Is It Safer To Speed In a Car OR on a Motorbike?
Discussion
Thought that im would pose this question to everyone out there, i know that everyone will have their own opinions which is what im looking for and hopefully there will be some balanced discussions along the way!
Hopefully no one will say 'its safer not to speed' as we all know this to be true (in some circumstances).
This is purely a hypothetical question and im NOT condoning speeding in any way shape or form.
I was prompted to ask this question as i replied to another thread on this Forum regarding the 2 Motorcyclists that were Jailed for an Excess Speeding Offence.
I will post my opinions below.
Hopefully no one will say 'its safer not to speed' as we all know this to be true (in some circumstances).
This is purely a hypothetical question and im NOT condoning speeding in any way shape or form.
I was prompted to ask this question as i replied to another thread on this Forum regarding the 2 Motorcyclists that were Jailed for an Excess Speeding Offence.
I will post my opinions below.
Its all to do with the preceived risk
Ie if you know the consiquences of an impact you will minimize the risk which can be done in different ways pay lots of attention drive safly or drive a "safe car Volvo type"
A healthy fear of death will consentrate the mind, when driving fast you tend to consentrate on driving alone untill red mist comes down which is the line you should not cross.
70mph in a volvo quite safe same speed in my Westfield open to the wind [no screen] feels fast and you pay lots of attention to other drivers and how they are driving same most apply for bikers.
Paul.
Ie if you know the consiquences of an impact you will minimize the risk which can be done in different ways pay lots of attention drive safly or drive a "safe car Volvo type"
A healthy fear of death will consentrate the mind, when driving fast you tend to consentrate on driving alone untill red mist comes down which is the line you should not cross.
70mph in a volvo quite safe same speed in my Westfield open to the wind [no screen] feels fast and you pay lots of attention to other drivers and how they are driving same most apply for bikers.
Paul.
A car should always be able to out-stop a bike, massively so in the wet.
However, sports bikes now come with such incredible braking systems as standard that they can often out-brake many non-sports cars. Take a look at acceleration graphs from track days where cars and bikes have been running and you'll see that the very best cars always beat the bikes on the brakes, but that the bikes do beat some of the 'lesser' cars.
Another good example is Autocar's 0-100-0 tests. Bearing in mind that a decent sports bike will do 0-100mph in around 6s, if their braking was as good as the best cars (4-ish seconds, less for a Caterham R500 I think hence its world record) then we could expect a sub-11s 0-100-0 time, but we see more like 12s because their braking is simply not as good as the very best cars.
The next generation carbon-ceramic brakes that we're starting to see on the Enzo and Porsche GT should really move things on.
Amazingly an F1 car will brake from 100 mph to 0mph in less than 2 seconds and from 186mph to 0mph in around 4s!
If any race or road bike ever matches this without a parachute I'll be stunned and massively impressed.
As for answering the original question, I'd be happier travelling at a constant 150mph on a lightly trafficed road in a suitable car because I'd be safer. However, I agree that other people are probably safer when you're speeding on a bike.
I'd guess that anyone who has experienced travelling at 150mph in say a Porsche or high-powered Mercedes would agree?
If I just wanted to hit 150mph for a second or so and then slow down then a bike is probably safer because it would take much less time to do it (unless I was driving a McLaren F1!).
However, sports bikes now come with such incredible braking systems as standard that they can often out-brake many non-sports cars. Take a look at acceleration graphs from track days where cars and bikes have been running and you'll see that the very best cars always beat the bikes on the brakes, but that the bikes do beat some of the 'lesser' cars.
Another good example is Autocar's 0-100-0 tests. Bearing in mind that a decent sports bike will do 0-100mph in around 6s, if their braking was as good as the best cars (4-ish seconds, less for a Caterham R500 I think hence its world record) then we could expect a sub-11s 0-100-0 time, but we see more like 12s because their braking is simply not as good as the very best cars.
The next generation carbon-ceramic brakes that we're starting to see on the Enzo and Porsche GT should really move things on.
Amazingly an F1 car will brake from 100 mph to 0mph in less than 2 seconds and from 186mph to 0mph in around 4s!
If any race or road bike ever matches this without a parachute I'll be stunned and massively impressed. As for answering the original question, I'd be happier travelling at a constant 150mph on a lightly trafficed road in a suitable car because I'd be safer. However, I agree that other people are probably safer when you're speeding on a bike.
I'd guess that anyone who has experienced travelling at 150mph in say a Porsche or high-powered Mercedes would agree?
If I just wanted to hit 150mph for a second or so and then slow down then a bike is probably safer because it would take much less time to do it (unless I was driving a McLaren F1!).
Hm good question Tonyrec.
Lets have a look at the pro's and con's of each mode of travel.
High performace car.
Pros: Can have better cornering power.
Affords greater protection to the occupants in a collision, (airbags etc).
Is more visible usually than a bike.
Better wet traction.
Cons: Takes longer to stop as has a larger mass for the same speed.
Does greater damage at speed to other objects/people/cars.
Restricted visibility out, in some vehicles.
Loss of control on some models is harder to correct.
Bikes.
Pros: Has very good visibility out.
Better braking capacity than a car (less mass).
Has good manoureability, but dependent on rider skill.
Can cause significantly less damage in a collision to other vehicles.
Easy to outrun police...(joke
)
Cons: Poor crash protection for rider.
Low visibilty to other road users.
Easy for loss of control to occur, especially on wet surfaces.
There's most likely others that i havent thought of, but these are about the most important ones i can manage at the moment.
As for which one is "safer" to go a speedin in/on......ooooooo not my call.
For myself, id stick to the car, i really dont fancy getting blended by a tractor, ya know what i mean?
Lets have a look at the pro's and con's of each mode of travel.
High performace car.
Pros: Can have better cornering power.
Affords greater protection to the occupants in a collision, (airbags etc).
Is more visible usually than a bike.
Better wet traction.
Cons: Takes longer to stop as has a larger mass for the same speed.
Does greater damage at speed to other objects/people/cars.
Restricted visibility out, in some vehicles.
Loss of control on some models is harder to correct.
Bikes.
Pros: Has very good visibility out.
Better braking capacity than a car (less mass).
Has good manoureability, but dependent on rider skill.
Can cause significantly less damage in a collision to other vehicles.
Easy to outrun police...(joke
) Cons: Poor crash protection for rider.
Low visibilty to other road users.
Easy for loss of control to occur, especially on wet surfaces.
There's most likely others that i havent thought of, but these are about the most important ones i can manage at the moment.
As for which one is "safer" to go a speedin in/on......ooooooo not my call.
For myself, id stick to the car, i really dont fancy getting blended by a tractor, ya know what i mean?
tonyrec said:
Thought that im would pose this question to everyone out there, i know that everyone will have their own opinions which is what im looking for and hopefully there will be some balanced discussions along the way!
Hopefully no one will say 'its safer not to speed' as we all know this to be true (in some circumstances).
This is purely a hypothetical question and im NOT condoning speeding in any way shape or form.
I was prompted to ask this question as i replied to another thread on this Forum regarding the 2 Motorcyclists that were Jailed for an Excess Speeding Offence.
I will post my opinions below.
If you bin the bike your chances of walking away are obviously much slimmer, and statistics show bikes to be many times more dnagerous per mile travelled etc. These are real statistics rather than safety partnership statistics based on within 500m of a safety camera over a time period they choose and using a measure that suits them.
However a bike well ridden can be very safe, and even in some circumstances can have advantages over a car, for example you can position yourself much more to the left before a right hand bend than a driver of a right hand drive car could thus giving yourself a much better view of the road ahead. If you overtaking a group of cars and you have misjudged how long before a car on the other side of the road arrives in the same space as you there is much less likely to be a collision because there is more likely to be enough room for all the vehicles. If you come across the start of a queue on the motorway, you can filter rather than have to sit at the back hoping the person behind you clocks there is a queue (alright you can help yourself with the hazard lights in this situation).
However when braking hard you are much more subject to the standard of the road you are riding on. I once came of after my front wheel hit a ridge and I have seen the same thing happen to other people. Memorably one guy in Ealing High Street who had the anchors on full (but hadn't locked up) hit a ridge of no more than about an inch on the far side of the traffic lights which upset the geometry enough to pitch him off. With the state of the roads in Britain this has to be borne in mind, just about all cars would have shrugged off the road conditions in the incidents I described above but a bike won't.
Braking on bikes is limited by wheelbase and C of G. Brake too hard, and you get a stoppie. Surely this is the limiting factor under braking.
Also would have thought that braking hard mid corner on a bike is likely to spit you off, high side stylee. Isn't it also more difficult to change line on a bike or swerve? You've got the inertia of the whole bike to contend with rather than just that of the front wheels.
Also would have thought that braking hard mid corner on a bike is likely to spit you off, high side stylee. Isn't it also more difficult to change line on a bike or swerve? You've got the inertia of the whole bike to contend with rather than just that of the front wheels.
roadsweeper said:
.
I'd guess that anyone who has experienced travelling at 150mph in say a Porsche or high-powered Mercedes would agree?
Maybe... But the SL500 is sooo quiet that you dont really assimilate the actual speed you're doing and don't give adequate attention to what is happening around you.
No problem with the TVR as it's toooo loud to forget what speed you're doing.
And with the bikes I was always 110% concentration at that sort of speed. "everyone else on the road is a certified homicidal maniac' as I remember from a course with the Surrey BiB traffic bikers. They forgot to mention that its not just other 'road users'.... anyone else ever hit a bird at >100 on a bike??
mungo said:
I will post my opinions below.
Why do I get the impression the first post is a loaded question?
Certainly not.....im genuinely interested in the answers and everyone seems to have a balanced point to make, a lot of which comes down to personal experiences.
Apart from that its a change from the normal Talivan threads...!
Very good question Tony. From the answers already given I think it needs to be clarified though.
Are we talking average bike over average car or are we talking high performance types?
If average vehicles of each type then I would go for the bike. The average bike can out accelerate, out brake and out manouver the average car in most circumstances. Plus the average bike rider is far more aware of their surroundings and machine capabilities than the average car driver.
On the high performance end I would go for the car as they can brake and manouver better (due to more rubber on the road) and they tend to be driven enthusiats who are much more aware of their own and the cars abilities.
One other important point is physical size. The larger size of the car gives other road users greater visibility of the vehicle but the smaller size of the bike allows for smaller emergency escape routes and faster bursts of acceleration to get out of trouble. Also the height of a bike rider allows for better forward observation for hazards etc.
Unfortunately the final thing to consider is the damage done if an accident occurs. As we all know the main cause of injuries is not the accident itself but the way you stop. Stopping suddenly by hitting a fixed object such as a tree is pretty damaging to the body. Stopping against something soft-ish like an airbag is much safer. So again cars have the edge here. Especially with the improving crash test results of modern cars.
I'm not sure I have a final conclusion except that the main safety factor in speeding is the driver/rider and their skill and awareness of the road conditions. Rather than an particular vehicle type.
Are we talking average bike over average car or are we talking high performance types?
If average vehicles of each type then I would go for the bike. The average bike can out accelerate, out brake and out manouver the average car in most circumstances. Plus the average bike rider is far more aware of their surroundings and machine capabilities than the average car driver.
On the high performance end I would go for the car as they can brake and manouver better (due to more rubber on the road) and they tend to be driven enthusiats who are much more aware of their own and the cars abilities.
One other important point is physical size. The larger size of the car gives other road users greater visibility of the vehicle but the smaller size of the bike allows for smaller emergency escape routes and faster bursts of acceleration to get out of trouble. Also the height of a bike rider allows for better forward observation for hazards etc.
Unfortunately the final thing to consider is the damage done if an accident occurs. As we all know the main cause of injuries is not the accident itself but the way you stop. Stopping suddenly by hitting a fixed object such as a tree is pretty damaging to the body. Stopping against something soft-ish like an airbag is much safer. So again cars have the edge here. Especially with the improving crash test results of modern cars.
I'm not sure I have a final conclusion except that the main safety factor in speeding is the driver/rider and their skill and awareness of the road conditions. Rather than an particular vehicle type.
its differentt for different situations.
ie. on my bike outside lane of motorway guy in middle lane decides he wants to overtake after all, even though hes sat there quite happy until Ive reached him.
1) bike thinner so I can move a litte to the right out of the way. cant move teh same way in a car in this circumstance
2) bike accelerates much much faster than any car other than a super car so I can move to the right and give it a squirt and i'm out of the way.
but If I am hit in this way I will probably be dead on the bike but not in the car.
so probably slightly better for avoiding an accident but worse for survivng once involved
ie. on my bike outside lane of motorway guy in middle lane decides he wants to overtake after all, even though hes sat there quite happy until Ive reached him.
1) bike thinner so I can move a litte to the right out of the way. cant move teh same way in a car in this circumstance
2) bike accelerates much much faster than any car other than a super car so I can move to the right and give it a squirt and i'm out of the way.
but If I am hit in this way I will probably be dead on the bike but not in the car.
so probably slightly better for avoiding an accident but worse for survivng once involved
Iam talking about in general.
My own opinion is that, 'in general' you are at a far greater risk of causing yourself serious injury 'on average' whilst riding a motorcycle fast (or slow i guess).
From what ive seen and from my own experiences its not very often that you get a second chance of making a mistake on a Motorbike.
In general terms, if you make a mistake on a bike you are you are punished to a greater extent than if you had been driving a car.
This can be applied to almost every situation that i can think of.
The one example that i can think about regarding speed is......youre riding/driving along a deserted straight motorway cruising at 150mph.....all of a sudden you get a rear tyre blowout,hmmmmmmm.....i think that i would have a better chance of survival if i was sitting in the car.
I dealt with a Collison the other day whereby a Motorcyclist couldnt take a slight bend on a Dual carriageway (going too fast)and hit the central reservation which caused him to lose limbs.......I know for a fact that had he been driving a car then he would have had an awful lot more protection and would probably be telling the story to his mates.
I love to ride Motorbikes and couldnt do without the Buzz but i know that i feel a lot safer driving a car at speed.
Interesting comments though and it goes to show that everyone is different and has their own opinions.
My own opinion is that, 'in general' you are at a far greater risk of causing yourself serious injury 'on average' whilst riding a motorcycle fast (or slow i guess).
From what ive seen and from my own experiences its not very often that you get a second chance of making a mistake on a Motorbike.
In general terms, if you make a mistake on a bike you are you are punished to a greater extent than if you had been driving a car.
This can be applied to almost every situation that i can think of.
The one example that i can think about regarding speed is......youre riding/driving along a deserted straight motorway cruising at 150mph.....all of a sudden you get a rear tyre blowout,hmmmmmmm.....i think that i would have a better chance of survival if i was sitting in the car.
I dealt with a Collison the other day whereby a Motorcyclist couldnt take a slight bend on a Dual carriageway (going too fast)and hit the central reservation which caused him to lose limbs.......I know for a fact that had he been driving a car then he would have had an awful lot more protection and would probably be telling the story to his mates.
I love to ride Motorbikes and couldnt do without the Buzz but i know that i feel a lot safer driving a car at speed.
Interesting comments though and it goes to show that everyone is different and has their own opinions.
My personal perception is that I find it probably more dangerous in a car. To get a sensation of speed in a car, I find I need to maintain speed - it's not sufficient to just spool up to xxx mph and then down. On a bike, however, I'm much happier having a quick blat and then slowing down, because maintaining a high speed is quite noisy with the wind noise plus any road imperfections are significantly magnified. Plus, on a bike, I'm much more paranoid about upcoming corners, other road users, and the phantom tractor stopped around the next corner than I ever am in the car.
This might be why, in 12 years of driving better-than-numpty cars, I've never done any advanced tuition, whereas I've been riding for only two and half years and had two days of advanced training plus a Bikesafe day.
This might be why, in 12 years of driving better-than-numpty cars, I've never done any advanced tuition, whereas I've been riding for only two and half years and had two days of advanced training plus a Bikesafe day.
whoozit said:
This might be why, in 12 years of driving better-than-numpty cars, I've never done any advanced tuition, whereas I've been riding for only two and half years and had two days of advanced training plus a Bikesafe day.
As an aside...what did you think about the Bikesafe and where did you do it?
I'm lucky enough to have a fast bike and a fast car. The bike can go fast everywhere (where appropriate) as the acceleration is so strong and useable. Braking is not quite as good as a performance car, but not as bad as people think. Going over the braking limit on a bike is perilous though...
You need a lot of room to hustle a fast car along. It takes a while to get there due to being slower through the gears, and road position into corners is a handicap as the width of the car means you can't see through right hand bends as far.
At really high speed, the bike loses masses of speed due to the aerodynamic inefficiency, so you don't have to work too had to modulate your speed. Also, your senses are getting so much feedback, your awareness is generally higher, and if you have been riding for some time, you head for gaps, not obstacles while avoiding accidents!!
Prolonged high speed is, of course, much easier in a car due to comfort, effort needed and tank range.
50 miles 'A' road - No hesitation, Bike. Overtaking and space needed makes it much safer. 300 miles on a motorway - Car, on a fast bike I'd be knackered!
You need a lot of room to hustle a fast car along. It takes a while to get there due to being slower through the gears, and road position into corners is a handicap as the width of the car means you can't see through right hand bends as far.
At really high speed, the bike loses masses of speed due to the aerodynamic inefficiency, so you don't have to work too had to modulate your speed. Also, your senses are getting so much feedback, your awareness is generally higher, and if you have been riding for some time, you head for gaps, not obstacles while avoiding accidents!!
Prolonged high speed is, of course, much easier in a car due to comfort, effort needed and tank range.
50 miles 'A' road - No hesitation, Bike. Overtaking and space needed makes it much safer. 300 miles on a motorway - Car, on a fast bike I'd be knackered!
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff