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.

Scooters Safer Than Mopeds And Motorcycles: Study

Discussion in 'Research, Studies, and Data' started by joetdm, Apr 22, 2012.

  1. Really can any idiot get a position in uni research studies...


  2. is it really a surprise? scooters generally spend their time in inner city/suburban environments where speeds are low.

    At the end of the day, its a lot easier to die when your going 110kph then when your going 25kph in mild traffic. This is simple physics.
    I would be willing to bet scooter riders have the largest amount of non fatal injuries considering most of them see the scooter as a fashion accessory and dont wear any gear.

    I think the fact that anyone can hop on a moped is ****ing retarded, i pretty sure its not like that in NSW any more. Of course queensland is a little slow.

    I think the MASSIVE problem with ALL of these studies, weather about cars, bikes, mopeds, pushys or anything is this:
    How the **** can you accurately determine the risk of having an off, when the majority of incidents are not reported to anyone anyway?
  3. So you are saying "speed kills".

    Quick someone get the holy water, the Evil has possessed Unconnected....

    Edit i have found my 2 stroke oil, we can use that, quick whats your location before its too late.
  4. I wonder how they measure crashes - insurance data maybe? Given the number of mopeds hired out to tourists, you can bet they claim every scratch they come back with.
  5. You'd have to assume there is a substantial number of motorbike crashes that aren't reported where as most scooter/moped accidents would be. Low speed low sides and minor crashes where the rider has been able to walk/ride away due would be under reported (particularly ones where the gear took the punishment). Compare this to scooters/mopeds where no gear = messy in pretty much every crash over 20kph.

    I still find it ridiculous that moped riders are regarded somehow as safer in their short-shorts and singlet top than the kitten killing biker in gear. 40kph into tarmac is like sitting on a belt sander
  6. No insurance on those. I hired a harley on the gold coast and even that had no comp insurance, $30k liability makes you ride careful.

    So motorbikes crash even more than 3 times as often?

    I believe the numbers. I have both, the scooter is safer as you have less to worry about with no gears and ability to throw it around and the engine keeps the speed down. I counter that by wearing no gear, life would be boring to be too safe.
  7. Just because you don't like scooters doesn't mean that the study is invalid. I find the findings quite plausible.

    In short:

    Untrained and often young moped riders fall off a lot.

    Trained but inherently conservative and risk averse scooter riders who will mostly be commuting don't fall off much.

    Motorcyclists, some of whom commute but many of whom also give it a fang on inherently hazardous roads at weekends and quite a few of whom only do the latter fall off quite a bit and when they do it tends to be serious.

    I fail to see why this is stupid.
    • Like Like x 5
  8. I also find the results reasonable, and they fit with other studies I have seen before.

    It's probably also to do with the risk-taking profile of scooter riders.

    I think this challenges the mantra of sports bike owners who say that it is necessary to have vast reserves of power to accelerate out of trouble.
  9. The scooterati however hold these studies up as arguments for the promotion of scooters and the demotion of motorcycles in safety based arguments.
    • Like Like x 1
  10. Having a particularly good friend who has had relatively low speed crashes on both a 250mc and a 175 scooter I can agree that the risk of damage, not fatality, is probably less with the scooter. The main difference with my friend's crashes was that on the bike he was astride the vehicle, so when it fell suddenly his leg was between it and the roadway. With the scooter, his leg was inside the metal of the scooter and the injury was just gravel rash rather than two broken bones.

    As I said, both relatively low speed, but similar in cause but very different in outcome. He had the bike first, as a commuter, but replaced it with the scooter.

    I know minimal survey data, but a fairly simple difference in fundamental design of the vehicles had a significant effect on the injuries sustained.
  11. Geez!
    Talk about timing!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


  12. Well.... Duh

  13. ...Yeah... I'm going to need a source on this Mr Blackman.
    because I think motorcyclists have scooter riders pretty soundly beaten when it comes to gear.
  14. Gear makes you compensate.
  15. If I was compensating wouldn't I have a harley?
  16. That's not what I was getting at :)
    But my failed attempt at humour aside...

    I know what you're saying, but
    I think that statement suffers from the same problem as the one made by the original researcher.

    The sports bike is most likely a much safer vehicle than a scooter.
    The actions of the rider may cause it to be involved in more crashes.

    But it's important to separate vehicle capability from rider behaviour.

    Anyone going out to buy a scooter because "They're safer than motorcycles" may be in for a shock.