RE: PH2: new licencing laws explained...
Discussion
catso said:
For a bigger bike the test was purely theory, around a dozen multiple choice questions (car licence gave automatic bike entitlement) although it was restricted to certain engine sizes for 3 age breaks; 16, 18 & 21.
i heard in the USA to ride even a Hyabusa in some states was no more arduouse than a cbt in the UK. Could be wrong but you tube is full of videos of people picking up 1000cc machines at the dealers an riding straight into a tree etc.An isuspect if there was not test at 14 for a moped then people will still just ride them paper work in order or not
Seems like a lot of fuss to restrict bikers further. What difference does being 24 make to your ability to ride a big bike straight away?? I think it should have just stayed as it was but with no direct access. Anyone 19 or over should have to ride 33bhp first. (Two years is longer than nessacerry, if your still struggling to manage 33bhp after a year maybe bikes arent for you! I think we only need a 1 year restriction)
16 - 50cc Ped
17 to 19 - 125cc Ped/Bike
19 & Up - 33bhp for one year the unrestricted with no additional testing
Sounds fair to me.
16 - 50cc Ped
17 to 19 - 125cc Ped/Bike
19 & Up - 33bhp for one year the unrestricted with no additional testing
Sounds fair to me.
AntJD said:
Anyone 19 or over should have to ride 33bhp first. (Two years is longer than nessacerry, if your still struggling to manage 33bhp after a year maybe bikes arent for you! I think we only need a 1 year restriction)
not sure how this works but could you not do your test, wait two years or even the year as you suggest then just buy a 1000cc bike etc having never ridden at all. When I passed my test it was 3 months before I bought the GSXR due to funds avalible etcOn the whole I think the restrictions being age related are floored. experience is the key. insurance firms ask if you have ridden a bike over 600cc in last year etc.
My idea restrictions to thoes under 18 can ride up to 33bhp after doing a test and can have lessons on full power bike.
18+ can do DAS learn on full power bike pass test ride 33bhp for 1 year then if they want upgrade but you have to have ridden a bike for a year before you can buy a sports bike etc.
seems simple to me, an yes some peole would ensure a old cb500 an never ride it but that would be rare.
Bugger. Wish I'd have done the 33bhp test when I was 17 - instead I decided to wait until I was 21 (last year) to do Direct Access.
Couldn't do that because I knackered my back, and now I have to wait over 2 more years before I can ride any bike? Sigh.
Meh, I'll just stick to cars I think.
Couldn't do that because I knackered my back, and now I have to wait over 2 more years before I can ride any bike? Sigh.
Meh, I'll just stick to cars I think.
CBR JGWRR said:
The instructor is just trying to get a test out of you - provided you keep redoing CBT you can stay on a 125 for as long as you like. Well, nearly. Effectively as long as you would want...
Well, well, apart from being a load of bo....cks, were we not told that on such matters the U.K. would 'do it's own thing' over licencing? SO, IS "MR.SLIPPERY", WHILST NOW ABOUT TO TELL THE E.U (WE HOPE) THAT WE'VE HAD ENOUGH OF THEIR STUPID RULES, HE WILL MEANWHILE FOLLOW THEM AND REINSTATE THE ROLLING DATE FOR ROAD TAX LICENCE CONCESSIONS FOR HISTORIC VEHICLES, WHICH FIVA DEFINES AS OVER 30 YEARS OLD.Please note! There is a petition currently on the Government website - http://epetitions.direct.gov.uk/petitions/37880 - calling for reinstatement of the concession (as promised previously by the Conservatives if they were elected) but if you or your club subscribe to FBHVC don't expect them to remind you or encourage signing...you could ask them why!
You can get a schedule of COUNTRIES AND OLD VEHICLE CONCESSIONS from FIVA in Brussels. E-mail, info@FIVA.org
the government.....!(Silly money grabbing fuss. Took my test on Triumph Speed Twin immediately old enough for licence and i'm still alive)
Edited by gaz9185 on Monday 21st January 15:30
20 year old here.
Riding bikes since about 10.
50cc at 16
125cc at 17
33bhp licence at 18
Just came out my restriction now so free to ride anything.
I love my bikes and the first date I could get after my 16th birthday I went and did my CBT. But now, if i was doing it all again under these rules, I'd probably do a CBT at 16 and then car at 17 and thats that. Maybe return to bikes once over 24.
Shame.
I've sold my bike recently due to getting slightly bored of having no riding pals. Over 1000 friends on Facebook around my age, and only 1 other person rides a bike.
Too much hassle, too much money.
Riding bikes since about 10.
50cc at 16
125cc at 17
33bhp licence at 18
Just came out my restriction now so free to ride anything.
I love my bikes and the first date I could get after my 16th birthday I went and did my CBT. But now, if i was doing it all again under these rules, I'd probably do a CBT at 16 and then car at 17 and thats that. Maybe return to bikes once over 24.
Shame.
I've sold my bike recently due to getting slightly bored of having no riding pals. Over 1000 friends on Facebook around my age, and only 1 other person rides a bike.
Too much hassle, too much money.
Gecko1978 said:
gareth_r said:
It's nothing less than an attempt to remove motorcycles from the roads. They know they won't be able to get away with an outright ban (yet) so this is the first step.
If you were a bureaucrat trying to implement vision zero, where would you start?
I doubt it's an attempt to ban bikes etc more an attempt to reduce deaths on the roads, well intentioned but ill thought out.If you were a bureaucrat trying to implement vision zero, where would you start?
I think all car drivers should also have to do a cbt it would improve road awareness much more than an on screen hazard perception test (I did this for bike licence there was no theory etc when I did car licence).
And while insurance does limit chances of someone at 17 owning a Ferrari (that an the cost of the damn thing) I am pretty sure a Ford ka will kill a biker if it hits one on the motorway etc. Age limits are not the answer better training and consideration for others are key.
To my mind if you think breaking both legs on a scooter is fine then odds are you think ragging a Fiesta to death past a school is fine, or doing 110 on a dual carriage way in the rain is fine as long as your music is turned up high.
All this legislation will do is prevent new bikers getting on the scene. Which is odd given bikes are cheap fuel efficient reliable modes of transport. Who needs a G whiz when a cb125 will do 100mpg and crack the national speed limit.
HoggyXR3 said:
Hi, It would be a good idea to make all car drivers get a M/bike license, before being able to get a car license.
Hoggy.
Controversial!Hoggy.
It should certainly make the roads a safer place with regards to peoples awareness on the road. There is no doubt in my mind that riding a bike makes you more considerate on the road, and a better user of the road.
However on the downside - some people are just not built for using the road - and where as their box on wheels allows them to drive, crash, and hopefully not kill or injure anyone, riding a bike I can see the KSI stats rocketing.
The thought of some drivers I know riding a bike is petrifying. They would not be around long to tell the tale.
vonuber said:
So why doesn't this apply to cars?
It will, don't worry. Give them a few years, and when they can point to the "success" of the motorcycle licensing system, cars will inevitably follow.
Start with a minority (young motorcyclists) of a minority (young drivers), and work your way up.
Those of us who took our tests in the years before CBT or any of that stuff, when a learner was restricted to a 250cc bike, then on passing the test could ride "anything", and can pass comment on these new regulations, we all have different perspectives on this, good, bad, or indifferent.
The rot was started when Yamaha brought in the RD250LC, which in some circles was "guaranteed" to "do the ton". This set alarm bells ringing with those who make the big decisions, and before anyone could blink, in 1983 the 125cc law was introduced, along with a 17bhp limit to foil those clever engineers who could squeeze 50bhp out of a 125, and CBT. What they forgot was the issue of sidecars, which resulted in weird outfits like the Sidewinder, a tea tray with a wheel attached, and a frame attached to the bike of your choice, as long as "L" plates were displayed. I believe that that loophole has been closed?
Now, it's even more complex, and the howls of protest have started again. If I was 17 or 18 years old, I would be howling along with them.
However, there are on or two things that some of us older riders are either forgetting or ignoring.
Yes, we got our full licence at 17, 18, 19 years old, and jumped on our CB900, Z1, GS1000 or whatever, and rode them like demons and had a blast of a time and are none the worse for it. We can tell the young'uns how those were the days, etc etc.
The guys who can't tell us how wonderful it was are the ones who weren't so skilled, gifted or downright lucky as the rest of us, and who wrapped themselves around a lamp post, tree or car while attempting to do the ton on a bike with a fraction of the capabilities of today's bikes. They didn't even get the chance to see the internet.
There are exceptions, and always will be. It's been mentioned elsewhere, but Scott Redding would not be allowed to ride a 1000cc bike in the UK for a few years, yet he will be racing one with considerably more power this year in Moto GP. So while there are plenty of youngsters out there who have ridden since they were six years old, and can handle a big bike, they are just as stuffed as the other 17, 18 and 19 year olds. That's hard, but that's life.
I'm sure that we all know of "mature" bikers that have a fraction of the skills of a 19 year old. That includes both those who have ridden for 30 years, and those that passed their tests last week, aged 44. The main differnce, though, is that they will have a more mature outlook on life, and perhaps take a more resposible attitude to biking. Well, that's the theory anyway. The evidence in the courts might suggest otherwise, looking at the age of those caught speeding at ridiculous speeds recently. I know that that's a different can of worms, but let's just leave it at that.
As for the car versus bike argument, and 17 year olds driving Ferraris, well, while agree that that stinks, statistically at least, I would suggest that a £3000 second hand Fireblade is within reach of more 18 year olds than most second hand Supercars.
Personally speaking, when I was 19 years old, if someone gave me the keys to ANYTHING fast, car or bike, I wanted to see how fast it would go. Now, at 55, not so much.
In conclusion, if you are young, these new laws suck, and I fully understand the frustration of those that have been affected. I also agree that they are badly thought out, and introduced at a time when for both financial and environmental reasons, the government should be doing more to encourage us on to two wheels.
However, I don't think that they are "out to get us", rather than having a misinformed and misguided attempt at saving us from ourselves.
The rot was started when Yamaha brought in the RD250LC, which in some circles was "guaranteed" to "do the ton". This set alarm bells ringing with those who make the big decisions, and before anyone could blink, in 1983 the 125cc law was introduced, along with a 17bhp limit to foil those clever engineers who could squeeze 50bhp out of a 125, and CBT. What they forgot was the issue of sidecars, which resulted in weird outfits like the Sidewinder, a tea tray with a wheel attached, and a frame attached to the bike of your choice, as long as "L" plates were displayed. I believe that that loophole has been closed?
Now, it's even more complex, and the howls of protest have started again. If I was 17 or 18 years old, I would be howling along with them.
However, there are on or two things that some of us older riders are either forgetting or ignoring.
Yes, we got our full licence at 17, 18, 19 years old, and jumped on our CB900, Z1, GS1000 or whatever, and rode them like demons and had a blast of a time and are none the worse for it. We can tell the young'uns how those were the days, etc etc.
The guys who can't tell us how wonderful it was are the ones who weren't so skilled, gifted or downright lucky as the rest of us, and who wrapped themselves around a lamp post, tree or car while attempting to do the ton on a bike with a fraction of the capabilities of today's bikes. They didn't even get the chance to see the internet.
There are exceptions, and always will be. It's been mentioned elsewhere, but Scott Redding would not be allowed to ride a 1000cc bike in the UK for a few years, yet he will be racing one with considerably more power this year in Moto GP. So while there are plenty of youngsters out there who have ridden since they were six years old, and can handle a big bike, they are just as stuffed as the other 17, 18 and 19 year olds. That's hard, but that's life.
I'm sure that we all know of "mature" bikers that have a fraction of the skills of a 19 year old. That includes both those who have ridden for 30 years, and those that passed their tests last week, aged 44. The main differnce, though, is that they will have a more mature outlook on life, and perhaps take a more resposible attitude to biking. Well, that's the theory anyway. The evidence in the courts might suggest otherwise, looking at the age of those caught speeding at ridiculous speeds recently. I know that that's a different can of worms, but let's just leave it at that.
As for the car versus bike argument, and 17 year olds driving Ferraris, well, while agree that that stinks, statistically at least, I would suggest that a £3000 second hand Fireblade is within reach of more 18 year olds than most second hand Supercars.
Personally speaking, when I was 19 years old, if someone gave me the keys to ANYTHING fast, car or bike, I wanted to see how fast it would go. Now, at 55, not so much.
In conclusion, if you are young, these new laws suck, and I fully understand the frustration of those that have been affected. I also agree that they are badly thought out, and introduced at a time when for both financial and environmental reasons, the government should be doing more to encourage us on to two wheels.
However, I don't think that they are "out to get us", rather than having a misinformed and misguided attempt at saving us from ourselves.
Mad Jock said:
I'm sure that we all know of "mature" bikers that have a fraction of the skills of a 19 year old. That includes both those who have ridden for 30 years, and those that passed their tests last week, aged 44. The main differnce, though, is that they will have a more mature outlook on life, and perhaps take a more resposible attitude to biking. Well, that's the theory anyway. The evidence in the courts might suggest otherwise, looking at the age of those caught speeding at ridiculous speeds recently. I know that that's a different can of worms, but let's just leave it at that.
That's all well and good mate but at best their attitude is an irrelevance. Look at the actual numbers:http://www.maids-study.eu/pdf/OTS_MAIDS_comparison... Page 168.
Age 26-40 is the highest risk group and are responsible for over double the number of accidents.
Yet this is the group the legislation allows to get unrestricted licences with no previous experience required.
The theory of "they'll be more mature", is sound. But it has been disproved. In fact from a road safety perspective the legislation makes literally no sense. I think its far more likely that these older bikers are jumping on massive bikes, rushing their learning and thinking their car skills are transferable like cocky s
ts. Unless of course I'm misunderstanding these numbers, and I hope I am.
[Edit several times for s
t English]. Edited by Prof Prolapse on Monday 21st January 16:43
Boy how things have changed since I did my test. Back then the examiner was on foot and ran from corner to corner as you went around the block.
This is a sad day for motorcycling and I'm sure in a few years time seeing a youngster on a big bike will be quite rare. Let's face it, nobody buys a super bike to ride around like you've got Mrs Daisy on the back regardless of their age. My worry has always been the number of riders on sports bikes you see out and about that don't know what they're doing when pressing on - regardless of their age. I don't mean with regard to the highway code etc I mean with regard to riding a bike properly. CBT and tests don't teach this. If they really wanted to reduce bike deaths then a days training on a circuit teaching the basics on high performance riding skills would be better money spent. This of course would never happen, could you imagine the Daily Mail headlines if part of motorcycle training was to learn how to ride fast properly? Apparenty one of the most common motorcycle accidents is when someone is pressing on into a corner they then think they won't get around, panic and stand the bike up and then crash. In most cases the bike would have made it round.
I've been riding since I was a kid and have always had a bike, my later teen years were spent on 2 strokes like the RD500 etc. I've seen some pretty nasty accidents in years gone by, including a guy that rippped his left arm off. In what the mid 90's? We see biking become very popular, it was almost fashionable to have a motorbike. This extra popularity was good in many ways. It made biking more acceptable and the industry has boomed. The down side to his boom was the larger numbers in 'their' stats that were having accidents and this unfortunate fact brings us to where we are today.
Personally I think all drivers/riders should sit an IQ test before being allowed out on our roads, that would be a better way of reducing accidents.
This is a sad day for motorcycling and I'm sure in a few years time seeing a youngster on a big bike will be quite rare. Let's face it, nobody buys a super bike to ride around like you've got Mrs Daisy on the back regardless of their age. My worry has always been the number of riders on sports bikes you see out and about that don't know what they're doing when pressing on - regardless of their age. I don't mean with regard to the highway code etc I mean with regard to riding a bike properly. CBT and tests don't teach this. If they really wanted to reduce bike deaths then a days training on a circuit teaching the basics on high performance riding skills would be better money spent. This of course would never happen, could you imagine the Daily Mail headlines if part of motorcycle training was to learn how to ride fast properly? Apparenty one of the most common motorcycle accidents is when someone is pressing on into a corner they then think they won't get around, panic and stand the bike up and then crash. In most cases the bike would have made it round.
I've been riding since I was a kid and have always had a bike, my later teen years were spent on 2 strokes like the RD500 etc. I've seen some pretty nasty accidents in years gone by, including a guy that rippped his left arm off. In what the mid 90's? We see biking become very popular, it was almost fashionable to have a motorbike. This extra popularity was good in many ways. It made biking more acceptable and the industry has boomed. The down side to his boom was the larger numbers in 'their' stats that were having accidents and this unfortunate fact brings us to where we are today.
Personally I think all drivers/riders should sit an IQ test before being allowed out on our roads, that would be a better way of reducing accidents.
Edited by Gixer on Monday 21st January 16:45
I passed my test at 16.5 years old and got a 650 Triumph Bonneville, one of the top 120 mph bikes then, my present bike has 4 times the power and I still do track days in the fast group. Guess what, 40+ years of riding and despite countless attempts and 3 strikes, car drivers have failed to kill me and I have only falled off 3 times on the road all in town on bad surfaces at low speed. 22% of bike accidents are down to the rider, 14% to excessive speed. Last time, I spoke to anyone about this the cost was around £450-500 for effectively a 2 part Test. What is it going to be now? £1,000 - 1,500 thats the real sly devious killer for kids and thier parents, BEFORE insurance. On the otherhand a young car driver, what? ... one two part test and out on the road in a £400 hothatch shed battering ram. Haven't followed car licences either but how long before the 6" exhaust Subbie WRX?
Gecko1978 said:
catso said:
For a bigger bike the test was purely theory, around a dozen multiple choice questions (car licence gave automatic bike entitlement) although it was restricted to certain engine sizes for 3 age breaks; 16, 18 & 21.
i heard in the USA to ride even a Hyabusa in some states was no more arduouse than a cbt in the UK. Could be wrong but you tube is full of videos of people picking up 1000cc machines at the dealers an riding straight into a tree etc.Basically the DVLA and Parliament (and their equivalents in the rest of the EU and various other civilised nations ) considers the USA to have driving tests of an equivalent standard to Bongo-Bongo Land ...
Gassing Station | Biker Banter | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff