Why I'll never take a bike to the ring...
Discussion
black-k1 said:
stuff
Just cos he rides a bike and I ride a bike doesn't mean I'll automatically 'side' with him. In my view, the car is not indicating right demonstrating he has seen the biker. Therefore the rider must assume that the car is going to go for the apex, he would be foolish to assume otherwise.The biker then proceeds to accelerate towards the apex from a slow entry speed - in my view - to try and keep up with the bike infront.
I still attach blame for this off to the biker I'm afraid.
black-k1 said:
To the biker in the video – you have my deepest sympathy mate and I hope you make sure that the car driver pays for all damage done to you and your bike.
Well, I hope he's ok of course but I doubt the car driver is culpable in that sense.hornetrider said:
black-k1 said:
stuff
Just cos he rides a bike and I ride a bike doesn't mean I'll automatically 'side' with him. In my view, the car is not indicating right demonstrating he has seen the biker. Therefore the rider must assume that the car is going to go for the apex, he would be foolish to assume otherwise.The biker then proceeds to accelerate towards the apex from a slow entry speed - in my view - to try and keep up with the bike infront.
I still attach blame for this off to the biker I'm afraid.
black-k1 said:
To the biker in the video – you have my deepest sympathy mate and I hope you make sure that the car driver pays for all damage done to you and your bike.
Well, I hope he's ok of course but I doubt the car driver is culpable in that sense.I will give you what I see is an equivalent UK road scenario: Dual carriageway approach to a round about (normal 4 roads meeting set-up) with a car being driven quickly in the left lane, not indicating. A bike approaching, behind the car but in the right lane, again, not indicating. The roundabout is clear and visibility across it is good. The car gets onto the roundabout ahead of the bike but the bike is going significantly faster than the car. The car ‘cuts’ the roundabout, moving to the apex on the right and in doing so causes the bike to brake ‘mid lean’ to avoid hitting the back of the car. This in turn causes the biker to loose the front and end up in scenery. Now, who is at fault?
black-k1 said:
hornetrider said:
black-k1 said:
stuff
Just cos he rides a bike and I ride a bike doesn't mean I'll automatically 'side' with him. In my view, the car is not indicating right demonstrating he has seen the biker. Therefore the rider must assume that the car is going to go for the apex, he would be foolish to assume otherwise.The biker then proceeds to accelerate towards the apex from a slow entry speed - in my view - to try and keep up with the bike infront.
I still attach blame for this off to the biker I'm afraid.
black-k1 said:
To the biker in the video – you have my deepest sympathy mate and I hope you make sure that the car driver pays for all damage done to you and your bike.
Well, I hope he's ok of course but I doubt the car driver is culpable in that sense.I will give you what I see is an equivalent UK road scenario: Dual carriageway approach to a round about (normal 4 roads meeting set-up) with a car being driven quickly in the left lane, not indicating. A bike approaching, behind the car but in the right lane, again, not indicating. The roundabout is clear and visibility across it is good. The car gets onto the roundabout ahead of the bike but the bike is going significantly faster than the car. The car ‘cuts’ the roundabout, moving to the apex on the right and in doing so causes the bike to brake ‘mid lean’ to avoid hitting the back of the car. This in turn causes the biker to loose the front and end up in scenery. Now, who is at fault?
"You'll be overtaken by lots of fast-moving traffic, so keep an eye on your rear-view mirror, move over to the right and indicate right to let it past"
the BMW is not indicating right demonstrating he has seen the biker. Therefore the rider must assume that the car is going to go for the apex, he would be foolish to assume otherwise.
Edited by y2blade on Tuesday 4th March 11:43
black-k1 said:
hornetrider said:
black-k1 said:
stuff
Just cos he rides a bike and I ride a bike doesn't mean I'll automatically 'side' with him. In my view, the car is not indicating right demonstrating he has seen the biker. Therefore the rider must assume that the car is going to go for the apex, he would be foolish to assume otherwise.The biker then proceeds to accelerate towards the apex from a slow entry speed - in my view - to try and keep up with the bike infront.
I still attach blame for this off to the biker I'm afraid.
black-k1 said:
To the biker in the video – you have my deepest sympathy mate and I hope you make sure that the car driver pays for all damage done to you and your bike.
Well, I hope he's ok of course but I doubt the car driver is culpable in that sense.I will give you what I see is an equivalent UK road scenario: Dual carriageway approach to a round about (normal 4 roads meeting set-up) with a car being driven quickly in the left lane, not indicating. A bike approaching, behind the car but in the right lane, again, not indicating. The roundabout is clear and visibility across it is good. The car gets onto the roundabout ahead of the bike but the bike is going significantly faster than the car. The car ‘cuts’ the roundabout, moving to the apex on the right and in doing so causes the bike to brake ‘mid lean’ to avoid hitting the back of the car. This in turn causes the biker to loose the front and end up in scenery. Now, who is at fault?
garyhun said:
black-k1 said:
hornetrider said:
black-k1 said:
stuff
Just cos he rides a bike and I ride a bike doesn't mean I'll automatically 'side' with him. In my view, the car is not indicating right demonstrating he has seen the biker. Therefore the rider must assume that the car is going to go for the apex, he would be foolish to assume otherwise.The biker then proceeds to accelerate towards the apex from a slow entry speed - in my view - to try and keep up with the bike infront.
I still attach blame for this off to the biker I'm afraid.
black-k1 said:
To the biker in the video – you have my deepest sympathy mate and I hope you make sure that the car driver pays for all damage done to you and your bike.
Well, I hope he's ok of course but I doubt the car driver is culpable in that sense.I will give you what I see is an equivalent UK road scenario: Dual carriageway approach to a round about (normal 4 roads meeting set-up) with a car being driven quickly in the left lane, not indicating. A bike approaching, behind the car but in the right lane, again, not indicating. The roundabout is clear and visibility across it is good. The car gets onto the roundabout ahead of the bike but the bike is going significantly faster than the car. The car ‘cuts’ the roundabout, moving to the apex on the right and in doing so causes the bike to brake ‘mid lean’ to avoid hitting the back of the car. This in turn causes the biker to loose the front and end up in scenery. Now, who is at fault?
i knew we wer'nt the only ones that see it this way
black-k1 - in your roundabout scenario (which is different incidentally) I would still attribute some blame to the biker.
Part of your responsibility on 2 wheels is to assume everyone is out to get you and ride accordingly. If a roundabout is such a shape and I'm approaching at high speed with a car in front of me also approaching the obstacle at speed, you'd better believe I'm not going to undercut that guy on the roundabout.
I would be foolish to do so, because I would be putting myself and my lovely machine at risk.
At the end of the day, the rider has to assume that cos this is the ring, the likelihood is that the car is going to gun for the apex, given he is not indicating to the right.
As has been mentioned, I see no gain in smashing into a car who undercut me on a roundabout, picking up my destroyed bike but saying "I was technically in the right".
I'd much rather hang back, let the car do its thing, be pleasantly surprised when he goes all the way round in his correct lane, and shoot past him on the straight.
But perhaps thats why I've never put my bike into an armco.
Part of your responsibility on 2 wheels is to assume everyone is out to get you and ride accordingly. If a roundabout is such a shape and I'm approaching at high speed with a car in front of me also approaching the obstacle at speed, you'd better believe I'm not going to undercut that guy on the roundabout.
I would be foolish to do so, because I would be putting myself and my lovely machine at risk.
At the end of the day, the rider has to assume that cos this is the ring, the likelihood is that the car is going to gun for the apex, given he is not indicating to the right.
As has been mentioned, I see no gain in smashing into a car who undercut me on a roundabout, picking up my destroyed bike but saying "I was technically in the right".
I'd much rather hang back, let the car do its thing, be pleasantly surprised when he goes all the way round in his correct lane, and shoot past him on the straight.
But perhaps thats why I've never put my bike into an armco.
y2blade said:
black-k1 said:
hornetrider said:
black-k1 said:
stuff
Just cos he rides a bike and I ride a bike doesn't mean I'll automatically 'side' with him. In my view, the car is not indicating right demonstrating he has seen the biker. Therefore the rider must assume that the car is going to go for the apex, he would be foolish to assume otherwise.The biker then proceeds to accelerate towards the apex from a slow entry speed - in my view - to try and keep up with the bike infront.
I still attach blame for this off to the biker I'm afraid.
black-k1 said:
To the biker in the video – you have my deepest sympathy mate and I hope you make sure that the car driver pays for all damage done to you and your bike.
Well, I hope he's ok of course but I doubt the car driver is culpable in that sense.I will give you what I see is an equivalent UK road scenario: Dual carriageway approach to a round about (normal 4 roads meeting set-up) with a car being driven quickly in the left lane, not indicating. A bike approaching, behind the car but in the right lane, again, not indicating. The roundabout is clear and visibility across it is good. The car gets onto the roundabout ahead of the bike but the bike is going significantly faster than the car. The car ‘cuts’ the roundabout, moving to the apex on the right and in doing so causes the bike to brake ‘mid lean’ to avoid hitting the back of the car. This in turn causes the biker to loose the front and end up in scenery. Now, who is at fault?
"You'll be overtaken by lots of fast-moving traffic, so keep an eye on your rear-view mirror, move over to the right and indicate right to let it past"
the BMW is not indicating right demonstrating he has seen the biker. Therefore the rider must assume that the car is going to go for the apex, he would be foolish to assume otherwise.
Edited by y2blade on Tuesday 4th March 11:43
http://www.nurburgring.org.uk/ringrules.html
These are taken from the rule board at the entry slip road to the 'Ring.
Rule 2.3 is VERY clear
3) Vehicles must drive on the right, in particular when overtaken, on crests, in bends or in case of breakdown.
(my bold)
Yes, the biker should have taken the safer option and not gone for the overtake but his ONLY mistake was to assume that the car would do what it was supposed to do.
y2blade said:
hornetrider said:
black-k1 - in your roundabout scenario (which is different incidentally) I would still attribute some blame to the biker.
Part of your responsibility on 2 wheels is to assume everyone is out to get you and ride accordingly. If a roundabout is such a shape and I'm approaching at high speed with a car in front of me also approaching the obstacle at speed, you'd better believe I'm not going to undercut that guy on the roundabout.
I would be foolish to do so, because I would be putting myself and my lovely machine at risk.
At the end of the day, the rider has to assume that cos this is the ring, the likelihood is that the car is going to gun for the apex, given he is not indicating to the right.
As has been mentioned, I see no gain in smashing into a car who undercut me on a roundabout, picking up my destroyed bike but saying "I was technically in the right".
I'd much rather hang back, let the car do its thing, be pleasantly surprised when he goes all the way round in his correct lane, and shoot past him on the straight.
But perhaps thats why I've never put my bike into an armco.
exactly Part of your responsibility on 2 wheels is to assume everyone is out to get you and ride accordingly. If a roundabout is such a shape and I'm approaching at high speed with a car in front of me also approaching the obstacle at speed, you'd better believe I'm not going to undercut that guy on the roundabout.
I would be foolish to do so, because I would be putting myself and my lovely machine at risk.
At the end of the day, the rider has to assume that cos this is the ring, the likelihood is that the car is going to gun for the apex, given he is not indicating to the right.
As has been mentioned, I see no gain in smashing into a car who undercut me on a roundabout, picking up my destroyed bike but saying "I was technically in the right".
I'd much rather hang back, let the car do its thing, be pleasantly surprised when he goes all the way round in his correct lane, and shoot past him on the straight.
But perhaps thats why I've never put my bike into an armco.
black-k1 said:
Yes, the biker should have taken the safer option and not gone for the overtake but his ONLY mistake was to assume that the car would do what it was supposed to do.
so after all that you agree the biker should have waited!assumption is the mother of all f-ck-ups
as i biker i dont take anything for granted...i ride as if everyone else is out to get me
y2blade said:
black-k1 said:
Yes, the biker should have taken the safer option and not gone for the overtake but his ONLY mistake was to assume that the car would do what it was supposed to do.
so after all that you agree the biker should have waited!assumption is the mother of all f-ck-ups
as i biker i dont take anything for granted...i ride as if everyone else is out to get me
hornetrider said:
black-k1 - in your roundabout scenario (which is different incidentally) I would still attribute some blame to the biker.
Part of your responsibility on 2 wheels is to assume everyone is out to get you and ride accordingly. If a roundabout is such a shape and I'm approaching at high speed with a car in front of me also approaching the obstacle at speed, you'd better believe I'm not going to undercut that guy on the roundabout.
I would be foolish to do so, because I would be putting myself and my lovely machine at risk.
At the end of the day, the rider has to assume that cos this is the ring, the likelihood is that the car is going to gun for the apex, given he is not indicating to the right.
As has been mentioned, I see no gain in smashing into a car who undercut me on a roundabout, picking up my destroyed bike but saying "I was technically in the right".
I'd much rather hang back, let the car do its thing, be pleasantly surprised when he goes all the way round in his correct lane, and shoot past him on the straight.
But perhaps thats why I've never put my bike into an armco.
My new bed time prayer: Part of your responsibility on 2 wheels is to assume everyone is out to get you and ride accordingly. If a roundabout is such a shape and I'm approaching at high speed with a car in front of me also approaching the obstacle at speed, you'd better believe I'm not going to undercut that guy on the roundabout.
I would be foolish to do so, because I would be putting myself and my lovely machine at risk.
At the end of the day, the rider has to assume that cos this is the ring, the likelihood is that the car is going to gun for the apex, given he is not indicating to the right.
As has been mentioned, I see no gain in smashing into a car who undercut me on a roundabout, picking up my destroyed bike but saying "I was technically in the right".
I'd much rather hang back, let the car do its thing, be pleasantly surprised when he goes all the way round in his correct lane, and shoot past him on the straight.
But perhaps thats why I've never put my bike into an armco.
I only hope that one day, with enough practice, I too will be a good enough rider as to be able to anticipate the actions of other road users, even if they decide not to follow the rules of the road. In the mean time, if I do make the occasional mistake in judgement, even though my actions are perfectly legal and regardless of whether other road users are following the rules of the road, I will simply have to accept that it is at least partially my fault.
y2blade said:
GreenV8S said:
Under those circumstances I would expect most cars to take the racing line through most corners. It seems very foolish to me to risk your life on the assumption that they won't. It may be that the circuit rules say they're in the wrong, but that won't be any consolation to your next of kin.
very well saidI've been to the ring a couple of times now, and I've never seen anyone adhering to these rules, bikes and cars alike.
(in fact, I have a video of myself and a mate stuck behind some slower bikers who kept coming across to the left to hit the apex - we didn't dare overtake as there almost certainly would have been a collision)
black-k1 said:
Yes, I have always agreed he should have waited but he was not the one who was 'at fault'. I am just surprised at the apparent lack of sympathy/understanding for a fellow road user who has suffered as a result of the illegal actions of another.
Sticking my neck out here and shall wait for the backlash.I have no sympathy for the bike rider.
Irrespective of the 'rules'of the ring, he went there for one reason and one reason only. TO GO FAST. Unfortunately for him, so did the driver of the bmw. The bike rider made the most stupid mistake ever in trying to take him on the inside, and he paid for his mistake. I suspect neither of the people involved are experienced racers, had they have been, the outcome may have been different.
The car driver was probably focussing on what was ahead, just as I would on a 'track' and had no idea there was a bike about to dive up his inside.
It sounds like everyone agrees the biker shouldn't have gone for the overtake, but the question is over the technical liability. I read black-k1's comments as "yes as a biker, I would choose self-preservation over being in the right, but given that it's happened, the car still performed the illegal manoeuvre not the biker". I can see the logic there - that regardless of whether there was a crash the blame still lies with the car driver if you go by the rules. And that the biker performed a very-ill-advised-but-technically-legal overtake.
trumpet600 said:
black-k1 said:
Yes, I have always agreed he should have waited but he was not the one who was 'at fault'. I am just surprised at the apparent lack of sympathy/understanding for a fellow road user who has suffered as a result of the illegal actions of another.
Sticking my neck out here and shall wait for the backlash.I have no sympathy for the bike rider.
Irrespective of the 'rules'of the ring, he went there for one reason and one reason only. TO GO FAST. Unfortunately for him, so did the driver of the bmw. The bike rider made the most stupid mistake ever in trying to take him on the inside, and he paid for his mistake. I suspect neither of the people involved are experienced racers, had they have been, the outcome may have been different.
The car driver was probably focussing on what was ahead, just as I would on a 'track' and had no idea there was a bike about to dive up his inside.
I wish I had your ability to read minds! How the hell do you know what reasons either the biker or the car driver had for going to the ‘Ring?
And before you answer ‘well, that’s why everyone goes’ I’ve been to the ‘Ring with a group of friends and I can confidently say that none of us went there ‘TO GO FAST’. We went to experience riding the ‘Ring and just to see what it was actually like. I have ridden many public roads faster than I rode at the ‘Ring.
Edited by black-k1 on Tuesday 4th March 13:28
black-k1 said:
trumpet600 said:
black-k1 said:
Yes, I have always agreed he should have waited but he was not the one who was 'at fault'. I am just surprised at the apparent lack of sympathy/understanding for a fellow road user who has suffered as a result of the illegal actions of another.
Sticking my neck out here and shall wait for the backlash.I have no sympathy for the bike rider.
Irrespective of the 'rules'of the ring, he went there for one reason and one reason only. TO GO FAST. Unfortunately for him, so did the driver of the bmw. The bike rider made the most stupid mistake ever in trying to take him on the inside, and he paid for his mistake. I suspect neither of the people involved are experienced racers, had they have been, the outcome may have been different.
The car driver was probably focussing on what was ahead, just as I would on a 'track' and had no idea there was a bike about to dive up his inside.
I wish I had your ability to read minds! How the hell do you know what reasons either the biker or the car driver had for going to the ‘Ring?
And before you answer ‘well, that’s why everyone goes’ I’ve been to the ‘Ring with a group of friends and I can confidently say that none of us went there ‘TO GO FAST’. We went to experience riding the ‘Ring and just to see what it was actually like. I have ridden many public roads faster than I rode at the ‘Ring.
Edited by black-k1 on Tuesday 4th March 13:28
everyone else see's this differantly to you!?! surely you cant be wrong?
y2blade said:
black-k1 said:
trumpet600 said:
black-k1 said:
Yes, I have always agreed he should have waited but he was not the one who was 'at fault'. I am just surprised at the apparent lack of sympathy/understanding for a fellow road user who has suffered as a result of the illegal actions of another.
Sticking my neck out here and shall wait for the backlash.I have no sympathy for the bike rider.
Irrespective of the 'rules'of the ring, he went there for one reason and one reason only. TO GO FAST. Unfortunately for him, so did the driver of the bmw. The bike rider made the most stupid mistake ever in trying to take him on the inside, and he paid for his mistake. I suspect neither of the people involved are experienced racers, had they have been, the outcome may have been different.
The car driver was probably focussing on what was ahead, just as I would on a 'track' and had no idea there was a bike about to dive up his inside.
I wish I had your ability to read minds! How the hell do you know what reasons either the biker or the car driver had for going to the ‘Ring?
And before you answer ‘well, that’s why everyone goes’ I’ve been to the ‘Ring with a group of friends and I can confidently say that none of us went there ‘TO GO FAST’. We went to experience riding the ‘Ring and just to see what it was actually like. I have ridden many public roads faster than I rode at the ‘Ring.
Edited by black-k1 on Tuesday 4th March 13:28
everyone else see's this differantly to you!?! surely you cant be wrong?
(Not everyone disagrees with me - check all the posts)Interesting article here:
http://driving.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_styl...
Key text from the article:
German traffic laws apply: overtaking is on the left only and if you’re rear-ended when you’re on the left of the track the accident is your fault. 
So, given the rules clearly signed at the 'Ring, and the clear definition from German traffic law, where exactly is the justification for the biker being wrong and the car not being wrong coming from?
Ah yes, I remember, it’s a track and the car was taking the racing line! Except .......
it’s not a track! 
black-k1 said:
trumpet600 said:
black-k1 said:
Yes, I have always agreed he should have waited but he was not the one who was 'at fault'. I am just surprised at the apparent lack of sympathy/understanding for a fellow road user who has suffered as a result of the illegal actions of another.
Sticking my neck out here and shall wait for the backlash.I have no sympathy for the bike rider.
Irrespective of the 'rules'of the ring, he went there for one reason and one reason only. TO GO FAST. Unfortunately for him, so did the driver of the bmw. The bike rider made the most stupid mistake ever in trying to take him on the inside, and he paid for his mistake. I suspect neither of the people involved are experienced racers, had they have been, the outcome may have been different.
The car driver was probably focussing on what was ahead, just as I would on a 'track' and had no idea there was a bike about to dive up his inside.
I wish I had your ability to read minds! How the hell do you know what reasons either the biker or the car driver had for going to the ‘Ring?
And before you answer ‘well, that’s why everyone goes’ I’ve been to the ‘Ring with a group of friends and I can confidently say that none of us went there ‘TO GO FAST’. We went to experience riding the ‘Ring and just to see what it was actually like. I have ridden many public roads faster than I rode at the ‘Ring.
Edited by black-k1 on Tuesday 4th March 13:28
As for reading minds, I believe that all regular riders begin to 'read' what other drivers are going to do to a degree. It helps keep you alive.
I don't know the reason for either of them being at the ring, but you're fooling yourself if you think it was for anything other than 'stretching their legs'. The biker may have had a little red mist going on and thought the opportunity had arisen to take the bmw. I can just see it now.....'I hope my mates are watching thiiiiiiii'..............BANG.
trumpet600 said:
black-k1 said:
trumpet600 said:
black-k1 said:
Yes, I have always agreed he should have waited but he was not the one who was 'at fault'. I am just surprised at the apparent lack of sympathy/understanding for a fellow road user who has suffered as a result of the illegal actions of another.
Sticking my neck out here and shall wait for the backlash.I have no sympathy for the bike rider.
Irrespective of the 'rules'of the ring, he went there for one reason and one reason only. TO GO FAST. Unfortunately for him, so did the driver of the bmw. The bike rider made the most stupid mistake ever in trying to take him on the inside, and he paid for his mistake. I suspect neither of the people involved are experienced racers, had they have been, the outcome may have been different.
The car driver was probably focussing on what was ahead, just as I would on a 'track' and had no idea there was a bike about to dive up his inside.
I wish I had your ability to read minds! How the hell do you know what reasons either the biker or the car driver had for going to the ‘Ring?
And before you answer ‘well, that’s why everyone goes’ I’ve been to the ‘Ring with a group of friends and I can confidently say that none of us went there ‘TO GO FAST’. We went to experience riding the ‘Ring and just to see what it was actually like. I have ridden many public roads faster than I rode at the ‘Ring.
Edited by black-k1 on Tuesday 4th March 13:28
As for reading minds, I believe that all regular riders begin to 'read' what other drivers are going to do to a degree. It helps keep you alive.
I don't know the reason for either of them being at the ring, but you're fooling yourself if you think it was for anything other than 'stretching their legs'. The biker may have had a little red mist going on and thought the opportunity had arisen to take the bmw. I can just see it now.....'I hope my mates are watching thiiiiiiii'..............BANG.
although me and my g/f are going to the ring in sept in the car! not to thrash the t-t's off it but for the road trip and to say we have been...you know "tick that box"
i'll be keeping a good eye on my mirrors for sure, i do anyway in everyday driving/riding...i'm very aware of whats going on around me
Just another opinion to throw into the pot, I for one could not see if the biker was indicating to overtake a requirement by german road law, a small but important piece of information IMO and looking at the video the bike was for a large part in the drivers blind spot so it is even more riduculous to think he would overtake at that point.
I feel for the fella but when on average you have 1 death per week on the ring with regards to riders I most certainly would not drive it to the limit like he was.
I feel for the fella but when on average you have 1 death per week on the ring with regards to riders I most certainly would not drive it to the limit like he was.
Gassing Station | Biker Banter | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff