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.

Monash Uni study of motorcycle crashes

Discussion in 'Riding Gear and Bike Accessories/Parts' started by DJmotorcycle, Feb 26, 2009.

  1. Hi,

    Whilst looking for Nolan helmets on the web i came across the following study produced by Monash Uni:

    Case-control study of motorcycle crashes

    The complete report is at:

    I am not sure if this has been posted here (it was from 1997) but made for interesting reading, anyway.

    e.g. Helmets
    * 145 helmets worn by riders and pillions were inspected
    * over 50% were black or "dark"
    * 20% of visors were tinted
    * the average age was four years, with 16% more than 5 years old and so may no longer have been performing optimally
    * more than 80% had obvious signs of damage, mostly scratches but some fractures
    * in 43% the interior padding was visibly worn or compressed

  2. Think ive read that report somewhere before. Read the short version, not the PDF just now.

    I seem to recall something about recommendations, and them saying that bike and gear colour made no difference at all. I found that interesting.
  3. Well, that's how I spent my saturday night!

    There's some really interesting stuff there, even just in the overview section.

    Dj, that stuff on helmets was interesting, but it goes on to say that helmet condition had no effect on the injuries sustained. It was also interesting to see that a small percentage of accidents involve facial injuries, and the risk of them is only slightly increased by wearing an open face - 8% compared to 4%. (PatB, feeling vindicated?)

    Seems that obese people are more likely to crash. Ha!

    Also interesting that riding a dirtbike before hitting the road and being licenced really -increases- the chances of having an off. There ya go!
  4. So it made interesting reading, especially for me as a new Learner rider- I am still looking for a bike and gear.

    Without riding experience I cannot comment with authority, except to say that anecdotal evidence or what we call "common sense" is not always correct.
  5. Guys I'm gonna Post the original post as a sticky in Politics and the law with all kudos to the OP, you can continue talking about it here.
  6. thanks.

    although after reading the summary of teh study again I woudl suggest you delete all reference to the post and the study- it almost makes you want to give up riding!

    These points reminded me of the "theory" class for the learners:

    # the rider was judged to have contributed to about two-thirds of the multi-vehicle crashes, mainly by inappropriate positioning or failure to respond
    # most riders did not consider themselves to be at fault in multi-vehicle crashes to which failure to respond was judged to contribute
  7. Remember the study was made in 1997
    Bikes and safety equipment as well as training have improved somewhat since then, so it would be interesting to see a comparison study made in the next few years.
    We have had a very large increase in the number of bikes sold yet not a significant rise in accidents over this period.

  8. and now I am happy again and have to get out there!
  9. Yeah, that's twelve years ago, and things would have improved since then. Maybe. I still think the amount of accidents that were the motorcyclists fault, and the general denial of fault/blameshifting sounds about right to me.

    Some stuff, like the over 30% of accidents involving sub 280cc bikes were two strokes makes more sense with the study being that old.

    But I do think a lot of the stuff there is still relevant.
  10. Agreed, the main difference is that we have effectively nearly doubled the number of bikes sold yet the accident rate has remained fairly the same considering the larger number of riders on the roads today.
    We should also look at the amount of unriders that were killed/injured back then as opposed to today.
  11. That's true.

    Unriders do you mean cars/peds or unregistered riders? I'm pretty sure many of the stats I've read that are more recent seem to say that more people are riding unregistered and crashing.

    Bloody hell I'm agreeing with you a lot these days Smee. Must be something in the water :grin:
  12. Yep, unregistered/unlicensed/uninsured/etc riders.
  13. It's actually a Monash Uni Accident Research Centre (MUARC) study commissioned by the (then) Federal Office of Road Safety. Not sure where you get CSIRO from.

    I've quoted from this study previously (esp in helmet discussions...)
    # after adjustment for BAC, there was no significant increase in risk associated with wearing an open face helmet compared to a full face helmet

    It's not a wonderful study (222 cases only) but there are some interesting points.

    It is, however, now very out of date and the profile of riders today is quite different - especially with the huge increase in scooters.
  14. not sure either.
    perhaps because i was reading some CSIRO stuff at the same time. :?:

    sorry about the mixup. Moderator, would you be able to change the title of the sticky.

    yes, another (bigger) study would be useful.
    thanks for pointing out the mistake.