Unfortunately, you are mistaken. The largest growing segment of riders involved in accidents are older (middle-aged) adults returning to riding after a significant lay-off time. Perhaps all riders independent of age should be required to take a motocycle safety class.
Don't need one but I sure as heck want one. Just wanted to make a few comments about this thread.
First off, this 20 yr old hasn't found it all that easy to get his hands on a new r1 or r6 of the dealer lot. I started on an ex250, and after 5-6k miles, I got a race prepped 600f4 which was stolen after about another 5-6k miles. Now a year later no one will finance me unless I get full coverage insurance (I have good credit, I'm just young). BTW full coverage insurance for the R1 for one year costs as much as the bike does, probably has something to do with the kid I picked up out of the middle of SR436 in orlando at 2am last night after cartwheeling his new gsxr 1000 while driving drunk. I don't know where anyone got the impression that it was easy to finance a bike, I think there are just a lot more young people out there with cash that can walk in and pay full price, after all we aren't talking about a 120k porshe. It certainly hasn't been easy for me trying to buy a new bike.
As far as a tiered system I am completely for it. I just picked up a used 900rr with 26k miles, and I am confident I can handle it, but only after 10+k miles, and as a third bike. Meanwhile my roommate is trying to convince me to still try to get an r1 in a couple months and sell him the 900rr as his first bike! I think the best thing I ever did was listen to my dad, a long time rider, and start out on a 250. The tiered system should apply to everyone, regardless of age, and should be based upon solid demonstration of experience and skill, in a gradual process of increasing freedoms. I'm tired of picking up kids out of the middle of roads because they were ****ier then me and skipped the 250 and 600 and went to a bike that has 30 more hp at the tire then my third bike!
On to the whole 180mph thing and darwinism. Last night I topped my bike out to see what it had, and it made me wonder reading this thread if I shouldn't be chasing any more ass as a result. (185 indicated at 10,500 rpms but that is with a stunter sprocket on the bike and apprx. +15% error on the speedo) I did it at 3am, in south orlando on the portion of goldenroad by the airport that becomes a toll, and only after I rode the road up and down several times without seeing a soul. It's a very fast built (straight w/ sweeping turns) road headed only to the airport, and you have to pay a toll for access. In other words at 2-3 am there is abs. no one on it except for an orange county sherriff dep for some odd reason. I know it was illegal, and irresponsible and all that stuff. But did I really risk anyone else?? Does that one act make me worthless despite my other contributions to society? And even if it does, lets face the fact that although I might not be the brightest, I'm also not the dumbest and there are obviously a lot more people maxxing there bikes out, out there then just me. But where is there a legal safe outlet to do it at? I'm trying to be as safe as possible, you won't see me doing that crap in the middle of rush hour traffic. Shouldn't it be perferred that I do it where I did, rather then on the hwy? Last time I knew there is no where that beats a deserted road at 3 am as far as safety is concerned. Track days are pretty far and few between in central florida, and a 1/4 mile run is fun, but its not completely satisfying. So here is a guy that wants to be legal and as safe as possible (in other words I don't want to hurt anyone else in pursuit of my happiness) but wth am I supposed to go?
Bring on the flames, but I wanted to say that no it isn't that easy for some of us 20 yr olds to get nice new crotch rockets (even if we have taken a more responsible route), and yes I am a fan of a tiered system, because of the way I did it, I haven't wrecked a bike yet (I don't count dropping bikes in parking lots ). And yes I still want a bike that does 180, or in my case for now about 150-160. But please oh please won't someone give me a cheap place to play at so I don't have OCSO telling me what 'normal' people do at 2 am in the morning.
Sounds like you are somewhere that actually has turns. For those of us in Central Florida, its hard to find a strech where 150 is a problem. I don't think limiting speeds would help at all. Let me get this straight by limiting my 900rr to 150 it would be safer? Well its great because I basically have done that by buying it from a stunter who put one of those giant sprockets on the rear. But do you think that that makes it any safer for a new rider?? I think the opposite. It makes the bike fast as all get out from 0-150 because the power is over a narrower band. In other words, one oopsy on the throttle and there you go through the air. If anything if I were to give this bike to a new rider (ie my roommate and btw this is hypothetical cuz everyone should start on 250-600) I would stick the smallest damn sprocket on the rear that I could find. Sure it might top out at 200 mph, but I would want to spread that 130 hp over 200 mph rather then 100. In this case size is what matters, hp or torque however you measure it, not neccessarily speed. My 600F4 could go faster then my 900rr can now due to the sprocket, but I'll tell you hands down my 900rr is way more dangerous. One wild ride cracking her open.
Nope, there is not a person that can argue that they NEED a 180 mph bike. There aren't any places that you can legally ride that fast nor does any one have a NEED to get somewhere so badly that they need to travel 3 times the legal speed limit. Having said that, everytime the government regulates something like this, a small piece of america and the freedom we love, dies. The whole reason I think most of us love to ride is the freedom we feel. It's also the same reason I love my country and would gladly die to protect that freedom. No one has the right to ride a motorcycle anything over the legal speed limit, just as with a car. I personally don't think the government has any place telling us what speed a bike should be capable of. They have speed limits to regulate how fast we go. They shouldn't regulate speed limiters or HP on bikes. No matter what they make the regulation 100, 125, 155, whatever...you can be assured that someone will be going exactly that fast. So please, don't ban sportbikes, or 2000cc engines, or 185 HP 400 lb bikes. Continue to do the best you can enforcing the driving laws and place stronger punishments on those that choose to break them and break them multiple times.
You guys must all be very young. Sportbikes, and their perceived threat to society have already been under the legislative microscope, going on almost 20 years ago. Doesn't anybody around here remember the Danforth Bill?
Take really good care of your ZX-10R(etc)! It will provide you years and years of high performance enjoyment. I had an 86 GSXR-1100 for years and it ran as good the day I sold it as when I bought it. I only sold it to buy the 99 ZX-9R, which along with the R-1 were the new standard of high performance. If they strap us with HP restrictions, we still have this generation of 160 hp bikes to keep us happy.
Perhaps people there are technically 'more free', but their standard of living has declined to near barbarism, so to say that life has been an improvement for them would be pretty disingenious. They used to have the best education system in the middle east, Israel included, and had universal health care, too. Power and water were reliable and there was a secular government in place, even if it was a despotic one. Saddam, for all his faults, took pretty good care of people until they pissed him off. Remember, too, that most of the Iraqi citizens he killed were Kurds or Shi'ites that rebelled against him at the end of the last war and that he did so at least with the tacit compliance of the US. If you weren't in either of those groups, life wasn't too bad until the sanctions kicked in.
"[snip]scream comparisons of Bush to Hitler and suffer no persecution whatsoever."
Welcome to the rough side of freedom of speech. We lefties get the 'treason' label slapped on us as fast as the right-wing can open their mouths, pretty much, and it has gotten to the point where O'Reilly called Cindy Sheehan treasonous for camping out at Bush's ranch to try and get some answers. You have to have some giant balls to call a mother who has lost her son to the war treasonous, and it made my blood boil to hear that comment - probably as much as it makes your blood boil to hear the Hitler-Bush comparison.
That being said, every dictator slowly erodes the public's freedoms and it usually begins with little erosions here and there, not something big that would scare too many people. Small erosions like the Patriot Act, forcing protestors to protest in 'approved areas' that happen to be twenty miles from the event they are protesting, punishing people with dissenting opinions, putting party loyalists in charge of a supposedly neutral elections apparatus, petitioning to control broadcasting, the judiciary, etc. are all twigging people's radar. You should be glad that the canaries are singing now, even if you disagree with their opinions. The worm will turn and eventually it will be the righties out there protesting and demanding answers from a lefty administration. Wouldn't it be nice to ensure you have that right? As you yourself have said many times, once taken away, rights are never given back.
Find me a federal politician with a son/daughter in Iraq right now and I'll eat my hat ... yet they all publicly support it. Lots of people wave signs suporting Bush, but their kids won't line up at the recruiting office, either. The military is having a devil of a time filling spots, even if 51% of the population supported the war president.
My ex-girlfriend ran the Sierra Club for western Canada. She was astounded that I rode my bike to work whenever there wasn't snow on the ground. She had a fuel-efficient vehicle, but going that next step to be without a vehicle was too much to sacrifice. I advised her to move closer to her office and bike whenever she didn't need to drive for some media event. Yeah, whatever. She had a 1100 square foot house filled with stuff for one person and when I told her I purposefully lived in a bachelor pad so that all the things I owned fit into a standard bedroom, she was astounded.
Some people do, other just say they do. That is the story of the world.
"forcing protestors to protest in 'approved areas'"
Like at the Dmocratic National Convention?
"punishing people with dissenting opinions,"
"putting party loyalists in charge of a supposedly neutral elections apparatus,"
Like the Democratic election board that designed the Florida ballot that confused Democrats?
"petitioning to control broadcasting"
Like the Fairness Doctrine, supported by liberals who want the influence of conservative talk radio curtailed?
"the judiciary, etc."
What petitioning to control the judiciary are you talking about?
"are all twigging people's radar."
Oh, so it's a vague sensation.
"The worm will turn and eventually it will be the righties out there protesting and demanding answers from a lefty administration."
Because currently, lefties are shuttered in their homes, unable to dissent for fear of being crushed. Except when they're making anti-Bush films and camping out in front of his ranch calling him a murderer.
I said it before, and I'll say it again - you lefties are bigger drama queens than teenage girls, and half as rational.
My question is: Why would anyone want to go that fast on the street? I have been riding along at 75 to 80 in a car in the center lane of Interstate 95 and had two bikes pass me well in excess of the ton. What if I moved into the left lane to pass the car in front of me? I would not have had enough time to react to there unbelievable approach time. All I heard was the sound as they went by. I ride, but not that fast. My rule of thumb is to be safe not sorry.
what if they limit speed to something ****ty like 75 mph and displacement to 600? I would be so pissed. There are alot of cagers and few of us, the cagers would win lawmaker's attention more easily than sport bikers.
81 - 100 of 118 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.