Safe Speed Forums

The campaign for genuine road safety
It is currently Sat Sep 21, 2019 06:55

All times are UTC [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 24 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Thu Mar 29, 2007 04:08 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2004 06:46
Posts: 16903
Location: Safe Speed
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/6505423.stm

Call for motorbike speed limiters

MPs have urged the government to carry out a study into the possibility of fitting speed limiters to motorbikes.

The House of Commons Transport Committee said accident rates are far too high and radical action is needed.

The report on government motorcycling strategy also said motorbikes were too polluting and that illegal use of mini motos was a problem.

The committee called on ministers to support the development of cleaner motorbikes to reduce pollution.

'Sensible debate'

The report said: "We recommend that the government commission...research on the viability of introducing speed limiters on motorcycles in order to stimulate a sensible debate of the options."

Cutting pollution was another argument for reducing the maximum power and speed of bikes, the MPs said.

The report noted that there was a massive increase in numbers of Motorcycles for Use on Private Property (MUPP).

The market was about 7,000 new bikes a year of this type in 2001, but an estimated 170,000 were imported to the UK in 2005.

There have been at least seven deaths involving mini motos since mid-2004, five of which were children under the age of 15.

Mini moto danger

The police have the power to seize mini motos being driven illegally off or on the road, or in an anti-social way.

The committee said police "blitzes" on the vehicles were effective short-term, but the long-term results were not so conclusive.

"We recommend that the government undertake a review of enforcement against mini motos to gauge whether police blitzes work to reduce anti-social behaviour in the longer term," said the report.

The MPs were concerned that the bikes were being bought by parents for their children "without understanding that they can be dangerous".

They concluded: "If the problem persists, the government should make the case to the EU trade commissioner to restrict the imports of these goods if they are of a particularly low standard, as the (motorcycle) industry appears to think is the case."

***

Perhaps they thnk you can limit the speed of motorbikes to below a deadly level. Someone needs to remind them that 30mph is a deadly speed... Perhaps I will.

_________________
Paul Smith
Our scrap speed cameras petition got over 28,000 sigs
The Safe Speed campaign demands a return to intelligent road safety


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Mar 29, 2007 08:32 
Offline
User
User avatar

Joined: Sat Apr 23, 2005 08:22
Posts: 2618
They were talking about this on Breakfast this morning. They had Ian Munch (MAG) on saying what a load of cobblers it is. Interestingly, he said that since bike use in London has increased due to the congestion charge, bike accident rates have actually FALLEN due to increased awareness.

As for pollution, what a load of b*llocks. Where else can you get a vehicle that develops about 200 bhp/tonne and returns 53mpg?

I think its time to join MAG...

_________________
Science won over religion when they started installing lightning rods on churches.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Mar 29, 2007 09:08 
Offline
Gold Member
Gold Member

Joined: Tue Nov 28, 2006 15:27
Posts: 683
Location: New Forest
Yet again, people with influence display utter ignorance of their subject. How on earth can a speed limiter make any difference to the number of motorbike casualties?
I really despair.

If they were even remotely serious or aware, why not consider government assisted Track School sessions. That is a brilliant way to teach people how to handle their bike. Corners are the problem – not straight-line speed.

_________________
It's tricky doing nothing - you never know when you're finished


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Mar 29, 2007 09:38 
Offline
User

Joined: Thu Feb 08, 2007 11:46
Posts: 125
There's a fair few issues all lumped in together there.

Mini motos would appear to be an issue that may need action to deal with. The article does say that Police have the power to seize them if not being used properly so I don't see what could be useful over and above taking them away without harming legitimate users. It is pretty hard to legislate against stupidity.

As for the speed limiting, and pollution by motorcycles in general..... utter, utter bollocks. :roll:

Mike.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Mar 29, 2007 09:54 
Offline
Gold Member
Gold Member

Joined: Thu Nov 09, 2006 14:06
Posts: 3654
Location: Oxfordshire
If my riding style is anywhere near the norm, then limiters on bikes would kill people, fact!

One of the most important self-preservation tools available to a biker is the ability to not be there, dropping the wrist and escaping from a sticky situation quick-smart. Take that ability away and SMIDSYs will go through the roof, I guarantee it.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Mar 29, 2007 11:22 
Offline
Member
Member
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2004 09:16
Posts: 3655
I suspect tha the majority of fatal accidents ocure below 70 miles per hour.....which is the minimum you could limit a bike to for motorway riding.

I wonder how many accidents there are on mopeds (limited to 30) or 125s which can just about get to 65 with a following wind.

We need to see more data and less prejudice......some hope of that!

Motorcycling is always a favorite for MPs wanting to make a name for themselves...usualy the name is TWAT.

What you will get is the same as happens with scooters. An underground industry emerges in de-restricition equipment.

Quote:
The report on government motorcycling strategy also said motorbikes were too polluting and that illegal use of mini motos was a problem.


Compared to what!.....most bikes do between 50 and 100 miles per gallon. That would make them VED exempt if they were a car.


As a foot note I recently de-restricted a Monkey Bike engine. Cost me £10 for a new CDI unit and a minor exhaust mod. The fuel consumption improved dramaticaly because it was not retarding the ignition and choking the exhaust to cut power. Speed limiting big bikes in the same way will cause exhaust emissions to increase at the limited speed.

_________________
Speed camera policy Kills


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Mar 29, 2007 11:38 
Offline
Gold Member
Gold Member

Joined: Tue Nov 28, 2006 15:27
Posts: 683
Location: New Forest
Gizmo wrote:
I wonder how many accidents there are on mopeds (limited to 30) or 125s which can just about get to 65 with a following wind.


For 2005, total casualties for bikes under 125cc = 11,485 ; bikes over 500cc = 10,841

_________________
It's tricky doing nothing - you never know when you're finished


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Mar 29, 2007 11:45 
Offline
Life Member
Life Member
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 22, 2006 13:54
Posts: 1711
Location: NW Kent
Sixy_the_red wrote:
Where else can you get a vehicle that develops about 200 bhp/tonne and returns 53mpg?


Ahh, but they are talking about the new improved safety bikes with side impact bars, roll over cage, airbags, extended crumple zones and stabilisers. With that lot you will be lucky to get 100bhp/tonne and 30mpg.

You might get an LSIS to match that but then it would not have much crash protection either. Though generally 300bhp/tonne and 40+mpg is preferred.

_________________
Driving fast is for a particular time and place, I can do it I just only do it occasionally because I am a gentleman.
- James May


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Mar 29, 2007 11:54 
Offline
Member
Member
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2004 09:16
Posts: 3655
Grumpy Old Biker wrote:
For 2005, total casualties for bikes under 125cc = 11,485 ; bikes over 500cc = 10,841


So the greatest number of accidents are with bikes that

a:- already cannot achieve NSL on dual carriagways

b:- are already restricted in some way or another (either power or speed).

so remind me..what was the argument "for" again.

_________________
Speed camera policy Kills


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Mar 29, 2007 11:59 
Offline
User

Joined: Tue Dec 21, 2004 21:19
Posts: 1059
If you take into consideration the hydrocarbon and NOx pollutants then bikes are far worse than cars, and it's these compounds that are hazardous in terms of air quality. CO2 is largely irrelevant here.

If you've ever sat behind a bike without a catalysed exhaust, you can smell what I'm talking about!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Mar 29, 2007 12:21 
Offline
User
User avatar

Joined: Sat Apr 23, 2005 08:22
Posts: 2618
Yes, and it smells GOOD! *Ehem...*

I wonder how much of the concern is actually down to 2 strokes...?

_________________
Science won over religion when they started installing lightning rods on churches.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Mar 29, 2007 13:18 
Offline
Gold Member
Gold Member

Joined: Tue Nov 28, 2006 15:27
Posts: 683
Location: New Forest
Gizmo wrote:
Grumpy Old Biker wrote:
For 2005, total casualties for bikes under 125cc = 11,485 ; bikes over 500cc = 10,841


So the greatest number of accidents are with bikes that

a:- already cannot achieve NSL on dual carriagways

b:- are already restricted in some way or another (either power or speed).

so remind me..what was the argument "for" again.


Yeah, but it's the killed figure which ain't so good

<125cc = 84
>500cc = 410

_________________
It's tricky doing nothing - you never know when you're finished


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Mar 29, 2007 13:32 
Offline
Member
Member
User avatar

Joined: Tue Nov 29, 2005 22:47
Posts: 1511
Location: West Midlands
Grumpy Old Biker wrote:
Yeah, but it's the killed figure which ain't so good

<125cc = 84
>500cc = 410

And do we know the ratio of whether the biker was at fault, location etc?

_________________
Pecunia Prius Equitas et Salus


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Mar 29, 2007 14:03 
Offline
Gold Member
Gold Member

Joined: Tue Nov 28, 2006 15:27
Posts: 683
Location: New Forest
BottyBurp wrote:
Grumpy Old Biker wrote:
Yeah, but it's the killed figure which ain't so good

<125cc = 84
>500cc = 410

And do we know the ratio of whether the biker was at fault, location etc?


Allocation of fault is not something I can find........but we do know the location in the sense of: type of road, day of week and time of day. We also know the age of the rider.

Loads of interesting stuff.

_________________
It's tricky doing nothing - you never know when you're finished


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Mar 29, 2007 14:49 
Offline
Member
Member
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2004 09:16
Posts: 3655
Also <125 are mainly for city commuting (although I did do a 400 mile ride on a 125 a few years ago) where average speeds are probably less than 30. I expect that bigger bikes are used more on out of town roads. I would still like to know how many accidents are as a result of speeds over the NSL and how many are due to other road users, road condition or rider error (taking a turn too fast).

Raw statistics mean nothing.

Sixy_the_red wrote:
Yes, and it smells GOOD! *Ehem...*


Yep..I am with you on that one. Beats the rotten egg smell you get from a cold cat.

_________________
Speed camera policy Kills


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Mar 29, 2007 15:36 
Offline
Member
Member
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2004 09:16
Posts: 3655
http://uk.news.yahoo.com/29032007/325/motorcycle-top-speeds-capped.html

Quote:
Giving evidence to the committee, transport author Stephen Plowden said he could not see why anyone needed a bike with a top speed of more than 65 mph.


This must be a guy that has NEVER EVER ridden a bike. Otherwise he would not be such a wanker.

oooh hold on here is the tosser again..
http://www.brake.org.uk/index.php?p=847
Quote:
• Cars are accelerating faster. 0 to 60 mph in 25 seconds is all that is needed


The bottom line is that if all new bikes were restricted to 65 I would never ever buy another new bike. With what is left of my riding life there will never be a shortage of existing bikes that can go faster, And I will always own one. Our kids will have to grow up in this super sterile world that will attempt to protect them from the act of living its self. They will be forced to tiptoe through life only to arrive tediously but safely at death.

_________________
Speed camera policy Kills


Last edited by Gizmo on Thu Mar 29, 2007 15:47, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Mar 29, 2007 15:45 
Offline
Gold Member
Gold Member

Joined: Tue Nov 28, 2006 15:27
Posts: 683
Location: New Forest
Gizmo wrote:
Also <125 are mainly for city commuting (although I did do a 400 mile ride on a 125 a few years ago) where average speeds are probably less than 30. I expect that bigger bikes are used more on out of town roads. I would still like to know how many accidents are as a result of speeds over the NSL and how many are due to other road users, road condition or rider error (taking a turn too fast).


We can make many assumptions, and the stats become a little less helpful here. What we do know is:

Bikes < 50cc : 65% of killed riders occur in built up areas
Bikes > 50cc : 42% of killed riders occur in built up areas

Also, 64% of total mileage travelled by all motorcycles is on minor roads. Seeing as we travel much faster on country roads I would think that motorcycles spend more time in towns, but a huge amount of those must be the scooter mob.

Interestingly, only 3% of motorcyclist deaths happen on motorways; It’s 6.4% of car driver deaths.

It’s a commonly held belief that the big killer on bikes is the 30ish year old male, on a sports bike, on a rural A road, who loses control with nobody else involved. But I don’t know how true that is.

_________________
It's tricky doing nothing - you never know when you're finished


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Mar 29, 2007 16:44 
Offline
Member
Member

Joined: Thu Jun 23, 2005 02:50
Posts: 2868
Location: Dorset
Last week a boy I know was hit by a motorbike of some kind. I have read that it was probably doing somewhere around 15mph. As far as I know he is still in intensive care. What bloody good would a speed limiter do?

_________________
Andrew.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Mar 29, 2007 17:00 
Offline
Life Member
Life Member
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 22, 2006 13:54
Posts: 1711
Location: NW Kent
Gizmo wrote:
http://uk.news.yahoo.com/29032007/325/motorcycle-top-speeds-capped.html

Quote:
Giving evidence to the committee, transport author Stephen Plowden said he could not see why anyone needed a bike with a top speed of more than 65 mph.


This must be a guy that has NEVER EVER ridden a bike. Otherwise he would not be such a wanker.

oooh hold on here is the tosser again..
http://www.brake.org.uk/index.php?p=847
Quote:
• Cars are accelerating faster. 0 to 60 mph in 25 seconds is all that is needed




My learner bike, Suzi GP100, would do about 75mph down hill with a tail wind, on the flat it would do about 65mph in fourth and when put in fifth would gradually slow down to 55 over a mile when I would drop it back into fourth and thrash it back up to the redline. I regularly got less than 50mpg on a run and going on dual carriageways could be pretty scary. My FZ750 would get the same fuel consumption cruising at 100mph and 55-60mpg at 70mph. You could maybe get away with a top speed of 100mph but 65mph is just stupid.

0-60 in 25s is also daft, your car would be left standing by cyclists up to 30mph. I also doubt the fuel consumption and engine life would be very good as it would spend most of its life with the throttle nailed to the floor. Drivers would avoid slowing down at all costs making the roads more dangerous.

I wonder if this guy leaves the plastic wrapping on his furniture?

Is it just me or does not all this targeting of what are basically small groups of people, dare I say minorities, by the PC mob smack of discrimination? Motorcycling could be said to be a lifestyle choice much like travelling or religion yet attacking it is somehow OK whereas slaughtering animals in contravention of animal cruelty laws cannot be touched.

_________________
Driving fast is for a particular time and place, I can do it I just only do it occasionally because I am a gentleman.
- James May


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Mar 29, 2007 17:07 
Offline
Member
Member
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2004 09:16
Posts: 3655
toltec wrote:
Motorcycling could be said to be a lifestyle choice


Not according to the lib "Dims"

http://www.greenlibdems.org.uk/articles/30.html

Quote:
Unless we curb our enthusiasm for motorbikes we will end up undermining attempts to attract car drivers to more sustainable alternatives. Increasing the attractiveness of PTW use would directly weaken attempts to encourage cycling and walking as the danger and intimidation posed to pedestrians increases. And in the worst case scenario we could end up with people switching from public transport, cycling and walking back to motorised personal travel :o .


Remember that come election time... :wink:

_________________
Speed camera policy Kills


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 24 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
[ Time : 0.705s | 13 Queries | GZIP : Off ]