Motorbike rant :(

[DITTRICH]

I think it would be constructive for the bike users to put together a top ten 'constructive' gripes about car drivers, and for the car drivers to do the same about bike users.

My pet gripe about bikes is when they use the opposite lane to make progress against oncoming traffic. In London, this can be very very dangerous.

Second pet gripe is that sometimes bikes position themselves in a blindspot behind my vehicle - this is not necessarily a fault, it just makes it much more difficult to spot them.

Third pet gripe is overtaking me just before I overtake another car. Coming from behind at speed in this situation again makes them difficult to spot as even if I check behind, they can approach and overtake as I am beginning to manoeuver.

There are alot of good points in this thread - if only they were summarised up - then I might learn something and focus on the certain key things that reduce risk. After all, I've never ridden a bike. Bikes are IMHO the single biggest 'risk' in travelling through London - note NOT risk as in their fault - but risk because they're more difficult to spot.

Interesting thread.

Les

 

[Dieselman]

I just looked it up, good old highway code

A driveway is basically a private side-road!

They are advisories, not legalities. You would not be prossecuted for reversing out of a driveway, unless you committed a seperate offence.

 

[Howard]

The campaign i guess went a bit over my head....

So, the biker is in the right to ride down the queue of traffic without observing properly what is going on ahead , surely he would think, 'i'll just go slowly here , perhaps someone is turning right ' but no ,he just blithely rides down the wrong side of the road.....

And, the car driver is in the wrong for indicating his intentions, having oncoming traffic stop for him (which would surely be visible even to a biker)and then having someone crash into him effectively from behind, having ridden the down the wrong side of the road.....

OK......

and yes i do, believe it or not, check both ways on a green light, albeit only glance, because i have t-boned a car that flew through a red light while mine was on green and ended up in the front of a shop.... thats a good lesson let me tell you !

 

[Dieselman]

Second pet gripe is that sometimes bikes position themselves in a blindspot behind my vehicle - this is not necessarily a fault, it just makes it much more difficult to spot them.

Les

Well put Les.

I believe this is the point behind the Government ad. Bikes can easily be lost in blindspots.
To my mind that says as well as car drivers keeping an eye out for them, the biker should position themselves in a visible position and not take risks that could place them in the blindspot.

 

[Howard]

Well put Les.

I believe this is the point behind the Government ad. Bikes can easily be lost in blindspots.
To my mind that says as well as car drivers keeping an eye out for them, the biker should position themselves in a visible position and not take risks that could place them in the blindspot.

deleted my post ..... sorry.....

 

[scotth_uk]

Interesting tidbit from: http://www.essex.police.uk/bikesafe/stats.htm

"Despite the myths about poor car drivers, in nearly two thirds of the Essex motorcycle deaths the motorcycle rider was found to be at fault."

and

"Riding experts like the IAM agree that speed and power alone doesn’t kill motorcyclists. Inappropriate speed in the wrong place, speed without judgement, or speed without ability, can and does kill."

and:

"Motorcycle road deaths cause trauma not only to the rider’s family members, but often involve other road users as well. In two thirds of all our deaths, the motorcyclist collided with another vehicle. Of the other third, nearly all collided with roadside furniture or buildings"

-----> Roadside furniture or buildings? :-(

And from: http://www.pacts.org.uk/policy/briefings/statistics_uk.htm

"5. Your chances of being killed on a motorcycle are 42 times higher (per billion passenger km) than that as a car passenger "

With stats like that I am surpised that any of us even own a bike.

 

[jeremytaylor]

Ahhh thats because in over 80% of fatal motorcycle accidents involving cars, the drivers of the cars were found to be at fault.

(My insurance on my bike is only 30% of the cost of my car insurance - I guess the insurance companies have done their sums) QUOTE]

Sp!ke, I think you will find that your bike insurance is cheaper for two reasons.

1. Because you can only have 1 passenger max, the potential for a third party injury claim is much lower. MPVs have higher insurance premiums than normal cars not because they are high performance or expensive to repair or driven by boy racers but because they can seat up to 7. There is therefore a much higher risk third party injury claim against the driver's insurance in the event of a crash.

2. The value of the bike is lower, so in the event of a total loss the claim is smaller.

 

[Benzowner]

Interesting tidbit from: http://www.essex.police.uk/bikesafe/stats.htm

"Despite the myths about poor car drivers, in nearly two thirds of the Essex motorcycle deaths the motorcycle rider was found to be at fault."

and

"Riding experts like the IAM agree that speed and power alone doesn’t kill motorcyclists. Inappropriate speed in the wrong place, speed without judgement, or speed without ability, can and does kill."

and:

"Motorcycle road deaths cause trauma not only to the rider’s family members, but often involve other road users as well. In two thirds of all our deaths, the motorcyclist collided with another vehicle. Of the other third, nearly all collided with roadside furniture or buildings"

-----> Roadside furniture or buildings? :-(

And from: http://www.pacts.org.uk/policy/briefings/statistics_uk.htm

"5. Your chances of being killed on a motorcycle are 42 times higher (per billion passenger km) than that as a car passenger "

With stats like that I am surpised that any of us even own a bike.

NOOOOOO we choose not to live in Essex

 

[Sp!ke]

BUT if the car driver is indicating while waiting to turn right, then the biker should not be overtaking. The government add doesn't make it clear whether or not the car driver is indicating or not (IIRC).

In the advert in question, the driver was distracted by other things... the radio, shops etc - he didnt follow the highway code of looking first then signalling and then looking again before manoevering. He glanced in the mirror and turned in one swift action. Whether he indicated or not, its irrelevent - he shouldnt have looked before indicating and looked again before turning.

In motorcycle training they call this last minute look over your shoulder before a monoever "A Lifesaver". We are taught not to rely on mirrors.

Blindspots are well publicised... thats why your driver training told you you shouldnt rely on mirrors.

Dont get me wrong, I am well aware that bikes are hard to see but then neither are pedestrians or cyclists. We all need to remember that there are different types of road users out there and adjust our drivin/riding to encompass that.

 

[Sp!ke]

Interesting tidbit from: http://www.essex.police.uk/bikesafe/stats.htm

"Despite the myths about poor car drivers, in nearly two thirds of the Essex motorcycle deaths the motorcycle rider was found to be at fault."

What do expect from Essex... everything is backwards there?

On a serious note, this is an interesting statement that conflicts with the national ones.

 

[Dieselman]

Interesting tidbit from: http://www.essex.police.uk/bikesafe/stats.htm

"Despite the myths about poor car drivers, in nearly two thirds of the Essex motorcycle deaths the motorcycle rider was found to be at fault."

and

"Riding experts like the IAM agree that speed and power alone doesn’t kill motorcyclists. Inappropriate speed in the wrong place, speed without judgement, or speed without ability, can and does kill."

and:

"Motorcycle road deaths cause trauma not only to the rider’s family members, but often involve other road users as well. In two thirds of all our deaths, the motorcyclist collided with another vehicle. Of the other third, nearly all collided with roadside furniture or buildings"

-----> Roadside furniture or buildings? :-(

And from: http://www.pacts.org.uk/policy/briefings/statistics_uk.htm

"5. Your chances of being killed on a motorcycle are 42 times higher (per billion passenger km) than that as a car passenger "

With stats like that I am surpised that any of us even own a bike.

Thanks Scott

I knew that the increasing number of road deaths is down to bikers and also that a fair number involve only one vehicle.
The middle aged "born again" bikers make up the highest number of road fatalities apparently.
Obviously not all car drivers are angels but bikers generally have one for the speed thrill. They call it "making progress". That's why they crash more often.

The Police now run "Bike Safe" scheme to reduce accidents and deaths. This focuses on rider training as they are the ones creating the problem.

http://www.bikesafe.co.uk/

A comment in this article says only one in five m/cycle accident are the other vehicles fault.

http://www.bikesafe.co.uk/Bikesafe/Bikesafe2000/ridingtips.htm

Another page covers fatal accidents. In each case highlighted the biker is at fault, speed being the principle cause.

http://www.bikesafe.co.uk/Bikesafe/fatalities.htm

 

[jeremytaylor]

Whether he indicated or not, its irrelevent - he shouldnt have looked before indicating and looked again before turning.

Er ... actually I think it's extremely relevant whether or not he's indicating.

If a car is stopped, indicating right, waiting to turn right, and it is then clear to turn right, are you seriously saying that the car driver should then look behind him to make sure no-one's overtaking, before then turning right?

Whatever happened to 'only overtake when it is clear and safe'? That applies to bikes as well as cars you know.

 

[Shude]

If a car is stopped, indicating right, waiting to turn right, and it is then clear to turn right, are you seriously saying that the car driver should then look behind him to make sure no-one's overtaking, before then turning right?

Whatever happened to 'only overtake when it is clear and safe'? That applies to bikes as well as cars you know.

It is considered bad driving to overtake at a junction - it can lead to nasty situations!

A friend of mine knew someone that was indicating right, heard sirens, panicked and turned right when there was a gap - a police car chose to overtake him and drove straight into his front wing at high speed, totalled his car and probably also the police car. Insurance was knock-for-knock of course .

 

[glojo]

Some really interesting posts,
Motard...

Both you and I very rarely go out on English roads so we both appreciated the 'crazy' amount of traffic that are congesting our overloaded system. This in my opinion might well be the cause of this horrible new fashionable disease that we call road rage.

Motorbikes can make progress through slow movingtraffic and this might well be a cause of frustration. No sane motorcyclist will ever putthemselves into a position where they are vunerable to being hit by a ton of steel!! They might give the impression that they are heading right at you, but they WILL come off second best if there is a collision. It is very hard to describe the acceleration of a motorcycle, but trust me when I say it is quick!! A bike rider will have an early view of the road ahead and SHOULD!! be able to make progress in what to a non bike rider would consider a reckless manner.

When I was an advanced instructor I would eventually be taking students on roads that were reasonably busy, and quite narrow. There was NO WAY I would allow the student to break any speed limit, but it would be impossible a car to keep up. Yes oncoming cars would sometimes flash their headlamps and some even braked, but the braking was done purely as a very, very late reaction to a perceived collision that was never there. I might be describing this in a very poor way, but I never had a single student fail there advanced course and more to the point we never, never had a single accident (nor deliberately caused any). Advanced riding, or driving is NOT about how fast you can go, it is about making progress, reading the road, positioning and safety.

Yes the majority of fatal motor cycle accidents are self inflicted, this is the Darwinian theory proving itself, but usually when a motor cycle and car are involved in an accident it is usually the car driver that "did not see the bike!!!" Cars have blind spots, car drivers should be aware of these and use their mirrors, or turn their heads!!!!!! What a strange idea.

All my students were ALWAYS told to treat ALL other road users as idiots!! and never take anything for granted. Overtaking a moving vehicle on the approach to a road junction is a very big No, No.... be it a car driver or bike rider. Trust me when I say that car drivers sometimes only look right when pulling out of a side road. Anything overtaking on the approach to a junction is just asking to swop number plates!!

Boy am I having fun... There is in my opinion no absolute offence of reversing out of a driveway, but it is bad practice and potentially dangerous. Your cannot be as good as when you drive, young (small) children, pedestrians or other road users are all vunerable. Strange how we all think we are good drivers, but all we sometimes have is years of developing bad habits.

Regards,
John

 

[Sp!ke]

A comment in this article says only one in five m/cycle accident are the other vehicles fault.
http://www.bikesafe.co.uk/Bikesafe/fatalities.htm

Actually Iif I'm looking at the same section as I think you are, I interpret it completely differently...

JUNCTIONS

The most common accident type was another vehicle crossing the motorcyclist's path to enter or leave a side road or private drive.

At roundabouts, the most common accident type was another vehicle entering the roundabout in the path of a motorcyclist already on the roundabout.

Over 1 in 5 of all motorcycle accidents were of this type, where the motorcyclist had right of way.

I interpret that to mean that 1 in 5 of all motorcycle accidents were at a junction where motorcyclists had the right of way.

It does not in my mind suggest that 4 out of five times the motorcyclist was at fault.

Clearly badly written which ever way you look at it.

 

[Sp!ke]

Ahhh thats because in over 80% of fatal motorcycle accidents involving cars, the drivers of the cars were found to be at fault.

(My insurance on my bike is only 30% of the cost of my car insurance - I guess the insurance companies have done their sums) QUOTE]

Sp!ke, I think you will find that your bike insurance is cheaper for two reasons.

1. Because you can only have 1 passenger max, the potential for a third party injury claim is much lower. MPVs have higher insurance premiums than normal cars not because they are high performance or expensive to repair or driven by boy racers but because they can seat up to 7. There is therefore a much higher risk third party injury claim against the driver's insurance in the event of a crash.

2. The value of the bike is lower, so in the event of a total loss the claim is smaller.

There is some truth in what you say but I dont think it covers all bases.

For instance, my 4 seater W124 CE is more expensive to insure than the same model in estate form with seven seats.

My bike inssurance is 30% of the cost my car insurance (excellent value actually) when my car is a slow old bus in comparison with my bike and I travel in different timezones if you look at average speeds. My bike is also worth more than my car and has to be more at risk from theft.

Insurance is all about statistics - why then would my bike insurance be so much cheaper unless it is considered to be less of a claim risk?

 

[scotth_uk]

All my students were ALWAYS told to treat ALL other road users as idiots!! and never take anything for granted.

That is the best advice for any road user. Amen!

 

[blassberg]

When I drove an ML, I thought what an uproar there would be if I overtook the queue by going off road and driving on the central reservation stones or the grass verge, making use of the attributes of my vehicle to continue progress.

And yet its common (not accepted) practice to use the attributes of your bike to make progress :bannana:

 

[Sp!ke]

When I drove an ML, I thought what an uproar there would be if I overtook the queue by going off road and driving on the central reservation stones or the grass verge, making use of the attributes of my vehicle to continue progress.

And yet its common (not accepted) practice to use the attributes of your bike to make progress :bannana:

LOL

If yoiu can make your ML 18" wide so you can 'make progress' *without* using the central reservation then I dont think it would be a problem

 

[glojo]

I go along with Spike's intrepretation, BUT only an idiot overtakes on the approach to a road junction and from experiences car drivers simply come out with the pathetic excuse of not seeing the bike. This to me is totally unacceptable, bikes do not just appear.

John