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:

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 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  

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         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...

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.