High horsepower bikes does not equal "more dangerous"

[Aluisious]

300 riders in 4 years with zero injuries on the street is a pretty bombproof record.

 

[Aluisious]

That's one... 267,234 members left to go...

Dude...when it comes to the risk of fast bikes, it's all "oooooh the rider must be trained it's all about rider safety can't blame the bike."

But when it comes to the benefits it's "well even if you're not paying attention and get into a bad spot the awesome power can bail you out."

No. I do not accept the double standard. Stop trying to justify having a literbike for any reason other than fun/material desire. It is not safer.

 

[gixxerboy55]

I think this is where a part of the disconnect in this thread comes from. The environment of the street compared to the track introduces extra variables which can confound identifying the "truth"

On the street, when you take a cross section of riders, you get a far flatter bell curve in regard to risk, because there are a greater number of people at the extremes on bikes, who shouldn't be on them (i.e. no training at all, operating from false assumptions, no assumptions etc)

At the track you typically have a more competent group in control conditions (fewer flyers)

On a high horsepower sportbike, (this is my opinion) two people will make throttle mistakes on exit leading to a low or highside 1. The clueless who whack the throttle on exit not knowing any better, and 2. The skilled, who overextend the traction limits of the rear tire thru power by riding close to the edge of the bike's performance.

But taking those groups out of the equation, we are left with a LARGE group of riders who repsect the bikes "meanness", and ride rationally and sensibly on the street. If they crash on the street for loss of rear tire traction, it's because of an anomaly in the road surface. Oil, fluids, leaves, sand, potholes. Something that a Ninja 250 would find as debilitating to control as a 180hp ZX-10r.

I've ridden both my wife's Monster (70hp) and my ZX-10r (150+hp) in the hills. THe only time I've ever blown a double yellow line because of excessive speed entering the corner was on the Monster.

Because the results of the throttle being "whacked" on exit is different between low and hi horsepower bikes doesn't mean you'll see more literbikes on the ground compared to 600, even after you adjust for differences in population of bikes.

Again, I only believe this to be true so you can only tell me I am wrong, not that what you might believe is what is the absolute truth.

I realize that the circulation of this information in a public forum infers responsibility, which I think is covered by the extensive references to TRAINING. In my mind, sportbikes are like guns, and like guns, it takes a whole series of errors in a row to result in tragedy wether we're talking 9mm or 44 magnum. The power of the weapon is only one factor, and perhaps not even close to the MAIN one.

p.s. I am NOT justifying my literbike! I couldn't care less. I actually bought it to piss off my brothers and sister. I would by another tomorrow if I didn't know my wife would be riding it. :|

Stefan

[/personalopinion]

Good post Stefan. What happened to Mr. Code, i hope i didn't scare him off. We had Mr. Code speak at one of our meeting, i will say he was one of the most interesting speakers we had.

 

[littlebeast]

It was more a statement of ground pressure. Tanks are weighty and yet they cross sand and mud with relative ease. It's mainly because the tread is a HUGE surface area on the ground. Your pickup has four contact patches that probably equate to about a square foot of surface area. A tank as dozens of square feet to support its bulk so pressure per square inch for the 60 ton tank is probably less than your 2 ton pickup. That's why you might get bogged down in soft sand if you came to a standstill but a tank would just get up and go

Stefan

not trying to be argumentative - but soft sand was actually the first time i noticed the toy's skills. i thought i was screwed. the little puppy just popped to the surface and skipped across. i laughed like a school girl.

 

[Feanor]

Dude...when it comes to the risk of fast bikes, it's all "oooooh the rider must be trained it's all about rider safety can't blame the bike."

But when it comes to the benefits it's "well even if you're not paying attention and get into a bad spot the awesome power can bail you out."

No. I do not accept the double standard. Stop trying to justify having a literbike for any reason other than fun/material desire. It is not safer.

Ugh... once again, I am not justifying my bike. I got it because it is LESS safe. On this we agree, but because it is LESS safe (by some definition) doesn't mean it ends up getting ultimately used that way in the world. This is what I am trying to say, and I think Mr. Code as well.

 

[Burning1]

Stefan, let's back up for a second...

Are we talking about experienced riders who have controlled their impulses to test the limits on the street? If so, I think you make an incredibly valid point.

I often argue that it's over-confidence that tends to get riders into the most trouble. It would not be a great stretch to imagine that a rider might respect the power and weight of a literbike more than he or she would respect the risks of riding a 600. Certainly I would feel more confident cornering aggressively on the smaller bike.

I would argue though that a newer rider who is still finding the limits is at greater risk on the faster motorcycle. But, beyond that, I would tend to group the 600s and 1000s together as far as risk when ridden by a moderately experienced motorcycle. Both are incredibly capable on the street, and both are capable of getting a rider into deep trouble before showing signs that something is amiss.

When I ride my brothers old Ninja 250 around, the head wobbles, the brakes skitter across the ground, and I really have to work at planning my passes. The risk of going too hot into a corner is lessened because of how much damn work it takes to get the bike to those speeds. I'm constantly reminded that the bike has it's limits, but when I exceed those limits I've found it's much easier to maintain control of the bike, and to recover. I respect that bike, and I've never gotten into a risky situation that I couldn't see before hand.

 

[gixxerboy55]

Maybe just take a look at the last paragraph again.

Over the past 4 years of this training, as it stands right now, the over 300 riders who went through this program have all managed to not only stay alive but they also had NO severe injuries. These were all street riders. This is verifiable information. It is extremely difficult to argue with or tamper with a 0 statistic.

Keith

Sorry Mr. Code this really shows how much of a differance good training can affect the outcome, when it comes to riding motorcycles.

 

[duh_ave]

The fact is most riders start out on a 600, and for a lot thats as far as they get. The ones that get up the nerve and have the money to move up to a litre bike, have more riding time and are better riders, in a nutshell litre bike riders are more muture

or they may go down to smaller bikes and continue to develope their skill sets.
It's not about what bike your on, it's about you.

I think many people may be intimidated by a liter bike and hence maybe take it easier, but most people can't really get a small bike going fast and maintain it either.

 

[Aluisious]

Ugh... once again, I am not justifying my bike. I got it because it is LESS safe. On this we agree, but because it is LESS safe (by some definition) doesn't mean it ends up getting ultimately used that way in the world. This is what I am trying to say, and I think Mr. Code as well.

Not YOUR bike, but this whole thread is about high power bikes not being more dangerous. They are more dangerous. Whether they are USED that way isn't a function of the bikes.

My handgun is more dangerous than a pizza, but I've come closer to dying while choking on a pizza than I have while using my gun.

I'm not going to go make a thread about how handguns aren't more dangerous than pizzas as a result.

 

[Feanor]

not trying to be argumentative - but soft sand was actually the first time i noticed the toy's skills. i thought i was screwed. the little puppy just popped to the surface and skipped across. i laughed like a school girl.

Oh, I'm sure it scooted along as you say It sounds like a good littlebeast (no pun intended ) But you DEFINITELY see your share of vehicles stuck in the sand at Pismo when I used to go there all the time to ride. It was funny, and lucrative too! Once I made $100 in one hour pulling people out of the sand, they just kept giving me money even though I refused


Stefan

 

[Feanor]

Not YOUR bike, but this whole thread is about high power bikes not being more dangerous. They are more dangerous. Whether they are USED that way isn't a function of the bikes.

My handgun is more dangerous than a pizza, but I've come closer to dying while choking on a pizza than I have while using my gun.

I'm not going to go make a thread about how handguns aren't more dangerous than pizzas as a result.

That's because you don't eat handguns. We're not that far off in our thinking, you just believe that I'm an exception, and I believe that I'm actually closer to the mean. The mechanics and foundation of our arguments are essentially the same.

Stefan

 

[Aluisious]

or they may go down to smaller bikes and continue to develope their skill sets.
It's not about what bike your on, it's about you.

I think many people may be intimidated by a liter bike and hence maybe take it easier, but most people can't really get a small bike going fast and maintain it either.

This is why GaryJ is twenty times more awesome than someone going the same speed as him on a literbike.

I'll give mad props to the fast guy in a dumpy car or a small bike every time.

 

[corndog]

The problem I have is that the core of this thinking relies on statistics, and we all know how you can find any statistic to support your position. I like motorcycles, and dislike idiot riders, so I will side with your reported statistics Stefan.

 

[Aluisious]

That's because you don't eat handguns. We're not that far off in our thinking, you just believe that I'm an exception, and I believe that I'm actually closer to the mean. The mechanics and foundation of our arguments are essentially the same.

Stefan

Stefan, if I ever happen to bump into you (and you're not riding), remind me to buy you a beer.

Difficult bastid

 

[littlebeast]

Oh, I'm sure it scooted along as you say It sounds like a good littlebeast (no pun intended ) But you DEFINITELY see your share of vehicles stuck in the sand at Pismo when I used to go there all the time to ride. It was funny, and lucrative too! Once I made $100 in one hour pulling people out of the sand, they just kept giving me money even though I refused


Stefan

if it's pismo we're talking about (the particular experience i referred to was moss landing), then the sand would be powdered sugar, the toy would be a dune buggy - and the argument for light power would be even more persuasive.

 

[Feanor]

Stefan, if I ever happen to bump into you (and you're not riding), remind me to buy you a beer.

Difficult bastid

Ok, deal, but next round is on me! and mine has to be wine because I don't drink beer.

 

[Lovedoc]

Horsepower is virtually irrelevant on the street, most 30 hp bikes will handily exceed the speed limit. Torque is lovely on the street, yes you can easily leave a bad situation behind, no downshift needed. Lots of relatively inexpensive bikes provide plenty of of escape power, AND offer other street benefits, like improved low speed handling, visibility, luggage and repairability. So when we pretend the liter bikes actually are a practical street machine we're saying we watch porn because we love the cinematography.

MANY riders probably can ride a 'Busa, or liter bike or 600 and never crash. A substantial minority, those with poor impulse control, need for speed whatever, are going to push those bikes WAY beyond their skill level. They will loop them, run from police, run wide, and head-on a minivan full of babies. I'm glad they got a chance to read this thread, I just love posting in thosE RIP/get well soon threads. Like the one we put up for you Feanor, 50+ pages IIRC. Dont recall you posting much on them tho, prove me wrong, plz. Any way SHAME on YOU feanor.

Mr Code, will you be changing the recommendation I have heard you make in the CSS classroom, and read on this forum, that a 600 is the best trackbike for a track newb?

 

[Yody]

People who go to track schools and the like are going there to learn. A large majority of people who buy 1000 liter bikes are squids who aren't really into learning they'd like to be a great rider but lets be real here, most of them aren't. Track riders make up a small percentage of all the street riders out there. The problem is of the mentality that translates from cars. Buy the biggest most badass most powerful vehicle. Only thing is that doesn't work on a motorcycle so well. How many videos have you seen from somebody on a sportibke and tries to show off in front of the camera while taking off and "goosing" the throttle only to highside themselves. I've seen it more than once.

We're talking a liter bike in the hands of your average Joe Schmoe. Go to Socal or the Valley, or Florida etc etc and see what kind of riders you see around. Sorry its not the guys with the full piece suit on, with their balls of the feet on the pegs....ready to ride their bike the way they should be. Its the average person who wants the ultimate machine. There are enthusiasts and able minded people out there but being realistic, they're a small minority.

Would you say that a dodge viper does not equal more dangerous than a Honda Accord? There's a reason why insurance rates are higher on faster cars and bikes, and Insurance companies do a lot more in depth surveys than whats been highlighted here.

This sounds like another case of Feanor trying to rationalize his choice of bike IMO

 

[MackeyStingray]

it's simple really. the potential for more shit to go wrong is there on a liter sportbike. regardless how you rationalize it w reports and stats, the potential is there.

 

[aciurczak]

Weight isn't as much of a limiting factor as you would think. If it were, we could expect the stopping distance delta between motorcycles, cars, and SUVs to be much greater than it currently is.

A friend of mine used to drive a bus. He could throw all the passengers through the front windshield if he set his mind to it.

I'm not sure I get your point, what you quoted of mine was pretty much saying exactly what you were saying; the effect of the weight difference on stopping distances of different motorcycles was less than many expect. Heavy cruiser, light sportbike, etc.

But every bit of weight affects just about every performance measure, including stopping performance. That same bus you describe could do about 3 of those emergency stops in a row before its brake pads would be on fire, the rotors would be beyond warped, and the hydraulic lines were at risk of destroying themselves. Because stopping (or starting, or turning) that much weight takes that much more energy. F=MA. We're never going to get around that one. The more M, the more F you need to get the same A. No matter which vector of A you're talking about. It's why there are minimum weight limits in racing. If it didn't matter, why would we need them?

That's what makes this so unintuitive, as it seems like the heavier bike would take more time to stop, but there are other factors at play that are more important within these limited parameters. That said, do a panic stop from 100 mph to 0 mph 10 times in a row, first on a 2008 sportbike, and then on even the most modern cruiser, and the brakes will be done on the cruiser. The braking force required to stop a heavier bike (or car, or truck, or "insert moving body here"), is always going to be more than a lighter bike (or car, or truck, you get my point).