Posted on 07/08/2005 8:30:36 AM PDT by NormsRevenge
Of course the environmental disaster is the battery that need to be replaces do often compared to gas engines. I understand we are already running out of space to store and destroy them.
My best friend has a zx-11 and a zx-9. He has gone over once and it was minor. He has also put literally hundreds of thousands of miles under him in his 48 years.
The thing about bikes is that it takes skill AND a natural hand-eye coordination and certain mindset to not get yourself killed. If one is in that group, one is fairly safe on a bike, irresponsible behavior notwithstanding. If one is not, they are an accident waiting to happen.
An oversimplified generalization I use is this: If you were always the last to be chosen for sandlot sports, or if you found you hated or kept falling when riding a bike, you might want to avoid owning a motorcycle - permanently.
Likewise if you find yourself drinking and driving...
I agree with you...I sense s bunch of gas hog owners who can't find a passenger are beginning to get bitter about their current truck or SUV purchase.
I agree, and fortunately, I seem to have the appropriate wiring to operate a bike safely. However, this is not something that can be empirically proven to someone else, short of riding one's entire life and dying of something completely bike-unrelated (and it's hard to say I told you so afterwards).
And did you ever try to get out of the diamond lanes across 4 lanes of stopped traffic.
The commute lanes backup more than the regular lanes. It was easier to not use them the few time I could.
Plus people who work sales or service/repair equipment can’t use them.
And hydrogen power has problems even potentially worse. The good news is that hydrocarbons are abundant and easily converted to the form necessary to run automobiles, (ie.. depolymerization...etc.)
BTW, I ride a 1982 honda magna v45. My wife spends a lot of time on the back when we go to eastern Washington. She has actually fallen asleep on the back.
On one trip, we traded with my friend and we rode the zx-11. It was like riding on a rail compared to the old magna! Unfortunately it was very uncomfortable to my wife. The magna is just plain retro fun.
My understanding is that federal highway funding is contingent on including HOV lanes. Unless I'm mistaken, not ALL of the Federal Funds are designated for HOV lanes, but states that refuse to include HOV lanes will receive zero federal funding. In other words, the state seeks federal funding to improve highways, not to build HOV lanes -- it's the federal gov't that insists that state include HOV lanes as a condition of getting the funds. There's no "bargaining" involved, the "deal" stunk to begin with and "going back on it" would improve traffic for everyone. This has nothing to do with improving traffic or congestion and everything to do with Federal coercion and gratifying the egos of social engineers.
Do you like your Prius?
Funny, my wife falling asleep on the back of the ZX-11 was the main reason for selling it in favor of buying a car (bike was the sole means of transport at the time, and we were doing weekly long rides to a city over an hour away, with nighttime return trips). Two of my bikes were 87 "Supermagnas", and while they were fun, they got awfully uncomfortable if you planned a ride that used more than one (2.5-gal) tank of gas. My various passengers have told me, however, that the back of the Supermagna, with the backrest, was very comfortable. I figured that with a corbin seat and backrest for the passenger, the ZX-11 would be the near-perfect two-up mount (save that the early ones like mine cooked off the battery if you rode them on the highway for any great length of time).
Me: 2001 Honda ST1100
Sister 1: 1995 Harley Davidson Heritage Softail Classic
Brother-in-law 1: 2004 H-D Electra Glide
Sister 2 and Brother-in-law 2 double up on a 2004 Goldwing Trike.
My dad had a bike when I was a kid, but he laid it down after having it for literally about 15 minutes. My mom made him sell it the next day. Looking back I think he forgot what hand and what foot did what, and I'm sure a Schlitz or two was involved as well.
Æ
Overall I'd give it a "meh". The actual stat breakdowns aren't very helpful:
52% of fatals weren't wearing a helmet. In other words, about half are and half aren't wearing. The key detail left out is, how many riders overall are wearing and how many aren't. Are unhelmeteds more likely to crash than helmet wearers, and if so, why? The stats do say that helmets seem to reduce the likelihood that a crash becomes fatal, but only by about 1/3.
The largest age group for fatalities is 20-29. But, they don't say what proportion of the riding public is that age. If 20-29 yr. olds are also the largest riding group, then they of course will have the highest representation of accidents. They do point out that 46% of riders are now over 40, which helps some, but leaves out which group does the most riding mileage-wise. 40-yr-olds may simply putt around a bit (minus the tourers), whereas the 20-29s may ride as primary transportation.
Alcohol is a problem (DUH), and unlicensed operators are 25% of all fatalities. No big surprises there, though it would be nice to see what the percentage of unlicensed riders is of the overall riding public to see just how much difference licensing makes.
The single-vehicle accident rate is kind of meaningless without a reference, i.e. how does this compare to cars.
We do see that accidents are up on rural roads vs. urban streets, but not by how much, and how does the age of the rider factor into that? A wipeout that might bang up a younger rider on a lighter bike might be fatal for an older rider on a cruiser (more on this later).
More night accidents involve alcohol than daytime ones (DUH), likewise weekend vs. weekday. No surprises there.
Drinkers are more likely to pitch their bikes down the road. Straight riders are more likely to be bagged by a cage driver, but they leave out the total numbers of each.
Large bikes are figuring in more fatal accidents, but they do not discuss what the distribution of bike displacements is. If everyone is riding a large-displacement bike, this stat is meaningless.
Likewise the notation that the mean engine size in fatal crashes has gone up. If bike sizes in general have gone up, (and they have) then of course the mean size will go up. This does not mean that big bikes are necessarily more dangerous (though this does seem to be the intended thrust of this section).
Also, the rate of over-40 riders killed on big bikes is meaningless, since most over-40 riders go out and buy big cruisers, so of course they will be the lion's share of all accidents in that age group. Without correcting for displacement distribution, this stat is also meaningless. If, per x number of bikes in a certain displacement category, big bikes were overrepresented, you might have something.
At best, one can pull out of this that riding with a helmet may improve your chances of surviving a crash, though it says nothing about whether helmeted riders are less likely to be in a crash at all. Don't drink and ride, as if that weren't already obvious to anyone who was a serious rider (and understood the operation of a bike). There's more here, but I really don't feel like digging that deep right now.
Totally false. No Prius battery, for example, has yet ever had to be replaced.
Motorcycles have been allowed in the HOV lanes for years.
This is because 1, they are energy efficient and 2, two wheel mean 1/2 the wear on the roads 3, more motorcycles in same space.
The hybrids in the HOV makes no sense at all. Four wheels mean the same amount of road wear as any other automobile.
That's because most haven't been on the road long enough. The design life of these batteries is in the 4-5 year range, though, so they will soon be coming in for replacement (and they ain't cheap). I dunno where Kretek gets his info from (Xenu?).
Sorry, meant to say, dunno where edcoil is getting his info from.
please NHTSA studies and an exercise in biased studies. They are just pissed they are no longer allowed to lobby in congress and have to resort to fixing studies the same way the MSM push polls.
FMVSS 218, the federal helmet standard, is a joke. It has ZERO neck standards for helmets, does NOTHING to prevent the neck strap from acting like a noose if the helmet is too heavy, AND only tests helmets to 15 mph.
IOW if you ride a motorcycle faster than 15mph you have exceeded the design limits of the helmet.
These are helmet facts which should be considered so as to prevent a false sence of secuirty.
Knowledge is the only true safety factor.
So when choosing a helmet realize what you are buying and what you are wearing.
consumer reports did something on hybrids.
When you factor in the cost/FINANCING of the battery. (3-5k!) you don't save money.
IOW it is a zero sum game. You just don't use as much gasoline.
However a batery WILL degrade over time used or not.
Now if you could have a car that could autodrive, THEN we would be cooking!
Helmets are kind of useful in protecting the head from friction damage when sliding, but as an impact protection device, you are correct. To be more accurate, helmets are designed to protect your head for the distance from a sitting position on the bike to the ground, straight line, as though you fell off the bike while sitting still. Anything beyond that is gravy.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.