Self posting video gets him Nine months inside

[raddish]

to be honest I think driving to fast and filming it does not warrant a prison sentence - after all he didn't hurt anyone did he? I accept he could have, but he didn't.

And when you compare it to videos such as the the following in this article and the thug only got 12 months it makes me sick...

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3211414/Te...

[Undinist]

Hang on everyone, the crucial stat you're all missing is that when bikes crash, the people hurt are almost always the ones on the bike, not other drivers or pedestrians. Other casualties are so rare that nobody bothers to total them up. Yes, we can all think of an example when someone else has been hurt, but stats should beat anecdotal evidence if we're realists. So what if a biker does 140 mph on a country lane? The chances of it affecting others are tiny. Take the example upthread of the guy having a head-on with a Renault - he died, the driver wasn't hurt. Typical. His mum was upset. He should have avoided that collision - he let his mum down badly by dying young because of his own inattention. The collision was a classic SMIDSY and if you do nearly 100 through a junction with such poor anticipation skills you won't keep getting away with it.

As for the test rider who's now in jail, from an IAM point of view his lines were a bit st - if you want to go fast you should use the whole road to extend your view. Maybe the judge has saved his life by making him think twice about the way he rides in future. But on the whole I'd prefer not to jail the guy and let him compete for the Darwin award if he wants to. If he kills himself his friends and family will grieve, but they have to know that it was always a possibility. The fatality rate of bikers isn't exactly a secret. If we take the risk and it doesn't pay off and our mum dies heartbroken and alone...that's down to us.

[LoonR1]

Undinist said:

Hang on everyone, the crucial stat you're all missing is that when bikes crash, the people hurt are almost always the ones on the bike, not other drivers or pedestrians. Other casualties are so rare that nobody bothers to total them up. Yes, we can all think of an example when someone else has been hurt, but stats should beat anecdotal evidence if we're realists. So what if a biker does 140 mph on a country lane? The chances of it affecting others are tiny. Take the example upthread of the guy having a head-on with a Renault - he died, the driver wasn't hurt. Typical. His mum was upset. He should have avoided that collision - he let his mum down badly by dying young because of his own inattention. The collision was a classic SMIDSY and if you do nearly 100 through a junction with such poor anticipation skills you won't keep getting away with it.

As for the test rider who's now in jail, from an IAM point of view his lines were a bit st - if you want to go fast you should use the whole road to extend your view. Maybe the judge has saved his life by making him think twice about the way he rides in future. But on the whole I'd prefer not to jail the guy and let him compete for the Darwin award if he wants to. If he kills himself his friends and family will grieve, but they have to know that it was always a possibility. The fatality rate of bikers isn't exactly a secret. If we take the risk and it doesn't pay off and our mum dies heartbroken and alone...that's down to us.

Where do you come up with that joyous stat? Bikes can and do crash into and injure plenty of other roadusers or pedestrians.

[LoonR1]

Esceptico said:

LoonR1 said:

People panic brake and crash when they could just ride round the corner at the original (or quicker) speed. The real underlying cause could be that they're lacking skill, so require more training, or bigger balls

Sorry for banging on about inappropriate speed but...doesn't .inappropriate mean the wrong speed for the conditions...and isn't the skill and experience of the rider a key condition? Do people crash because they misjudge a corner and go in too slow?

It's not the conditions is it? It's the skill of the rider. The word "conditions" tends to suggest external factors, rather than internal ones. People do crash because they're too slow as well.

[ORD]

There were pedestrians on that road and the rider didn't change his driving one bit once he saw one. That alone is pretty awful behaviour.

[moanthebairns]

LoonR1 said:

Esceptico said:

I am looking at the underlying cause not the surface ones.

Accidents are almost always caused by human error in my view.

On the list is "sudden braking". What does that mean? Brakes don't apply themselves so more likely the rider tried to lose speed quickly and crashed. But why did they need to lose speed? Isn't that the real, underlying cause?

People panic brake and crash when they could just ride round the corner at the original (or quicker) speed. The real underlying cause could be that they're lacking skill, so require more training, or bigger balls

When a blue Mondeo pulls out on you identical to the video of the chap that died (the first time I saw it i swear I thought it was a video of mines) at sixty you grab a st load of brake and go over the bars missing the car in my case. I am actually one stat in that somewhere as my crash was reported that year.

[theshrew]

black-k1 said:

As requested:

Motorcycle 2013

Contributory factor attributed to vehicle	Number	Per cent
Road environment contributed	2253	13.361404341122
Poor or defective road surface	244	1.44704068319298
Deposit on road (eg. oil, mud, chippings)	467	2.76954097971771
Slippery road (due to weather)	1253	7.43090973787214
Inadequate or masked signs or road markings	26	0.154192859684498
Defective traffic signals	11	0.065235440635749
Traffic calming (eg. road humps, chicane)	21	0.124540386668248
Temporary road layout (eg. contraflow)	17	0.100818408255248
Road layout (eg. bend, hill, narrow road)	314	1.86217530542047
Animal or object in carriageway	178	1.05562803937848
Slippery inspection cover or road marking	22	0.130470881271498
Vehicle defects	181	1.07341952318823
Tyres illegal, defective or under inflated	67	0.397343138417744
Defective lights or indicators	25	0.148262365081248
Defective brakes	72	0.426995611433994
Defective steering or suspension	26	0.154192859684498
Defective or missing mirrors	1	0.00593049460324991
Overloaded or poorly loaded vehicle or trailer	8	0.0474439568259993
Injudicious action	2497	14.808445024315
Disobeyed automatic traffic signal	107	0.63456292254774
Disobeyed 'Give Way' or 'Stop' sign or markings	105	0.622701933341241
Disobeyed double white lines	35	0.207567311113747
Disobeyed pedestrian crossing facility	29	0.171984343494247
Illegal turn or direction of travel	55	0.326177203178745
Exceeding speed limit	812	4.81556161783893
Travelling too fast for conditions	890	5.27814019689242
Following too close	711	4.21658166291069
Vehicle travelling along pavement	21	0.124540386668248
Cyclist entering road from pavement	2	0.0118609892064998
Driver/Rider error or reaction	7652	45.3801447040683
Junction overshoot	116	0.68793737397699
Junction restart (moving off at junction)	60	0.355829676194995
Poor turn or manoeuvre	1603	9.50658284900961
Failed to signal or misleading signal	66	0.391412643814494
Driver/Rider failed to look properly	2682	15.9055865259163
Driver/Rider failed to judge other person’s path or speed	2244	13.3080298896928
Too close to cyclist, horse rider or pedestrian	73	0.432926106037244
Sudden braking	1099	6.51761356897165
Swerved	436	2.58569564701696
Loss of control	2646	15.6920887201993
Impairment or distraction	550	3.26177203178745
Driver/Rider impaired by alcohol	285	1.69019096192622
Driver/Rider impaired by drugs (illicit or medicinal)	36	0.213497805716997
Fatigue	38	0.225358794923497
Uncorrected, defective eyesight	3	0.0177914838097497
Driver/Rider illness or disability, mental or physical	46	0.272802751749496
Not displaying lights at night or in poor visibility	38	0.225358794923497
Rider wearing dark clothing	31	0.183845332700747
Driver using mobile phone	4	0.0237219784129996
Distraction in vehicle	22	0.130470881271498
Distraction outside vehicle	82	0.486300557466493
Behaviour or inexperience	3292	19.5231882338987
Aggressive driving	376	2.22986597082197
Driver/Rider careless, reckless or in a hurry	1630	9.66670620329736
Driver/Rider nervous, uncertain or panic	167	0.990392598742735
Driving too slow for conditions or slow veh (eg tractor)	8	0.0474439568259993
Learner or inexperienced driver/rider	1439	8.53398173407662
Inexperience of driving on the left	32	0.189775827303997
Unfamiliar with model of vehicle	192	1.13865496382398
Vision affected by external factors	878	5.20697426165342
Stationary or parked vehicle(s)	460	2.72802751749496
Vegetation	15	0.0889574190487487
Road layout (eg. bend, winding road, hill crest)	128	0.759103309215989
Buildings, road signs, street furniture	12	0.0711659352389989
Dazzling headlights	12	0.0711659352389989
Dazzling sun	136	0.806547266041988
Rain, sleet, snow, or fog	119	0.705728857786739
Spray from other vehicles	8	0.0474439568259993
Visor or windscreen dirty, scratched or frosted etc.	12	0.0711659352389989
Vehicle blind spot	15	0.0889574190487487
Pedestrian only (casualty or uninjured)	3	0.0177914838097497
Crossing road masked by stationary or parked vehicle	0	0
Pedestrian failed to look properly	2	0.0118609892064998
Pedestrian failed to judge vehicle’s path or speed	0	0
Pedestrian wrong use of pedestrian crossing facility	0	0
Dangerous action in carriageway (eg. playing)	1	0.00593049460324991
Pedestrian impaired by alcohol	0	0
Pedestrian impaired by drugs (illicit or medicinal)	0	0
Pedestrian careless, reckless or in a hurry	0	0
Pedestrian wearing dark clothing at night	0	0
Pedestrian disability or illness, mental or physical	0	0
Special codes=	298	1.76728739176847
Stolen vehicle	88	0.521883525085992
Vehicle in course of crime	42	0.249080773336496
Emergency vehicle on a call	12	0.0711659352389989
Vehicle door opened or closed negligently	0	0
Other	171	1.01411457715573

Who / How do they actually come up with this rubbish

[moanthebairns]

Esceptico said:

moanthebairns said:

Or your just well, a bit st

Sometimes you are funny

Sometimes you just come across as a mouthy,
rude adolescent.

Think I'm tending towards the latter this time.

I'm Scottish for fksake. We're renowned for a dark sense of humour.

There's never malicious undertones in mines, or at least that's my view. However I'm not going to sugar coat a response when you openly admit to crashing trying to get your knee down on the road blaming tyres, you and the conditions but placing it on speed. You fked up. Be man enough to accept it then laugh and learn. Everytime someone has a crash there's always mitigating circumstances. It's never 100 rider error.

My last 3 crashes were all my fault. Take my last one for example. Probably caused by a cold tyre in the wet. But I should have been vigilant to this so it's still my fault. I fked up 100 rider error. Mimes.

How often do we make mistakes at work. You wouldn't stand there arguing why you got it wrong you'd go st I fked up its me. Why when people crash do they blame twenty other things first.

[Stickyfinger]

A bit like the guy in another post who tried the "I did not realise I was doing 112mph in my BMW M3 on the M6 toll road until I saw the blue lights"...."what should I say to in court tomorrow to stop me being banned as I drive for a living"....go figure

[creampuff]

black-k1 said:

As requested:

Motorcycle 2013

Contributory factor attributed to vehicle	Number	Per cent
Road environment contributed	2253	13.361404341122
Poor or defective road surface	244	1.44704068319298
Deposit on road (eg. oil, mud, chippings)	467	2.76954097971771
Slippery road (due to weather)	1253	7.43090973787214
Inadequate or masked signs or road markings	26	0.154192859684498
Defective traffic signals	11	0.065235440635749
Traffic calming (eg. road humps, chicane)	21	0.124540386668248
Temporary road layout (eg. contraflow)	17	0.100818408255248
Road layout (eg. bend, hill, narrow road)	314	1.86217530542047
Animal or object in carriageway	178	1.05562803937848
Slippery inspection cover or road marking	22	0.130470881271498
Vehicle defects	181	1.07341952318823
Tyres illegal, defective or under inflated	67	0.397343138417744
Defective lights or indicators	25	0.148262365081248
Defective brakes	72	0.426995611433994
Defective steering or suspension	26	0.154192859684498
Defective or missing mirrors	1	0.00593049460324991
Overloaded or poorly loaded vehicle or trailer	8	0.0474439568259993
Injudicious action	2497	14.808445024315
Disobeyed automatic traffic signal	107	0.63456292254774
Disobeyed 'Give Way' or 'Stop' sign or markings	105	0.622701933341241
Disobeyed double white lines	35	0.207567311113747
Disobeyed pedestrian crossing facility	29	0.171984343494247
Illegal turn or direction of travel	55	0.326177203178745
Exceeding speed limit	812	4.81556161783893
Travelling too fast for conditions	890	5.27814019689242
Following too close	711	4.21658166291069
Vehicle travelling along pavement	21	0.124540386668248
Cyclist entering road from pavement	2	0.0118609892064998
Driver/Rider error or reaction	7652	45.3801447040683
Junction overshoot	116	0.68793737397699
Junction restart (moving off at junction)	60	0.355829676194995
Poor turn or manoeuvre	1603	9.50658284900961
Failed to signal or misleading signal	66	0.391412643814494
Driver/Rider failed to look properly	2682	15.9055865259163
Driver/Rider failed to judge other person’s path or speed	2244	13.3080298896928
Too close to cyclist, horse rider or pedestrian	73	0.432926106037244
Sudden braking	1099	6.51761356897165
Swerved	436	2.58569564701696
Loss of control	2646	15.6920887201993
Impairment or distraction	550	3.26177203178745
Driver/Rider impaired by alcohol	285	1.69019096192622
Driver/Rider impaired by drugs (illicit or medicinal)	36	0.213497805716997
Fatigue	38	0.225358794923497
Uncorrected, defective eyesight	3	0.0177914838097497
Driver/Rider illness or disability, mental or physical	46	0.272802751749496
Not displaying lights at night or in poor visibility	38	0.225358794923497
Rider wearing dark clothing	31	0.183845332700747
Driver using mobile phone	4	0.0237219784129996
Distraction in vehicle	22	0.130470881271498
Distraction outside vehicle	82	0.486300557466493
Behaviour or inexperience	3292	19.5231882338987
Aggressive driving	376	2.22986597082197
Driver/Rider careless, reckless or in a hurry	1630	9.66670620329736
Driver/Rider nervous, uncertain or panic	167	0.990392598742735
Driving too slow for conditions or slow veh (eg tractor)	8	0.0474439568259993
Learner or inexperienced driver/rider	1439	8.53398173407662
Inexperience of driving on the left	32	0.189775827303997
Unfamiliar with model of vehicle	192	1.13865496382398
Vision affected by external factors	878	5.20697426165342
Stationary or parked vehicle(s)	460	2.72802751749496
Vegetation	15	0.0889574190487487
Road layout (eg. bend, winding road, hill crest)	128	0.759103309215989
Buildings, road signs, street furniture	12	0.0711659352389989
Dazzling headlights	12	0.0711659352389989
Dazzling sun	136	0.806547266041988
Rain, sleet, snow, or fog	119	0.705728857786739
Spray from other vehicles	8	0.0474439568259993
Visor or windscreen dirty, scratched or frosted etc.	12	0.0711659352389989
Vehicle blind spot	15	0.0889574190487487
Pedestrian only (casualty or uninjured)	3	0.0177914838097497
Crossing road masked by stationary or parked vehicle	0	0
Pedestrian failed to look properly	2	0.0118609892064998
Pedestrian failed to judge vehicle’s path or speed	0	0
Pedestrian wrong use of pedestrian crossing facility	0	0
Dangerous action in carriageway (eg. playing)	1	0.00593049460324991
Pedestrian impaired by alcohol	0	0
Pedestrian impaired by drugs (illicit or medicinal)	0	0
Pedestrian careless, reckless or in a hurry	0	0
Pedestrian wearing dark clothing at night	0	0
Pedestrian disability or illness, mental or physical	0	0
Special codes=	298	1.76728739176847
Stolen vehicle	88	0.521883525085992
Vehicle in course of crime	42	0.249080773336496
Emergency vehicle on a call	12	0.0711659352389989
Vehicle door opened or closed negligently	0	0
Other	171	1.01411457715573

I'm not entirely sure it was necessary to use 16 signifiant digits when expressing percentages. Imagine sitting down in front of the TV with your feet on the coffee table. They will be about a metre from your head. Now imagine the number of metres between your head and the nearest star, Alpha Centauri a bit over 4 light years away. 16 significant figures is enough to identify your feet on the coffee table in the 40-odd thousand billion kilometres between your feet and Alpha Centauri.

Or to put it another way if all 60 million people in the UK suddenly simultaneously died in a traffic crash, you would be able to attribute about 20 million contributory causes of death to each person before running out of significant digits.

[Esceptico]

E

creampuff said:

I'm not entirely sure it was necessary to use 16 signifiant digits when expressing percentages. Imagine sitting down in front of the TV with your feet on the coffee table. They will be about a metre from your head. Now imagine the number of metres between your head and the nearest star, Alpha Centauri a bit over 4 light years away. 16 significant figures is enough to identify your feet on the coffee table in the 40-odd thousand billion kilometres between your feet and Alpha Centauri.

Or to put it another way if all 60 million people in the UK suddenly simultaneously died in a traffic crash, you would be able to attribute about 20 million contributory causes of death to each person before running out of significant digits.

You definitely win nerd of the day for that comment! Although maybe I win for enjoying it?

[black-k1]

creampuff said:

I'm not entirely sure it was necessary to use 16 signifiant digits when expressing percentages. Imagine sitting down in front of the TV with your feet on the coffee table. They will be about a metre from your head. Now imagine the number of metres between your head and the nearest star, Alpha Centauri a bit over 4 light years away. 16 significant figures is enough to identify your feet on the coffee table in the 40-odd thousand billion kilometres between your feet and Alpha Centauri.

Or to put it another way if all 60 million people in the UK suddenly simultaneously died in a traffic crash, you would be able to attribute about 20 million contributory causes of death to each person before running out of significant digits.

Or, to put it yet another way, you could just use Excel to divide two numbers and not format the resulting value!

[black-k1]

LoonR1 said:

Esceptico said:

LoonR1 said:

People panic brake and crash when they could just ride round the corner at the original (or quicker) speed. The real underlying cause could be that they're lacking skill, so require more training, or bigger balls

Sorry for banging on about inappropriate speed but...doesn't .inappropriate mean the wrong speed for the conditions...and isn't the skill and experience of the rider a key condition? Do people crash because they misjudge a corner and go in too slow?

It's not the conditions is it? It's the skill of the rider. The word "conditions" tends to suggest external factors, rather than internal ones. People do crash because they're too slow as well.

Travelling too fast for the conditions means that, in the eyes of the police investigating the accident, you were going too fast for the conditions. It's not the skill of the rider that counts but the skill of the police officer in judging what the correct speed for that situation would be, and what the speed the person involved in the accident was.

Unexpected situations like diesel or oil on the road resulting in an accident will not be put down to travelling too fast for the conditions if the rider was travelling at a rate that was appropriate for the road without diesel or oil on it. It is considered reasonable to expect certain levels of grip and why, if they were ever caught, those dropping the diesel/oil on the road would be held responsible for the riders accident. It's also why we have the category deposit on road (eg. oil, mud, chippings)

As there can be more than 1 contributing factor per accident, it's quite likely that a significant proportion of the 5% travelling too fast for the conditions and the 5% exceeding speed limit account for the same accidents.

The other thing to remember is that the contributing factors apply to the accident, and thus potentially to any person/vehicle involved in the accident, so it may not be the biker who was speeding/travelling too fast for the conditions.

These statistics show that if, the actions of the judge in this case in handing out 9 months was to act as a deterrent and thus reduce motorcycle accidents than it is very unlikely there will be any possibility of a noticeable reduction.

Of course, it could be argued that if the judge indented to deter people from riding a motorcycle while wearing a hoodie, then he's probably been more successful. But I didn't think that fashion crimes came under his jurisdiction.

Edited by black-k1 on Saturday 29th August 08:53

[Reardy Mister]

Stickyfinger said:

A bit like the guy in another post who tried the "I did not realise I was doing 112mph in my BMW M3 on the M6 toll road until I saw the blue lights"...."what should I say to in court tomorrow to stop me being banned as I drive for a living"....go figure

Did you give that bloke the sermon on the mount until you'd bludgeoned him to your way of thinking too, or are we just lucky?

[Stickyfinger]

Reardy Mister said:

Did you give that bloke the sermon on the mount until you'd bludgeoned him to your way of thinking too, or are we just lucky?

Rotate on it

Maybe if you had to go thru what I have seen people go thru because of stupid deadly speeds on public roads you would think before you talk bks

Edited by Stickyfinger on Saturday 29th August 09:11

[NoNeed]

LoonR1 said:

Undinist said:

Hang on everyone, the crucial stat you're all missing is that when bikes crash, the people hurt are almost always the ones on the bike, not other drivers or pedestrians. Other casualties are so rare that nobody bothers to total them up. Yes, we can all think of an example when someone else has been hurt, but stats should beat anecdotal evidence if we're realists. So what if a biker does 140 mph on a country lane? The chances of it affecting others are tiny. Take the example upthread of the guy having a head-on with a Renault - he died, the driver wasn't hurt. Typical. His mum was upset. He should have avoided that collision - he let his mum down badly by dying young because of his own inattention. The collision was a classic SMIDSY and if you do nearly 100 through a junction with such poor anticipation skills you won't keep getting away with it.

As for the test rider who's now in jail, from an IAM point of view his lines were a bit st - if you want to go fast you should use the whole road to extend your view. Maybe the judge has saved his life by making him think twice about the way he rides in future. But on the whole I'd prefer not to jail the guy and let him compete for the Darwin award if he wants to. If he kills himself his friends and family will grieve, but they have to know that it was always a possibility. The fatality rate of bikers isn't exactly a secret. If we take the risk and it doesn't pay off and our mum dies heartbroken and alone...that's down to us.

Where do you come up with that joyous stat? Bikes can and do crash into and injure plenty of other roadusers or pedestrians.

And the people they hit have to live with what they witnessed for the rest of their lives, and so do the people that had to pick up all the body parts.

[Reardy Mister]

Stickyfinger said:

Reardy Mister said:

Did you give that bloke the sermon on the mount until you'd bludgeoned him to your way of thinking too, or are we just lucky?

Rotate on it

Maybe if you had to go thru what I have seen people go thru because of stupid deadly speeds on public roads you would think before you talk bks

Edited by Stickyfinger on Saturday 29th August 09:11

I understand you're passionate about it. I'm mainly interested in at what point you will be satisfied that you've made your point and end the impotent rage? It must be quite an effort.

[Esceptico]

E[quote=black-k1]

Travelling too fast for the conditions means that, in the eyes of the police investigating the accident, you were going too fast for the conditions. It's not the skill of the rider that counts but the skill of the police officer in judging what the correct speed for that situation would be, and what the speed the person involved in the accident was.

Unexpected situations like diesel or oil on the road resulting in an accident will not be put down to travelling too fast for the conditions if the rider was travelling at a rate that was appropriate for the road without diesel or oil on it. It is considered reasonable to expect certain levels of grip and why, if they were ever caught, those dropping the diesel/oil on the road would be held responsible for the riders accident. It's also why we have the category deposit on road (eg. oil, mud, chippings)

As there can be more than 1 contributing factor per accident, it's quite likely that a significant proportion of the 5% travelling too fast for the conditions and the 5% exceeding speed limit account for the same accidents.

The other thing to remember is that the contributing factors apply to the accident, and thus potentially to any person/vehicle involved in the accident, so it may not be the biker who was speeding/travelling too fast for the conditions.

These statistics show that if, the actions of the judge in this case in handing out 9 months was to act as a deterrent and thus reduce motorcycle accidents than it is very unlikely there will be any possibility of a noticeable reduction.

Of course, it could be argued that if the judge indented to deter people from riding a motorcycle while wearing a hoodie, then he's probably been more successful. But I didn't think that fashion crimes came under his jurisdiction.



[footnote]Edited by black-k1 on Saturday 29th August 08:53[/footnote

The key point I'm trying to make - but not really succeeding - is that appropriate and inappropriate speed are completely conditional on the unique circumstances of each ride and each rider. On the same bend the appropriate speed could vary massively eg a really skillful and experienced rider on a warm sunny day with light traffic could take it well above the speed limit and that would not be inappropriate versus inexperienced rider with wet roads with less than perfect tyres (where appropriate speed could be less than the speed limit). Not sure how a policeman sitting at his desk could retrospectively judge that.

I think you have hit the nail on the head when you use terms like "expect" and "assume" for road conditions. In my view that is another key contributor to accidents - riders "expecting" other road users to act correctly eg not pull out when they shouldn't, not stop or do things unexpectedly and for road conditions to be "normal" rather than looking to make sure that the road conditions are actually okay. If a rider is not able to read the road and conditions and behaviour of other road users (and have enough time to react to put themselves out of danger) I would suggest they are going too fast - irrespective of the actual speed they are going.

I suspect that a lot of people don't want to listen to such arguments because they have a knee-jerk reaction as soon as speed is mentioned because they are sick of the simplistic and counterproductive "speed kills" messages (especially as it is usually put forward to kill joy Mr Shouty types that have invaded this thread).

Appropriate speed is all about context. I was out riding yesterday and overtook lots of vehicles. Did I pull out and dawdle past (thereby being close to the vehicles I was overtaking for longer and being on the wrong side of the road)? No I used appropriate speed and got past as swiftly and safely as possible. But in the same context, for some reason there seemed to be an unusually high amount of dirt and stones and crap on the roads and so was riding a bit slower overall (especially as the sun was making it a bit difficult to see at times).

[croyde]

In my 35 years of biking I have never ridden the likes of the Fireblade.

Biggest bike I had was the GPZ900R back in the 80s and now I ride a Vespa.

Have to say that the video has convinced me to try one

[Stickyfinger]

Reardy Mister said:

I understand you're passionate about it. I'm mainly interested in at what point you will be satisfied that you've made your point and end the impotent rage? It must be quite an effort.

Try not regurgitating crap comments then in a stupid attempt score a neg point pages after the topic has come to an end and the thread has moved on to cover other people points/views/information.

Edited by Stickyfinger on Saturday 29th August 09:51