GStwin.com GS500 Message Forum

i search the web for motorcycle related news on a daily bases. i see at least one motorcycle related fatality a day. and i notice that the most of times it's single bike accidents resulting from operator error, agressive riding, etc...

so...what do you think is the biggest cause of motorcycle accidents (not just deaths)?

i tend to think that most of the accidents can be avoided if you ride smart.

You are correct, sir! Most accidents can be avoided by training, knowledge, practice, skill, observation, experience, prediction, intuition, control, self-control and good judgement.

The Hurt Report said that the vast majority of motorcycle accidents are caused by a car violating a motorcycle's right-of-way.

Which is not to say that they can't be avoided by training, knowledge, practice, skill, observation, experience, prediction, intuition, control, self-control and good judgement.

Quote from: RoadstergalThe Hurt Report said that the vast majority of motorcycle accidents are caused by a car violating a motorcycle's right-of-way.
.

yep-car turning left in front of a motorcycles path is most common accident. I'd guess single vehicle would be second (ie, losing it in a turn).

First place: Srinath (I blame him for everything, so why not this).

Second place: crazy noobiez

Second place: crazy cagerz

Third place: crazy cagerz and noobiez

Fourth place: JetSwing

I tend to believe that *most* accidents can be avoided by riding smart; unfortunately, there will always be that percentage of crazy cagerz that whack us when there's not a whole lot we can do to protect ourselves.  :dunno:

(P.S. I don't really blame noobies, as long as they take the time to get themselves trained properly and get a lot of safe practice in!  :thumb: )

Quote from: RoadstergalThe Hurt Report said that the vast majority of motorcycle accidents are caused by a car violating a motorcycle's right-of-way.

Which is not to say that they can't be avoided by training, knowledge, practice, skill, observation, experience, prediction, intuition, control, self-control and good judgement.

is it true that the hurt report was published in 1981? if so, i don't think it would honestly represent today's statistics.

No, but we don't have anything better.

Yet.

And I doubt cagers have changed for the better.

but the demographic for motorcycle riders have changed vastly.

one of the question in msf written test were: "what's the biggest factor in motorcycle accident?" the correct answer was "turn or curve on the road". i'm pretty sure "intersection" was one of the choices.

Was the question "what is the biggest factor in solo motorcycle accidents?"

In the course I took, they talked about right-of-way violation, then alcohol (although they did not cite the source, they referenced that as one of the most significant factors in solo motorcycle accidents - I'm assuming also from Hurt).  If there's more current data that has a cohort that's so statistically significant, I'm all ears.

i don't think it mentioned "solo"...this question was the only one i had gotten wrong. i think i chose "rainy weather/wet road". i remember being confused because i didn't think there were any clear cut answer.

Inexperience and stupidity.  No other causes.

Which makes me wonder why the 'crazy cager' option has six votes and Rider Error only 5? I mean aren't we talking about single vehicle accidents? Where the bike is crashed without another vehicle in sight (because the rider misjudged the turn?

Quote from: RoadstergalThe Hurt Report said that the vast majority of motorcycle accidents are caused by a car violating a motorcycle's right-of-way.

Which is not to say that they can't be avoided by training, knowledge, practice, skill, observation, experience, prediction, intuition, control, self-control and good judgement.

I was always told that right-of-way is not something you take...it's something you give.  :dunno:  Seems to keep me out of a lot of trouble.

The Hurt Report says just under 50% of accidents are caused by crazy cagers ie cars violating the motorcycle's right of way.  "The most frequent" (no % given) accident of this type is the dreaded "left turner".  

~17% are the rider just losing control and wiping out.  

As scratch said, even in accidents were it's technically "the other guy's fault", there's often a chance for the rider to avoid or at least mitigate the accident.

jeff

 :icon_confused:

Hi Ed, nice to see you in print again

Probably the biggest SINGLE cause is the four-wheeler turning accross the m/C, in your case the left-turner (right turner in mine) but taking everything into account it has to be rider error. So many of us seem to forget our vulnerability. We need to think for the motorists who clearly can't or won't think for themselves, like Ed says less fun but a longer life.

I think we have to go back about five years in this country for a bike-on-bike fatal crash, then about twelve years prior to that. Some people say that this is evidence the the crashes are caused by others but on the other hand most fatal bike crashes involve no-one else, makes you think.

Training-practice-training-practice....

i used to think my greatest chance of going down was of my own doing, single vehicle lowside or something like that...  but after i was involved in an accident where a vehicle ran a stop sign, my opinion changed.  If your a mature rider and not acting squidly its the other guy you gotta look out for...

 :dunno_white:

Quote from: Ed_in_AzI must however disagree with the prevailing mantra of saying it's the rider's fault, regardless of the circumstances. We are the most vulnerable of vehicles, but that does not make us liable. We are no more liable for the dreaded left turn accident than a gunshot victim is for being in line with the bullet.

Can you say "strawman"?   :lol:  I see a lot of "mosts" and "oftens" but no "regardless of circumstances".  Well mackenzie said they're all from stupidity and inexperience, but if we include car drivers among the stupid and inexperienced then he's correct  :lol:

Pretty much every safe riding strategy is predicated on the MSF stuff like the ladder of risk, risk chain, etc.  Like I said, even when it's the other guy's fault, oftentimes there were opportunties prior to the accident where the rider could have prevented it from happening.  There is a huge difference between being liable for something and having missed an opportunity to avoid it.  Sometimes there isn't, the one you had or getting t-boned at an intersection are good examples where there's probably not much that could be done, but lots of other times there is.  

jeff

 :icon_confused:

Ok, I'll restate it to say there's no "prevailing mantra of saying it's the rider's fault, regardless of the circumstances".  Cal seems to be saying that, and mackenzie may or may not have.  That's 2.  The rest of us (5) said most and often.  No prevailing mantra.

If you still don't get it, repeat the reading until you do, or have someone explain it to you  :roll:

jeff

 :dunno_white:

Quote from: Ed_in_AzIf you just want to argue, then postwhore away.

Coming from you, the irony in this statement is laughable.  peace  :thumb:

jeff

Quote from: Jeff POk, I'll restate it to say there's no "prevailing mantra of saying it's the rider's fault, regardless of the circumstances".  Cal seems to be saying that, and mackenzie may or may not have.

First, it's makenzie.

Second, I never placed blame on any particular party.

No need to guess about the causes of motorcycle accidents thanks to Motorcycle Accident Cause Factors and Identification of Countermeasures, Volume 1: Technical Report, Hurt, H.H., Ouellet, J.V. and Thom, D.R., Traffic Safety Center, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, California 90007, Contract No. DOT HS-5-01160, January 1981 (Final Report)  (http://www.clarity.net/~adam/hurt-report.html)

But, it would be nice if they'd update it...  I'm positive things have changed since 1981.

Quote from: RVertigoNo need to guess about the causes of motorcycle accidents thanks to Motorcycle Accident Cause Factors and Identification of Countermeasures, Volume 1: Technical Report, Hurt, H.H., Ouellet, J.V. and Thom, D.R., Traffic Safety Center, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, California 90007, Contract No. DOT HS-5-01160, January 1981 (Final Report)

But, it would be nice if they'd update it...  I'm positive things have changed since 1981.

Quote from: RoadstergalThe Hurt Report said that the vast majority of motorcycle accidents are caused by a car violating a motorcycle's right-of-way.

Which is not to say that they can't be avoided by training, knowledge, practice, skill, observation, experience, prediction, intuition, control, self-control and good judgement.

Quote from: JetSwing
is it true that the hurt report was published in 1981? if so, i don't think it would honestly represent today's statistics.

The idea is still there...  Even though I'd say the "squidly rider error" cause would be higher...

The number one cause is still going to be collision with a car...  And...  I'd say that most of those collisions could have been avoided...  So, I still vote "Rider Error."

I think there's a difference between "It was the rider's fault" and "With more experience, the rider could have avoided the accident."

If a cage violates a bike's right-of-way, an accident is the cager's fault.  Period.  But that is not incompatible with the idea that the biker could have avoided the accident.

Quote from: RoadstergalI think there's a difference between "It was the rider's fault" and "With more experience, the rider could have avoided the accident."

If a cage violates a bike's right-of-way, an accident is the cager's fault.  Period.  But that is not incompatible with the idea that the biker could have avoided the accident.

This is what I've been trying to say.  :cheers:

An example would be if you're riding along in the right lane of the highway in the area of an interchange. A crazy cager in the left lane realizes he's about to miss his exit, and zooms across the lanes and hits you en route to the exit ramp.  Clearly the cagers fault.  But, we should all be aware that cagers are apt to do this sort of thing, and avoid riding in the right lane at interchanges.  

jeff

I think we can all agree that taking the MSF course will reduce the likelyhood of an accident from 4% to 2%.


But I'd also point out that 77% of all statistics are made up on the spot (winks at RG).

Quote from: Jake DBut I'd also point out that 77% of all statistics are made up on the spot (winks at RG).

:lol:  :lol:  :lol:  :lol:

i think you're 92.3% (made up on the spot) correct  :thumb:

Quote from: RVertigoThe number one cause is still going to be collision with a car...  And...  I'd say that most of those collisions could have been avoided...  So, I still vote "Rider Error."

I've been riding for a long time and have seen a great many of my friends and acquaintances go down.  I've been a part of the motorcycling community for last quarter of my life.  I've been hearing stories since I was 10, been helping with accidents since I was 15.

I can tell you that, no matter what any report anywhere tells you, the number one cause of rider accidents is inexperience, and the mojoraty of ALL motorcycle accidents that involve injury of some sort involve the motorcycle ONLY.

The hurt report...that's utter bullshit.  So is any other "statistic" stating that a specific percentage of accidents are caused by anything.  Statistically, 65% of all cycle-related accidents go unreported at the time of the accident.

Quote from: makenzie71The hurt report...that's utter bullshit.  So is any other "statistic" stating that a specific percentage of accidents are caused by anything.  Statistically, 65% of all cycle-related accidents go unreported at the time of the accident.

Um, in one breath you call any stats about accidents bullshit, then in the next you throw out your own statistic (without a reference) about accidents.   :dunno:

You're probably correct that the Hurt report understates the number of motorcycle-only accidents.  If I wipe out and don't really get injured, nobody official will probably find out.  Does that make it "utter bullshit"?  I don't think so.  It's the best info we've got.  Certainly better than anecdotes from the internet.  

jeff

Quote from: Jeff PUm, in one breath you call any stats about accidents bullshit...

Read it again.

The statistic of unreported accidents was gathered from a past issue of Road Racer X or Road Racing World, don't remember which.  I'm sure it's just as flawed as every other statistic posted in here...

QuoteDoes that make it "utter bullshit"?

Actually, it does.  You've allowed yourself to be removed from the statistic, and have furthered it's inaccuracy.

There is a 100% chance that the record number of posts for a new member of GStwin.com the first day of membership is 52.


And there is a 100% chance I'm just kidding with you about all the TX stuff!

:lol:

Quote from: Jake DI think we can all agree that taking the MSF course will reduce the likelyhood of an accident from 4% to 2%.


But I'd also point out that 77% of all statistics are made up on the spot (winks at RG).

QuoteThe motorcycle riders involved in accidents are essentially without training; 92% were self-taught or learned from family or friends. Motorcycle rider training experience reduces accident involvement and is related to reduced injuries in the event of accidents.

in this particular case, i would have to totally discredit the hurt report.

first it was publushed in 1981. the statstistics used in that report's probably close to 30 years old. just think of how the motorcycle scene was like 30 years ago. half of us were barely walking...it was that long ago! although you can find stats that still apply today, you can pretty much put the report in the garbage.

makenzie71, has brought up an interesting fact. i would say at least 40% (made up on the spot) accidents go unreported. even if you were involved in an small accident with a fairly new motorcycle, it's usually cheaper to fix than to claim it to the insurance company.

 :cookoo:

Quote from: Jake DThere is a 100% chance that the record number of posts for a new member of GStwin.com the first day of membership is 52.


And there is a 100% chance I'm just kidding with you about all the TX stuff!

:lol:

I've only been here about 14 hours...

I eye balled it.  And you know what Ryan??? I got purdy damn close!!!!!

I am the king of all the land.  Bring me your finest meats and cheeses!!!


Jake D wrote:
I think we can all agree that taking the MSF course will reduce the likelyhood of an accident from 4% to 2%.


But I'd also point out that 77% of all statistics are made up on the spot (winks at RG).
Quote:
The motorcycle riders involved in accidents are essentially without training; 92% were self-taught or learned from family or friends. Motorcycle rider training experience reduces accident involvement and is related to reduced injuries in the event of accidents.

Quote from: makenzie71I've only been here about 14 hours...

so are you a noob or nood?

depends entirely on what a "nood" is...

New to the forum...but definately no noob...

Before someone makes you search for the meaning of nood, I can tell you a nood is a noob with no motorcycle.

I was never a nood mostly because I couldn't figure out how to type the backwards b.

There's a difference between acknowleding that studies like this (which are conducted in every field) have errors, and stating that those errors make them total bullshit.  

Of course the Hurt Report wasn't 100% accurate when it was conducted, and improvements in gear and training, changing demographics, and other factors would probably lead to some different results if they repeated it today.  

That does not mean there aren't useful lessons to be learned from the data though!  We can only use what info is available to us.  The Hurt Report points out the danger of left-turners (there's a video going around right now that illustrates it nicely), the utility of helmets, the poor visibility car drivers seem to have for riders, the time periods after starting riding that accidents happen, etc.  Loads of good info to be found, quibbling with the exact %s is pointless.  

jeff

It it wasn't for the hurt report I never would have taken the MSF...

If it wasn't for the Hurt report, I never would have bought a motorcycle.  I was thinking about it, but was worried that it would be too dangerous.  The Hurt report convinced me that if I took a safety course ("The motorcycle riders involved in accidents are essentially without training; 92% were self-taught or learned from family or friends.") and wore proper gear ("The use of heavy boots, jacket, gloves, etc., is effective in preventing or reducing abrasions and lacerations, which are frequent but rarely severe injuries.") and wasn't a complete dipshit ("Almost half of the fatal accidents show alcohol involvement.") I would probably be OK.  It seems like if you do all the "right" things, motorcycling isn't all that much more dangerous than driving.  So it convinved me it was OK to get a motorcycle in the first place (and to definitely take the MSF - puts me in the 8%).

Quote from: Ed_in_AzYour ego will not protect you against a car.

I think if you resign yourself to the fact that accidents are simply unavoidable, you're just relying on fate.  

That won't protect you against a car, either.

the report is f%$king ~30 years old.

Total number of motorcycle models sold around the world:

1975: only 119 models
1980: still only 176 models
2005: total of 721 models are on the road today

that's how much the motorcycle scene have changed in past 30 years.

in 1975, you would most likely be rugging this around town:

(http://www.bikez.com/pictures/suzuki/1975/9685_0_1_2_gt%20250_Image%20credits%20-%20Markus%20Dingeldein.jpg)

Still, it's the best statistics we have, really, and most of the conclusion seem, logically, to be valid today.  It may be a bit outdated, but overall, I think it's still very relevant.

Just dug up this (http://www.dft.gov.uk/stellent/groups/dft_rdsafety/documents/page/dft_rdsafety_035422.pdf) study.   It was published in 2004, and s\maintains that right of way violations are still the most common type of accident (38% of accidents), and that in only 20% of those accidents was the motrocyclist rated as even partly to blame for the accident.

Quote from: JetSwingthe report is f%$king ~30 years old.

Quit making me feel old you jerk.

Please refer to the report as "almost 25" years old...  Thanks.

Quote from: RVertigo

Quote from: JetSwingthe report is f%$king ~30 years old.

Quit making me feel old you jerk.

Please refer to the report as "almost 25" years old...  Thanks.

quit crying old man  :P

Quote from: RVertigo

Quote from: JetSwingthe report is f%$king ~30 years old.

Quit making me feel old you jerk.

Please refer to the report as "almost 25" years old...  Thanks.

+1  :thumb:  :thumb:  :thumb:   No Kidding!!!!!

It's clear that a new report would be more accurate to the current trends and conditions...  But, what can be learned from the "almost 25 year old" report is still the same as what would be learned today.

Most accidents with motorcycles are with other cars, training makes you less likely to crash, and protective makes you less likely to die.

Other than that, it would be minor differences in the numbers.

Quote from: RVertigoMost accidents with motorcycles are with other cars...

i'm still trying to argue that point. if you were to say "most of the reported motorcycle accidents are with other cars", I would definitely agree.

i'm trying to dig up an estimated fingure of unreported motorcycle accidents.

I guess we have to define accident... :roll:

If you're driving your cage and back into a light post, but do very light damage, do you report it as an accident?

If you're riding your moto and lose your balance and drop it, do you report it as an accident?



I don't think either one even counts as an accident...  Nor do they matter for this discussion.

Accidents that cause >$1000 damage to a vehicle, injury, or death...  Other than that, who gives a crap?

Some little scratch on the can isn't what this is about...

Quote from: JetSwingmost of times it's single bike accidents resulting from operator error, aggressive riding, etc...

so...what do you think is the biggest cause of motorcycle accidents (not just deaths)?

i tend to think that most of the accidents can be avoided if you ride smart.

I mean...  Does a low-speed drop or low-side with little to no injury and damage really matter in the grand scheme of motorcycle safety?

look at it this way. how many motorcyclists have used bikes without full insurance coverage? i do. if you get into any kind (big or small) single bike accident, it won't get reported. even if you have a full coverage, if the damage to the bike is less than say $1000, it might not get reported. most elect to fix it themselves rather than get a bump in the premium.

also, amount of damage to bike does not depict any bodily injury you might inccure. so, yea, you can bike a bike going only 10 mph and break your wrist, for example.

in general, any kind of accident matters (i'm not talking about drops on a parking lot). i'm talking about accidents on the road.

I don't have any insurance at all...  If I was in a single-vehicle-accident, it wouldn't get reported.  You're right about that...

But, what does that really mean in regards to the topic?  A single-vehicle-accident is the fault of the rider in one way or another...  So, wouldn't that just go to prove that the majority of unreported accidents (which is still an unknown estimate) are going to be A) Minor and B) the fault of the rider?

The question is, who's at fault?  Supporting your case only supports the case that the rider is at fault more often that the "almost 25 year old" report says.


I believe that most motorcycle accident could have been avoided by the rider...  Doesn't that mean we agree?

yup, we do agree on the fact that most of the motoorcycle accidents can be avoided. if in fact the rider have some what of large influence over the occurance of mototcycle accidents, you can argue that dangers associated with motorcycle riding is largly dependent on the rider.

also, ultimately i want to compare the dangers of riding motorcycle vs cage. (if both the car and the motocycle get in to accident, it's obviously a no contest. duh!) but factor in the probability of getting into accidents and the fact that most accidents can be avoided. now, how much more dangerous is a motorcycle compared to a car?

i truely believe that riding motorcycle is as dangerous as you wanted to be. i also believe that many people wanted it to be dangerous (they may not realize it till it's too late).

that's where i wanted to go with this thread.