ClioSport.net
Register a free account today to become a member!
Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
-
When you purchase through links on our site, we may earn an affiliate commission. Read more here.
Black Devil - Nutjob on an R1
- Thread starter Rob_
- Start date
Mr Burns
ClioSport Club Member
Swift Sport
I give bikers room... Regardless of blame I don't want their death on my conscience. I don't want any involvement in a fatal crash as I don't think I would contented with telling people "It's okay wasn't my fault". Chances are the motorist would be partly to blame anyway, especially reading the stuff people do on here.
CBR1K, F21 125D
It's hard to ride a bike these days with all the senna' on the road, with there infinate knowledge and skills they have..
and the fact 80% of car drivers refuse to move out the way, when a bike is simply making progress (some of the time, there are exceptions to riders) - which i might add we are all taught in the tests / advanced riding, passing a standard car test does not make you a good driver, and its not like you can use track skills on the road either. So dont start that argument, most riders ARE more aware.
Not like they are going to hold you up if you do move out the way.
That video is ridiculous though, no doubt he will be dead soon.
and the fact 80% of car drivers refuse to move out the way, when a bike is simply making progress (some of the time, there are exceptions to riders) - which i might add we are all taught in the tests / advanced riding, passing a standard car test does not make you a good driver, and its not like you can use track skills on the road either. So dont start that argument, most riders ARE more aware.
Not like they are going to hold you up if you do move out the way.
That video is ridiculous though, no doubt he will be dead soon.
Very entertaining a few arse clenching moments in that lol. 
And this thread was just as entertaining, lol at the amount of hate and stereotyping given to riders. Just as many vids up on the tube of nutters racing around in cars, but your not gonna grief or moan to yourself about it.
And this thread was just as entertaining, lol at the amount of hate and stereotyping given to riders. Just as many vids up on the tube of nutters racing around in cars, but your not gonna grief or moan to yourself about it.
That biker is riding like a bellend no doubt ... I would never ride like that through traffic but when you're on a fast bike it is hard to resist a twist of the throttle and in a few seconds your hitting triple figures its that easy .... its like putting a clio driver off here in a ferrari and saying don't drive like a bellend (in which most general public regard, loud noise + fast acceleration = driving like a nob!!). Imagine how hard that would be!!
So before you start tarring all bikers with the same brush just imagine what you would be like in something with 400bhp/ton+
So before you start tarring all bikers with the same brush just imagine what you would be like in something with 400bhp/ton+
Clio 182 2005
400BHp per tonne? The r1 in the video looks around a 2003-2005 its about 900 Bhp per tonne lool
Last edited:
Clio 182 2005
Theres problems with whatever vehicles are on the road. Your right in what your saying i think bikers are more 'hooligan-ish' on the road it takes someone with a bit more guts to get there leg over a sportsbike, sportsbike riders tend to be younger and theres always the tempatation of the power as said before. In cars people are in a lot more relaxed enviorment and it doesnt take hardly any awareness to drive a car at all so people naturally fall into a state of being completely unaware of any one around them.
Cars Vs Bikes is going to be argued on and on aslong as there is still both cars and bikes on the road.
lol, i think my CBR is about 650bhp/ton ... thats fast enough for me! I love cars and bikes but as with anything theres always a few that spoil it for everyone else .... I got called a charva for owning a 172 Cup and a lunatic for owning a bike ... can't win ffs! ha.
Clio 182 2005
Ive had 3 R1s in past couple of years, i crashed one through being a knob and was nearly killed by a van driver who pulled across the road infront of me on the 2nd. Sportsbikes are best for the track or for long distance rides if your to cool for a tourer in my opinion. If you try to use a sportsbike to its pottential on a public road it will end in tears eventually. I stick to supermotos now and currently Stunting/Street riding in industrial estates or well out of the way on the weekends.
R1's are pretty brutal like .... thats the problem with supersports, they just egg you on and you can't really have much fun on them unless you are going for it. Stunting is pretty awesome just expect a few bruises lol. Weekends can be good if you're out early enough, I often do a run upto Hartside Cafe between Alston and Penrith ... amazing country roads. I also done a trip down to snake pass but was very disapointed (50mph limit + solid white lines + loads of traffic). I think in the next few years I'll be moving towards naked bikes and away from supersports ... some of the best rides I've done have been cruising along taking in the scenery lol
Not quite sure where these stats you quote prove that the majority of bikers are just plain stupid and would be interested to hear how you draw this very generalistic view.
It would be a start if you could explain how your figures portray the majority of bikers to be plain stupid. Simple question.
Darren S
ClioSport Club Member
I thought it was going to be crunch time at 5:18!
D.
D.
+1 m8 people like u and me who ride and drive tend to be more aware and curteous towards bikers i find, like u said there is a reason... if half the guys slating bikers actually tried riding one for a week they may see how dangerous it can be without riding like a prat....
FN2 Type R +MK6 Golf
Simple answer then,1% of traffic is motorbikes and they account for 20% of all accidents.
Of that 20% of all accidents 82% is a result of a crash by a biker on there own due to excess speed.
Is that simple enough...lol
And by the way im not slagging bikers off,just giving you facts.I love bikes and the power they have.Maybe just sometimes the idiots who own them dont respect the the road or other people on it.And i know cars can be as bad...
172 cup- suzu rf600r
i know i said i was done here ,....but -
ian where are you getting those stats?
"Away must be found of targeting the other parties who so frequently cause
motorcycle collisions. Drivers have to be made aware of the numerous ways that
they can fail to perceive a motorcycle in the typical ROWVaccidents that are
most frequently not the fault of the rider involved. Our results suggest that
interventions should be focussed on (but not exclusively confined to) older
drivers.
If all such accidents (right of way) were to be eliminated, our results suggest a theoretical fall of
slightly over 25% in the total motorcycle accident rate. - both from http://www.dft.gov.uk/pgr/roadsafety/research/rsrr/theme5/indepthstudyofmotorcycleacc.pdf
The most recent large-scale study of motorcycle accidents is the MAIDS report carried out in five European countries in 1999 to 2000, using the rigorous OECD standards, including a statistically significant sample size of over 900 crash incidents and over 900 control cases.
The MAIDS report tends to support most of the Hurt Report findings, for example that "69% of the OV [other vehicle] drivers attempted no collision avoidance manoeuvre," suggesting they did not see the motorcycle. And further that, "the largest number of PTW [powered two-wheeler] accidents is due to a perception failure on the part of the OV driver or the PTW rider." And "The data indicates that in 68.7% of all cases, the helmet was capable of preventing or reducing the head injury sustained by the rider (i.e., 33.2% + 35.5%). In 3.6% of all cases, the helmet was found to have no effect upon head injury" and "There were no reported cases in which the helmet was identified as the contact code for a serious or maximum neck injury."[10]
- from the MAIDS report
i could go on like this but cant be assed, and i think the figure your quoting is wrong, your maybe thinking 20% of injuries or death following a RTI are on motorcyclists?
the above indicates that three quarters of accidents involving a motorcycle also involves another vehicle, and in two thirds of THOSE, the other vehicle was to blame, generally because they didnt see the motorcycle.
your stats are wrong mate, and what the others guys were asking is how you can draw a conclusion about the majority of riders being stupid when (even if your stats were accurate) its not possible to prove that from them.
ian where are you getting those stats?
"Away must be found of targeting the other parties who so frequently cause
motorcycle collisions. Drivers have to be made aware of the numerous ways that
they can fail to perceive a motorcycle in the typical ROWVaccidents that are
most frequently not the fault of the rider involved. Our results suggest that
interventions should be focussed on (but not exclusively confined to) older
drivers.
If all such accidents (right of way) were to be eliminated, our results suggest a theoretical fall of
slightly over 25% in the total motorcycle accident rate. - both from http://www.dft.gov.uk/pgr/roadsafety/research/rsrr/theme5/indepthstudyofmotorcycleacc.pdf
- 75% of accidents were found to involve a motorcycle and a passenger vehicle, while the remaining 25% of accidents were single motorcycle accidents.
- "In the single vehicle accidents, motorcycle rider error was present as the accident precipitating factor in about two-thirds of the cases, with the typical error being a slide-out and fall due to overbraking or running wide on a curve due to excess speed or under-cornering."
- "Almost half of the fatal accidents show alcohol involvement" and "injury severity increases with speed, alcohol involvement and motorcycle size."
- In the multiple vehicle accidents, the driver of the other vehicle violated the motorcycle right-of-way and caused the accident in two-thirds of those accidents.
- The report's additional findings show that the wearing of appropriate gear, specifically, helmets and durable garment, mitigates crash injuries substantially.
- "Vehicle failure accounted for less than 3% of these motorcycle accidents, and most of those were single vehicle accidents where control was lost due to a puncture flat" and "Weather is not a factor in 98% of motorcycle accidents."
- "The failure of motorists to detect and recognize motorcycles in traffic is the predominating cause of motorcycle accidents... Conspicuity of the motorcycle is a critical factor in the multiple vehicle accidents, and accident involvement is significantly reduced by the use of motorcycle headlamps-on In daylight and the wearing of high visibility yellow, orange or bright red jackets." - from HURT report
The most recent large-scale study of motorcycle accidents is the MAIDS report carried out in five European countries in 1999 to 2000, using the rigorous OECD standards, including a statistically significant sample size of over 900 crash incidents and over 900 control cases.
The MAIDS report tends to support most of the Hurt Report findings, for example that "69% of the OV [other vehicle] drivers attempted no collision avoidance manoeuvre," suggesting they did not see the motorcycle. And further that, "the largest number of PTW [powered two-wheeler] accidents is due to a perception failure on the part of the OV driver or the PTW rider." And "The data indicates that in 68.7% of all cases, the helmet was capable of preventing or reducing the head injury sustained by the rider (i.e., 33.2% + 35.5%). In 3.6% of all cases, the helmet was found to have no effect upon head injury" and "There were no reported cases in which the helmet was identified as the contact code for a serious or maximum neck injury."[10]
- from the MAIDS report
i could go on like this but cant be assed, and i think the figure your quoting is wrong, your maybe thinking 20% of injuries or death following a RTI are on motorcyclists?
the above indicates that three quarters of accidents involving a motorcycle also involves another vehicle, and in two thirds of THOSE, the other vehicle was to blame, generally because they didnt see the motorcycle.
your stats are wrong mate, and what the others guys were asking is how you can draw a conclusion about the majority of riders being stupid when (even if your stats were accurate) its not possible to prove that from them.
Hmmmm..still no explanation? As for your stats, were they written by Enid Blyton per chance?
172 cup- suzu rf600r
lol
FN2 Type R +MK6 Golf
Heres some fatalities from 2006 and can you notice the pattern
http://www.motorcycle-accidents.com/pages/stats.html
http://www.motorcycle-accidents.com/pages/stats.html
FN2 Type R +MK6 Golf
No the government,you know the same people that pay your giro...
FN2 Type R +MK6 Golf
Ok keirvan this is taken from the same website that you just quoted.
Motorcyclists themselves seem to have far more problems with other types of
accident, such as those on bends, and overtaking or ‘filtering’ accidents.
• There are two main groups of riders that interventions should be focussed on.
The first is young and inexperienced riders of smaller capacity machines such as
scooters, and the second is older, more experienced riders of higher capacity
machines. Both the skills and attitudes of these riders need to be addressed.
5
2 INTRODUCTION
2.1 Motorcycle accidents
Motorcyclists have an especially poor safety record when compared to other road
user groups. Their killed and serious injury (KSI) rate in the UK, per million vehicle
kilometres, is approximately twice that of pedal cyclists and over 16 times that of
car drivers and passengers. Motorcyclists make up less than 1% of vehicle traffic but
their riders suffer 14% of total deaths and serious injuries on Britain’s roads (DETR,
2000).
26,192 motorcyclists (this figure includes moped and scooter riders) and pillion
passengers were injured in reported accidents in Great Britain in 1999. 6,361 of
these injuries were considered serious, and 547 motorcyclists and passengers were
killed. In the same year 205,735 car drivers and passengers were injured in
accidents. 18,681 of these injuries were considered serious, and 1,687 drivers and
passengers died.
In 1999 a motorcyclist was killed or seriously injured for every 665,894 kilometres
ridden. Car drivers, however, covered an average of 18,661,626 kilometres before a
serious injury or death occurred. According to these figures, in 1999 motorcyclists
were approximately 28 times more likely to be killed or seriously injured on the
roads in Great Britain than car drivers.
Chesham et al. (1993) compared distance travelled with injuries sustained and found
that in 1990 a motorcyclist was 35 times more likely to be killed or seriously injured
than a car driver. Although the figures have improved over the last 10 years, the risk
factor for motorcyclists when compared to car drivers is still very high.
Motorcyclists themselves seem to have far more problems with other types of
accident, such as those on bends, and overtaking or ‘filtering’ accidents.
• There are two main groups of riders that interventions should be focussed on.
The first is young and inexperienced riders of smaller capacity machines such as
scooters, and the second is older, more experienced riders of higher capacity
machines. Both the skills and attitudes of these riders need to be addressed.
5
2 INTRODUCTION
2.1 Motorcycle accidents
Motorcyclists have an especially poor safety record when compared to other road
user groups. Their killed and serious injury (KSI) rate in the UK, per million vehicle
kilometres, is approximately twice that of pedal cyclists and over 16 times that of
car drivers and passengers. Motorcyclists make up less than 1% of vehicle traffic but
their riders suffer 14% of total deaths and serious injuries on Britain’s roads (DETR,
2000).
26,192 motorcyclists (this figure includes moped and scooter riders) and pillion
passengers were injured in reported accidents in Great Britain in 1999. 6,361 of
these injuries were considered serious, and 547 motorcyclists and passengers were
killed. In the same year 205,735 car drivers and passengers were injured in
accidents. 18,681 of these injuries were considered serious, and 1,687 drivers and
passengers died.
In 1999 a motorcyclist was killed or seriously injured for every 665,894 kilometres
ridden. Car drivers, however, covered an average of 18,661,626 kilometres before a
serious injury or death occurred. According to these figures, in 1999 motorcyclists
were approximately 28 times more likely to be killed or seriously injured on the
roads in Great Britain than car drivers.
Chesham et al. (1993) compared distance travelled with injuries sustained and found
that in 1990 a motorcyclist was 35 times more likely to be killed or seriously injured
than a car driver. Although the figures have improved over the last 10 years, the risk
factor for motorcyclists when compared to car drivers is still very high.
172 cup- suzu rf600r
the first point is a fair one as work is defo needed to adjust some bikers attitudes iv never denied that. though luckily im 25 so dont come under this particular point lol
but the rest of this just reinforces what iv been trying to say, that motorcyclists are much more vulnerable than car drivers, so dont bloody tailgate them lol! but we are boring everyone so lets agree to disagree.
even though you are completely WRONG :dapprove: lmao
Lol, poor response. When the discussion doesent go your way you resort to imature childish remarks!
I have asked you repeatedly a very simple question of which I must apologise to the rest of you who must be sick of reading it and that was. How do you draw the conclusion from your stats that the majority of bikers are just plain stupid?
Waitey
ClioSport Club Member
Alpina D3, AC Cobra
