[JimmyD]

Originally Posted by hordak

Your right. HP is more important then CC's. However I live in the US where legislators don't have that kind of sense. Here in the peoples republic of California they have banned certain firearms not because there more dangerous the average hunting rifle but because the look more dangerous. My Ninja 500 cost more to insure and is classified as a sports bike, because it has fairing's and R in the name even though it doesn't compare to most modern sports bikes that the insurance companies see as such a big risk. Because most insurance companies rate by CC's and style that is what the government would do.

That's a problem with the insurance company though. In certain province/states (manufacturer supplied) HP is used to calculate your insurance premiums, at least in part. In others, paint color can be used to determine cost. Of course, the only way insurance companies would be consistant is if (GASP!) the government became involved, and we don't want that.

I am well aware of the fact the hurt report is outdated. However most people still it support points about training a gear so the other info could be used as well.

I looked over the MAIDS report (don't have it open in front of me) and it seemed to me that most motorcycle accidents were cause perception error and rider error is still just a small cause of motorcycle accedents.

The only problem I have with people quoting the Hurt report for any reason is that specific statistics, like you've pointed out, no longer apply to the industry. For that matter, they didn't apply to the industry in 1985, let alone today. The ideas are the same (having to do with helmets, gear, types of collisions) but not things like bikes on the road, average age of riders, things like that.

The MAIDS report as well as the COST report still state that (I forget the exact number) somewhere around 75% of accidents are from cars turning in the way of motorcycles in traffic, and far less are because of single rider accidents.

For some reason this doesn't sound right to me because IIRC I read that most accidents are single vehicle (aka the bike). Maybe that's within the first 6 months of ownership, I dunno.

Like someone mentioned earlier, Not paying attention and getting hit at 40 mph on a 250 rebel or a gsxr 600 is the same thing. Besides 33 hp might be great for people in Europe but for people who commute 20 miles to work on the freeway every day it might not be enough.

Germany has HP restrictions on new riders and they're also home to the autobahn. If an 18 year old german with a restricted bike can do it, I'm pretty sure they can do it on our side of the pond. An EX500 is only putting out 50hp and they're capable of 130mph. Regardless of where you live, you still aren't allowed to speed?

According to Beat the queues on two wheels — Parking for Bikes British commuters have the highest commute times in Europe, with a quarter of commuters on the road /rails for over 2 hours a day. Surely we're not that spoiled as North Americans that we can't drive 20 miles on a restricted bike?

Imagine if they did pass it. You go to renew your registration on a bike you have driven safely for a few years and the lady behind the counter says, Sorry sir but based on our studies most people in your experience group can't properly handle that much bike.

I don't think you understand how tiered licensing works. It goes something like this. New rider at 16 takes his motorcycling exam and road test. He is given an A1 license, which limits him to 125cc or 11KW (about 15 hp). He rides this until he's 18, and then he is given another road test. He then has an A2 license which limits him to anything under 35KW (around 47HP) with no CC requirement. This means you can ride any bike as long as you buy a restrictor kit to keep the bike at 47 hp.

You MUST have your A2 for 2-3 years before you can get your unrestricted A license, allowing you to ride whatever you like.

This has no effect on anyone who already has a license, nor should it. Some licensing systems only apply to younger riders anyway. If you're over 24 there's no restrictions placed on you.

Why am I agents tiered licensing. Because I believe in a free market economy where a private parties purchase should be based his or her money and desire and not on some bureaucrats idea of a need.

It's still a free market. Japan has a three stage licensing system, seperate licenses for <125, <400, and a third with no restrictions. You know what? Japan has a far larger amount of models available as far as motorcycles go, because they have to cater to these different licenses. Just like California still has a large and healthy selection of vehicles even though they're (I think) the only state that has extra emissions equipment.

It's also not like you are being forced into buying any model or brand. I'm not an expert but most models can be restricted to the 47hp standard. As far as the 125cc bikes are concerned, there are tons on the used market.

Great idea eh komrade.

Neit. Canada's had things like helmet laws for decades and we're hardly what you would call a communist paradise. Germany has horsepower restrictions on new riders and they've got one of the world's best economies. I'm pretty sure they're a democratic, capitalistic society.

Gotta apologize for my last post though. I was a jackass but I'd been drinking! It's a good debate so far and I understand that I'm not going to change your mind, nor are you going to change mine, unless you really hit me with something good!