Cars or motorcycles are no different. You use F1 as an example for a young experienced driver, yet fail to mention young motorcycle champions. :confused:

I could make a bike dance at the age of 12 and I'd be willing to bet a young experienced motorcyclist would shame most car drivers for roadcraft. Similarly those that have both now are probably better car drivers than they might have been.

It's basically useless individuals which includes a mixture of talent and brain capacity that ruin it, whether it's a bike or a car.

I too was riding moto-x and trials at 12yo. Back then it was a leisure pursuit, and at 37yo I still see bikes as a leisure pursuit, pedal and motor. In todays health & safety conscious world I can't fathom why motorbikes are allowed, apart from the fact that they always have been. No airbags, crumple zones, laminated glass, seatbelts, ABS (mostly), TC, pedestrian impact protection, anti-sub seats yadda, yadda, yadda. Same with pushbikes. No age restriction, no formal qualification or training required and no liability insurance to mix it with 38 tonners at 60mph and cars at 70mph on all but motorways on what is effectively a big coathanger with wheels :cuckoo:

On that point we differ and I lost interest in reading further. :thumb:

I too had a bike from an early age: First one being a little Puch 50cc scrambler at the tender age of 8. Fast forward 20 years and I still don't feel the need to razz about on a CBR wotsit in jeans and T-shirt every sunny weekend trying to find a Nissan Micra pulling out of a side road so I can plough into the door at 1XXmph .

My bloodline (sadly - to some) doesn't carry the suicide by riding/driving gene :)

Ali, then you're like corradoBoy, I on the other hand rode competitively, until I was forced to stop, and still today wouldn't have anymore of a problem on a big bike than a car with circumstances being different. In fact I'd feel somewhat safer as daft as it sounds.

I don't understand how it would work? Surely most people want to drive as soon as they can, if they had to wait another year would that not mean severly reduced work loads for driving schools for a year till the people who missed the change over then turned 18?

I may be wrong (I often am!)

I was never given the opportunity to compete :( You know these days when you see a bunch of chavs razzing a stolen moped across some wasteland? Well 20 years ago that would have been me, except the bike wasn't stolen and I was under adult supervision ;)

Bikes or cars feels natural to me, although I am more alert/awake on a bike than in a modern car, where I tend to switch off. The exception is if the car is more raw, like a Westfield, 1970s 911 or a Series Land Rover, where there is alot more involvement to driving. I'm far more comfortable with the lack of refinement that gives me more positive confidence in the vehicle, as I am far more aware of the limitations and have more feedback through the controls. Something I feel that generations of people who have never driven antiquated cars will never be able to fully appreciate the physical limits of that they capable of (or not).

It goes to say I have similar view with bikes; The newest bike I own is of 1984 vintage, with exception of a 1986 Honda Magna which I inherited off my late father and weighs the best part of a ton (well, it feels like it). I'd like to see a born again R1 rider try and ride that :lol1:

Where do you stand on woman's-side airbags? Should they be standard equipment on modern cars like the driver's side ones, or optional? :)

Women usually come with airbags as standard :)


.....I have no complaints with that :D

Good, as I have both :D

Too many would fail any reasonable NCAP test, though. :(

Apart from 84 and the missis, I hasten to add. :)

:lol1:
Canny shock absorbers

This is a good post and I agree with all which was said.

I don't think we are blaming all young drivers for causing all accidents, nothing could be further from the truth. However there is a large number of young drivers who do cause accidents by their irresponsible driving in today's heavy traffic and this is bound to make the news. If this does continue then we can expect restrictions on driving with regard to age. The problems are caused by attitudes and competitive natures which are mainly existent in younger drivers. They can be as capable of controlling a car as anyone with ever so fast reactions but all that will not save them from the chance of a bad accident due to seriously dangerous driving habits.

I do agree with the restrictions placed on inexperienced motor cycle riders and would also like to say that riding a bike is a very good way of learning about traffic conditions and also how to take note of significant road conditions. In the case of nutters on bikes, they usually hurt only themselves at least! I certainly would not want to give up my bike riding even in today's traffic conditions.

Les

A bit like saying that the best way to learn that guns might kill people is to give them to 16yo's and see what happens.

One of the key reasons why youngsters cause such mayhem on the roads is the lack of active policing. We all know that (s)cameras only catch one type of offence, without intelligent reason or discretion. Without traffic officers slapping their wrists from time to time, the young idiots never learn. Many of todays idiots are much more idiotic too, having never received a slap at the appropriate time throughout their formative years due to liberal wet do-good nannying sparing the rod. Can anyone honestly say that this policy has produce a caring and respectful generation :rolleyes:

You aren't seriously suggesting that irresponsible driving by youngsters is a new phenomenom, are you?

Well I think they do give guns to lads who are not much older than that in the forces!

Young riders are restricted to bikes which ar not very powerful until they pass a further test. The training for motor cycle riders is pretty good and comprehensive and most lads do ride sensibly. Like in cars there will always be a proportion of dangerous ones however but I don't think that justifies banning all the others from their bikes.

I strongly agree with your point about traffic police.

Les

Experience is a bigger factor than age. I agree with a previous poster who suggested that there should be a limit put on the engine size and power of a car a newly qualified driver can drive. Perhaps after 3 or 5 years they would need to take a further test should they want to apply to engine sizes above say 1400cc for example so there would be a 2 tiered license system (or perhaps this legal loophole could see loads of teenagers driving around in old mazda RX7s)

The thing that winds me up most on this subject is the fact that many people see a driving licence as a right, not a privilege!!!

I cannot count the number of times i've seen/heard of people who just scraped through their test on the 40th time etc. These people should NOT be allowed on the road and this is backed up when you see them on the road, they're way too nervous & as has been mentioned not seated correctly etc.

Making the test longer, stricter and due every 10-15 years would go a long way to solving a lot of the poor driving you see on the road today.

Now i've gone & wound myself up again LOL :mad:

Periodic retesting seems a good idea, but the DSA already conduct 2.1m tests a year (1.9 million practical tests for car drivers, 113,000 vocational tests and over 87,000 motorcycle rider tests), and with 30m+ drivers on the road, a retest every 10 years would add 3m+ tests to that, requiring a massive increase in staffing and infrastructure. Of course, people whose tests are looming may seek out instructors like me to give them a refresher for a fee ;)

Tiered testing for higher powered vehicles could work, and there needn't be a time limit. If they have the skill to pass the test then let them drive the next car up. Alternatively, they could skip the tests and wait 5 years or so to gain the necessary experience to move up a level.

Retesting at 70 should be brought in, with periodic retesting thereafter. The number of times I see some confused old duffer causing mayhem is untrue. It's not just the young :p

As for the test being stricter, if you live in Leeds it's strict enough. I have clients who in my professional opinion are excellent drivers who fail for the slightest thing in Leeds, often numerous times. Speaking to other instructors from around the country they don't share that experience. Many in Leeds travel to surrounding areas for their tests as the reputation is well earned and known. Chatting to other instructors in Leeds they all have the same opinion, one recently telling that he hasn't had a pass in Leeds this year, despite over 20 years as an instructor. My own father who is accident free in 42 years of driving failed 5 times here, and then passed 1st time in Harrogate, where the examiner could not understand how he could have ever failed. Within 6 weeks he had passed a further 6 tests in the Army under national service for a variety of vehicles.
Maybe they need to use Leeds as a national model for the test criteria :rolleyes:

But then families would have to buy a special underpowered car specifically for junior, and they would not be able to borrow the parents car, or take the wheel on a family outing. Also very difficult to enforce a power limit.

Bikes are relatively cheap and 99% of the time used solo, so having a dedicated one for young riders is not such a burden.

I don't think power limits on bikes works, well not as fully as one would want...

How many times have you been aggrevated by a 50cc scooter driven by a feejit on L plates?

Worst one is when diving out and inbetween cars in traffic, they don't realise there is 2ft of bike, engine and rear wheel still behind the rider when they prematurely cut infront of a car....and then brake sharply. Glad I haven't got "road champ" tyres, otherwise if it was wet it would be bye bye learner biker - although would that be a bad thing? Dawinism and all that. ;)

Those supporting some kind of power/bhp limit AND complaining about a nanny state??? :confused: <<<<<<< Notice anything in that sentence?

Like most things today. Stop the breeding from bad genes, make that law and leave everything else alone. :thumb:

That is it, what Mr Spoon say is very true, people that are stupid should not be allowed to breed.

Or people on low incomes.

Also, lazy people.

Well, basically people that drink Tenants then :D

I agree that with age does not come experience, even if you were to pass your testing on your 17th birthday you still would only have 1 years experience by the time you reached 18, or alternatively if you passed your test on your 18th birthday you would have no experience but these new suggested changes to the law would not apply to you.

Over here in N'orn I'ron no matter what age you pass your test at you're classed as "restricted" and have to display an "R" plate on your car for the first year which means that you are "not supposed" to go faster than 45 mph. This doesn't mean that we have the best drivers as all newly passed drivers drive slow but it could be something extra for government to throw into the mix.

Windyboy.