Honda VTX Forum banner

41 - 52 of 52 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
15,774 Posts
I feel it unfair to generalize any group or motorcyclist. Dumbasses come in all ages, and ride all kinds of bikes.
Interesting data here:

http://www.webbikeworld.com/Motorcycle- ... 09-360.pdf
Quote from atricle:
"Table 4 shows there are still proportionally more fatalities in the 20-
29 year old age group
than in the under-20, 30-39, 40-49, and over-49 year old age groups from 1990 to 1999. This indicates that the 20-29 year old age group is still the leading at risk age group in terms of the number of motorcyclist fatalities. However, the number of fatalities in the 30-39 and 40-49 year old age groups are fast approaching the number of fatalities in the 20-29 year old age group."
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,766 Posts
Discussion Starter #43
EricR1970 said:
I'd like to know what your source is for this ...


Edit: It also sounds like you're saying that people who ride cruisers are more reckless than those who ride sports bikes as witnessed by the fact that you claim more people are killed on cruisers. Is that your position?
The stats were posted here some time ago. I was surprised too, but I imagine it is due to the fact that more inexpereinced middle agers are buying bikes (mainly cruisers) combining it with the social aspect (hanging out at bars) and we all know what that leads to.

My position is that it is foolish to classify a riders ability, awareness, recklessness, etc. by what bike he rides. there are good and bad riders on all kinds of bikes. The sportbikes get a lot of attention in the media is the only difference. I Know very responsible riders on both cruisers and sportbikes. I also know a few fools on each? I thought the qoute "crotch rockets....Gods way of weeding out the stupid!!" was, well, a stupid comment. that was the only point I was trying to make. By the way, how are we supposed to classify the guys that have both cruisers and sportbikes?? Are they dunb on certain days and smart on others, depending on what bike they ride??
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
153 Posts
black hills said:
EricR1970 said:
I'd like to know what your source is for this ...


Edit: It also sounds like you're saying that people who ride cruisers are more reckless than those who ride sports bikes as witnessed by the fact that you claim more people are killed on cruisers. Is that your position?
The stats were posted here some time ago. I was surprised too, but I imagine it is due to the fact that more inexpereinced middle agers are buying bikes (mainly cruisers) combining it with the social aspect (hanging out at bars) and we all know what that leads to.
I hate to be argumentative on such a silly point, but I beg to differ. I just found this:



Which clearly shows that by far the highest percentage of motorcycle fatalities occur in the 501cc to 1000cc range, which pretty much shows that a higher percentage of people are killed on sports bikes than on cruisers.

Here is the link to my source:

http://www.webbikeworld.com/Motorcycle- ... 09-360.pdf
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
595 Posts
Who says that stupid people even need a motor?

http://media.putfile.com/huge-jump30

I see guys doing stuff on sport bikes that I wouln't attempt on someone else's bike, and I know plenty of idiots that drink and ride. Stupid is a feature that's available on every make and model of everything (and available in every color, too).
Brian
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,766 Posts
Discussion Starter #46
Well, that is for 1999. not many > than 1500cc bikes then? here's what I found:

By Age: Older motorcycle riders, who have become an increasingly larger proportion of all motorcyclists, now account for about half of all motorcycle rider fatalities. NHTSA data show that in 2004, 46 percent of motorcycle riders age 40 and over were killed in crashes, compared with 23 percent ten years earlier. In contrast, fatalities among young motorcycle riders have declined in the past ten years relative to other age groups. In 2004 fatalities in the under 30-year old group dropped to 32 percent, from about 50 percent in 1994. Fatalities among motorcyclists in the 30- to 39-year old group fell to 22 percent in 2004, from 26 percent ten years earlier.



read more here:
http://www.iii.org/media/hottopics/insu ... otorcycle/

I'll see what I can find as far as bike type. I'm thinking most of those >40 are riding cruisers?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
153 Posts
black hills said:
Well, that is for 1999. not many > than 1500cc bikes then? here's what I found:

By Age: Older motorcycle riders, who have become an increasingly larger proportion of all motorcyclists, now account for about half of all motorcycle rider fatalities. NHTSA data show that in 2004, 46 percent of motorcycle riders age 40 and over were killed in crashes, compared with 23 percent ten years earlier. In contrast, fatalities among young motorcycle riders have declined in the past ten years relative to other age groups. In 2004 fatalities in the under 30-year old group dropped to 32 percent, from about 50 percent in 1994. Fatalities among motorcyclists in the 30- to 39-year old group fell to 22 percent in 2004, from 26 percent ten years earlier.



read more here:
http://www.iii.org/media/hottopics/insu ... otorcycle/

I'll see what I can find as far as bike type. I'm thinking most of those >40 are riding cruisers?
Your argument has gone from one of "which type of bike is more dangerous" to one of "which age group is more dangerous". It sounds like you are now saying that older people (>40 who are typically cruiser owners) are apparently more reckless beer guzzling incompetents as witnessed by the fact that you claim more of them are killed on sports cruisers than younger folks killed on crotch rockets (a claim that is still in dispute, absent any cited statistic).

Your position is untenable. Older people are in general more experienced and more cautious than younger people. Also, younger people are more prone to doing stupid things like driving while intoxicated than older people.

You may be able to make the argument that there has been a surge in the percentage of "cruiser" related fatalities, but I'd say even that would be a tough argument to substantiate.

Edit: Further, the point has already been made in this thread that the percentage of fatalities is highest in the 20-29 age bracket (sports bike age), not the >40 age bracket (cruiser age). Again, the statistics show a higher percentage of death by sports bike.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
595 Posts
black hills said:
NHTSA data show that in 2004, 46 percent of motorcycle riders age 40 and over were killed in crashes, compared with 23 percent ten years earlier
That seems like a lot of dead riders :shock: Might be safer to take up smokin dope and shooting at Hell's Angels than to ride a bike if you're over 40 (yeah, I know what you were saying, but I don't think anyone's going to budge off their current position :wink: )
Brian
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
153 Posts
BDKesling said:
black hills said:
NHTSA data show that in 2004, 46 percent of motorcycle riders age 40 and over were killed in crashes, compared with 23 percent ten years earlier
That seems like a lot of dead riders :shock: Might be safer to take up smokin dope and shooting at Hell's Angels than to ride a bike if you're over 40 (yeah, I know what you were saying, but I don't think anyone's going to budge off their current position :wink: )
Brian
Problem with that argument is that it presumes that:

1. Most people over age 40 ride cruisers, and few ride sports bikes

2. A disproportionate number of inexperienced 40 year olds have taken up riding in recent years as compared to the number of inexperienced youths who have done so.

3. If you're over 40 and on a cruiser you are somehow more prone to guzzling beer and hopping on your bike than if you're 18-29 and own a crotch rocket.

Facts are that you have to make a lot of logical fallacies in order to hold the postion that people who ride sports cruisers are in general more prone to poor judgement and unreasonable behaviour while riding than those who choose to ride rice burners.

Not to mention the fact that one year of data is insignificant in the face of more than a decade of data from previous years. Perhaps 2004 was an anomaly?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,766 Posts
Discussion Starter #51
I'm not sure what your point is? The statistis show 46% of fatalities are over 40 years old. this is a change from previous years. No where in any of the statistics does it differentiate between types of motorcylces (other than size)? Are you assuming that all 500-1000cc's are sport bikes? If so that is none to scientific, is it? You may want to run a little poll to see how many here rode, or may still have 500-1000cc cruisers. Once again my only point is:

My position is that it is foolish to classify a riders ability, awareness, recklessness, etc. by what bike he rides. there are good and bad riders on all kinds of bikes. The sportbikes get a lot of attention in the media is the only difference. I Know very responsible riders on both cruisers and sportbikes. I also know a few fools on each? I thought the qoute "crotch rockets....Gods way of weeding out the stupid!!" was, well, a stupid comment. that was the only point I was trying to make. By the way, how are we supposed to classify the guys that have both cruisers and sportbikes?? Are they dunb on certain days and smart on others, depending on what bike they ride??

But, we can continue as long as you would like. Although I do think this would be better discussed over a few beers. are you going to make the Sturgis trip???
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
83 Posts
gpettit said:
Crotch rockets...God's way of weeding out the stupid!!

George
As the saying goes, it's not the bike, it's the rider.

Funny thing is the majority of the population thinks ALL motorcyclists are idiots for riding around on public highways. Cruiser riders included.
 
41 - 52 of 52 Posts
Top