Being a biker you would expect me to leap to their defence but really this is a non-issue for me.
Yes there are mad bikers but unfortunately they soon become organ donors, you never get old mad bikers.
And yes I will say it car drivers are MUCH worse because:
1. There are more of them and so there are more chances of them being nutters.
2. They can (or believe) that they can do stupid things and not get hurt/die.
3. It is possible to drive a car with brain in neutral and a lot of the bad car driving you see is down to simple lack of attention, it is not possible to drive a bike thus as you will almost immediatly fall off/hit something. To take the example you quote weaving in and out of traffic may be stupid but it takes concentration and timing or you will hit the first car hard.
|
|
|
|
Wrong. The time I leave in the morning and come home I very rarely have to sit in traffic. I would say that out off all car drivers I would see in a day either in front, behind or oncoming, a minute proportion of those would be, in my opinion, driving recklessly. Whereas I would consider 80% of all motorcyclists I see are riding recklessly and 10% of those just have a death wish.
|
|
|
|
When other road users complain about bikers blinding them with full beam the bikers will usually say something like; 'well I'm afraid it's tough, my safety is more important than irritating a few car drivers'. That always makes me smile.
|
I'm not getting involved in arguing about the generalisation, just making the observation that in my experience 90% of bikers ride about ten feet behind me, regardless of speed, while they are waiting to overtake.
Does the 2-second safe distance rule not apply to bikes?
|
No: the two second rule applies equally to motorcycles.
However, it may be that their width means that the two seconds ends in front of the car they are following because they can see that far ahead into clear space which will take a bike but not a car.
When on a bike, because the view to the rear is more restricted that in a car, I find it safer to be travelling SLIGHTLY faster(and it do mean only a little bit faster) than the surrounding traffic because then one can concentrate on what is happening in front and spend less time looking (fairy inefficiently) behind.
I agree with the comments about poor observation. I have come off a bike more than once and seen others brought off, and almost always due to a car driver failing to use their eyes. This has included three occasions when I had been stationary.
I do 400 miles a week on a bike in all weathers and have been motorcycling for 30+ years, so have seen a few things in my time.
And yes, there are nutters on bikes, not everybody is perfect.
|
|
|
|
|
I think people are misunderstanding my post. The point that I'm trying to make is that if I were riding a bike I would make sure that I would ride in a safer manner than I do in a car. For self preservation I wouldn't take risks in weaving in and out of traffic or on the opposite side of the road to get in front of a few more cars. Why is it that I could be doing 60mph on a 50mph road in free flowing traffic(ok breaking the speed limit I know but going with the flow in a safe manner IMO) but literally every motorbike I see is not content at that speed and feel the need to exceed it by at least another 10 or 20mph weaving between lorries and cars!!! Absolute madness to me.
|
I know this is an old, old topic but the proportion of motorcylists I see with no sense of self preservation on the M3 / M27 every day must be roughly 30 - 40 % in summer; much lower in winter : the seasonal 'nutter count' is very noticable. I just can't understand what makes them think that when there are 3 lanes of solid motorway traffic doing around 60 mph it is OK to weave in and out of the lanes, constantly occupying someone else's braking space, at 70 - 80 mph.
I see this happen literally every day.
|
I think it's simple really. Motorcyclists:
1. Sit higher, see more of the road ahead, and above cars.
2. Are much more "flexible" / can maneuver much more tightly.
3. Have a power-to-weight ration that car drivers can only dream of - can accelerate 'by thought'.
4. Same as (3) but for braking.
All these make them think they're invulnerable. They get away with it, but those who insist don't last, I'm afraid...
Of course, there are also the motorcyclists that play it safe, and those are the ones who last.
Vagelis.
|
When I was a motorcyclist (16 years ago) I was intent on travelling as fast as possible on the open road but within the speed limits in town.
I rode my motorcycle to my limits and then (as time went on) that of the bike itself at up to 135 MPH.
It took me approximately 3,000 miles on this machine to discover exactly where those limits were: I could have either wheel a fraction from locking in the wet or dry on a corner or in a straight line. I could slide the front or rear wheel whilst in complete control.
I lived to within a millimetre of my death most of the time I was on it but never really crossed 'the line'...
Sure I had a couple of accidents and eventually wrote the thing off to my immense relief.
When you are tidying your room before you go out for a ride so that it won't give a bad impression to those who will empty it after your death it's time to give up.
I learnt enormously about road surfaces, etc... lived to talk about it with my kids and wouldn't change a thing but there is no way I would get on one now.
|
|
|
In answer to your headline, I don't think motorcyclists are psychopaths. Some may have a child-like lack of fear but the reason why this kind of driving is seen more by bikes than cars is because motorcyclists do have a lot more choices than car drivers when driving and often they use those choices (not necessarily wisely):
1. Can a car zip past for overtaking quickly? No, it takes a few seconds of 'exposure' to the other lane even in a performance car. Because a bike is much quicker, shorter and more agile you can overtake in a second or less.
2. Can a car drive between lanes on a motorway? No, too wide. A bike can zip through, weaving in the manner that we've all seen!
3. Can a car accelerate away quickly? For £30,000 you can buy a car which does 0-100 in about 15 seconds. For £4000 you can buy a bike which does 0-100 in under 9 seconds.
Bikers take more chances because they can. Some might be insanely dangerous but they have the choice, car drivers don't so they can't.
As has been mentioned, things like this aren't sensible if you want to live for a long time and if something does go wrong it will hurt. Does that make it wrong to ride a motorcycle? Is it wrong to do skydiving / hang gliding / motor racing?
Gareth
|
Is it wrong to do skydiving / hang gliding / motor racing?
No - but these activities are not on public roads and therefore pose no threat of serious injury to anyone else!
|
Yes they do, haven't you seen the signs which say "Motorsport is dangerous"? Cars / karts or whatever spinning out, debris flying, fire....
If there were as many hang gliders as there are drivers they'd be crashing on to patios the length of Britain.
Aside from my flippant comment, does the thing about motorcyclists *having* the choice to drive badly compared to car drivers ring true?
Gareth
|
|
I'm not just saying this to be controversial, but there seems top be a misconception here that driving/riding fast and weaving is "reckless" or "dangerous". I drive/ride fast on both my Bike and in the car but am in total control at all times. I often think when passing people in cars that they are thinking "What a nutter" but the fact is it they only think that because they CANNOT DO IT THEMSELVES !!
|
Also it's a well known fact that everyone who goes slower than you do is an idiot, while everyone who goes faster is stupid.
As you were
Gareth
|
I take my hat off to anyone who can go faster than me.
ONLY JOKING.
|
|
No, tat, you are only in total control of the parts between your knees. You can't control anything other road users do, so I hope you leave a good safety margin for that.
|
|
No contol over that patch of diesel on the bend, or the wet leaves you failed to notice. Or the dog or child that runs out, or the pheasant flying across the road. Riding a bike is inherently more dangerous than driving a car because things that may not even be noticed or only cause minor damage to a car can easily result in the death of the rider and it doesn't make much difference how good or bad the rider is. Is it this feeling of exposure to the world that makes riding a bike so thrilling?
|
No contol over that patch of diesel on the bend, or the wet leaves you failed to notice. Or the dog or child that runs out, or the pheasant flying across the road.
Or the fact that I have not seen you in my offside (or worse on m/ways nearside) blind spot.
|
I have seen many accidents over the years.
Some have involved motorcylists.
In fact, most of the injuted/dead I have seen on the road were on two wheels.
Most of these motorcyclists were killed by people in cars not looking in their mirrors, moving sideways into a passing motorcylist, or pulling out in front of them or doing a u-turn in front of them.
I think, by and large, motorcylists cause the least aggro, move over in good time and they overtake/undertake with a friendly acknowledgment and off they go.
Most stupidity I see on two wheels, are spotty 16 year olds riding along with no silencers on little yellow and blue scooters, @£$%ing about.
|
|
Granted I have no control over what a car may do, but I think motorcyclists have a much hightened awareness of their surroundings. I remember when I was learning to drive a car my instructor said that people who had ridden bikes prior to cars had much better awareness of other road users etc.. This is born out of neccessity of course.
|
Live to ride, ride to live. If you have to ask you don't understand, and other slogans off my many HD t-shirts.
|
"Granted I have no control over what a car may do [...]"
The sad truth (IMVHO) is that we have no control, both drivers and riders. Just think, there are a zillion of things that can go wrong: your motor, the road, other road users, the weather, people not thinking, children running after a ball, a cat crossing the street, ...
One could go on and on. Just because all these things happen to each individual driver rarely, doesn't mean we control things. It's just statistics.
Vagelis.
|
|
Hear hear. Motorcyclists, unlike car drivers also know that if it is cold or wet that there is an incey wincey chance that the road may be slippery. The average car driver makes no allowance for this in their nice heated cabin and carry on driving up the pink fluffy dice of the vehicle in front regardless. This is highlighted every winter when it starts raining with multiple pile ups on the motorways.I\'m a motorcyclist and car driver and resent the generalisation that we are all nutters. As usual it is the minority of prats that get us all tarred with the same brush. As a generalisation, bikers are more alert (because it\'s cold mostly) and observant than car drivers. A couple of insuarance firms - Norwich Union I think - used to acknowledge this and offer better premiums on car policies for experienced motorcyclists.
|
Never mind the Pheasant. What about the Deer!
Now that really hurts. GOODNIGHT USUALLY!
Regards.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
