EXUP Worldwide

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/st ... d=tab3pos2

Go about halfway down (past the babes in bikinis ) and you'll see this guys thoughts on the Busa and other high performance bikes in general. Gotta warn you, it's a bit maddening.

BAH!!! Just one persons opinion.

nanny state!


fuk em

on that premis going outside should be banned as over 50% (made up stats) of folk in road acident die whilst outside

Gregg Easterbrook is a moron columnist who probably drives a Yugo.

Like many columnist, he makes rhetorical statements without including any research. I would believe a study like the Hurt Report but not Gregg's claims; such as:

Gregg says "The Hayabusa looks pretty sweet -- but it's a weapon on the roads."

I say - Ok, how about some statistics to illustrate the weapon on the road claim? Oh, by the way - it was was old lady making a left turn in front of Roethlisberger that caused the crash (not yielding to on coming traffic), and Roethlisberger was reportedly not speeding. That makes the old lady the weapon on the road in this instance.

Gregg says "It is past time the high-horsepower motorcycle was regulated off the roads."

I say - No, regulate who can buy them. It's the rider and not the motorcycle that needs regulated. Want to buy a high-performance bike? Where's your motorcycle endorsement?

The problem with motorcycles is they're so affordable to buy compared to cars. If everyone could afford 500 HP cars like the Corvette Z06 we would be having columnist advocating the Z06 needs to be banned. It's the rider and not the vehicle. Do they sell cars to people who don't have a drivers license? Why do they sell motorcycles to people without a license?

Gregg needs to reshape his thinking - if he thinks at all - rather than just dreaming up more media flash.



Don

For those of you who may not be familiar with the Hurt Report ...
it was a study issued by Hugh H. Hurt (Hugh Harry Hurt), and his team, back in 1981. It was the first scientifc study ever made on why and how motorcycle accidents occur. The official name of the report is the DOT Motorcycle Accident Cause Factors and Identification of Countermeasures Study. Funded by the Dept of Transportation.

There has been talk of another study funded by the federal government and involving Professor Emeritus Harry Hurt. Harry wants to scientifically study what's behind the growing motorcycle fatalities in the U.S (up 85% since 1997).

Don

Results of said test...

http://www.magpie.com/nycmoto/hurt.html

djalbin wrote:Harry wants to scientifically study what's behind the growing motorcycle fatalities in the U.S (up 85% since 1997).

Don

Well dont need a degree to figure this out.

Reason they are up 85% since 97 is there are 85% more motorcycles now.

The percentage of motorcycles may have increased 85% but it would still be interesting to see the research to see which bikes, age groups, etc ... are represented in the 85% percent increase ...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qZlAPD67jfQ

Don

Last I seen its teh 40-55yr old riders who are returning to motorcycles after 20 yrs off that are the big stat.

YZFRob wrote:Last I seen its teh 40-55yr old riders who are returning to motorcycles after 20 yrs off that are the big stat.

+1...my insurance representative says the same thing...i thought completely opposite when we were conversing about it...i figured it was the younger crowd into stunting and such, but that's what i get for stereotyping LOL...

there have been some interesting studies here in the uk on motorcycle acidents


the trrl (the ransport and road research laboritiers) pump out the figures with one of the headline ones being that if you drve a large bike (750 +) then you stand the highest risk of death if involved in an accident (most being cuased on left handers, that being running wide into oncioming traffic)

but this somewhat sqews the figures as the vast majority of accidents on two wheels are scooters in the town (summit like 80% of all two wheel road accidents) and proportionally they have the largest death rate (pure numbers not %)

it would clearly be usefull if i could link the article but i cany find it right now ;-(

again there figures are bolloxed by the simple fact that the vast majority of bike accidents that dont require the law are rarely reported ( out of my 10 - 15 offs the police have been involved in 1) so the figures miss out all the monir accidents and thus rate bikes as more harmfull when they do crash, which just isnt so (any road traffic accident is ment to be reported and its a crime not to, still i aint telling them in big letters that i can be a fanny at times!!)