|
Lets ignore the above comment.
I was t'boned a few years ago on my bike going to work. The driver saw me but thought she could just sneak across my path behind another car. So no blind spot/behind an A piller etc. She was late for work! No one in front of me, no one behind, just plain "I'm going to risk it" She got 3 points and a 120 pound fine.
The most common bike accident is at junctions..."I didnt see them officer" is the most heard of excuse. 1/2 asleep, putting on lipstick, combing hair, adjusting radio, texting or yakking on the phone, eating a burger.
I still ride, bikes bigger, 2 huge headlights but car drivers still feel safe in their tin tank and take risks.
Treat everyone else on the road as an idiot and you might be safer! Car OR biker
|
Lets ignore the above comment.
Gladly :o)
|
|
|
|
"
Treat everyone else on the road as an idiot and you might be safer! Car OR biker"
Agreed. But sadly - particularly on Bank Holidays and hot sunny weather - the idiot bikers outnumber the idiot car drivers..By about 3:1...
|
Agreed. But sadly - particularly on Bank Holidays and hot sunny weather - the idiot bikers outnumber the idiot car drivers..By about 3:1...
I do agree, on those days my bike stays in the garage. Nowadays hhen mates ask if I'm coming out for a burn I decline the offer. Depends what your idea of fun is I suppose, I don't hang about by any stretch but some of the things I've seen would give you nightmares!
Mind you it is fun to laugh at idiots on sports bikes wobblnig round corners at 2.5mph then growing a huge pair as soon as the road straightens out. Even funnier when they used to try and shake that ratty old big traily...and failed. :o)
|
|
|
|
The point is, if you're an idiot in a car and crash into another car particularly in town the chances are you'll probably be ok. If you're an idiot on a bike and you have an accident, you're far more likely to be killed. With that in mind you'd think bikers would be extra careful and extra safe as if they crash, its them who's more likely to come off worse, not the car they crash into.
Theres only about three bikes on Britains roads yet they somehow manage to be involved in about a quarter of all accidents. Ok slightly exaggerated but you get my point and statistics have been that way since long before cars became safe and chunky. The percentage of bikers killed out of the total road death toll has always been higher than the percentage of bikers on the road in general. Riding a motorbike is naturally more dangerous than being in a car, thats just how it is.
But to answer the question about lights no i dont think they should go round with full beam on. Just dipped lights and a flourescent digustingly coloured helmet would probably prevent around half of the accidents as they'd stand out like a beacon.
|
|
I don't think fluorescents help with some complacent drivers. It used to be that Volvos were so uniquely safe, drivers were less worried about crashes, assuming that they would survive intact. With other makers "catching up" the Volvo assumption seems to have spread.
|
|
If you're a motorcyclist caught in the ever inceasing thickness of car blindspots, a fluorescent jacket isn't going to save you. If motorcycles had a sharp object, whch ativated outwards when it hit a car, motorists would make sure they were a little more alert. Still, if it's as a result of a blindspot, the car designer should go to court!
A well know car designer, whose name escapes me, was talking to the government about this very subject until he recently passed away.
N.B. I am not a motorcyclist.
|
|
I think crashing into a motorcycle in general would make quite a mess of your car!! If a flourescent jacket wont help you be seen how will a Boadicea accessory help you be seen? To make the roads safer you want to have motorcycle which can end up causing more damage in the case of an accident? Expect to see bike insurance skyrocket. How will the bike know when to deploy this? What if they lose control in the rain and crash into a bus stop of school children then the Boadicea's come out and severe their heads off?
Im sick of the argument constantly revolving around 'those damn complacent non-alert motorists!' when the fact is theres plenty of idiots on bikes who bring it on themselves. But its politically incorrect to admit that isnt it. I think the idea of complacent Volvo driver not looking for anything is nonsense, if you know how to drive properly it should be second nature to look where you're going, regardless of what car you're in.
Cars have always had blind spots, it may be true theres more of them now which is why cyclists/motorcyclists etc should take extra care and take that into account as well as the motorist double checking their surroundings, if only one of these two parties does this = crash.
The fact is you're never going to get car designers or manufacturers to backtrack and decide they will now make their cars less safe, that'd be a PR and business disaster and universally slammed by all bar the few nutters on the Guardian. Ultimately the motorist is the car manufacturers customer, so they focus the vehicles safety features with the aim of protecting their customer in a crash. If they were to say 'we value motorcyclists higher than you' that car firm will go out of business.
Edited by jamie745 on 26/09/2011 at 23:56
|
|
Poor visibilityy out of cars is inceasing as a gripe of car buyers. Rearch into best and worst offenders has been carried out. Some manufacturers are therefore aware of this issue, if not all.
If you're a motorist and you pull out into the path of another road user because of a blindspot, it's your fault, not the other party. If you can't see motorcyclists/cyclists/pedestrians you're more likely to hit them, or have them run into you because you've missed them.
If a motorcyclist slams into your door because you've missed it as a result of poor visibilty, you'll be more than sick.
|
|
All drivers need to be aware that every vehicle has its blind spots and that these will always be different.
|
|
I think ive mentioned before about the University study a couple of years ago between a new Corsa and an 80s Escort which discovered visibility out of the latter was significantly better than the modern Corsa. But of course should you crash into another car in the 80s Escort you're more likely to sustain serious injury than in the new car, so it goes in circles.
No parent would ever let their newly passed son/daughter buy an old rickety car with no airbags would they?
Edited by jamie745 on 27/09/2011 at 14:20
|
|
I would say that numpty motorcyclist outnumber numpty car drivers hence the higher death rate in ratio to car drivers. I used to motorcycle, RG500 & GS1000E and plenty of others too, but came to the conclusion some years ago that bikes are just dangerous on the road however careful you ride. In over 20 years never fell off one but had plenty of very close shaves especially communting 50 miles a aday on one !
I hate these idiot motorcyclist that squeeze down the outside of traffic and force their way in when it comes to a traffic island in the middle of the road, i had one do it couple of days ago when he overtook me when i was doing 60 but failed to see the traffic island comming up and had to stand on the brakes to allow him to weave in ! I was more worried about the damge to my car if his bike went down the side of my car rather then what he would do to himself !
one of our coach drivers had a motorcyclist years ago doing over 100 on a B road round a bend when the coach driver had stopped at a bus stop . hence to say the bike went through the boot and his torso ended up wrapped around the rear axle ! Idiot rider I'm afraid , cant balme anyone else !
in one year in the 70's I lost 9 friends to motorcycle accidents in 2 years and have to say that not one of them was a suprise !
So in essence yes cars do need to be aware but so do motorcyclists of speed ! and a car drivers blind spots
|
|
With the fact theres not many bikes on Britains roads yet they seem to be involved in all crashes cannot be co-incidental and mathematical logic would tell you theres no way its all cars blindspots fault. Ive been in 40 limits going more than 40 and had motorbikes absolutely cain past me, i expect to see them in the ditch at the next roundabout.
|
|
Ere!!
Me & the Missis run across (not literally you understand) European Bike week when travelling through Slovenia/ & Austria in early September, it seemed like 10's of thousands of Harleys.
We choose to avoid lake Faakerzee, when we established where they were based.
We could not however unfortunately persuade them to avoid the hairpin bends & mountain passes.
|
|
No parent would ever let their newly passed son/daughter buy an old rickety car with no airbags would they?
Maybe not, but I know someone who bought their daughter a car not as safe as was suggested to him, bacause the daughter was regularly involved in a sport which could kill her.
The designer campaigning against thicker pillars and blind spots was Spen King.
|
|
Car drivers cannot blame cars for blind spots. They can test drive before buying and avoid cars with poor visibility.
I beieve judging from many coments people buy cars without a test drive...
I always try reversing a car before I buy it.. and speed humps and parking and....
|
|
Blame the designers. They design the cars. Thick pillars are unnecessary.
I'm sure you're right about most people not test driving cars. I've known of some rejecting cars, as a result of thick C-pillars.
|
|
As indeed they should. Personally I wouldn't even accept a Honda Civic or Renault Megane as a hire car. I haven't sat in a new-shape Fiesta or Kia Sportage but from the outside both look as if rear visibility is dire.
There must be a lot of test drives taken which don't include reversing. A salesman on an accompanied drive is probably relieved to get back unscathed, and quickly offers to park the car rather than risk the punter punting it into another part of the stock.
|
|
Visibility from the front quarters of my car is pretty average, entire motorbikes can be hidden at a certain angle. Luckily the cars big enough that they tend to see it coming. Most cars have poor rear visibility though, i cant think of many cars which have good visibility which i actually like, safety is important but not if it means resorting to a Malaysian rotbox.
High windows is another recent trend, it looks great but entire children can go unseen behind the car, mind you what a child would be doing behind a reversing car i have no idea but some people are pretty stupid. Its interesting you mention the Fiesta Avant, very popular choice with driving instructors now and people are passing with them including the reverse round a corner bit so it cant be that bad.
I must admit i never tried reversing the Jag before i bought it, i'd already decided i wanted it and that wouldnt of put me off, its not too bad, being a saloon you can see lower than in a modern hatchback and im now confident i know where the end of the car is. All my point earlier was trying to say is that if we know new cars are hard to see out of, then everybody should know it and motorbikes/cyclists/pedestrians etc solely relying on you to see them and taking no responsibility for themselves could end up a dangerous and tragic game.
|
|
In a test of 183 vehicles each was awarded a maximum of 5 points for 180 degree forward vision. None was awarded a maximum score. Only two were awarded 4 points. These were the Citroen C4 Picasso and VW Golf.
“Manufacturers must ensure there is a good balance between crash safety and visibility,” Mr Case said. “In some vehicles tested, a pedestrian or cyclist as close as nine metres away and a vehicle 20 metres away couldn’t be seen by the driver because the design of the vehicle created a side blind spot.
“RACV urges manufacturers to review their car’s ratings in this study and create designs that combine vehicle safety, ergonomics and visibility.”
Mr Case said drivers had to be aware of their cars’ blind spots and should be prepared to move their head to look around them when necessary.
“It’s particularly important when drivers approach intersections, especially roundabout, to keep sight of other vehicles as you give way,” he said.
Edited by 475TBJ on 28/09/2011 at 21:41
|
|
Very interesting thanks for that. When im out walking i am very aware theres plenty of cars out there you cant see out of so i keep firmly out of cars way, as my mother and the green cross code man told me to do (as an aside does the GCC man still go into schools?) not that anyone should be stupid enough to stand in the road when traffic's coming but you know what people are like.
Out of interest was the Jaguar S-Type one of the 183 tested?
|
|
Unfortunately there are people who are not as aware as some here, regarding blindspots.
Sorry can't help you with GCC man and schools. Perhaps it is now a woman!
No, too late for the S-Type. XF/XK and Octavia just 2 points.
|
|
S-Type is probably similar as it is pretty chunky, oh well better hope nobody gets in the way!
Yes there are people who are unaware but people who think its sensible to walk in front of moving vehicles in general are people we can do without, natural selection. Cyclists who toodle along on the left like normal on the way up to lights then without looking behind tear off to the right, wrong side of the road to skip round the junction to avoid the red light (like i had yesterday) and it shocks me that i mightve actually been deemed responsible had i of hit him. What is this world coming to?
We should do our best to make people aware of this fact that they are not as visible to car drivers as they perhaps think and to just not risk it under any circumstances. Theres only so many directions you can look in at one time from within your car, anatomy doesnt alter to let eyes look in 8 directions at once just because you're in a car, people need to realise this. And driving what by the sounds of it are essentially postboxes doesnt make it easier for us.
What did this investigation show to be the best car(s) for visibility then?
|
|
Dear me jamie, you're not very observant tonight. ;) For someone so aware, you're not tonight. Seek and ye shall find.......... a couple of posts ago.
I like your postbox analogy. I think more like tanks!
|
|
I read the post, i apologise, to me it read like you were saying every car except the Picasso and Golf got 5 stars, so i thought the Golf and Picasso were bad, not good. I see what you mean now.
Well you still wouldnt find me in either of them, but surely this test is only relevant if they were to get hold of 183 typical popular cars from the 80s and examine them on the same grounds.
Is this a good argument for having a convertible?
|
|
No. The Mini convertible has been banned from driving test centres.
|
|
Poo rear r visibility!
Edited by madf on 29/09/2011 at 10:37
|
|
>> Poo rear r visibility!
I love the way that the 'r' of 'poor' has become misplaced, but the response still makes sense!
|
|
To get back to the original point, maybe if bikes didnt drive around with complete contempt for the other users of the road and for speed limits then they wouldnt die in such numbers.
|
|
Surely when the roof is down visibility must be perfect!
Yes sandy unfortunately theres so many idiot bikers out there and they stand out more than idiot motorists because they're on a bike that i imagine it'd be very hard for many to find sympathy with this issue. Most people will bluntly say 'their own fault for being on a bike' as in this country most of us regard the motorcycle as a segway into a coffin and anybody who rides one must be willing to take that risk. Just as astronauts got into the shuttle knowing they might not come back.
As ive said earlier you can be the most sensible, considerate motorcyclist in the country (and im sure theres plenty of them) you're still more likely to die than if you were in a car. An idiot motorist could have the same crash as an idiot biker and is more likely to survive, the biker generally ends up three miles from the crash, in a hedge. And thats been the case since year dot, possibly made slightly worse by postbox-cars and heavy traffic but when you're toodling along an NSL road at 55 and a bike comes steaming past you doing 4 times the speed of sound on a blind bend you just think 'well its their own fault they all die'
Ive got cars up to some irresponsible speeds on motorways and dual carriageways i'll admit but i'd never have the bottle to do 130+ on a bike as im sure we've all seen someone do at some stage. But bikers are like racing drivers, they dont have the 'what if..' sensible part of their subconscious. They're nutters.
|
|
For once I agree 100% with jamie
|
|
I must say I can't remember ever overtaking a motorbike. Today I was overtaken on a bend by a motorcyclist. By the time I got round the bend it was gone. Quite clearly travelling at an illegal speed. We need to keep an eye out for them at junctions 'cos they go so stupidly fast.
I see no motorcyclists dfending their actions here
|
I see no motorcyclists dfending their actions here
Well they cant as they're all in a ditch at the side of the M62
|
|
I hate to say if one overtook me and I saw it crashed further up the road, I'd drive on!
|
|
If they hadnt blocked the road or created some sort of fire then i would too.
|
If they hadnt blocked the road or created some sort of fire then i would too.
Yes, I was delayed in a huge jam alongside Loch Lomond while police and ambulances attended a biker crash about 7 years ago. As we eventually drove past the crash site it was horrendous - a bike embedded in the driver's side of a car, just the back wheel showing. I assume rider and driver were killed outright. It actually traumatised me and I wish I'd never seen it.
The suicidal riding mentioned in other posts is rife in my area, but seems to have declined in recent years, thank God. Not sure why, but the days of nutters overtaking against opposite traffic down the white lines seem to be over round here at least. Absolute scum in my opinion, as they seriously endanger all road users.
|
|
Just dug this up from last year www.bbc.co.uk/news/10454356
Half of fatalities happen on just 10% of roads and look at which roads they are, those are notorious 'bikers roads' if ever i saw any. The northern roads with hills and twisty bits are a firm favourite with bikers. And bikers like that dont complain that roads are unsafe, ive worked it out now its because its unsafe is why they do it. They do it for the thrill, for the buzz, they dont have the 'what if...' in their mind that most of us do, they think 'why not?' they probably know its dangerous and they wouldnt have it any other way.
Frankly if you're going to get on a deathtrap and ride at insane speeds for the thrill and fun of it, you're also signing up to the fact and must accept that each journey could well be your last. It goes hand in hand im afraid. But i dont think its these bikers who ever campaign for improvements in road safety, nor are they the ones who use their bike as a city commute tool where i would think having a motorbike is relatively safe.
|
|
Thats because they read some of the moronic posts that jamie puts on here and just wish to ignore his rather childish opinionated garbage
|
|
Mind you Jamie is essentially correct in that the bike riders are seeking a thrill.
Therefore they will push their speeds & risk taking up to what they percive to be an acceptably risky limit.
That is the source of the thrill.
That is the nature of the human animal.
I also drove like this occassionally as a young man.
|
|
If you want to ignore my opinion Expats then ignore it, why bother posting in response? Idiot.
|
|
Ponce jamie the t(h)urd, legend in his own lunch time. Look at me , look at me, I drive a jag you know so I am REAL important and your not.
Despite only being 27 and 3/4's, I know everything have driven everything and will give my opinion on everything and will ignore yours , 'cause I am right and you're not.
family motto....Its all about me.
AND if any of us forget that, then yes we are ALL idiots!
|
|
Ponce jamie the t(h)urd, legend in his own lunch time. Look at me , look at me, I drive a jag you know so I am REAL important and your not.
Despite only being 27 and 3/4's, I know everything have driven everything and will give my opinion on everything and will ignore yours , 'cause I am right and you're not.
family motto....Its all about me.
AND if any of us forget that, then yes we are ALL idiots!
|
|
Oh just go and walk under a Bus will you. Degrading a perfectly good thread which went well for 40 odd posts before you came and dumped a typical uneducated turd on it.
|
|
Before the mods lock down another fight between bikers and motorists, may I say that these disputes are better worked out here than on the road.
Personally I would endorse the 'Think bike' campaign because if motorists are thinking about road safety then that compensates for the fact that bikers often aren't.
|
Personally I would endorse the 'Think bike' campaign because if motorists are thinking about road safety then that compensates for the fact that bikers often aren't.
Perhaps but why should the motorist have to take responsibility for the biker? Why do we have to do extra to take care of them when as you've just said most bikers often dont. Surely we should be focusing on preventing reckless riding and its the bikers who need re-educating on road safety. What you've just said is lets let the bikers ride with disregard and we'll just put the responsibility onto the motorist to facilitate law breaking instead of deal with the real culprits.
Motorcyclists have driving licences they've done theory tests and practical tests, they know the law they know the rules and they also know just as much as we do about common sense and road safety there is no excuse for excusing them and absolving them of responsibility and saying 'the motorist can compensate'.
|
|
Your point is not lost on me - I was being ironic. ;-)
|
Still good to explain for the intelligence challenged out there. It is funny though, the think bike campaign.
We'll get the motorists to take all responsibility so bikes don't have to!
|
Personally I would endorse the 'Think bike' campaign because if motorists are thinking about road safety then that compensates for the fact that bikers often aren't.
I disagree with the above sentiment. It should read:
Personally I would endorse the 'Think bike' campaign because if motorists are thinking about road safety then that compensates for the fact that bikers often don't think - about anything.
|
|
be very careful when you amend Jamies posts as he is an expert on everything. At 27 and 3/4's he has been around and can state that ALL bikers are complete idiots and know nothing where as he knows everything. jamie, legend in his own lunchtime, knows everything and whatever YOU say....YOUR WRONG!
|
|
Oh go jump off a bridge you useless moron.
|
|
Whats the matter, lose your dummy Mr Expert!
Jamie. THE most castigated, disliked, warned, edited and just a plain old knowitall.
|
|
You do know that sitting there mouthing off about me with every single post makes you look like a four year old dont you.
|
|
Abso flippin lutly AND its not every post by the way, just ones where you spout of as Mr expert a b***** knowitall, despite having zero actual experience on the subject,(which of course you just must tell everyone as well). Sometimes perhaps your opinions should be kept to yourself rather than broadcasted ....out there. But when you do, as you do to almost every subject, you come across as the opiniated nerd that you appear to be, its all about me me me.
Just suck it up like a man......Just face it, your just disliked.
|
Just suck it up like a man......Just face it, your just disliked.
Oh do you know what; I'm weighing in on this one. I don't dislike Jamie; I just read his posts with the knowledge that most of them are very tongue in cheek. A forum is designed for opinion and discussion; the ancient Romans had them as places to put opinions forward and undertake constructive argument. This dull baiting accompanying many threads on this forum is getting irritating. It's not often I'll add my thoughts about it but I think it's warranted here.
It's also 'you're' not 'your' in that sentence.
|
I see no motorcyclists dfending their actions here
Same with Muslims, every single one of them can't drive either.
|
|
Can we have that feature by which you can set up a forum profile to hide posts by people which you'd rather not waste time reading?
|
Can we have that feature by which you can set up a forum profile to hide posts by people which you'd rather not waste time reading?
Ooohhhh, YES PLEASE!!!
Please, please, pretty please!!!
Oh what bliss that would be.
Trouble is, there'd be hardly any posts left to view, billy745
How 'tragic' that would be.
|
|
If we had a filter facility, I would love to know who would not filter...?
|
|
|
|
|
|
