Welcome to Netrider ... Connecting Riders!

Interested in talking motorbikes with a terrific community of riders?
Signup (it's quick and free) to join the discussions and access the full suite of tools and information that Netrider has to offer.

Are bike restrictions a waste of time?

Discussion in 'Politics, Laws, Government & Insurance' started by removed-6, Apr 8, 2006.

  1. I guess what I'm getting at is, I can still get a 250 that will go over 200kmh here in Victoria. What is the point of the restrictions?
    Is the pure acceleration of the bigger bike the killer? Given that I am not allowed to go over 110kmh, all a bigger bike has is more acceleration to this speed. So are the majority of accidents caused by the acceleration or by going at a higher speed than is safe, which I can easily do on a 250 anyway?
    At some point, I am going to be getting on a litre bike for the first time, whether it is the day after I get my P's or a year after, I don't see what difference it makes really. On this given day I am in new territory and need to be careful of what I have beneath me. All the restrictions do is make me inexperience at riding a big bike for longer. Is this wise? I think not, it means there are two times within 12mths that I am an inexperienced rider on the bike I am riding, that seems silly to me.
    Now I know some people will do stupid things with more power, but generally I think these people will do what they want anyway, which is evident by the number of people here that admit to riding unlicenced and/or on bigger bikes than their licence currently allows, so trying to police these riders is a fruitless task.
    I think each rider should be able to ride the bike they see fit for themself, perhaps a silly little test like the one we do to get our L's should be done on a bigger bike to let them know you can handle the bike to the same extent that you can the 250, which is sufficient for them to let you on the road in the first place.
    Why do I have to 'learn' all over again in 12mths? Seems silly to me :roll:

  2. Im totally against restrictions for bikes and cars.

    Id like to see it removed.

    Though id also like to see more worthwhile testing, maybe an advanced course for those who wish to own high performance vehicles, better roads, and harsher penalties for those who do really stupid shit.
  3. Yes, we should have restrictions, but along the lines of NSW scheme based on power/weight ratio. I agree simple 250cc limit is stupid.
    As for your point about it always being the first time - no, it is not the same after you've been riding a smaller machine for a year. It (hopefully) means you've got other skills under control, now you just have to adjust them for bigger bike.... it's like the Air Force pilots, even those who will eventually fly F18s start learning to fly on a single prop plane....
  4. I think the licence should be cheeper but!! there should be more "stages" perhaps first one up to 160cc than up to 260cc than another up to 660cc and than open... Also I would allow younger riders say from 16Y.O.??

    Than perhaps some drivers will look twice b4 turning... just incase they are about to run over their kid!!
  5. Well they have them for cars aswell - P's & L's can are limited to cars under V8.

    Mik84 - If they removed the restrictions from cars you would see newbies in large capacity cars/4WDs. It may take a while for them to be caught speeding and they would probably take off lights quicker...and they would probably lose their liscence when they kill someone eg. yourself....

    Do you agree with what im saying?
  6. NO WAY!

    Just coz they have them for cars as well doesn't make it right. cars have a front number plate, should we?

    You can still get a V8 statesman, just as an example, now.

    When oh when will the govt learn that the key to curbing the road toll is education, not restrictions!
  7. The main issue with larger bikes is their sheer acceleration. Quite easy to be enjoying some bit of road, look down at the speedo, and get a bit of a shock. Am not saying that speed alone kills, but am saying that the ability to accelerate extremely rapidly can have an inexperienced rider approaching a corner or other road hazard far more quickly than they are either prepared for, or have the skills to deal with.

    Like cb250goespop is saying above. You don't learn to fly and land by jumping into an F18 on the nearest air-craft carrier out in a warzone. You develop all the required skills on slower, more sedate aircraft, and then you slowly push those skills higher and higher.

    Not saying that riding a bike is as complex as flying an F18 in a warzone, although the road skills and obstacles when riding within a large city could probably be equated to a mine-field of trouble.

    Yes, there are very quick 250cc bikes, which makes the Victorian blanket 260cc limit quite silly. In Victoria there have been recent forums in government related circles and safety advisory bodies to move towards a LAMS based system like NSW/SA, and this will happen within a few years is my guess.

    i.e. just because the current system is a little silly with its exceptions doesn't mean that it's then justifiable to jump onto the nearest 1000cc hypersports bike that will take you from 0-200kph in less time than the average family car will get do 0-80kph in. It means that there's a loophole in the current system that should be addressed, because the loophole is silly, not because jumping onto a 1000cc hypersports bike with zero experience is safe.
  8. ...and you'll find that your average 250cc 2-cyl 4-stroke bike will accelerate about as well as a V8 statesman for ~0-120kph.

    You're arguing that we should be giving inexperienced riders access to bikes that will do 0-200kph in about the same time as a V8 Stateman will go from 0-100kph in.

    I know where you're coming from, but I don't think that you understand the sheer scale of the differences in acceleration. Justifying that a learner can jump in a V8 car still equates roughly to a learner jumping onto a 250cc 4-stroke. If that seems a little extreme to you, you're now trying to justify the learner getting onto a vehicle that accelerates almost 3x more quickly.
  9. But you forget that the burden of gaining experience is on me. Nothing is stopping me getting my L's and then my P's and then not riding for 12mths, after which time I can instantly swing my leg over a 'busa, with the gov't just expecting that I am now an experienced rider? Dumb, dumb, dumb!
    With a truck licence I can have a test to determine whether I am capable enough to get the next level of licence before the waiting period of 12mths is up, why isn't it the same for bikes?
  10. No.

    Every car i owned whilst on my P's was a V8 because i love that type of car. I was the only one out of 5 of my best mates at school that didnt lose my licnecse during that period, and they all drove 6's and one even had a 4.

    I just think its bullshit to punish every young aussie thats been brought up to love commodore and falcon 8's(before theyve even done anything wrong) because some people cant control themselves. As stated id rather give everyone the benefit of the doubt and have larger penalties.

    All i can say is that despite having V8s from day dot and now having a performance bike when ive only been riding a little over a year, ive never had any type of accident.
  11. I interpreted the people who started this post were winging that motorbikes should not have restricitons but cars should maintain they rules (i.e. restrictions)

    We have one...and its a granny car....an expensive granny car at that. :roll: - The idea is to stop P's from getting fast cars that can kill you on the road

    You can tell someone somthing untill you are blue in the face...but it does not mean they will listen :roll:

  12. I agree with that. There should be more stringent practical tests to get your L's, to progress from L's to P's, and to progress from P's to full-license. I have raised this point many times.

    Again, just because there are flaws in the system, and loopholes and ways around it, doesn't then mean that it would be right to abolish the restrictions altogether. If anything, it means that the relevent authorities are too busy sitting on their butts rather than acting to address the deficiencies in the driver/rider training system, and then use road accidents and deaths to justify deploying more speed cameras, rather than addressing a major cause of the road death issue, which I personally believe is adequate & sufficient training.

    If there's a lack of training, and there's loopholes, then it'll do no good as your original post suggests by removing the existing system totally. Instead the existing system should be improved, and with a good implementation I reckon we'd cut the road toll near in half within 5 years.
  13. I know where you're coming from, but I don't think that you understand the sheer scale of the differences in acceleration. Justifying that a learner can jump in a V8 car still equates roughly to a learner jumping onto a 250cc 4-stroke. If that seems a little extreme to you, you're now trying to justify the learner getting onto a vehicle that accelerates almost 3x more quickly.[/quote]

    I agree stew when I first got my 04 blade I hadnt been on a bigbore for a few years(not my choice the magistrates) but I had plenty of experience on big bikes but I am not afraid to admit I had forgotten about their acceleration until the day I dropped her back to second at 120 and gave her a squirt well it scared the hell out of me and if I hadnt had thet previous experience with big bikes it would have been very nasty so I think you definately need to get experience on smaller bikes as they may be as quick or quicker than a v8 but they dont compare with a litre bike
  14. Here we go with the victim mentality. It's not punishment. Driving around 1-2 tonnes of steel at speed is dangerous, to yourself and others.

    In the grand scheme of things, you're asked to spend about 3% of your total driving life on restrictions, learning the required skills, and with any luck, proving it too (doesn't happen now). You don't give any idiot a gun and bullets and let them loose with no training. A car in the wrong hands is a heck of a lot more dangerous than a gun, IMO.
  15. Please expand on your point....
  16. That is a NSW law I asume? I'm from Victoria.

    Yes, my question probably should have said "are the CURRENT restrictions a waste of time"

    Seems a bit contradictary? If you didn't have the big bike experience you would have been in trouble, so how's learning on a small bike ever going to prepare you for that?
  17. i disagree, the road is full of morons and slowing morons down who don't know how to drive (and worse still think they are pro's) is imo a good thing.

    80% of your group drove in the eyes of mr plod irresponsibly, that's a pretty good illustration of my point.

    re. restrictions the government puts laws in place that are easy and cheap, road education = hard, expensive. stay on a puny bike for 15 months = cheap, easy.

    i think there is more to a 120hp bike than straight line speed, gear down on some of those bike and the engine braking might catch out a newbie, a minor twist of the throttle in a turn might bring a rider unstuck, where as on a 250 it would not have, stuff like that needs to be considered.

    qld has rules where you can ride any bike from day dot and look at their fatality figures for bikes.
  18. Uh, read the thread. Spelled out there.

    Ways around the Victorian system.

    1) Go buy the baddest fastest 250cc stroker you can find, and kit it out, get its weight down to 100kgs and work the engine to ~85hp. It'll do 240-250kph top speed, and if you're a light person (<65kgs) certainly surprise any 4-stroke sportsbikes short of 1000cc's for acceleration.

    2) Do what triway says. Borrow/rent a bike. Go sit your learners, wait 3 months, then sit your P's, then wait out 12 months and go buy whatever bike you want and ride it with no experience.
  19. No, its a good illustration of the fact that some people will drive stupidly no matter what they drive. Yet some young people have the responsibilty to drive very high performance vehicles without a problem.
  20. Agreed. They are additional concerns. Gear down on a 1000cc bike coming into a corner and don't match the revs properly when you release the clutch as you turn in will have the bike sideways in a jiffy. Applying too much throttle when in a turn will throw you over the high-side. Applying to much throttle on a slippery surface can cause you to drop the bike. Applying too much throttle can cause the bike to power wheelie and flip.

    Doesn't just have to be an idiot doing these things too. Incorrect posture and grip onto the bars when hitting road bumps can cause bump induced throttle responses that can cause the above incidents to happen.

    Learning correct throttle control is a HUGE factor, and this should be learned on less powerful bikes where accidentally blipping the throttle is far less likely to cause the bike to crash. Learn the throttle response first and get that right, and then you're better prepared to ride a big bike without scaring yourself or crashing.