Sad Story

Message

jmillheiser · Sun Mar 19, 2006 9:11 am

Your gixxer is still way faster than it

Mintbread · Sun Mar 19, 2006 9:03 pm

Loonette wrote:My point is... in a passing zone, if I have the clearance, I'll overtake anything - on my bike or in my car. But if it's a no-passing zone, it's usually because there is a blind curve or a hill or an upcoming intersection. I don't feel it's wise to recommend that just because you're in/on a fast vehicle, then you should go passing in a no-passing zone. Also, in a crash situation, the police will issue a ticket for breaking that law, and then you're responsible for the crash and there's a whole new issue with insurance coverage.

Loonette

Well that is where we differ.
If I have the clearance, I will overtake anything, as I employ the same judgement to the overtake regardless of what is painted on the road. My motorcycle will out accelerate almost any car on the road, added to the fact that it is a lot smaller than a car so I need to spend only a very small portion of time a car would need in the other lane to pass, I will overtake anytime I deem it safe, not someone that assessed the road 10, 20 perhaps 50 years ago.

sapaul · #23 Unread post by **sapaul** » Sun Mar 19, 2006 10:59 pm

Mintbread wrote:
Loonette wrote:My point is... in a passing zone, if I have the clearance, I'll overtake anything - on my bike or in my car. But if it's a no-passing zone, it's usually because there is a blind curve or a hill or an upcoming intersection. I don't feel it's wise to recommend that just because you're in/on a fast vehicle, then you should go passing in a no-passing zone. Also, in a crash situation, the police will issue a ticket for breaking that law, and then you're responsible for the crash and there's a whole new issue with insurance coverage.

Loonette
Well that is where we differ.
If I have the clearance, I will overtake anything, as I employ the same judgement to the overtake regardless of what is painted on the road. My motorcycle will out accelerate almost any car on the road, added to the fact that it is a lot smaller than a car so I need to spend only a very small portion of time a car would need in the other lane to pass, I will overtake anytime I deem it safe, not someone that assessed the road 10, 20 perhaps 50 years ago.

Now it is really getting weird, I agree with Mintbread. Yes OK different places will have different laws and road conditions but my bike will also get past anything in a hurry and I reserve the right to make that judgement for myself. Just a thought though, some of us are on what may be considered to be "thin" bikes and maybe have a differing perspective on the available space.

Kal · #24 Unread post by **Kal** » Mon Mar 20, 2006 2:00 am

Pin_Cushion wrote:It's really sad when someone wrecks before they even have the time to learn what they're doing. There are no illusions about the fact that the first few months of biking are the most dangerous, and getting through them is about a little luck and a lot of caution. It's too bad that this guy, whoever he is, won't get the chance to develop any real riding skills. I hope he gets to walk again.

Agreed. My understanding of insurance stats is that in a bike or car we are most likely to have an accident (especially an 'operator error' accident) within the first two years.

If you have an accident you are more likely to have another accident within 6 months.

scan · #25 Unread post by **scan** » Mon Mar 20, 2006 2:08 am

sapaul wrote:Now it is really getting weird, I agree with Mintbread. Yes OK different places will have different laws and road conditions but my bike will also get past anything in a hurry and I reserve the right to make that judgement for myself. Just a thought though, some of us are on what may be considered to be "thin" bikes and maybe have a differing perspective on the available space.

So far I have not found a spot where I disagree with the line-painters and the law makers. But to each his own. As we said earlier, if you ride with someone else, it would be good to make that ideological difference clear. As a solid line passer, you might not care, but if you are with a group, or even a buddy who does care, it would matter to them.

roscowgo · #26 Unread post by **roscowgo** » Mon Mar 20, 2006 3:42 am

Mintbread wrote:
jmillheiser wrote:it takes some serious willpower to resist the urge to give the throttle a good twist on a high powered bike.
That or a healthy dose of fear.

Permanent pucker mark on the seat? heh i've got one of those.

vulcanguy · Mon Mar 20, 2006 4:55 am

Everybody seems to be forgetting something !!

" RIDE YOUR OWN RIDE "

He rode his..........too bad it was only one way

sapaul · #28 Unread post by **sapaul** » Mon Mar 20, 2006 7:03 am

Kal wrote:
Pin_Cushion wrote:It's really sad when someone wrecks before they even have the time to learn what they're doing. There are no illusions about the fact that the first few months of biking are the most dangerous, and getting through them is about a little luck and a lot of caution. It's too bad that this guy, whoever he is, won't get the chance to develop any real riding skills. I hope he gets to walk again.
Agreed. My understanding of insurance stats is that in a bike or car we are most likely to have an accident (especially an 'operator error' accident) within the first two years.

If you have an accident you are more likely to have another accident within 6 months.

South African stats that I work on for insuring a motorcycle are:

Accident or dropped form static within the first three(3) weeks.

Accident after three years.