WSJ article on sportbike fatalities

[jukief]

The New Motorcycles: Bigger, Faster, Deadlier

Trend Toward Outsize Power and Lighter Weight Coincides With Increase in Fatalities

By JONATHAN WELSH
September 18, 2007

Bigger, faster, more-powerful machines are helping to make 2007 the deadliest year yet for motorcycle riders, say safety officials and a new insurance-industry study.

In the past few years a horsepower battle in the cycle industry has produced bikes that have the power of a car but often weigh less than ever. Sophisticated suspension and braking systems and other electronics make them easy for inexperienced riders to handle -- up to a point. But the bikes' potential speed and violent acceleration can quickly overwhelm all but the most skilled riders.

These high-performance machines, often called "superbikes" or "supersports," accounted for less than 10% of motorcycle registrations in 2005 but accounted for more than 25% of rider fatalities, according to data collected by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration and analyzed in a study released last week by the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety.

The total number of rider deaths has more than doubled since 1997. At the current rate, some safety experts say, fatalities in 2007 could surpass the previous peak of 4,955 set in 1980.

Superbike riders suffer much higher death rates than riders of other kinds of bikes. And while superbikes still aren't as popular as the larger, more laid-back cruiser-style bikes made by Harley-Davidson Motor Co., such bikes have been one of the fastest-growing segments of the industry. They represented 9% of the market in 2005, compared with 47% for cruisers. But superbike registrations jumped 83% between 2000 and 2005.

In addition to more-powerful machines, an influx of inexperienced riders is also helping to drive accident rates higher. And as more middle-age consumers return to motorcycling -- often after not having ridden for 20 years or more -- more older riders are being killed in crashes. Another contributing factor: a trend toward more-liberal helmet laws.

"These guys start riding again in their 50s and don't realize that they aren't the same physical specimens they were in their 20s," says David Livingston, director of the New Jersey Trauma Center at University Hospital in Newark, N.J., who has recently seen an increase in motorcycle-related injuries. "During June, July and August, about one in four patients hurt in traffic accidents have been motorcycle riders," he says.

Motorcycles, much like cars, have gradually become more powerful and nimble over time. But the more-rapid run-up in engine size and performance has occurred in only the past few years, as overall sales of motorcycles have boomed. New construction techniques and the widening availability of lightweight materials like carbon fiber and titanium "have made it easier to reduce weight and increase power cost-effectively," says Ted Miller, director of the Pacific Institute for Research and Evaluation, a research group. "The stoked sport bike," he says, is a fairly new development.

Bike makers across the industry are conspicuously boosting power. Italian manufacturer Ducati Motor Holding earlier this year began selling the 1098, a superbike with 160 horsepower -- a big jump from the 112 horsepower the company's racy 996 model put out 10 years ago. The bike has about as much power as a Honda Accord EX sedan. BMW AG's motorcycle unit had a reputation for building sedate bikes with less than 100 horsepower until it rolled out the 167-horsepower K1200S about three years ago. Even Harley-Davidson, long known for its slow cruising and touring models, recently released the Night Rod Special, a fast, low-slung bike with a 125-horsepower engine developed with sports-car maker Porsche AG.

In the late 1970s and early 1980s -- the last time motorcycle fatalities were this high -- the hottest bikes included machines like Kawasaki Motors Corp.'s Z1000. A fearsome bike at the time, its 90-or-so horsepower and total weight approaching 600 pounds seem benign compared with the nearly 200 horsepower generated by the company's new ZX-14 or rival bike maker Suzuki Motor Corp.'s GSX-R1000.

The Suzuki weighs barely 400 pounds with a full fuel tank, and can accelerate to 60 mph in about 2.5 seconds. It even comes with a switch so the rider can select low, medium or high power settings. Other bikes have adopted electronically controlled brakes, transmissions and traction control to keep the rear wheel from spinning out of control under acceleration.

Many supersport bikes are actually built for racing. In popular racing events like the American Motorcyclist Association superbike series, riders use bikes that are modified versions of those available to the public at dealerships. In order to compete in the races, cycle manufacturers have to build hundreds of the bikes for sale to consumers.

The process, called "homologation," is meant to guarantee that the bikes found on the track are roughly the same as those widely available to the public. The bikes sold this way are sometimes touted as "race replicas" or "homologation specials."

Although a tripling of motorcycle sales over the past decade accounts for some of the rising death rate, fatal motorcycle accidents have also risen proportionally.

Over the time period of the IIHS study, from 2000 to 2005, the death rate for motorcyclists rose to 7.5 deaths per 10,000 registered motorcycles from 7.1. In the same period, the percentage of motorcycle deaths among all highway fatalities rose to 10% from 7%. Superbike riders had a death rate of 22.5 for every 10,000 registered motorcycles.

In 2005, riders 40 or older accounted for 47% of motorcycle fatalities, compared with 24% 10 years earlier. In the same period, the fatality percentage for riders younger than 30 years of age fell to 32% from 41%. Safety officials attribute this in part to a tendency of "returning" riders to overestimate their ability to handle the latest powerful bikes.

"You have a lot of people saying, 'I'm in my 40s and I want to start riding motorcycles again,'" says Daniel Lonsdorf, director of the Wisconsin Bureau of Transportation Safety. "But these aren't the same motorcycles they remember from 20 years ago."

[bamavulcandave]

Thanks for sharing Julie, interesting stuff. I am waiting on some guys around here that do the wheelie's at 60 mph+ to mess up.
A ex-biker who use to live in Florida told me that the first person to get killed in Florida without a helmet was the woman that pushed to do away with helmets there. I have researched that some on the internet but never found if this is true or not.

[seadood228]

I'd be all for a mandatory displacement law for new riders.

[jukief]

I'm just glad I ride a cruiser that doesn't have a lot of horsepower. No temptation!

[MTNFSH]

You beat me to posting this article but I think it shows that the debate raging elsewhere on the forum about Federal officials calling for mandatory helmet laws misses the big picture. More powerful sportsbikes, new or returning riders with little or no riding experience or training, lack of helmets or protective gear all add up to more motorcycle fatalities. For that matter, there are a lot more SUVs on the road today compared to 20 years ago which probably increases the chance of a motorcycle fatality when two-wheel metal hits much bigger metal.

Question is what do individual riders do about it and what is the role for the government. For myself as a guy who returned to riding last year after 15 years, I wear a helmet and protective gear, practice my riding skills and plan to sign up for an experienced rider course. For the government, I would support levying an extra fee for people who don't want to wear a helmet if people have a problem with mandatory helmet laws, mandatory rider training in order to get the M endorsement and funding to make the training available, and hefty fines or jail time for anyone - cager or motorcyclist - who causes an accident by failing to yield the right of way.

[Michael600r]

I think the squids are getting squiddier.

[Thunder Lizard]

Originally Posted by MTNFSH

You beat me to posting this article but I think it shows that the debate raging elsewhere on the forum about Federal officials calling for mandatory helmet laws misses the big picture. More powerful sportsbikes, new or returning riders with little or no riding experience or training, lack of helmets or protective gear all add up to more motorcycle fatalities. For that matter, there are a lot more SUVs on the road today compared to 20 years ago which probably increases the chance of a motorcycle fatality when two-wheel metal hits much bigger metal.

Question is what do individual riders do about it and what is the role for the government. For myself as a guy who returned to riding last year after 15 years, I wear a helmet and protective gear, practice my riding skills and plan to sign up for an experienced rider course. For the government, I would support levying an extra fee for people who don't want to wear a helmet if people have a problem with mandatory helmet laws, mandatory rider training in order to get the M endorsement and funding to make the training available, and hefty fines or jail time for anyone - cager or motorcyclist - who causes an accident by failing to yield the right of way.

There are other data missing from this report, too. Not that I don't agree with the basic points in the report... yes, motorcycles are rising in popularity and population, and perhaps there are more "new" or "renewed" riders too, but
I'd like to see several other breakdowns...
-percentage of "new" riders (whether pure noob or re-entry) killed/in accidents who have less than 6 months/3000 miles logged
- a breakdown of exactly what types/models of motorcycles are involved
-percentage of cages involved in these fatal incidents that fall into one or more of the following categories....
* "tuner" car/hot rod/ ridiculous 4x4 driven by persons with less than one year's driving experience.
* SUV, RV or minivan driven by someone with less than one year driving OR by someone who classifies as a "senior citizen" with no previous "large vehicle" experience. (This is a huge issue in our area. We regularly see monstrous RV's being driven or towed by someone who's only other driving experience is in a car or small truck, or people that are moving from their Hyundai Accent to a SUV or larger minivan, or worse yet, some kind of converted Greyhound bus as an RV)
* cage of any kind that had a cell phone/laptop/dvd player/superstereo system/GPS in use at the time of the accident.
*AND/OR an improperly restrained child, pet, or cargo. "Improperly restrained child" referring as well to children who are perhaps secured well, but allowed to scream, yell, thrash about, or otherwise distract the driver.
-a breakdown of fault.... as in, who was responsible for the accident.
-percentage of "at fault" drivers, either cagers or riders, who have previously been involved and at fault in accidents. (IE, bad drivers are bad drivers, no matter what they're driving at the time)

I think we might find that the survey/report might take on a different flavor if we had those details. The author makes it sound as if the only significant differences between 1987 and now are the size and power of motorcycles, and the relative experience or lack of it that riders are displaying.
I've seen similar reports regarding the increase in popularity of SUV's, minivans, and such, and those reports combined with this one might show a different picture.
Not only have we handed fair to poor drivers more complicated, more difficult vehicles to drive, we've also created a veritable smorgasbord of electronic distractions to help them stay unfocused and dangerous.

All that said, "remember, they're ALL out to get you" along with "ATGATT" will remain 2 of my main riding rules.
Interesting article, though. Thanks, J

[MTNFSH]

You have a good point about the fact that the statistics need to pull together more of factors that might be involved in increased motorcycle fatalities. All of these stories and their statistics highlight the need for an update of the comprehensive Hurt Report on motorcycle accidents.

[MTNFSH]

Here's one part of the WSJ article that really caught my attention:

"In the late 1970s and early 1980s -- the last time motorcycle fatalities were this high -- the hottest bikes included machines like Kawasaki Motors Corp.'s Z1000. A fearsome bike at the time, its 90-or-so horsepower and total weight approaching 600 pounds seem benign compared with the nearly 200 horsepower generated by the company's new ZX-14 or rival bike maker Suzuki Motor Corp.'s GSX-R1000.

The Suzuki weighs barely 400 pounds with a full fuel tank, and can accelerate to 60 mph in about 2.5 seconds. It even comes with a switch so the rider can select low, medium or high power settings. Other bikes have adopted electronically controlled brakes, transmissions and traction control to keep the rear wheel from spinning out of control under acceleration."

I ride a Vulcan 900 but really have to watch myself when I ride my wife's V-Strom 650 because of its light weight and ability to accelerate compared to a cruiser. I am really interested in the Concours 14 as a sports-touring bike but IMO the super-sports class bikes are better for the track than the public highways.

[Ninja_Wendy]

I think the MSF program is great and all states should encourage training for new riders. A lot of people take the MSF to avoid the DMV test but I think it's a good system. My trainer said an MSF course is equivalent to 6 months of learning on your own. I think a lot of the accidents can be inexperience or new riders on bikes that are too much for their skill level. I also see people popping wheelies on public roads and highways all the time. Those are the people who are going to get themselves into trouble. I've seen a lot of posts here where people say it is ok for a noob to start on a 1000cc bike. I personally think that is nuts. When I was new, I didn't have the best throttle control. You don't want to start off with a throttle control problem on a liter bike. Anyway, I think there are a lot of contributing factors but education and wearing helmets could definitely help the death rates.

[jukief]

I agree with you, Wendy. Too many people start out on bikes that are just way too much bike for their abilities. Better to start small and move up when you get more experience.

[PainlessWolf]

Okies, and Awaaaaay We Go. *Frowns* Hel, a 5 Hp Vespa will get ya killed if you Dress for Death. Case in Point, Heading home from work today, loafing along in the left lane of the Diagonal at 70, suddenly me and the cars behind me are passed on (hadda be 100+mph) the left _shoulder_ by a Sport Bike with the rider clad in the customary shorts, shirt and tennis shoes, no gear of any kind. Well, irony of ironies, the next light caught this fine specimen of motorcyclist. I pull up, flip the visor and thank him for that retarded display of stupidity. In my other ear, I can hear the cagers around me cussing him. He says nothing, doesn't look at me and makes a great show of studying the Bike's tires as I'm struck by the fact that he's no kid, has to be my age or older with grey in the sideburns. Light changes and I swear to God, the Bike and rider were outta sight around the next curve, dodgin' and darting around swerving traffic before I'm in 2rd gear on the Drifter. I was so in the mood for crude that I didn't even notice what kind of Bike he was riding except that it was Kawasaki green with a temp tag on it. I was gonna have the dips**t arrested but couldn't make out the scrawl on it, he was gone that fast. I dunno, I just dunno. *shakes head* Maybe the survey guys have got something there.
Painless Black Wolf
...Here for the Dawn...

2005 Drifter 800

[vulcan500rider]

Originally Posted by Thunder Lizard

There are other data missing from this report, too. Not that I don't agree with the basic points in the report... yes, motorcycles are rising in popularity and population, and perhaps there are more "new" or "renewed" riders too, but
I'd like to see several other breakdowns...

I've read reports where fully 1/4 (but some reports put this number at closer to 50%) of us crashing have done so without the help of another vehicle. Here is one study:

These findings are summarized as follows:

1. Approximately three-fourths of these motorcycle accidents involved collision with another vehicle, which was most usually a passenger automobile.

2. Approximately one-fourth of these motorcycle accidents were single vehicle accidents involving the motorcycle colliding with the roadway or some fixed object in the environment.

3. Vehicle failure accounted for less than 3% of these motorcycle accidents, and most of those were single vehicle accidents where control was lost due to a puncture flat.

4. In the single vehicle accidents, motorcycle rider error was present as the accident precipitating factor in about two-thirds of the cases, with the typical error being a slide out and fall due to over braking or running wide on a curve due to excess speed or under-cornering.

5. Roadway defects (pavement ridges, potholes, etc.) were the accident cause in 2% of the accidents; animal involvement was 1% of the accidents.

6. In the multiple vehicle accidents, the driver of the other vehicle violated the motorcycle right-of-way and caused the accident in two-thirds of those accidents.

7. The failure of motorists to detect and recognize motorcycles in traffic is the predominating cause of motorcycle accidents. The driver of the other vehicle involved in collision with the motorcycle did not see the motorcycle before the collision, or did not see the motorcycle until too late to avoid the collision.

8. Deliberate hostile action by a motorist against a motorcycle rider is a rare accident cause. The most frequent accident configuration is the motorcycle proceeding straight then the automobile makes a left turn in front of the oncoming motorcycle.

9. Intersections are the most likely place for the motorcycle accident, with the other vehicle violating the motorcycle right-of-way, and often violating traffic controls.

10. Weather is not a factor in 98% of motorcycle accidents.

11. Most motorcycle accidents involve a short trip associated with shopping, errands, friends, entertainment or recreation, and the accident is likely to happen in a very short time close to the trip origin.

12. The view of the motorcycle or the other vehicle involved in the accident is limited by glare or obstructed by other vehicles in almost half of the multiple vehicle accidents.

13. Conspicuity of the motorcycle is a critical factor in the multiple vehicle accidents, and accident involvement is significantly reduced by the use of motorcycle headlamps (on in daylight) and the wearing of high visibility yellow, orange or bright red jackets. (Note: the statistics which have just been released here in Australia - August 1996, DO NOT SHOW that "Lights on" legislation has worked!)

14. Fuel system leaks and spills were present in 62% of the motorcycle accidents in the post-crash phase. This represents an undue hazard for fire.

15. The median pre-crash speed was 29.8 mph, and the median crash speed was 21.5 mph, and the one-in-a-thousand crash speed is approximately 86 mph.

16. The typical motorcycle pre-crash lines-of-sight to the traffic hazard portray no contribution of the limits of peripheral vision; more than three- fourths of all accident hazards are within 45 degrees of either side of straight ahead.

17. Conspicuity of the motorcycle is most critical for the frontal surfaces of the motorcycle and rider.
18. defects related to accident causation are rare and likely to be due to deficient or defective maintenance.

19. Motorcycle riders between the ages of 16 and 24 are significantly over-represented in accidents; motorcycle riders between the ages of 30 and 50 are significantly under represented. Although the majority of the accident-involved motorcycle riders are male (96%), the female motorcycle riders are significantly over represented in the accident data.

20. Craftsmen, laborers, and students comprise most of the accident-involved motorcycle riders. Professionals, sales workers, and craftsmen are under represented and laborers, students and unemployed are over- represented in the accidents.

21. Motorcycle riders with previous recent traffic citations and accidents are over represented in the accident data.

22. T he motorcycle riders involved in accidents are essentially without training; 92% were self-taught or learned from family or friends. Motorcycle rider training experience reduces accident involvement and is related to reduced injuries in the event of accidents.

23. More than half of the accident-involved motorcycle riders had less than 5 months experience on the accident motorcycle, although the total street riding experience was almost 3 years. Motorcycle riders with dirt bike experience are significantly under represented in the accident data.

24. Lack of attention to the driving task is a common factor for the motorcyclist in an accident.

25. Almost half of the fatal accidents show alcohol involvement.

26. Motorcycle riders in these accidents showed significant collision avoidance problems. Most riders would over brake and skid the rear wheel, and under brake the front wheel greatly reducing collision avoidance deceleration. The ability to counter steer and swerve was essentially absent.

27. The typical motorcycle accident allows the motorcyclist just less than 2 seconds to complete all collision avoidance action.

28. Passenger-carrying motorcycles are not over represented in the accident area.

29. The driver of the other vehicles involved in collision with the motorcycle are not distinguished from other accident populations except that the ages of 20 to 29, and beyond 65 are over represented. Also, these drivers are generally unfamiliar with motorcycles.

30. The large displacement motorcycles are under represented in accidents but they are associated with higher injury severity when involved in accidents.

[vulcan500rider]

31. Any effect of motorcycle color on accident involvement is not determinable from these data, but is expected to be insignificant because the frontal surfaces are most often presented to the other vehicle involved in the collision.

32. Motorcycles equipped with fairings and windshields are under represented in accidents, most likely because of the contribution to conspicuity and the association with more experienced and trained riders.

33. Motorcycle riders in these accidents were significantly without motorcycle license, without any license, or with license revoked.

34. Motorcycle modifications such as those associated with the semi-chopper or cafe racer are definitely over represented in accidents.

35. The likelihood of injury is extremely high in these motorcycle accidents-98% of the multiple vehicle collisions and 96% of the single vehicle accidents resulted in some kind of injury to the motorcycle rider; 45% resulted in more than a minor injury.

36. Half of the injuries to the somatic regions were to the ankle-foot, lower leg, knee, and thigh-upper leg.

37. Crash bars are not an effective injury countermeasure; the reduction of injury to the ankle-foot is balanced by increase of injury to the thigh-upper leg, knee, and lower leg. 38.The use of heavy boots, jacket, gloves, etc., is effective in preventing or reducing abrasions and lacerations, which are frequent but rarely severe injuries.

39. Groin injuries were sustained by the motorcyclist in at least 13% of the accidents, which typified by multiple vehicle collision in frontal impact at higher than average speed.

40. Injury severity increases with speed, alcohol involvement and motorcycle size.

41. Seventy-three percent of the accident-involved motorcycle riders used no eye protection, and it is likely that the wind on the unprotected eyes contributed in impairment of vision which delayed hazard detection.

42. Approximately 50% of the motorcycle riders in traffic were using safety helmets but only 40% of the accident-involved motorcycle riders were wearing helmets at the time of the accident.

43. Voluntary safety helmet use by those accident-involved motorcycle riders was lowest for untrained, uneducated, young motorcycle riders on hot days and short trips.

44. The most deadly injuries to the accident victims were injuries to the chest and head.

45. The use of the safety helmet is the single critical factor in the prevention of reduction of head injury; the safety helmet which complies with FMVSS 218 is a significantly effective injury countermeasure.

46. Safety helmet use caused no attenuation of critical traffic sounds, no limitation of pre crash visual field, and no fatigue or loss of attention; no element of accident causation was related to helmet use.

47. FMVSS 218 provides a high level of protection in traffic accidents, and needs modification only to increase coverage at the back of the head and demonstrate impact protection of the front of full facial coverage helmets, and insure all adult sizes for traffic use are covered by the standard.

48. Helmeted riders and passengers showed significantly lower head and neck injury for all types of injury, at all levels of injury severity.

49. The increased coverage of the full facial coverage helmet increases protection, and significantly reduces face injuries.

50. There is not liability for neck injury by wearing a safety helmet; helmeted riders had less neck injuries than unhelmeted riders. Only four minor injuries were attributable to helmet use, and in each case the helmet prevented possible critical or fatal head injury.

51. Sixty percent of the motorcyclists were not wearing safety helmets at the time of the accident. Of this group, 26% said they did not wear helmets because they were uncomfortable and inconvenient, and 53% simply had no expectation of accident involvement.

52. Valid motorcycle exposure data can be obtained only from collection at the traffic site. Motor vehicle or driver license data presents information which is completely unrelated to actual use.

53. Less than 10% of the motorcycle riders involved in these accidents had insurance of any kind to provide medical care or replace property.

[sdbrit68]

we can have all the data we want, and the article does do a pretty good job,
But I believe the reckless way many people drive is also contributing to the increase.

people dont care when they drive any more and a very apathetic and believe people should get out of their way

[MotorCDR]

Originally Posted by seadood228

I'd be all for a mandatory displacement law for new riders.

What good would it do to displace new riders?

[D-Day]

Problem is, enacting more laws messes it up for the rest of us.

Let the idiots kill themselves. No more dealing with it.

[sdbrit68]

Originally Posted by D-Day

Problem is, enacting more laws messes it up for the rest of us.

Let the idiots kill themselves. No more dealing with it.

I agree with ya D-day, but..................

We go the route we go, we end up with laws that screw the guys that do it right, thats why I like the idea of displacement licenses, it effects the new riders, and within a few years, I believe it will develop a culture of better riders, which will slow down the public outcry.

but that is just an opinion

[sdbrit68]

Originally Posted by MotorCDR

What good would it do to displace new riders?

so we can make new BMW riders.........lol

[xeon]

I would really be behind a graduated system like in other countries. Americans suffer from "I want it and I need it right now" syndrome. That would be one way to eliminate my irritation of people recommending 600cc Super Sports to new riders. It wouldn't even be a possibility.

I also have no issue with helmet laws being mandatory across the board. My neighbor just was in an accident a few weeks ago and his flip up helmet on... it flipped up during the accident and he landed in the hospital unable to recognize his own children for a while. He's considering hanging up his boots and the other neighbor is thinking about dumping his flip-up helmet.

I agree with most of the article, but you always have to wonder what agenda the writer is operating under.