e-petition against 2013 bike law changes

[AZZ3R]

but it should be for the rider/ examinor to decide if he or she is ready for a big bike.

Out of these last 4 pages this has made the most sense, why has noone else said this. I totally agree!

 

[Mikesmotorbike]

(the age of around Thatmanfromyorkshire's)

Ouch! :lol:.

Mike I agree to a point, but my dad drives fast & my mum has the same car (pointless I know but) she drives like a nun, both no claims & I'd much rather be sat in my dads car due to his driving ability. Again that's how it's supposed to be older the wiser (not always the case) but thats the saying.

I do understand and know the saying. I'd much rather be with someone that has the ability to drive at such speeds (as opposed to someone who wets themselves if a HGV passes them in the opposite lane (not saying that's what your mum does ) ) but it's still down to the ability of the driver. I'd imagine if you had a Ferrari and your two parents were exactly the same age you'd give the keys to you dad rather than you mum for his driving abilities rather than his age. I think the license system should be the same. Instead of just everyone on a 600cc they should have a build up so (bare with me) instead of doing the whole license on the same bike, try people on 250 - 1000cc and see how they do on all those categories and have it upto the rider or instructor to see exactly how they handle it (impossible I know) hope that made sence.

 

[Friz]

I suggest you read your post again.

This test change will kill young rider motorcycling in Britain. End of discussion. There's nothing that you can say to argue that without looking like an idiot. I'm sorry, but thats true.

Neither of those statements are fact.

1. Kill young rider motorcycling...
2. Nothing you can say...

Yet you use the words "that's true".

I'll say what is true:

Noone can know for definite what will happen if this comes in, I believe it'll encourage folk to get into motorcycling at a younger age rather than just waiting for 21 and DAS as it is now.

Unlike a lot of you on here, I've had the privilge to spend a lot of time with younger riders and Being one myself (and riding a 600cc 101bhp sports bike with not a scratch on it), I've had an extended opportunity to talk to them about this since I found out about it around June time last year.

I can tell you right now, I haven't met a single person who will be effected by it that wants it to come in.

Ok, so what I'm saying isn't 100% fact but its not just blind opinion either. It's researched observations made over a 7 month period. Not one of the people I've spoke to wants this change.

Now on another view, some of you will know my dad works in the motorbike industry. He's quite high up, apparently. He spends his days in bike shops and talking to big people in the biking world and all of them are terrified of these changes!
No one believes manufactures are going to start coming out with 400cc machines again. Everyone is predicting more loss of buisness, much worse than the massive loss already seen over the last few years, particularly since the last bike test change.


With regards to the parts of your post I haven't quoted, yeah you could not ride a bike for 5 years and then get on a zx6, but whose to say they're going to be unsafe on that bike? Especially since, if they did theyre test at 17 then waited these 5 years they would be like 22 amd old enough to do the das and jump straight on a zx6 regardless. They're expected at that age to understand what thyre doing, apparently.

I've seen people who get put off a bike jump in a car and never look back. I think we already loose a lot of potential riders through that, we'll only loose more this way.

 

[Chessecake94]

Lets put it another way, what wrong with the current system???

Not a lot, people still have to have a decent amount of training, its still a tiered licence of sorts. Someone thats want to ride like and idiot still will, whether it takes them 8 years to get a big bike or not.

 

[CurlyBlakey]

Lets put it another way, what wrong with the current system???

Not a lot, people still have to have a decent amount of training, its still a tiered licence of sorts. Someone thats want to ride like and idiot still will, whether it takes them 8 years to get a big bike or not.

If it ain't broke,

DON'T FIX IT!

 

[Chessecake94]

No one believes manufactures are going to start coming out with 400cc machines again. Everyone is predicting more loss of buisness, much worse than the massive loss already seen over the last few years, particularly since the last bike test change.

Exactly, we in the UK are a small percentage of bike manufacture's global market. They're not going to spend millions re-building the 400 market, just for the government to change the law again and leave them out of pocket.

 

[Friz]

Lets put it another way, what wrong with the current system???

Not a lot, people still have to have a decent amount of training, its still a tiered licence of sorts. Someone thats want to ride like and idiot still will, whether it takes them 8 years to get a big bike or not.

If it ain't broke,

DON'T FIX IT!

Hear hear.

 

[AZZ3R]

yeah you could not ride a bike for 5 years and then get on a zx6, but whose to say they're going to be unsafe on that bike? Especially since, if they did theyre test at 17 then waited these 5 years they would be like 22 amd old enough to do the das and jump straight on a zx6 regardless.

There not waiting 5years they would be riding. & where not saying you can't/ won't, but in them 5years if your telling me you haven't learnt the basics of biking then you shouldn't be biking.(perosnally) In them 5years you can gain so much more experiance than just waiting untill your 21 & doing your DAS. so I dissagree with you there.

The more years you've been riding the safer you'll be or be 'classed' as.


& Mike your right, I'd suggest if they where to be tested on gradually bigger bikes (yearly gaps) it would make more sense. Each year you move up a class. but this would be aimed at the younger riders, at a certian age you are restricted by power so untill you 21 you can only ride a 600 at say 70bhp in the mean time?

 

[Bikermole]

yeah you could not ride a bike for 5 years and then get on a zx6, but whose to say they're going to be unsafe on that bike? Especially since, if they did theyre test at 17 then waited these 5 years they would be like 22 amd old enough to do the das and jump straight on a zx6 regardless.

There not waiting 5years they would be riding. & where not saying you can't/ won't, but in them 5years if your telling me you haven't learnt the basics of biking then you shouldn't be biking.(perosnally) In them 5years you can gain so much more experiance than just waiting untill your 21 & doing your DAS. so I dissagree with you there.

The more years you've been riding the safer you'll be or be 'classed' as.


& Mike your right, I'd suggest if they where to be tested on gradually bigger bikes (yearly gaps) it would make more sense. Each year you move up a class. but this would be aimed at the younger riders, at a certian age you are restricted by power so untill you 21 you can only ride a 600 at say 70bhp in the mean time?

Which brings us back to having to constantly change bike putting young riders off!

But I'm with Chessecake, whats wrong with the current system!

 

[Friz]

I agree with you, the more years youre riding the safer you'll be.

I was making the point that Bloke said a rider who did their test at 17 and waited 5 years while not riding before jumping on a super bike would be unsafe. However, they'd be 22 by this point and would be able to do a das and jump on a zx6 or whatever and that is considered fine. Pretty much exactly the same.

 

[AZZ3R]

Okidoke I understand it now, I misread yours & didn't read your replys to Blokes.

 

[Friz]

Okidoke I understand it now, I misread yours & didn't read your replys to Blokes.

Its cool

Re reading my posts, the later ones had started to turn to gibberish anyway.

Tired + Phone keyboard + Acheing hands = blaghsdhgsd

 

[Bloke]

However a das (so trained on a high capacity machine) followed by 1 year of rest is not nearly as bad on the "wtf is a lifesaver again" side as 5 years, who's last experience was on a 125.

Which is partly what the new tests will avoid. People will receive training or be deemed capable of riding a bike of a certain category of power, rather than just some arbitrary time period has passed.

Sent from my GT-I9000 using Tapatalk

 

[Chessecake94]

However a das (so trained on a high capacity machine) followed by 1 year of rest is not nearly as bad on the "wtf is a lifesaver again" side as 5 years, who's last experience was on a 125.

Which is partly what the new tests will avoid. People will receive training or be deemed capable of riding a bike of a certain category of power, rather than just some arbitrary time period has passed.

Sent from my GT-I9000 using Tapatalk

Sorry but I didn't understand that??

 

[Bloke]

Right now, you pass a test on a 125.

Then according to the current system, time is the only thing that makes you capable of riding a higher capacity machine. Not experience or ability, just the passing of time.

Which is blatantly wrong.

If you've done nothing for 10 years then decide to hop on a motorbike you're not going to be nearly as aware of biking safety as the guy who's continued to ride through the period.

Under the current system, a person can pass a test on a 125. Do nothing on a bike, rock up to a dealership aged 50 and walk out with a superbike.

Under the new system you have a licence for the type of bike you've been trained to ride.

Person passes aged 17 on a 125, decides he doesn't really like bikes so never rides again until his mid life crisis and he rocks up to a dealership aged 50 when he finds out he can only ride a 125.

If he wants to ride a larger bike, he's got to pass the test.

This... Is a bloody good thing in my opinion.

Friz saying "but you can do a das and do the same thing" is missing the point.

If someone does a DAS he had been trained and assessed to be safe riding that type of machine.

There has to be a point at which a line must be drawn and I think the new test has the right balance.

People qualify for the type of bike they're trained on, the final stage of which is obviously unlimited.

The whole 17-19-24 is obviously just based on crash statistics or some other metric and I agree it's as bad as the current 2 years and ride anything system that's in place right now.

However it's the graded testing in the form they have proposed, that I wholeheartedly approve.


Sent from my GT-I9000 using Tapatalk

 

[Chessecake94]

Then what would be wrong with just introducing a re-test of sorts if you've been off a bike more than 5 years. As far as breaking you in gently if your a new rider, the current system is perfect. 50cc, 125, 33bhp, any size.

 

[Bloke]

There'd be nothing wrong with it aside from people who ridden for 20 years, take a 5 year break and realise their licence is invalid. Can't please everyone and I think the new test gets it right.

It also is perfect for new riders.

50-125-45bhp-any

Sent from my GT-I9000 using Tapatalk

 

[Friz]

It's 45bhp and 400cc (or about that, can't remember exact).

Perfect, apart from the aditional cost, wait and extra tests.

 

[carlsant1]

I did a video to say my views... dont fancy getting involved in all this on here lol.
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k5jASCJbsYk[/youtube]

 

[sstimmyy]

I know im a bit late jumping into this but I am opposed to the changes for many of the reasons stated above! I think Carsant1s latest vlog outlines my main feelings against it in that it is rediculous that age is used to judge sombodies responsibility on a road. I bought a sporty 125 as my first bike because I feel safer knowing I have slightly more power to pull away from traffic and stay at the speed limits but i am still on a CBT which means i wont be able to ride anyhting more than 33bhp for at least 2 years which seems long enough to me, i dont want to be wasting money on a 400 after that when currently i could be buying a sporty 600 as soon as i've done my test and simply having it restricted for 2 years. I wont because i cant afford the insurance... but i could leagally get one and I see no justifiable reason as to why i shouldnt be allowed!

Insurance seems to me like the main restriction at present although i think the way prices are calculated it stupid.
I could ride 1000 miles or 10,000 miles in a year but will still be treated the same in terms of experience. Insurance will actually be more expensive for the follwing year with an increased milage due to the increased exposure to threats... it doesnt take into account that you are likely to have 10 times the experience in dealing with threats and actually making you less susceptible.
I could do a course and get my CBT done and pass my test in a few days, then pack it in for 2 years. Viola! <100miles experience and onto a CBR600RR paying only slightly more for insurance due to a lack of no-claims bonus.

I'm not from a wealthy familly but the wealthy area i live in also causes my insurance to be a triple figure sum higher than a clone of me living in a poorer area... my bike is kept in a double locked (on each door!) detached brick garage with an alarm fitted to both the garage and bike.

As some of you may know ive had rather a lot of back luck with my bike in the last couple of months originating from breaking the 'Dont fix it if i aint broke' rule... An Ex Moto GP chief engineer is currently helping me get things sorted. He stopped racing a number of years ago and has come of numerous times travelling well over 100mph and just had to brush himself down and smoke a fag. His worst accident was cuased by a van that indicated the wrong way and accelerated into him, clipped the tail of his bike and sent him skidding accros the tarmac... He'd have been fine if the van hadnt then run him over which broke his left leg in 7 places. It took him six years to recover and he still can feel his foot, 2 years spent just leaning how to walk again! Lost his Job, House and everything else and ended up having to live with his sister because the van driver lied... after 6 years the insurance company finally payed up and he walked away with just over £10,000 in compensation after tax and legal fees. Not even enough to buy back his bike...

This guy was travelling at 25mph. A speed easilly accieved by even 50cc scooters and i think many accidents happen like this. This I why I think it's madness introdcing these rules because as we all know, more often than not it's not the bikers fault! In this situation the only chance my mate had was to accelerate away but he didnt make it in time, at least a bigger bike gave him that option!


Sorry if bit's dont make sence but i've been unwell these last couple of day and really just trying to take my mind off my bloked sinuses!