Chris Harris having a pop at bikers....

[amare32]

Just been flicking through Autocar and read Chris Harris' article droning about how irresponsible some bikers are and sooner or later they'll spoil it for the majority by making the government forcing more restrictions...as if car drivers never drive irresponsibly. Jeez..

I'm a car driver myself and currently doing my DAS, since I've started biking I'm even more aware of idoits in cars than bikers TBH. The article was a bit sweeping and was pretty disappointed coming from him.

[johnnystorm]

He'll write what the readers want to hear. They won't mind fast cars because only the rich can afford them. Bikes are great as a pikey like me can keep up for a few quid.

[RemaL]

very true. also I found since getting my bike licence that I have been hearing more about bikes in the press from newspapers to magazines. but I think thats just because I am more aware of it and before I probably just passed it without notice

[black-k1]

I’ve not read the article but from the brief summary in the original post I think Chris Harris has a point. There are some extremely irresponsible bikers out there who do do some stupid things and are very likely to “spoil it for the rest”. While I know there are also some very bad car drivers/lorry drivers/van drivers etc. as motorcyclist we are different from all the other road users and thus we stand out when we do something stupid. When things go wrong we also tend to get hurt (often badly) which means that the perception of Joe Public that motorcycling is dangerous and thus motorcyclists must already be a couple of sandwiches short of a picnic. This perception is only enhanced when they spot someone “hooning” on the road.

We all have a responsibility to each other to ensure that motorcycling is not seen as a past time that needs a nanny state to control it and to impose restrictions for ‘our own good’.

[scotia_steve74]

He's just jealous as he doesnt have a bike!

Didn't he used to hoon his 993 RS and turbo about? Wouln't break the limits in them eh Chris

[Alex Gurr]

black-k1 said:

I’ve not read the article but from the brief summary in the original post I think Chris Harris has a point. There are some extremely irresponsible bikers out there who do do some stupid things and are very likely to “spoil it for the rest”. While I know there are also some very bad car drivers/lorry drivers/van drivers etc. as motorcyclist we are different from all the other road users and thus we stand out when we do something stupid. When things go wrong we also tend to get hurt (often badly) which means that the perception of Joe Public that motorcycling is dangerous and thus motorcyclists must already be a couple of sandwiches short of a picnic. This perception is only enhanced when they spot someone “hooning” on the road.

We all have a responsibility to each other to ensure that motorcycling is not seen as a past time that needs a nanny state to control it and to impose restrictions for ‘our own good’.

I agree. I also think part of the problem is weather related. As soon as there is a sunny day after a long period of wet weather the roads become swarmed with bikes.

I think many motorists can get intimidated by this, especially when bikers travel in groups and at high speeds.

At the end of the day it is all about perceptions. If there is a widely held perception that bikers are behaving like idots then we all have to do something to prove otherwise. If not, we all end up worse off as our freedoms are taken away from us.

[shot2bits]

black-k1 said:

I’ve not read the article but from the brief summary in the original post I think Chris Harris has a point. There are some extremely irresponsible bikers out there who do do some stupid things and are very likely to “spoil it for the rest”. While I know there are also some very bad car drivers/lorry drivers/van drivers etc. as motorcyclist we are different from all the other road users and thus we stand out when we do something stupid. When things go wrong we also tend to get hurt (often badly) which means that the perception of Joe Public that motorcycling is dangerous and thus motorcyclists must already be a couple of sandwiches short of a picnic. This perception is only enhanced when they spot someone “hooning” on the road.

We all have a responsibility to each other to ensure that motorcycling is not seen as a past time that needs a nanny state to control it and to impose restrictions for ‘our own good’.

I kind of agree but the biggest difference is "hooning" bikes are much more visible to other road users since they never sit behind a queue of traffic so there's many more overtakes compared to cars. What I mean is that they end up burning past giving the impression they're dangerous when in actual fact the overtake job is done much quicker than a tonne of metal at a higher, louder RPM. My wife often comments on how dangerous a biker looks when they come past or pass us the other way - in actual fact they're probably way within their limits but to somebody who doesn't ride, it looks dangerous. I think old Chris should stick to making comments about cars rather than a mode of transport that he knows nothing about.

[slim_boy_fat]

Having read the article tonight (unlike others who have commented!!) i think he has a point. Having seem two crashes this weekend (one fatal) and another fatal the same day different location i think bikers are really digging their own grave (which was really the point he was making)

Too many bikers are riding like tts all the time (not just the occasional time like most of us) and its not just new riders, or born again 40 year olds either.

I just cant see biking continuing like it is much longer without government intervention on power/speed/cost or much strickter training.

One things for sure, if my wife hears many more stories of dead bikers then i will have to call it a day, its just not worth the hassel. Even worse it will force me to have to spend more money than i want or can afford on a performance car. At best i might get away with a track only bike and trailer!!

[johnnystorm]

slim_boy_fat said:

Having read the article tonight (unlike others who have commented!!) i think he has a point. Having seem two crashes this weekend (one fatal) and another fatal the same day different location i think bikers are really digging their own grave (which was really the point he was making)

Granted, as bikes are a rarer sight misbehaviour is more obvious but how much is rooted in resentment of the fact we can make easier progress in what is perceived a "dangerous" manner? I'm convinced people would look at the gap that a bike needs to overtake and then can only imagine that manouvere in their lardy saloon without realising the actual safety margin. I know the stats show bikers as being involved in a disproportionate number of accidents but if you carved up car drivers into sub-sections I bet some of them would rival bikers! Case in point the 106 Chavmobile that rolled through my colleagues front garden and into his living room.

[amare32]

I think resentment plays a big part in people's attitude toward bikers. In the same way that a frustrated MPV driver giving you the 'V' sign if you overtook him in a high performance car even though you have applied the overtake in a safe manner. People are always jealous what they can't have.

[black-k1]

slim_boy_fat said:

Having read the article tonight (unlike others who have commented!!) i think he has a point. Having seem two crashes this weekend (one fatal) and another fatal the same day different location i think bikers are really digging their own grave (which was really the point he was making)

Too many bikers are riding like tts all the time (not just the occasional time like most of us) and its not just new riders, or born again 40 year olds either.

I just cant see biking continuing like it is much longer without government intervention on power/speed/cost or much strickter training.

And when the sanctions are imposed, we’ll have no one to blame but ourselves! While those on PH BB are certainly better than most, it is still very obvious that road skills training where not only will you learn to look after yourself but you will also learn how to ensure that others do not get the wrong impression of your riding, is viewed as considerably less important than track training.

slim_boy_fat said:

One things for sure, if my wife hears many more stories of dead bikers then i will have to call it a day, its just not worth the hassel. Even worse it will force me to have to spend more money than i want or can afford on a performance car. At best i might get away with a track only bike and trailer!!

That would be a shame but an understandable move. One thing to remember is that a motorcyclist with good road skills is actually not really any more likely to be involved in a serious or fatal accident than a high performance car driver.

If you use Roadcraft and drive for road conditions (not track conditions) then you will be able to have fun, ensure your own safety (as much as possible) and ensure other road users don’t get the wrong (right?) impression.

[slim_boy_fat]

black-k1 said:

That would be a shame but an understandable move. One thing to remember is that a motorcyclist with good road skills is actually not really any more likely to be involved in a serious or fatal accident than a high performance car driver.

If you use Roadcraft and drive for road conditions (not track conditions) then you will be able to have fun, ensure your own safety (as much as possible) and ensure other road users don’t get the wrong (right?) impression.

Unfortunatly thats not the case, motorcyclists are more likly to be involved in more non fault accidents, due to load of factors some of which cant be easily explained, and no amount of roadcraft can stop this.

But more of an issue is that if you are involved in a accident on a bike you are 20 times more likely to be killed than when in a car. Pretty obvious stuff really, the car protects its occupants in a crash better than a bike.

[black-k1]

slim_boy_fat said:

black-k1 said:

That would be a shame but an understandable move. One thing to remember is that a motorcyclist with good road skills is actually not really any more likely to be involved in a serious or fatal accident than a high performance car driver.

If you use Roadcraft and drive for road conditions (not track conditions) then you will be able to have fun, ensure your own safety (as much as possible) and ensure other road users don’t get the wrong (right?) impression.

Unfortunatly thats not the case, motorcyclists are more likly to be involved in more non fault accidents, due to load of factors some of which cant be easily explained, and no amount of roadcraft can stop this.

But more of an issue is that if you are involved in a accident on a bike you are 20 times more likely to be killed than when in a car. Pretty obvious stuff really, the car protects its occupants in a crash better than a bike.

So why do police motorcyclists have less accidents per mile and less serious or fatal accidents per mile than police car drivers?

[slim_boy_fat]

black-k1 said:

slim_boy_fat said:

black-k1 said:

That would be a shame but an understandable move. One thing to remember is that a motorcyclist with good road skills is actually not really any more likely to be involved in a serious or fatal accident than a high performance car driver.

If you use Roadcraft and drive for road conditions (not track conditions) then you will be able to have fun, ensure your own safety (as much as possible) and ensure other road users don’t get the wrong (right?) impression.

Unfortunatly thats not the case, motorcyclists are more likly to be involved in more non fault accidents, due to load of factors some of which cant be easily explained, and no amount of roadcraft can stop this.

But more of an issue is that if you are involved in a accident on a bike you are 20 times more likely to be killed than when in a car. Pretty obvious stuff really, the car protects its occupants in a crash better than a bike.

So why do police motorcyclists have less accidents per mile and less serious or fatal accidents per mile than police car drivers?

No idea, where do you get that info from?

But at a guess i woudl think

Your standard police car driver is a numpty NOT an highly trained persuit driver, oh and there are about 1000 times more drivers.!

Motobikes patrol m-ways car are in urban more often!

And probaly a 100 more reasons.

[black-k1]

slim_boy_fat said:

black-k1 said:

slim_boy_fat said:

black-k1 said:

That would be a shame but an understandable move. One thing to remember is that a motorcyclist with good road skills is actually not really any more likely to be involved in a serious or fatal accident than a high performance car driver.

If you use Roadcraft and drive for road conditions (not track conditions) then you will be able to have fun, ensure your own safety (as much as possible) and ensure other road users don’t get the wrong (right?) impression.

Unfortunatly thats not the case, motorcyclists are more likly to be involved in more non fault accidents, due to load of factors some of which cant be easily explained, and no amount of roadcraft can stop this.

But more of an issue is that if you are involved in a accident on a bike you are 20 times more likely to be killed than when in a car. Pretty obvious stuff really, the car protects its occupants in a crash better than a bike.

So why do police motorcyclists have less accidents per mile and less serious or fatal accidents per mile than police car drivers?

No idea, where do you get that info from?

But at a guess i woudl think

Your standard police car driver is a numpty NOT an highly trained persuit driver, oh and there are about 1000 times more drivers.!

Motobikes patrol m-ways car are in urban more often!

And probaly a 100 more reasons.

I don't, at the moment, have access to the actual study, but here is a link:

http://www.ixion.org.uk/faq/dangerous.html

Edited by black-k1 on Saturday 15th September 17:36

[Pugsey]

I did read the article and as he often does Harris made a lot of sense BUT towards the end of his column he came out with quite possibly THE MOST STUPID sentence I've ever read in Autocar - and that's saying something. I've long since thrown the mag out - perhaps someone else still has access to one and can give the exact quote - but it was something like 'the UK's road system is just not capable of servicing such huge numbers of bikes'!!!!!!! Oh that'll be right - all those things clogging up the road (and sitting bunched up in long slow moving lines making them impossible to overtake) when I go out for a hoon are BIKES and there was I thinking they were cars. HOW many bikes are there in the UK and HOW many cars - and remind me again which is bigger and, generally, slower?

[NorthernBoy]

One reason that we have higher accident figures than cars is the sort of people it attracts. If you want something very, very, very fast, and to use it in the way it was designed, then, for most of us, that means a litre (or bigger) bike. Therefore a larger fraction of us are hooligans than people of a similar age in cars.

Tarring us all with the same brish is a bit short-sighted, though, and I am a bit surprised at people on here tacitly accepting that we should all take collective responsibility for the most dangerous among us.

[slim_boy_fat]

NorthernBoy said:

Tarring us all with the same brish is a bit short-sighted, though, and I am a bit surprised at people on here tacitly accepting that we should all take collective responsibility for the most dangerous among us.

I think the only thing we can take respomsability for is our own riding and that of the people WE choose to ride with.

I agree with poster above, i think towards the end of the article hw ended up getting a bit silly.

[andy b2]

[quote= If you want something very, very, very fast, and to use it in the way it was designed, then, for most of us, that means a litre (or bigger) bike. Therefore a larger fraction of us are hooligans than people of a similar age in cars.
[/quote]

I disagree, my GSXR750 rocks !

GSXR ...... The original hooligan bike!