Limited power BMW K1200S in France

[Sunday Driver]

True, the death tolls are not falling.  According to Securité Routiere [url=http://www.securite-routiere.gouv.fr/infos-ref/observatoire/index.html]statistics for 2005[/url]:

• 30% of bikes exceed the speed limit compared to 13% of cars.

• Most bikes exceed the speed limit on D roads.

• Almost one in five road deaths involve motorcyclists.

• Most of these involved crashing into a tree or other fixed obstacle.

• Most deaths involve males over 35 years of age.

• Most deaths involve higher powered motorcycles.

• Least deaths involve the under 18s.

• Most accidents occur on clear D roads (no junctions) in good visiblity and in the summer, with no involvement of other vehicles/pedestrians.

Given that the statistics suggest that most fatalities result from mature riders on higher powered motorcycles going too fast on 'interesting' back roads and losing control, it could be argued that the power restriction levels are not low enough....

 

[bmt]

[quote user="Sunday Driver"]

• Most deaths involve males over 35 years of age.[/quote]

Not the case: "Trois motocyclistes tués sur cinq ont moins de 35 ans."  The over-35s: 100; under-35s: 237.  A higher proportion of all over-35s.

[quote user="Sunday Driver"]Given that the statistics suggest that most fatalities result from mature riders on higher powered motorcycles going too fast on 'interesting' back roads and losing control, it could be argued that the power restriction levels are not low enough....[/quote]

See above regarding mature riders.  To limit the excess speed by power limit alone just can't be done.  As I have said previously, it's a culture thing -- it's necessary to get folks to comply because they can see the reasoning.  If they can't follow the reasoning, nothing will make them comply.  Witness 'unreasonable' speed limits -- set artificially low for prevailing road engineering and conditions.

The overall accident rate has fallen considerably since the mid-70s.  It's too early to say whether the increase in 2005 is a reversal of the trend, or just normal variation around the trend.

[oakbri]

[quote user="Sunday Driver"]

Given that the statistics suggest that most fatalities result from mature riders on higher powered motorcycles going too fast on 'interesting' back roads and losing control, it could be argued that the power restriction levels are not low enough....

[/quote]

Hi Sunday Driver

I would have thought that if limiting the power of a bike had any positive effect we would have seen even a hint of a fall in the death toll. The fact it has had no effect whatsoever surely shows how flawed this method is.

The fact that the majority of the deaths happen on the D roads again I think points to a lack of training, leading to the riders riding way outside their ability.

As I said the riders in the UK use poorer quality, more over crowded roads on higher powered bikes and the death toll is less. The fact that France on the whole enjoys drier weather than the UK makes it even more difficult to understand the figures.

As a side note, I have also noticed that French riders AS A PERCENTAGE seem less educated in what they should wear on a bike. Over here I notice far more riders in jeans and even WITHOUT GLOVES !!!!!!!!!!!! Personally I always wear leathers and gloves, even if that makes my pinkies sweaty.

 

[Sunday Driver]

[quote user="oakbri"]

The fact that the majority of the deaths happen on the D roads again I think points to a lack of training, leading to the riders riding way outside their ability.

[/quote]

Agreed, and I think you've hit the nail on the head.  If you were to put those riders on more powerful, faster machines then surely the problem would be compounded.  On that basis, the power restrictions may well be at least containing the fatality levels

As BMT says, the culture here perhaps isn't the same as it is in the UK where road/traffic conditions are less favourable leading to more of a conciousness about personal safety and a premium on acquiring skills.

As always, it's the lowest common denominator situation.  The rules are in place to protect the less skilled majority, so us Riding Gods must put up with it....[;-)]

 

 

[Bob T]

If any biker wants to wear full leathers and gloves then that is their choice, and I would not try to persuade them not to. But if I chose to go out in a T shirt with no gloves then that is my choice and anyone who does not like it should mind their own business. In over thirty years of riding I have ridden in shirtsleeves many times, but not had an accident, so I have not affected the statistic at all.

[bmt]

[quote user="oakbri"]I would have thought that if limiting the power of a bike had any positive effect we would have seen even a hint of a fall in the death toll. The fact it has had no effect whatsoever surely shows how flawed this method is.[/quote]

But there has been a (considerable) reduction in the accident rate and the fatality rate since the mid-70s.  To what that reduction is attributable, I have no idea -- and I suspect no-one in road safety has any idea, either.  It's a bit like advertising -- half of it is of no value, but no-one knows which half.

From memory, in the UK at least, the over-35s fatalities are considerably (like, overwhelmingly) weighted towards the 'born-again' riders, returning to a very different motoring world after several years' sabbatical, involved in single-vehicle accidents on dry roads in good weather conditions, on Sundays.  A bit like chainsaws and Brits in France. [;-)]

[quote user="Bob T"]... if I chose to go out in a T shirt with no gloves then that is my

choice and anyone who does not like it should mind their own business.[/quote]

Not only that, but risk compensation needs to be considered, too: the rider in full protective clothing, highly visible and headlight on compensates for the perceived enhancement in his own safety and takes more risks.  Somehow, one's mortality is more apparent when more lightly clad and more careful riding is the result.  Compulsory seatbelts and compulsory helmets each saw a reduction in killed or seriously injured (KSI), but an increase in accidents.  A bit like telling people that sticking to the speed limit will prevent all accidents.

One of the general cultural differences in France that I like a lot, is the notion that one is largely responsible for one's own destiny in the nitty-gritty of everyday life.  Unfortunately, I can also foresee France going the way of the Anglo-Saxon countries, where legislation and warning labels abound.

[oakbri]

[quote user="Bob T"]If any biker wants to wear full leathers and gloves then that is their choice, and I would not try to persuade them not to. But if I chose to go out in a T shirt with no gloves then that is my choice and anyone who does not like it should mind their own business. In over thirty years of riding I have ridden in shirtsleeves many times, but not had an accident, so I have not affected the statistic at all.
[/quote]

Hi Bob T

I must admit this is the first time I have heard a biker actually promote the idea of wearing anything but the correct kit, but as you said it's your business and we should mind our own. However the point I was trying to make was trying to explain the poor statistics for bikers in France. No matter on your personal choice it is an undeniable fact that if you have a crash in full leathers, boots and gloves you are far far far more likely to walk away than the guy who crashes in shorts, t-shirt and flip flops. I am sure you will have seen the incredible crashes suffered by Rossi and the likes at immense speeds, and they more often than not get up and walk away. When you hit the road and start sliding the road will grind away bone at a rate of 1mm per second. So a fifteen second slide can lose you 1.5cm of bone, is it worth it?

At the end of the day wearing the correct gear does not make me go faster but it does make me feel that if I crash they will be less likely taking my body parts home in a carrier bag.

I, too, have many years riding without an accident, points or a speeding ticket, so I have not affected the statistics, but whats to stop my next ride being my last one when some guy in his company BMW on his mobile phone takes me out jumping a red light. When that day comes I will be at least a little protected. But each to his own.

 

[TreizeVents]

[quote user="bmt"]

One of the general cultural differences in France that I like a lot, is the notion that one is largely responsible for one's own destiny in the nitty-gritty of everyday life.  Unfortunately, I can also foresee France going the way of the Anglo-Saxon countries, where legislation and warning labels abound.

[/quote]

Isn't that odd?  As a general cultural difference, I think nearly everyone I know reckons the exact opposite is the case.  That rules and regulations and forms and bureaucracy (which I assume is what you mean as legislation and warning labels, although I might have misunderstood) are much worse over here.  Not that everyone obeys the rules.  One good thing about this forum is that you find two completely opposite views, treated as if they are common sense and obvious to anyone. 

[oakbri]

I'm with you on this TreizeVents

The main topic of the thread was the legislation introduced by the government here, which does not exist in the UK.

If France is so free why does everyone I know see France as becoming an increasingly nanny state.

[Sunday Driver]

I don't think you can accuse France of becoming a nanny state just because they restrict bikes.  [;-)]

And I don't see how anyone can complain about legislation and warning labels - conformity labels for electrical goods to prevent electrocution through shoddy manufacture?  Labelling of foodstuff ingredients so people can make an informed choice about what they feed their children with?

France is no more 'nanny' than anywhere else....

 

[bmt]

[quote user="Sunday Driver"]And I don't see how anyone can complain about legislation and warning labels - conformity labels for electrical goods to prevent electrocution through shoddy manufacture?[/quote]

I was thinking more along the lines of 'The beverage in this container may be hot'.

(Why did you edit the 2005 statistics link?  The originally-referenced document is [url=http://www.securiteroutiere.gouv.fr/IMG/Synthese/Motocyclettes.pdf]here[/url].)

[quote user="TreizeVents"]As a general cultural difference, I think nearly

everyone I know reckons the exact opposite is the case.  That rules and

regulations and forms and bureaucracy (which I assume is what you mean

as legislation and warning labels, although I might have misunderstood)

are much worse over here.[/quote]

You misunderstood! [;-)]  Certainly, the prescriptive bureaucracy is astonishing, but there seems to be far less finger-wagging at a personal level (excepting ex-pat forums, that is[:D]).  It is said (by the French) that the French complain about lack of State intervention and then complain about the excessive State intervention.

[Sunday Driver]

bmt

I originally posted the link to that bike document, then decided to change the link to point to the main statistics page where there is further interesting reading, together with some  2007 figures.

 

[Bugsy]

[quote user="oakbri"]

The main topic of the thread was the legislation introduced by the government here, which does not exist in the UK.

If France is so free why does everyone I know see France as becoming an increasingly nanny state.

[/quote]

France bears absolutely no resemblance to the UK when it comes to control of its populus.

Quite how you can conclude that the 106bhp limit on motorcycles in France is responsible for the accident rates is beyond me. Given that by far the greatest cause of bike accidents is down to skidding following a mis-calculation of a hazard or changing situation that has not been anticipated.

Read up on the research done on how much horsepower do skilled road-riders actually use and you'll be suprised to learn that its actually very low indeed, something around 40 to 50 bhp, from memory. (I'll find the article if you would like to read it)

Do you actually live in France oakbri, and do you regularly ride here? I only ask because your profile gives no details.

[bmt]

Just pulling your leg, SD, in case you thought you got away with it. [;-)]

As the waters have been somewhat muddied, I restate my position on the original topic:

I can manage very well with 100 bhp in the real world, but artificially limiting power on a more potent model may not produce good results.  I'm not convinced that a power limit is necessarily a useful road safety measure; if it does produce an improvement in accident figures, it is more likely to be masking an underlying lack of ability/awareness/training, which would be a better target to address (though not so expedient politically, more costly and more long term).

I don't like the idea of compulsion, but I can understand (though not agree with) why politicians do it that way.

[Sunday Driver]

[quote user="Bugbear"]

Read up on the research done on how much horsepower do skilled road-riders actually use and you'll be suprised to learn that its actually very low indeed, something around 40 to 50 bhp, from memory. (I'll find the article if you would like to read it)

[/quote]

Reminds me of one of our earlier rideouts where I was tail end charlie on my little GS500 twin (54bhp) - spent the whole day rolling off the throttle to avoid running up the back of Bugbear's Triumph Sprint....[:P]

 

[Bugsy]

[quote user="Sunday Driver"]

Reminds me of one of our earlier rideouts where I was tail end charlie on my little GS500 twin (54bhp) - spent the whole day rolling off the throttle to avoid running up the back of Bugbear's Triumph Sprint....[:P]

[/quote]

Was that the day I was stuck in second gear ?[:P]

[:D][:D]

[jc]

Common Triumph fault,is it???

[oakbri]

Hi bugbear

Yes I currently live in Picardie but due to the rain 360 days per year I am moving south next year.

The point of my posts were as bmt stated " artificially limiting power on more potent machines may not produce good results "

I ride as often as possible, weather permitting. I have a road going Ducati 998, a track only Honda CBR600 and a Yamaha XT660.

As I keep saying I think the poor statistics here are more down to training, and the governments policy of limiting power will do nothing. That is born out by the fact that after the limit was introduced there was no magic dip in the figures.

Nothing can replace training and experience. As Sunday driver mentioned a 54bhp model keeping up with a higher powered machine. On the track when I take my CBR I regularly outpace people on their RSV Mille's, likewise there are many better riders than me who come sailing past me on 400's etc etc.

Limiting the cc of inexperienced riders bikes WILL get results. I think you should be allowed to ride higher powered machines as your experience builds, combine that with extra training and you will definitely see the statistics drop.