corradoboy

Read in a newspaper over the weekend about bikers accounting for just 4% of road users, but 22% of accidents involving fatalities and serious injuries.
Seems strange then that the ACPO encourage the use of speed cameras which are incapable of enforcing the law for this dangerous community. They must have many hundreds of photos from Truvelo and SPECS cameras showing speeding bikers giving the finger.
These days a modern car must have seatbelts, airbags, crumple zones, anti submarine seats, laminated glass and side impact beams. Bikes have, er... oh yeah, a bucket on your head and two thumbs to stop you in an emergency.
I suppose the fact that they only make up 4% of road users limits the financial gains available. Still, at least they're (well, most) taxed, licensed and insured. Unlike those bloody cyclists and horse riders.

TonyBurns

iTrader: (3)

I think some of it is down to these "born again" bikers, who after 20years get back on a 600cc+ bike thinking it wont be a problem as they use to ride bigger in their day, then killing themselves as they have got a little more power than the old bikes had!
Then you have to look at those bikers injured due to diesel spills, this would account for quite a few (bloody trucks again!) but you should find most bikers are not too bad (unless they also count those muppets on mopeds who shouldnt be on the road at all!)

Tony

Jza

Just remember that of those 22% - the majority (and im talking 75% +) relate to incidents at junctions where some prat in a car pulls out on the biker.

Not all are speed related

And yes - we do do the finger to the gatso's.

Leslie

Yes one of the biggest hazards to biking is the driver who pulls out from a junction without looking properly. It is only too easy to shove the blame on "born again" bikers, but also most unfair. I don't believe that they are more likely to have an accident than the young tearaway with no experience and more bravura than ability. That must be why insurance rates are so much cheaper for older riders.

Diesel spills are horrifically dangerous of course, especially with a light coating of drizzle. It happens regularly around here and a young man was killed locally because of that. It is usually caused by bus drivers who can't be bothered to check their filler caps properly after filling up to the brim. They ought to get the book thrown at them for that kind of irresponsible carelessness.

Les

Puff The Magic Wagon!

iTrader: (2)

75% of all accidents involving cars and bikes are the fault of the car driver - FACT

Jye

Wierd bike you've been riding I use my fingers

r32

Most (not all) bike accidents are caused by other motorists, cars pulling out of (sorry but I didnt see him) junctions and dopy lorry drivers who spill diesel all over the roads.
Also its not born again bikers that are the most vulnerable, its the guy who gets to middle age has spare income, always fancied a bike, does his CBT and gets an R1 or a Blade.
STEVE...............

TonyBurns

iTrader: (3)

There was a report on last year about bikers in lancashire, the fact that some silly percentage of accidents where a single biker and no other road vehicle was involved, and we are not talking oil/diesel spills here either.... then again the worst accident around here in the last 2 years was a biker hitting a car which pulled out of a junction, no doubt the fact he was doing over 100mph in a 30mph zone (built up area! ) had something to do with it, they said he would have survived the accident when he went flying over the bonnet of the car, its just ashame the bus in the other direction ran over him, killing him outright.

Tony

CC

I think the discrepancy between accidents and serious injuries/fatalities figures given above could well be due, in part, to the fact that the bike rider is alot less protected and therefore more likely to receive serious injury.

chaos.

That falal accident on saturday was caused by a biker, the bike came speeding around the corner and overtook the car, the car swerved to miss the biker and ended up binning it into a tree. Bikers are *****.

Oh yea, and after fourcing him off the road, the bike sped off. Nice of him wasn't it.

Mogsi

<< Bikers are *****. >>

And how do you draw that conclusion...!!
Just because one rider makes a mistake is it really fair to tar them all with the same brush !! No me thinks not....

Muffleman

Yes yes, but 80% of people know that 60% of all these reports are 85% inaccurate, and that's assuming the other 15% weren't in the original 80% !

Or something like that.....

Matt

chaos.

He obviously knew he was in the wrong because he sped off. Did he thieve the bike?? Doesn't matter really someone died and it wasn't nice to see the consiquence..

Harry_Boy

Now then Dave (CB). Don't include us MTBers in the equation.

corradoboy

Chris, do you have insurance to ride your MTB down to Fenay?

NotoriousREV

chaos. using your line of thinking, then everyone from Manchester is a ****. As this is patently untrue, your reasoning must be faulty.

And yes, the large number in fatalities is the biker dying due to lack of protection, but then thats the bikers choice.

IMHO, every car driver should be made to do 1 year on a pushbike, 1 year on a moped, 1 year on a motorbike and then they can drive a car. It would change a lot of attitudes.

farmer1

And we all know that motorbikers are better car drivers due to gaining experience of watching what is happening on the road and looking more then four feet in front of there vehicle.

Sheepsplitter

Car drivers that haven't ridden a bike don't know diddly. Most have no anticipation, or ability to read the road.

Unfortunately though recent stats show that most bike accidents have been single vehicle incidents and mainly on left hand bends (just shows we need more practice going the wrong way around roundabouts if you ask me!).

jaf01uk

2 Wheeled organ donors are what we call them at work! I used to (and my younger brother still does) have bikes and had a bit of a rep locally for wheelies (I know I was young and its not exactly difficult to do on an XR500) but it's little consilation when your lying in traction in Stoke Mandaville (sp) that it was somebody elses fault!
Gary

GreenMachine

CC has made the obvious, and only really valid response to the statistics - bikers are more vulnerable and it's bleeding obvious (apols for pun) that they are going to suffer a much higher relative proportion of casualties, regardless of who's "fault" it was.

A small ding on the wing of a couple of cars could equate to a "knocked off and got stopped by the wall" for a motorcyclist

john_s

iTrader: (1)

I've certainly become more aware on the road since i started learning to ride.

John.

lmsbman

I'm sorry to disagree. I don't know what the official statistics are but these are my own personal ones. I have attended 4 fatal accidents involving motorcyclists.
1) M/c pulled out of motorway services, gave it a fist full of throttle, crossed the carriageway dividing white lines, lost control, skidded accross all three lanes and slid into central barrier. Took the top half of his head off.
2) Two bikers racing each other, going into a left hand bend at 80-90mph. First biker throttles off on approach. Second biker doesn't, realises he's going to hit his mate and brakes. This causes him to sit up and go straight on instead of going around the bend. He went head on into a car containing an elderly couple. Both vehicles caught fire, luckily other motorists managed to release the occupants of the car. The impact caused the bikers lungs to pop out of the top of his chest.
3) Two bikers racing each other again around a left hand bend, around which were some roadworks that were well signposted. Traffic lights are on red. First biker manages to stop, second hits the first and falls off, just as a 38 tonner is going past. Spreads his brains all over the road and splits his crotch so that his left leg is tucked behind his head.
4) Single bike with rider and pillion. Travelling around a left hand bend too fast. Went head on into a Landrover towing a caravan. Both bikers spread all over the place. (The fact that these two idiots were 3 times the drink drive limit might have had something to do with it!)

So from my perception these were all the bikers fault. All of the riders were experienced and not born again bikers. Sorry if some of the detail is a bit gruesome, but it might make some of you think twice before opening it up too much. As someone else said, you are very vulnerable with no protection. You have machines that can out-accelerate any car, so why take risks?

Brendan Hughes

Go easy on the Flimwell bends, there are plenty claimed there.

paulwrxboro

fact 95% of stats are made up

jaf01uk

And if there is a government agency is involved the other 5% are made to support whatever their argument is,
Gary

fast bloke

Imsbman - Are you on the special 'scraping up' shift?

I have come off quick bikes three times. Each time was the fault of a car or lorry driver. On each occasion only luck spared me my life. OK - So there are people who get it wrong, going way to fast for their skill or the conditions. Take the 4 guys in a Corsa in Belfast last month - Only the driver survived. Same goes for bikes. If you do something that feels life threatening, it probably is. Travelling at 140+ in anything is dangerous. That said - three of my mates have been killed in sub 40 MPH accidents when a car driver decided that an airbag replaces duty of care to other road users. Two others killed themselves and a car driver by hitting him airborne on a 'busa. The speedo stopped at 167. You can't make a sweeping generalisation about any of this. My feeling would be to say that as a rule most fatalaties are caused by car drivers, but without being on the scene in every fatal accident, no one really knows

imlach

Some of the problems perhaps lie with the acceleration of bikes too. Yes, drivers should ALL be aware of motorcyclists, but there are the ones that accelerate HARD around town and for the inobservant motorists who use their mirrors less often, that can mean the difference between being seen and not - ie, given the acceleration, a motorcyclist can be in your vicinity before you know it.

No excuse, but a lot of bikers do take risks in town. Namely, undertaking at momentary high speed, lane-switching at momentary high speed, overtaking in urban zones at momentary high speed. Obviously I'm not going to tar all bikers with this brush, but there's quite a lot of it going on sadly.

If I drive ANYWHERE in the highlands of Scotland in the summer, I can guarantee ON EVERY JOURNEY that a motorcyclist will overtake me FAR too close to a bend at 100+mph. What is worse is that 4 of his mates will overtake me into the bend too!!! These are the "experienced" bikers. They take a LOT of risks, and I suspect peer group pressure of staying with the leader plays its part.

PS I'm very aware of the dangers of the road being an experienced cyclist. Bumbling along at 30mph is bad enough on a bicycle for being "invisible", so heaven help the situation at 100+mph!

fatherpierre

I'm a car only driver and have no axe to grind with bikers. BUT, why do bikers always insist on overtaking @60mph+ (sometimes more) in 30mph areas?

Granted, you need to overtake the car (ave speed in London 12mph) but the way many do and the speed they do it at make them a danger - more to the pedestrian (built-up) than themselves.

Edited to say:

Imlach was typing similar points to me at the same time.