Motorcycle article rubs me the wrong way...
Extreme HDF Member
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 13,402
Likes: 941
From: Illinois
The largest % of fatal accidents is experienced riders going too fast and come to a curve, lock the rear brake up and go straight across the curve to impact whatever is there.
Far too many experience riders don't have any idea what their bikes limit is in a curve. They assume the bike won't make it and lock the rear which guarantees an accident. Trust the tires and counter steer hard to have some potential to make it. Learn two other things. Using both brakes and do so without immediately jamming them on. Then add the skill of trail braking through the curve.
Far too many experience riders don't have any idea what their bikes limit is in a curve. They assume the bike won't make it and lock the rear which guarantees an accident. Trust the tires and counter steer hard to have some potential to make it. Learn two other things. Using both brakes and do so without immediately jamming them on. Then add the skill of trail braking through the curve.
To be honest, I care far less about the helmet thing than I do bikers with no training or experience riding on public roads. Riding without a helmet wouldn't be my thing, but I get people not wanting to live in a nanny state. Your statement and mine are both partially true. Helmets don't save a lot of lives, but they do reduce a lot of injuries.
Bad/inexperienced riders endanger others and I DO have an issue with that. I also agree with those who say sport bikers are the bigger problem. More often than not, the riders I see riding like maniacs are on sport bikes.
Bad/inexperienced riders endanger others and I DO have an issue with that. I also agree with those who say sport bikers are the bigger problem. More often than not, the riders I see riding like maniacs are on sport bikes.
I don't wear a helmet, by choice, but I will never knock a man for choosing to wear one. I'm generally the guy cruising along at or maybe slightly above the speed limit, big smile, and enjoying the ride....
There are many times I'd like to stop someone on the road and beat some sense into them.
Road Master
Joined: Sep 2010
Posts: 803
Likes: 1
From: Port St. Lucie FL
Read the Hurt Report if you want actual statistics on motorcycle crashes. Not much has changed nor has the government ever sponsored research in motorcycle safety at that level since. Its from several years ago, but in general the findings still ring true.
Riding a motorcycle is not inherently dangerous, but if something goes wrong, it is very unforgiving.
It's all about mitigating risk. Some routinely take more risks than others, so what's new.
Riding a motorcycle is not inherently dangerous, but if something goes wrong, it is very unforgiving.
It's all about mitigating risk. Some routinely take more risks than others, so what's new.
Seasoned HDF Member
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 6,336
Likes: 67
From: SW Minnesota
When I was an MSF instructor, a big point in our discussions was the fact that most fatalities in Minnesota were caused by a "left turning vehicle" failing to yield to a biker. The last class I taught was in 2000.
However, the past few years, the highest percentages of biker deaths in Mn were single vehicle accidents. The majority of dead bikers had no one to blame BUT THEMSELVES!
http://www.woodsandthompson.com/Arti...increase.shtml
"Driver inattention, including cell phone use by the cyclist, is a factor in single-vehicle motorcycle accidents. Another cause for motorcycle fatalities is alcohol use. In more than 25 percent of fatal motorcycle accidents, the driver tested positive for alcohol. In Anoka County in 2012, there were five motorcycle fatalities, and they were all alcohol related. Police officers responding to the scenes of fatal motorcycle wrecks also cite illegal or unsafe speed and driver inexperience as culprits in single-vehicle deaths."
P.s. The Hurt Report, valid in its time, is now grossly out dated.
However, the past few years, the highest percentages of biker deaths in Mn were single vehicle accidents. The majority of dead bikers had no one to blame BUT THEMSELVES!
http://www.woodsandthompson.com/Arti...increase.shtml
"Driver inattention, including cell phone use by the cyclist, is a factor in single-vehicle motorcycle accidents. Another cause for motorcycle fatalities is alcohol use. In more than 25 percent of fatal motorcycle accidents, the driver tested positive for alcohol. In Anoka County in 2012, there were five motorcycle fatalities, and they were all alcohol related. Police officers responding to the scenes of fatal motorcycle wrecks also cite illegal or unsafe speed and driver inexperience as culprits in single-vehicle deaths."
P.s. The Hurt Report, valid in its time, is now grossly out dated.
Last edited by MNPGRider; Mar 31, 2014 at 08:34 PM.
Cruiser
Joined: Apr 2012
Posts: 115
Likes: 0
From: home
To be honest, I care far less about the helmet thing than I do bikers with no training or experience riding on public roads. Riding without a helmet wouldn't be my thing, but I get people not wanting to live in a nanny state. Your statement and mine are both partially true. Helmets don't save a lot of lives, but they do reduce a lot of injuries.
According to the U.S. Department of Transportation’s National Highway Traffic Safety Administration:
A motorcyclist not wearing a helmet is 40 percent more likely to die of a head injury than one who wears a helmet.
Web site below:
http://www.motorcycleaccident.org/mo...ssible-causes/
All the Best
Curt
Last edited by curtis myers; Mar 31, 2014 at 08:52 PM.
According to the U.S. Department of Transportation’s National Highway Traffic Safety Administration:
A motorcyclist not wearing a helmet is 40 percent more likely to die of a head injury than one who wears a helmet.
Web site below:
http://www.motorcycleaccident.org/mo...ssible-causes/
All the Best
Curt
A motorcyclist not wearing a helmet is 40 percent more likely to die of a head injury than one who wears a helmet.
Web site below:
http://www.motorcycleaccident.org/mo...ssible-causes/
All the Best
Curt
All due respect, Curt, I call BS on that website.
Anyone can put up numbers.... and it's all about the skew.
They said:
In 2008, 43% of all victims that were fatally injured in a motorcycle accident were not wearing helmets.
That's not looking up and validating their statement. Just telling the other side of the story.
I did all of the research for myself, raw numbers, not what the helmet industry wants you to see, and don't kid yourself, they pay people to tell "their" side of the story... and they pay well.
The truth is, statistically, comparing motorcycle crash rates, there is truly an insignificant difference in deaths between helmet and non helmet.
If you want to wear one, wear one! I am not saying it is dangerous...
HD Forum Stories
The Best of Harley-Davidson for Lifelong Riders
7 Surprising Harley-Davidson Products that Are Not Motorcycles
Verdad Gallardo
8 Best Harley-Davidson Motorcycles Ever
Pouria Savadkouei
10 Worst Harley-Davidson Motorcycles Ever
Pouria Savadkouei
Killer Custom's Jail Break Is The Breakout That Refused to Blend In
Verdad Gallardo
Crazy Bunderbike Build Looks Amazing, But Is It Impossible to Ride?
Verdad Gallardo
Harley-Davidson Reveals Super Cool Cafe Racer Concept
Verdad Gallardo
Engraved Rebellion: Inside Bundnerbike's Glam Rock II
Verdad Gallardo
10 Motorcycles You Should Never Buy
Joe Kucinski
10 Things Harley-Davidson Needs to Fix in 2026
Verdad Gallardo
Road Captain
Joined: Sep 2008
Posts: 727
Likes: 1
From: Silverdale, WA
Yeah, the problem with statistics is that it is data, and not information much less knowledge. You can use it to make or disprove a point based on the application, but more frequently by using it without placing it in context. For example, the 43% not wearing vs 57% wearing. Relevant points might also include, on road, off road, frequently statistics include fatalities of both types. Add in half helmets, 3/4 and full face, toss in novelty helmets, relative percentages of accidents in states that require helmets vs not required. You could show that only people wearing helmets are killed if every fatality was wearing a helmet in a state that requires helmets. Does it include the minors in states that don't require helmets except for minors? That is what I liked about the 2003 Aussie study, it seemed like it discussed the variables and conclusions in a logical and reasoned format. It also ventured into protective clothing benefits with respect to injuries and hospitalization. Looks like we live in a time of presentation of information with an agenda as the norm.
Last edited by DDuess; Mar 31, 2014 at 10:17 PM.
Road Warrior
Joined: May 2012
Posts: 1,388
Likes: 132
From: Baltimore, MD
I tend to ignore these kinds of articles. The death rate seems high and doesn't break out the stats based on riders using Snell approved helmets. Not to take the issue sideways but I dress for the crash not the ride. I'm probably one of very few Harley riders you run across wearing a full face helmet but I've hit the ground more times than I'd care to admit and only once was because of another vehicle. Instead factors included sheep, wet roads, gravel and of course excessive speed. At least the article listed the Road King as one of the 'safer" model bikes.