Kawasaki Motorcycle Forums banner

Should motorcycling become more universal/safe?

4K views 48 replies 21 participants last post by  04RDA 
#1 ·
After the bellyaching in the ABS thread I got to thinking

Seems like a lot of folks feel that their definitions & acceptance of risk should be the baseline set for everybody. I.e. if one doesn't like ABS, manufacturers shouldn't make it and nobody should have it.

My thing is, cars & gas are getting expensive as shit, so motorcycles are beginning to make sense from a purely practical POV. Lower running costs and cost of entry. Plus the safer it is, the more bikes people buy, the more $$$ manufacturers get, the more cool bikes become available for them to pour $$$ and R&D into on the high end. And of course the more awareness there is about motorcycling, hopefully the more people look for us and the less people have to get smashed up in SMISDY incidents. I think shit like automatic transmissions and ABS would be welcomed features for a lot of folks. Not everyone wants a ZX10R but then again not everyone wants a Burgman. Bikes like the NC700 make a lot of sense.

Its kind of like how people bitch about Porsche making the Cayenne + Panamera, even though all those cars do is enable them to keep making the 911s and Caymans. What do you think?
 
#2 ·
The people who want to ride will ride. You're either drawn to riding and love it, drawn to it and have the shit scared out of yourself and quit, or you refuse to ever get on one. Regardless of how much technology you put into it, you're not going to find my mom on one.

Automatic transmissions on bikes will take away some of the fun of it. With ABS, riders will lose a skill. They'll rely on that like people rely on traction/stability control in cars.

-Will
 
#5 ·
i dont think any of that shit would make a difference; i've had many people say this to me all the time

"I love motorcycles, but I'm shit scared of them"

people have the idea of motorcycles = death inbedded into them
 
#6 ·
The point was that people should have a choice. I do not want ABS and should not be forced to have it come standard on any bike I buy. If it's an option and someone wants it that's fine.

It isn't that it shouldn't be an option, it's that soon enough it won't be an option, it will be mandatory.
 
#7 ·
Why should I have to sacrifice the perfomance of newer machines (engine, chassis, suspension, aerodynamics...etc) over something that limits their abilities? Granted, many of these systems have different levels of 'interference' (including 'off'), but why force all to pay for a system (in price, performance and weight) that many won't use?

Sent from outerspace with the motorcycle.com app for space shuttle.
 
#16 ·
Heres the thing... most people who ride motorcycles go down at least once. I don't think anyone has died that way in the history of mankind, except maybe Jimmy Hoffa

If its safer the stigma goes away, more people ride, more $$$ gets put into cool bikes, people become more aware of bikes in general. I went to Paris, there were more motorcycles and scooters than cars
Which had nothing to do with rider aids.
 
#18 ·
Which had nothing to do with rider aids.
But prob a lot to do with the absence of the stigma of danger, which rider aids could assist in eliminating here
 
#8 ·
People don't like change. They get set in their ways and when something moves away from their comfort zone they go up in arms about it. Happens every where you look!

I'll be the first person to complain about modern technology in vehicles and how the advances in technology means that nowadays we are much more reliant on garages with specialised equipment for the jobs we used to do our selves.

But...

We can't stay in the past for ever and as technology improves we need to learn to adapt. And its not all bad, we are not being bottle necked into a no option scenario. The new bikes do have options for things like traction control and power. To illustrate this point here are a couple of snippets from the features page for the 636 on Kawasaki Motors United Kingdom

3-Mode KTRC (Kawasaki Traction Control)
The KTRC system on the new Ninja ZX-6R combines the best elements of Kawasaki's two traction control systems, S-KTRC and KTRC. Three modes cover a wide range of riding conditions, offering either enhanced sport riding performance or the peace of mind to negotiate slippery surfaces with confidence.
A choice of Full Power or Low Power modes allows riders to set power delivery to suit preference and conditions. While output al lower rpm is the same, Low power mode limits output to approximately 80 %of Full Power and uses a milder throttle response. Combining KTRC and Power mode options, riders have eight combinations from which to choose. Like KTRC, Power Mode can also be controlled from the left grip.
Spring rates and damping settings chosen to maximise performance on winding roads enable riders to enjoy the Ninja ZX-6R’s sporty performance in a wide range of situations. Greater control as the fork begins to compress and very calm attitude change as the vehicle weight shifts forward when reducing speed, offer greater chassis stability on corner entry.

Alternatively for you conspiracy theorists... The American Government have been watching you ride your whole life, they know what you like, they know how you like it and have improved the safety and performance of motorcycles just to fuck you all over.
 
#17 ·
I would rather everyone have to ride a motorcycle before getting full car driving privileges. Natural selection will take care of those not fit to be driving, or keep them off the road completely.
 
#22 ·
You can't legislate safety.

And every time you idiot proof someone we just build a better idiot.

Make them tougher to ride, and the consequences more dire.
 
#25 ·
Should motorcycling become more universal/safe?
Motorcycling will never be "safe". People are stupid and motorycles are unforgiving to the stupidity of yourself and others.

That said I dont like rider aids you should learn to control your machine. When shit happens electronics cant always help you like a developed skill set can.
 
#28 ·
There are more scooters in paris because of how tightly packed the city is and they are more widely affordable. They are just more practical, it has nothing to do with danger.

All this safety crap does is keep people on the road that should not be.

I've been riding forever without this crap on my bikes and I have never had a problem. There is no reason a new rider can not do the same. Give us more control by making bikes that handle better with better brakes, but dont take that handling away by adding electronic interference. If you are good at riding you are better without it.

New is not better, it is just different. New is actually worse a lot of times.

This stuff does not make riding a bike safe or really any safer. Riding a bike is inherently dangerous no matter wtf you do to one. We already have to many people on the planet, why are we trying to make is worse?

You come into a corner to fast, you lock up the back tire and go off the road because you dont know what you are doing. Do the same thing with ABS, the outcome is the same you just dont leave as much rubber on the road before you go into he ditch.

It might make thing easier in panic situations if you dont know what to do, but knowing what to do is WAY more beneficial and always will be. You learn what to do faster without electric help. So I say just leave things alone.
 
#29 ·
Cant believe I'm about to say this but... I agree with Weebel. Actually there have been some very good points against riders aids and although I made a point for them earlier on and I stand by it, I do also think there are some very good arguments against them, but in particular
All this safety crap does is keep people on the road that should not be.
Weebel wasn't the first person on this thread to say it but its very true. This also unfortunately means that more idiots riding means higher insurance premiums for (what will inevitably become the minority) good riders.
 
#30 ·
Safety aids on cars have brought accident rates down which have brought insurance rates down

And if motorcycle riders competing at the highest level of the sport use + value TC systems and still crash, how is any of this talk of "electronic aids kill riding skills" relevant? Can anyone here pull a MotoGP lap time on a MotoGP bike just by rider's aids? The riders aids don't control the bike, you do
 
  • Like
Reactions: chris140
#31 ·
Safety aids on cars have brought accident rates down which have brought insurance rates down

And if motorcycle riders competing at the highest level of the sport use + value TC systems and still crash, how is any of this talk of "electronic aids kill riding skills" relevant? Can anyone here pull a MotoGP lap time on a MotoGP bike just by rider's aids? The riders aids don't control the bike, you do
How is the talk about safety aids in cars relevant, motorcycles are a different type of a vehicle?

Motorcycles are two wheel vehicles and balance upright unlike a car. They have a small contact patch with the surface and are prone to falling over at low speeds. They require more skill than a car to operate

The portion I bolded is exactly what people against "safety features" all agree on. Why add more rider aids when the rider should be fully capable in handling his/her motorcycle in any condition? That's a responsibility for the rider, we shouldn't have to mandate rider aids.
 
#32 ·
Interesting factoid: Moto GP racers actually crashed more often on the electronic loaded 800's than they did the simpler 990's or even the 500 two strokes.

Now they just crash coming into corners instead of coming out of them as a rule.


Sent from my iPhone using Motorcycle.com Free App
 
#33 · (Edited)
My thing is, cars & gas are getting expensive as shit, so motorcycles are beginning to make sense from a purely practical POV.
My car (140 bhp and 120 mph, so not particularly slow even by no stretch of imagination a sports orientated vehicle) does 55 mpg. My bike does 49 mpg.

Car costs £200 for a 12K service. Bike costs £450 - and needs a £200 intermediate service at 6K.

Car costs £500 per 30K miles for tyres, bike costs around £750 per 30K miles.

Road tax and insurance are about the same. Bike needs riding gear, car doesn't.

Car is warm/cool, dry, comfortable and has a decent stereo. Bike is fast through traffic.

Bike is middleweight Street Triple R - an ideal commuter. ER-6 was a bit cheaper to run. Bigger bikes are not. Car is a turbo diesel,

On the other hand a small bike can be very cheap to run and some cars, particularly in the States, need a fuel tanker to follow them.

All that apart, why don't we go back to tubed cross-ply tyres, drum brakes, manual ignition advance and acetylene lights. Some of you seem to want to pick and choose what safety aids suit you (high grip tyres and slipper clutches for example) but despise other safety aids. That is not a logical position to take.

The best safety aid is also the best performance aid. It's your brain, and I'd like to see some of you making more use of it. Some of you talk as though you have the skill set of a moto-GP professional. You don't, or that's what you'd be doing for a living. Accept that your skills are limited and you'll live longer. Learn how to use the safety aids and add them to your riding and you'll live longer still - and might even be faster in a wider range of adverse conditions.

Rob
 
#34 ·
Sticky tires are not a safety aid. Disc over drum brakes are not a safety aid. Radial over tube ply are not safety aid. Digital ignition over manual ignition is not a safety aid. Your argument is invalid. To make it applicable...get rid of headlights, tires, brakes, an ignition system, clutches, etc...completely, not just retrograde.
ABS, TC, etc are not necessities and should not be mandated. If you feel it is a better option for you as a rider then YOU should be able to get it. I shouldn't HAVE to have it just because you think its better for you.
And for the record, I got kicked out of MotoGP because no one could keep up...


Sent from outerspace with the motorcycle.com app for space shuttle.
 
#35 ·
ticky tires are not a safety aid. Disc over drum brakes are not a safety aid. Radial over tube ply are not safety aid. Digital ignition over manual ignition is not a safety aid. Your argument is invalid. To make it applicable...get rid of headlights, tires, brakes, an ignition system, clutches, etc...completely, not just retrograde.
I don't agree with that, I think he has a very valid point. There are some very good arguments for and against, but in this case I agree with Williamr

How can you not consider disc brakes a safety aid? They stop faster and don't lock up as much. The next step in evolution is ABS.

It's kind of like going from vinyl, to CD to MP3... There are still collectors of Vinyl records and there are still companies that make them but the majority of the world uses mp3s. I don't see how a bike is any different.

The world is evolving and people need to learn to evolve with it. We might not like change and as someone said before if you want drum brakes buy an older bike... or retro fit a new one. I am sure drum brakes will still be manufactured for years to come.
 
#40 ·
I don't consider disc brakes a safety aid because they're not a safety aid. I see them as a performance upgrade. ABS is not a performance upgrade as it does not perform better in all circumstances and situations. Stickier tires are not 'safer' if you never get them too or keep them at ideal operating temperature.

Sent from outerspace with the motorcycle.com app for space shuttle.
 
#36 ·
Royal Enfield is thriving thanks to people stuck in the past. No shame in it.
 
#37 ·
It's amazing how some people cannot, or simply are not willing to differentiate between something that is a mechanical device that only responds to your input versus a computer that does the thinking for you.


Sent from my iPhone using Motorcycle.com Free App
 
#45 · (Edited)
So let's start by junking the ECU which handles your fuelling and ignition so that you don't have to think about it.

ABS systems don't 'think', btw. They compare the input from two sensors and follow a strict set of rules. They're no different in concept to a slipper clutch which lets go when the load exceeds a pre set measure. Why is one good and the other bad? It's role is to override your input when you get it wrong. I can control the clutch well enough to have no need of a slipper, except perhaps to gain a tiny fraction of a second on a track, but I don't hear anybody saying that the new 300 shouldn't have one because it takes skill away from the rider.

And just to reiterate - I don't think these systems should be mandatory. I don't have any objections to them being fitted but I want to be able to disable them. I don't want to be force to pay extra for them. I don't want to persuade anybody that they should use these systems.

I do want to challenge woolly thinking and illogical positions and the luddite mentality that rejects anything that doesn't clearly make the bike faster. Most of you never get anywhere near the limits of what your bikes can do anyway.

And anybody who doesn't think that a modern tyre is a safety aid should try riding on an old Avon SMll with a completely square section. I suspect that most of you would shit yourselves on the first gentle bend. I know I probably would, and I learned to ride on them.

Rob
 
#39 ·
making motorcycling safer in the US...ha. To do that, add two more wheels and a cage, to protect it from cars and poor road construction choices. ABS is a great technology jump, don't get me wrong. But the percentage of motorcycle fatalities that don't involve a car creating the danger in the first place, is very low. why did that guy lock up the front wheel on his bike and crash...well, because a car cut him off, pulled out in front of him, changed lanes into him...etc.

From the ground up, transporation in the US is all but ignores motorcyles and their saftey...road gaurding, painting, construction projects/planning and so on all all blissfully ignorant to the safety of motorcycles (and their operators). rubber aprons on RR crossings, tar and gravel road resurfacing to name a couple.

Then talk about the vacuum that exists behind the wheel....doing make-up, reading a book, texting/talking. The drivers ed program is a joke.

sorry...rant over...
 
#43 · (Edited)
That argument was invalid as sticky, radial tires, disc brakes, and elctronic ignition are not safety features or rider aids when compared to bias ply, drum, or mechanical ignition. I'll give him acetylene headlights over halogen (but not HID over halogen)...something about heating up a filament in expolsive gas doesn't sit well with me.
TC, WC, and ABS are all completely new systems. They are not improvements to existing systems. An improvement to your braking system would be a master cyclinder, stainless lines, new calipers, pads, rotors. Basically, replacing something already there. ABS is an additional system and it doesn't make a bike safer. It may provide you with the illusion of safety knowing that the system will kick in and not allow the wheel to lock up, but here is a novel idea...don't hammer the brakes so hard that they lock up!



Sent from outerspace with the motorcycle.com app for space shuttle.
 
#48 ·
I think motorcycles will eventually be like it is for cars. Most drivers do not know what to do in a panic situation, slam on the brakes and fail to corner properly. ABS braking, electronic stability control and airbags will soon be required for all cars built, and if you want the cheaper version with less safety equipment you have to buy used or a kit car.

Companies want their customers to live a longer life, so they can buy a new vehicle later.

Like airbags for cars, the future ABS and traction control systems will be better, with less for well trained drivers to complain about, and mass production instead of a rare option will greatly lower the extra cost.

This part of the history of car seat belts was interesting to me:

"In 1958, Saab decided to install seat belts for the first time for the front seat of their popular GT 750.

When the state of Victoria in Australia passed a seat belt law in 1970, in America it was likely that 9 out of 10 people probably didn't fasten their seat belts. Maybe it was more apt to happen when going out on the U.S.'s recently built interstates.

Other countries in Europe managed to pass mandatory seat belt-wearing laws, after Australia proved through annual statistics that wearing seat belts there was saving lives.

Oddly, Australia's direct link of the U.K. couldn't seem to pass a seat belt-wearing law until 1983.

Seat belt-wearing laws started popping up in most American states around 2000."

from The History of the Seatbelt in American Cars - Yahoo! Voices - voices.yahoo.com
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top