feels really scarey, how I am going to get this beast round this corner" , to imbue you with caution.

But, also, how many of the crash statistics amongst older riders are really born agains, and how many never really were born before? Riders who have either never ridden , but think, in middle age, that a bike would make a great fashion statement. Or rode a Honda 50 to uni for a year, 30 years ago. I've been told, by one who claimed to know, that we would all be amazed if we knew the figures for the number of Harleys being ridden by people with no class 6 at all (obviously, have a cage licence). And equally amazed at the number of Harleys that are sold, and are back in the workshop for (usually not too major) repairs within the first couple of months.

Good post, pretty much on the mark.

I wonder how many mature riders have never riden much on the road before.
I have heard of quite a few (mid life crises,sp) buying a Harley because of image. Haven't riden before and don't ride much now, I wonder if they feature more in the stastics.

[slowpoke]

I could have read through all the posts and young bull/old bull shite....but to save my 40+ year old eyes I used my 40+ year old brain and skimmed to the end.
I reckon the point is that learner riders crash more than seasoned riders, simple as that. If you are a rider returning to motorcycling after a substantial break then you are effectively a learner again. It's nothing to do with age or reflexes it's just going through the motions of relearning the do's and don'ts of a motorcycle as opposed to the car you've been sat in for the last X number of years.
This "modern super powerful bikes require catlike reflexes" mantra is a load of bollox too. How many people crash through a rear wheel 160-180hp slide or at 300km/hr? Virtually none.
The bulk of all accidents happen sub-160km/hr and even the old Bonneville/Commando brigade could do that. And if the shit was to contact the air mover then I'd rather be on something with 4/6 pot radial brakes (or ABS), GP spec rubber, mass centralised 170kg's than something with drum brakes, spindly forks and tyres made from what seems like recycled bakelite.
I'd like to see Mr Cock, I mean Kirk, and the young guns on here tell Jeremy McWilliams that his reflex's were shot when he set the last 2 stroke 500GP pole position vs the 990cc 4 strokes at 41 or Troy Bayliss to forget about winning this years SBK champuionship 'cos he's a silly slow ol' fool getting close to 40. Or closer to home, Tony Rees coming out of a couple of years retirement to show the younger blokes the way home at Puke at the ripe old age of 40, or Glenn Williams, Terry Fitzgerald, and co.

Age has got fek all to do with it, it's all about individual ability and individual attitude.

[Pwalo]

I think that you will find that the basic stats only give the age of the rider, not how many years they have been riding, or how many years they have had off, or even how experienced they are.

The intepretation that it is 'born agains' that are doing all the crashing is just that (an intepretation).

To fully comment on this you would need to know a great deal more about each crash. It may even be that older riders just ride a lot more miles than younger ones?