Too true. I could only really see the commybook looking like that if it had happened on a airfield or something similar where it could slide to a stop on its own. But to be honest looking at them pictures i think this story is BS. I've seen the state of a mates girlfriend coming off the back at a much slower speed than that and it wasn't pretty
Why exactly? There are bikes that go that fast, hell ive been that fast in a scooby. Not hard to mod one or de-restrict it if you know what your doing. Depends on the situation tho really doesn't it, my mate went through a brick wall at 80 on a bike and hes just fine (albeit the guy in front (the driver), broke his back)
Just factor in the cost of full leathers and boots when you buy it and you'll fare okay unless you're very stupid or very unlucky. There are plenty of safe bikers who go their whole lives without a serious injury, but of course they don't make the news.
The guy said it was a BMW - the BMW S1000 RR hits 190 at stock, and most bikes have inaccurate speedos for legal reasons (you don't want to get sued because your bike underestimates the speed) - the bike might have been showing 195 even if it was only going at 190. Alternatively, there could have been a tailwind, the rider could have been lighter, etc etc. It's possible for an S1000 RR to get that fast in good conditions, and even if it doesn't, it might say it is. So I wouldn't call BS just on the speed given. Or even just if it sustains a jolt - I can hear the heads parking constantly while going over bumps in the road or knocking my laptop. Laptops themselves are rated at about 250g non operating impact - more than would have been sustained in a drop like talked about. It's possible - you'd need a straight 2 miles long and perfect conditions - unlikely, but certainly possible, especially if the bike has aftermarket parts and upgrades. It depends what you're wearing - jacket and jeans = massive abrasion damage, probable back damage, chance of quite a few broken bones, etc - not good. Proper good quality leathers, boots, back protector, shoulder, elbow armour, etc makes riding a helluva lot safer. It can't take away all of the risk, but with proper clothing, a 200mph mistake on an open road wouldn't end as badly as a 70mph crash with improper clothing. The guy in this crash was hurt, but had no serious injuries. The crash was 200mph. For those uninterested in motorcycling, you get to hear an italian person say 'mamma mia'. http://www.break.com/usercontent/2007/2/11/accident-nakano-mugello-04-223816 Ride safe. Motorcycling can be extremely dangerous, but if you are riding properly, with adequate protection against abrasion and impacts, the danger is relatively low - an American report suggested that per 100k bikes, 55 end up in fatal crashes - in contrast to 18 cars. Even then, motorcycle statistics can't be used reliably - for example, half of the fatal accidents examined by the American Hunt study were influenced by Alcohol, 92% of the motorcyclists were self-taught and only 40% were wearing a helmet. Motorcycle responsibly, and the chance of a fatal accident is extremely low - only slightly higher than push-biking or travelling in a car.
I know they can. Was she in the right gear or not? I have no sympathy for people who get hurt and are in a T-shirt and shorts. I was going more by the damage then the speed (I know there are bikes that can hit that speed and that bike speedos over estimate speed) because if the laptop landed on tarmac the case would be ground away and on dirt it would be filthy. Spot on with regards to gear. Doesn't matter what you ride you should be in ATGATT, be it leathers or good textiles.
Does anyone have a broken macbook? If so, can you drive around 100kmh/60mph, throw it out the window, then go take some pictures, and post here. And as for bike safety, well just look at the stats above. Nearly 3x the amount of fatal accidents for bikes... and take into consideration how serious all riders about thier riding skills, compared to how most car drivers will admit not having a clue how to control a skid in a car If car drivers were as serious about driving as bike riders are about riding, the stats would probably show that cars are at least 10x safer than bikes, or you can just ask any observant rider for confirmation of this. You can have all the gear possible like a motogp rider, but on the road there are obstacles not found on a race track, like kerbs, poles, signs, cars changing lanes with no indicators, etc... and just 40kmh/25mph into one of these can see you in ICU for months. 100kmh/60mph+ into one of these things can mean instantly being turned into mince meat/cut in half/etc.... Wait, i've got it!!! All you need to do is duct tape some macbooks around you, creating an impenetrable force field, and you'll be fine
A couple things: Those figures are from the US where, from what I've seen, a lot of people still don't bother with helmets let alone leathers and the "training" to get your licence is pathetic. If car drivers were as serious about their driving as bikers tend to be about riding there would be less deaths on both sides as a high percentage of accidents in the UK are a car drivers fault (I think I remember a the figure of ~80% being due to the car drivers fault I'll see if I can't find the study done again if you are interested it had a break down from crashes in the UK by type and who was at fault) Of course bikes will always be more dangerous after all you aren't protected by a cage and so the forces you feel in a crash are going to be higher. I'll not test it but if someone proves it works you'll see me in a macbook suit!
In a sample size of 100,000 (as it was) there's a 0.055% chance of the bike being in a fatal crash as opposed to a 0.016% chance. It's a difference, yes, but the difference is tiny in the real world. Untrue, and the statistics back me up on this. According to the American Hurt Report, 3/4 of crashes are multi-vehicle collisions, and of those 2/3 are of the car violating the rider's right of way - ie the crash was the car's fault. Here are a couple of the findings from that report: Furthermore, with regard to the high accident statistic rate: Conclusions we can get from this: If you get proper training, wear a full face helmet, and don't drink ride, the chance of death on the road is decreased massively. That's very true. There are also races on real roads, the most famous being the Isle of Man TT, where racers essentially race round the Isle of Man (ie normal roads, very few crash barriers) at average speeds of around 130mph. There are also deaths at these events, heck, there have been 230-odd deaths during the 103-year history. I'm not saying that motorcycling isn't dangerous, of course if you come off at the wrong point and hit a tree at 70mph you're going to be hurt pretty badly, if not killed. What I'm saying is that many of the most common motorcycling injuries can be avoided relatively easily by wearing proper protection - sliding down a road at 40mph will hurt like hell if you're wearing jeans - the jeans will be ripped apart and your legs will be torn to pieces. This would be mitigated massively by wearing knee armour and proper abrasion-resistant leathers, which would let you skid to a stop.
What I took away from that discussion is that no matter how careful I am - ATGATT, advanced training, proper bike power progression, riding to my ability, riding in good weather - I am still most likely to be killed by some dozy motherf***er changing lanes/turning without looking. That tallies with the number of times I've seen complete dick moves by imbeciles in cars that would've killed a motorcyclist who happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time. If I drive a car, I take my life into my own hands almost totally; the chances of me being killed by someone else's idiocy instead of my own are relatively slim. On a bike, those chances are worse than reversed, and having seen the way people drive I'm just too scared to take that risk...
That's the reason why i'd never commute on 2 wheels PureSilver. Bikes are strictly recreational for me, same with parachuting or bungee jumping. The difference in safety is huge in the real world, as most experienced riders can tell you stories about crashes that caused them to bruise, shed blood, break bones, or all of the above, and many will always have scars they can show you. Most experienced car drivers can tell you a couple of stories such as the time they put a mark on the bumper or mirror, but a very small percentage of experienced drivers, can tell you about the time they were injured as described above. Sure, 2/3 of bike accidents could be avoided if all other road users took the roads seriously, but just imagine how many accidents between all other road users would be avoided, if every road user was cautious? Driving a modern car probably wouldn't be 10x safer than riding, but at least 20x.
Well, reports have suggested that the main problem is seeing the bike - for example bikes with big fairings are less likely to be in crashes and so are bikes where the rider has worn a high-vis jacket or been using day lights.
Yeah, this is a tempting advantage of a massive cruiser, one with some clearance and with heaps of shiny chrome and an epically loud exhaust, but the jacket and helmet would have to be black. Cruisers are not only more comfortable, but they are sexier than racers... it would be nice to have one of each
Yes, I'd love the idea of having a BMW S1000 RR and a Triumph Rocket Three - although the effort of cleaning all that chrome would probably stop me from riding it! I wouldn't say that it's chromed bikes in particular that have the lower crash rate - the report only mentioned faired bikes - I think it's safe to say that a big red fairing would have the same impact as a load of chrome.
