[HN Gopher] Why leather is best motorcycle protection [video]
___________________________________________________________________
Why leather is best motorcycle protection [video]
Author : lifeisstillgood
Score : 186 points
Date : 2025-07-31 10:10 UTC (2 days ago)
(HTM) web link (www.youtube.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.youtube.com)
| adzm wrote:
| In my experience, working with plastic surgery offices will
| certainly impact your desire to get a motorcycle. Wear helmets
| and gear up, everyone.
|
| Also this is a truly well done video. Entertaining, week
| executed, witty dialogue.
| rjsw wrote:
| Or work with any area of disabled sport, the two main routes
| into it for participants are the armed forces and motorbikes.
| lm28469 wrote:
| People working in hospitals would rather have their kids smoke
| crack than ride motorcycles from what I personally gathered.
| diggan wrote:
| Sounds like they would need to read up on "guaranteed
| effects" vs "probable events" if that's the case.
| frereubu wrote:
| I would love to get a motorbike - I enjoy cycling and love
| speed - but I've had three people in my wider circle of friends
| suffer life-changing injuries while riding motorbikes,
| including one just before his wedding that they had to cancel
| because he was in hospital. They were all careful riders too,
| the incidents being caused by distracted / aggressive drivers.
| The odds just don't stack up for me.
| diggan wrote:
| > They were all careful riders too, the incidents being
| caused by distracted / aggressive drivers.
|
| I'm not sure how true that is, even when the cause is
| distracted/aggressive drivers, unless the drivers actually
| hunted them and collided with them on purpose. Defensive
| driving is a thing for motorcycle drivers too, and if you
| take care you'll avoid even distracted/aggressive drivers
| too.
|
| With that said, it of course isn't risk free, I think in my
| country (Spain, lots of motorcycles in/around the
| cities/towns), just about 60% of those who drive motorcycles
| have never been in any accident ever[0], and that's including
| very dumb ("average") people so if you're more careful than
| the average driver, I'm sure you could get those odds to
| stack in your favor.
|
| - [0] https://www.dgt.es/export/sites/web-
| DGT/.galleries/downloads... Table 59. "ACCIDENTALIDAD"
| lloeki wrote:
| > I'm not sure how true that is, even when the cause is
| distracted/aggressive drivers
|
| Very.
|
| It's possible to make no mistake and still lose.
|
| My wife got hit-and-run when bicycling to work and she's
| exceeding careful and defensive in her riding.
|
| Her carefulness is probably what allowed her to catch a
| glimpse of the car in the corner of her eye and swerve at
| the last minute to not be caught head-on by the car and
| sent flying hundreds of meters away.
|
| She's "lucky" to even have made it, suffering debilitating
| neck pain every day and night, abated only by roughly a
| half through invasive surgery, a pain she will have to
| endure for the rest of her life which at the current rate
| of life expectancy is the next fifty years.
|
| Meanwhile the distracted and hurried driver who didn't
| bother to check around their A pillar blind spot drove away
| scot-free.
|
| That's one example. I have many such stories of cyclist and
| biker friends alike, many of which don't ever ride between
| lanes.
| diggan wrote:
| > It's possible to make no mistake and still lose.
|
| Sure, no doubt about that. But again, if people (60% of
| the riders in my case) manage to never be in an accident,
| and that's including a wide range of people, then surely
| the odds are greater of never being in an accident if
| you're careful.
|
| Still, sucks she had that experience. But it's important
| to realize that for every accident, there are thousands
| of people riding every day without a single accident in
| their life. But of course it's harder to think about that
| when you had someone in a accident and that person is
| close to you, I understand that.
| lloeki wrote:
| I don't think anyone's disputing that being careful
| increases your odds of avoiding accidents.
|
| Instead what I wanted to call out is that even if
| infinitely careful and drive defensively without fail you
| can still get into an accident, and you don't need to be
| hunted down or intentionally collided into+.
|
| Ultimately at a large enough scale it's all about odds,
| and it takes but one occurrence to go from "I've been
| fine so far" to "my life is upended".
|
| And like all statistical things, with a low enough sample
| size you're going to get an unbalanced result one way or
| the other.
|
| + On that note I wish drivers were made aware of CBDR
|
| https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constant_bearing,_decreas
| ing...
| diggan wrote:
| > Instead what I wanted to call out is that even if
| infinitely careful and drive defensively without fail you
| can still get into an accident, and you don't need to be
| hunted down or intentionally collided into+.
|
| And again, seems to be massively different depending on
| the country. Locally, ~60% of motorcycle drivers claim to
| never have been in any accident, and that's including
| even careless people, so surely the claims of "even
| careful motorbike drivers will be in a accident" are
| over-exaggerated.
| theshackleford wrote:
| > (60% of the riders in my case)
|
| 60% of the riders still alive?
| diggan wrote:
| I won't ruin the surprise for you, go ahead and read the
| source I put :)
| 9991 wrote:
| What if the mistake was riding a bicycle? You don't seem
| to be coming at this from the perspective of someone who
| is really thinking about safety.
|
| Sorry to be callous about it. You're understandably
| angry. It's one thing to say you accept the risks of a
| risky behavior, and yet another to declare nothing could
| have been done.
| dijit wrote:
| It's absolutely sick that we think of cycling as being
| dangerous and risk seeking behaviour.
|
| I'm coming from a part of the world that doesn't
| needlessly look down on cycling (its common for nearly
| everyone to cycle in Copenhagen/Malmo) and the idea that
| people should _become drivers because its safer_ is a
| total tragedy of the commons and would not hold much
| weight here - the cities would be crushed under the
| necessary weight of roads and cars.
|
| Other parts of the world need to get some more cars off
| the road by making safer infrastructure, it's ridiculous.
| 9991 wrote:
| There's no judgement. It _is_ dangerous, as the
| grandparent 's story illustrates, regardless of what
| anyone thinks about it. If your kid's life is on the
| line, and you absolutely have to get the answer right,
| and you cannot unilaterally effect public policy, what do
| you need to do?
| literalAardvark wrote:
| If she was obscured by an A-pillar she was likely riding
| too far to the side of the road.
|
| There's a reason that we have safety classes, and it's
| that being safe is emphatically not intuitive.
|
| You're much, much safer on the center wheel track.
|
| I don't mean to be rude or accuse anyone, it's just that
| this kind of blind confidence gives everyone the wrong
| ideas.
| jdietrich wrote:
| Even if you're an incredibly skilled and careful rider,
| there are a multitude of accident types that are just
| completely out of your control. If you hit a diesel spill
| on a roundabout, the outcome is pure fate. Defensive riding
| only gets you so far - staying at home is the only
| realistic way to defend against the possibility that the
| driver in the next lane will spill his coffee and swerve
| into your path, or a driver waiting at a junction will
| abruptly pull out in front of you because he wasn't
| looking.
|
| At least as importantly, the consequences of accidents are
| vastly magnified for motorcyclists. I know of people who
| have died in relatively low-speed crashes because they were
| unlucky enough to slide straight into a piece of road
| furniture or land head-first on a kerb. If you look at the
| accident statistics, a large proportion of fatalities and
| serious injuries involve low-powered motorcycles travelling
| at ordinary speeds on ordinary urban roads.
|
| https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads
| /...
|
| https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/reported-road-
| casua...
| sfn42 wrote:
| > driver in the next lane will spill his coffee and
| swerve into your path
|
| You can significantly reduce that risk by simply staying
| away from others and avoiding situations with a large
| speed differential. If the lane next to you is going
| 20mph, don't go 40+ next to them.
|
| There are a lot of these things you can do, that most
| people don't because "it's not their responsibility".
| frereubu wrote:
| Risk is a product of likelihood and potential seriousness
| of consequences. The reason I consider motorbikes too risky
| is that the potential seriousness of consequences is
| extremely high if you're going at any reasonable speed.
|
| And to flip the presentation of your stat around, that
| means 40% of motorbike riders have been in an accident.
| That sounds _really high_ to me given the potential
| consequences!
| diggan wrote:
| > And to flip the presentation of your stat around, that
| means 40% of motorbike riders have been in an accident.
| That sounds really high to me given the potential
| consequences!
|
| It sounds scary because it involves every type of
| accident, even minor ones. Useful to think about how many
| cars have ever been in accidents too, which should be
| around the same. The problem with motorcycle accidents is
| the fatality rates, just as you say, not the percentage
| of minor+major accidents.
| AdrianB1 wrote:
| Go offroad. For me, after 20 years on motorcycles, it is more
| interesting to cross the mountains than to cross the
| continent on 2 wheels and I did both, several times. I ride
| on the road only when needed, when I want to have fun I leave
| the asphalt. On a bicycle it is even more clear: I never
| liked riding on roads, I used to race amateur XC competitions
| for ~ 10 years. As much fun as it can be.
| xlii wrote:
| Isn't it true for every occupation that deals with the falloff
| of any activity?
|
| E.g.
| https://www.lemonde.fr/en/international/article/2024/01/19/s...
| monster_truck wrote:
| Recently had to deal with some unusual wisdom tooth bullshit,
| they sent me to a fancy oral surgeon who deals with the
| unusual. Guy sitting next to me in the lobby had his whole face
| caved in when he crashed his motorcycle (no helmet), he looked
| completely normal! The 'before' xrays he showed me on his phone
| were gruesome, completely unrecognizable as a human skull.
|
| Wear a helmet.
| slau wrote:
| F9 truly has no business being this good. Their previous video
| [1], about hub-center steering, has an absolutely fantastic oner
| where Ryan gets heckled by not one but two kids on scooters
| passing by, and still manages to finish the 3 minute take
| discussing path dependence and fitting a Robert Frost poem into a
| motorcycle review video. That segment starts around minute 7.
|
| [1]: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=JtBgv-SJEQg
| HPsquared wrote:
| Also Italjet popping into the comments to say they're still
| around.
| n1b0m wrote:
| What a pro :)
| Luc wrote:
| Yeah, those heckles are added in post IMHO. Microphones don't
| work that way.
| slau wrote:
| It's the same voice for both kids, so yes, but doesn't mean
| he didn't get heckled.
| snozolli wrote:
| It was a scripted joke and the voice was added in post.
| bartvk wrote:
| I agree but every now and then, he comes with truly exhausting
| things. Like protectors being not worth it.
|
| https://youtu.be/nINIJ1cAbYM
| kryogen1c wrote:
| > truly exhausting things. Like protectors being not worth
| it.
|
| What do you mean? The video is very convincing, I don't see a
| hole in the logic.
| bzz01 wrote:
| This video has a bunch of cherry picking results and sound
| bites from already underpowered studies.
| deelowe wrote:
| Many in the racing community share his opinions. All these
| things seem to accomplish is making you hot.
| sgt wrote:
| It's partly true. I used to ride dirt bikes with full
| protection everywhere and it just makes you hot, I went to
| thinner protection and with more focus on getting the
| basics right: protect your feet at all costs, and protect
| your head. Aside from that, you're mostly fine. I still
| wear some light armor on knees and upper body though.
| ManuelKiessling wrote:
| Why are the feet so important?
| guenthert wrote:
| Well, perhaps not more important than other body parts,
| but more likely to be injured.
|
| Every basic motorcycle safety class will urge you to get
| good boots. I just wished I had heeded that advise in
| time instead of buying them after my first crash ;-/
| sgt wrote:
| Because if you fall on dirt, there is a big risk you will
| mess up your feet or ankles without proper boots that
| protect them.
| LTL_FTC wrote:
| Well, I rode on the road but can imagine the same goes
| for off-road, but the right pair of boots makes a huge
| difference in one's confidence and ability to securely
| put one's foot down at a stop, especially if it's a bit
| slick from oil, or loose debris. That, and you can
| imagine an object hitting your foot while flying down the
| highway at 80mph feels very different when you're wearing
| riding boots vs. wearing vans. Then there's the whole,
| sliding on assault aspect.
| dathinab wrote:
| but there is a huge difference between:
|
| 1) racing, and normal motorcycle use -- like the kind of
| accidents you run into commonly differ hugely
|
| 2) you being able to afford a end of the line product or
| being very budged constrained
|
| and this are two important aspects completely ignored in
| this discussion
| JKCalhoun wrote:
| I've seen a few of his videos -- I think I am more put off by
| his lack of nuance. This is the _RIGHT_ thing and all other
| opinions are idiotic.
| slau wrote:
| Fully agreed. I t-boned a car that cut me off, doing
| approximately 60-80 km/h. My shoulder dented the car's roof
| through the door frame. I went flying through the air and
| landed on my back, on cement-cast stones protruding slightly
| from the cement (the decorative edge of the roundabout).
|
| I walked out of the hospital a couple of days later. I
| wouldn't have been walking then, nor today, if it wasn't for
| the protective shoulder pads and spine protection in my
| jacket. It took about 18 months of physiotherapy to stand and
| walk normally again, but still.
|
| Edit: I realise this is a POV with n=1, but it convinced me.
| bartvk wrote:
| Please disregard user mawr. Fact is, the body armor
| protected you. I'm happy you're able to stand and walk
| again.
|
| One of my buddies also got hit by a car and had a similar
| story. Nowadays I ride with a jacket with integrated
| airbag. Fantastic stuff. Also, check out the new Diablo
| armor from D3O.
| delichon wrote:
| "And that doesn't even count the stiffy you'll get every time
| you change tires on two single-sided swing arms."
|
| I thought that this man was brave when he allowed himself to be
| dragged across pavement in a nylon jacket, but his script
| writing is even more courageous.
| scythe wrote:
| Is it really nylon? Don't we have lots of polymers tougher
| than nylon? Sure they're expensive, but it's your life, isn't
| it?
| barrkel wrote:
| Cordura is the brand name for the usual abrasion resistant
| material in synthetic jackets, and it is a nylon.
| ubermonkey wrote:
| It's nuts, right? I mean, I ride, but I know plenty of folks
| who are subscribed to the F9 Youtube channel who don't just
| because so much of the content they do scratches nerdy itches.
|
| Some of my favorites, in case anyone's interested:
|
| * Ryan's periodic "check out this weird bike from the past"
| clips are always great, but I really LOVE the one about the
| Honda Rune: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mjuWiKz9zno
|
| * Their "trilogy" of sorts about Harley, and the hows and whys
| of their odd and honestly self-defeating decisions, are all
| great, but my favorite is the one that compares an Indian Scout
| to its then-corresponding Harley model; the Indian made 43%
| more power, and it's all down to Harley's genuflection at
| "tradition". https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-ooue7i73zo
|
| The other two are "why millions ride HD"
| (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XeuXShFIgyc), which kinda lays
| the background for the tradition at work in the aforementioned
| video; and "How HD killed itself"
| (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EOwxxsPaogY), which is more
| about their demographic problem.
|
| * They did a "how to deal with dealers" video that is really a
| thinly veiled tribute to a particularly excellent and
| longstanding dealership, which is just lovely:
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fbr3JZAXDxA
|
| * And my personal favorite is the FANTASTIC film homage built
| into Ryan's vid about the Ducati Desert X, which he ended up
| buying: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lcFqVIadWYo
| stickfigure wrote:
| Here's my favorite F9 video:
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fbr3JZAXDxA
|
| Without offering any spoilers, I bought a couple new dirt bikes
| recently and went out of my way to find a "Kenco equivalent" in
| the Bay Area. Glad I did.
| aunty_helen wrote:
| I took a bet this would be a F9 video before I opened the tab.
| Top quality content.
|
| A lot of motoring YouTube seems to have fallen away, or become
| so big it feels unreal "let's race these 2000hp lambos."
| draven wrote:
| I love FortNine, they always manage to be both funny and
| informative at the same time. And the way they do really long
| takes in their videos is really cool. Even the segment about the
| sponsors is well integrated into the video.
|
| The first video I saw from them was about the different
| motorcycle engine types:
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aOTz0Ol8fLA
|
| One of their latest videos
| (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GpVMsqSW6pk) contained a teaser
| about a documentary they're going to release in December: around
| the world in 17 days. Can't wait to see it.
| cs02rm0 wrote:
| I was terrified for his head. Great review though, as someone
| who's been mulling over getting a bike licence and struggling to
| wrap their head around gear ratings, this was eye opening.
| cjrp wrote:
| Not sure where you're based, but the Safety Helmet Assessment
| and Rating Programme[0] in the UK is my go-to for.. well,
| helmet ratings.
|
| [0] https://sharp.dft.gov.uk/
| cs02rm0 wrote:
| That's sort of what I mean.
|
| I looked up an Arai Tour X5, thanks for the link. It gives
| four stars and some colours for different zones at set impact
| speeds in m/s in a lab. It tells me it meets standard UN ECE
| REG 22.06 with a double D ring retention system and composite
| fibre materials. Super objective and necessary.
|
| But I've read a lot of similar information and, somehow,
| seeing the results of a person being dragged down the road,
| for some unknown amount of time, which is pretty super
| subjective, still feels (perhaps wrongly even) as though it
| gives me a better understanding than just reading
| numbers/letters/colours.
| thih9 wrote:
| The speed was relatively low. But yes, the lack of head
| protection was still scary.
| gherkinnn wrote:
| A silent upvote does not do this video justice, it is simply
| amazing.
| TheChaplain wrote:
| Getting a motorcycle license was a very good thing I've done for
| my life. Cruising on long roads, beautiful views, wild camping
| and meeting other people in a like-minded community. It really
| heals your mind and body.
|
| But obviously it comes with higher risk as you are more exposed
| and higher demands on your abilities. And good gear can help, but
| if it is not combined with training and of course a sound
| attitude, you may sooner or later find yourself in an undesirable
| situation.
|
| Go to refresher courses. I do it every year to update myself and
| get an idea of my current limits. It really helps.
|
| To see what I meant about attitude, just go on Instagram and
| check for motorcycle reels, you'll see soo many examples of how
| to not act in traffic or what to do on a motorcycle.
| xandrius wrote:
| I love the idea but our roads almost worldwide are cursed with
| ever-present cars which do not cars about anything else. I've
| heard lots of and lots of near-misses, accidents and bullshit
| interactions between bikes/motorbikes and cars.
|
| I just finished reading a travelogue about the dude who cycled
| around the world in 1800s. Sure, one could do it today but the
| roads he was riding on were almost empty, now you would have to
| be cautious every time, since 1 asshole and you're out.
| diggan wrote:
| > our roads almost worldwide are cursed with ever-present
| cars which do not cars about anything else
|
| Kind of feel like you're over-generalizing here. Where I
| live, there is almost more motorbikes than cars a lot of the
| time, which considering the rush hour traffic, kind of makes
| sense as most people don't wanna get stuck in those queues.
| Of course, there are accidents and near-misses (almost by
| definition, since those on motorbikes tend to go between car
| lanes), but it's not like there is a 99% chance of you dying
| every time you use a motorbike.
|
| I think it depends a lot on how used to motorbikes the car
| drivers are. Since I live in a place where there is a bunch
| of them always (and cyclists!), I feel like most of us pay
| attention to where they could show up. Compare that to
| countries where motorbiking isn't as popular, I could
| understand how it's more risky to go with the motorbike as
| the car-ists aren't as used to them appearing wherever.
| plemer wrote:
| My doctor buddy told of a room in the hospital called the
| Cabbage Patch, full of braindead people who absolutely will
| die but can't be let to die yet. Who is that room full of?
|
| Consider that the fatality rate is roughly 30 times higher
| per mile for motorcycles vs cars.
|
| I fully understand the freedom of the open road riding on a
| metal stallion - I've genuinely never felt anything else
| like it.
|
| But it's really god damn dangerous. Let's not kid
| ourselves.
| diggan wrote:
| > Consider that the fatality rate is roughly 30 times
| higher per mile for motorcycles vs cars.
|
| I guess it's worth asking, what country? In Spain, I
| think it's closer to ~10x, probably because we're very
| used to motorcycles driving all around us all the time.
| But still, riskier, no doubt.
|
| I'm guessing that numbers come from the US in some way or
| similar? Watching dashcam footage sometimes, I keep
| seeing people riding motorbikes in the US without
| helmets, something I almost never seen in Spanish
| traffic, I can only recall seeing that once in my life,
| and it's really uncommon to ride a bike without a helmet
| here.
|
| > But it's really god damn dangerous. Let's not kid
| ourselves.
|
| Agree, I'm not trying to convince anyone of otherwise.
| But lets have nuance as well, riding a motorcycle isn't
| the same everywhere, especially where motorcycles are
| really, really commonplace in daily traffic.
| theshackleford wrote:
| > I guess it's worth asking, what country? In Spain, I
| think it's closer to ~10x
|
| From what I've been able to gather, it looks to be closer
| to 20-23x on a per kilometer basis.
| hilbert42 wrote:
| _" I keep seeing people riding motorbikes in the US
| without helmets, something I almost never seen in Spanish
| traffic, <...>, it's really uncommon to ride a bike
| without a helmet here."_
|
| In many countries it's illegal to ride without a helmet,
| where I am the cops would catch you in an instant.
| literalAardvark wrote:
| If you factor in rider error and rider behaviour the
| rates are much closer.
|
| It's just that most riders can't ride worth a damn, 95%
| of the riding information on the internet is dangerously
| wrong, and most of us also often ride recklessly because
| we're on a motorcycle to have fun in the first place.
| hilbert42 wrote:
| I love motorcycles and it's years since I've been on one.
| Despite their convience and other virtues I won't own one
| as I reckon I'm not competent enough to drive one safety
| --despite having an excellent safety record with four-
| wheeled vehicles.
|
| Agreed, they're 'god damn dangerous' but where does that
| '30 times' figure come from? Where I am the generally
| accepted figure is seven times (or it was when I heard
| the figure a while ago).
|
| _Edit: for years I 've thought that if motorcycles were
| a new invention they'd never be licensed these days. That
| they still are is historical legacy upheld by riders and
| the industry that makes the machines._
| buran77 wrote:
| > I'm not competent enough to drive one safety
|
| Underestimating your abilities in any vehicle is a good
| way to stay safe. In my encounters with motorcycles in
| traffic, as pedestrian, cyclist, or driver, even in those
| short few seconds while our paths cross, the
| motorcyclists almost always put themselves in some
| dangerous situation (cyclists do it even more often I'd
| say, but at lower speeds).
|
| Every time I talk about this to acquaintances who ride
| they explain that "I do this all the time but it's fine
| because I know what I'm doing". Everyone is an above
| average driver or rider but drivers have a metal box
| filled with airbags. Motorcycle riders often play Russian
| roulette with 5 bullets in. Blaming another for when your
| luck finally runs out in on par with the belief most hold
| that they are above average.
| hilbert42 wrote:
| _" (cyclists do it even more often I'd say, but at lower
| speeds)."_
|
| The behavior of cyclists where I am is a particular
| problem. Unlike motorcyclists, they're unlicensed and
| don't even have to know the rules of the road, and it
| shows.
|
| Trouble is, during an incident between a cyclist and a
| car driver the sympathy vote is in the cyclist's favor.
| Especially so in recent times where cycling is seen as
| 'green' and environmentally friendly and with many cities
| making car drivers feel as if they're guilty pariahs.
|
| To give you some idea how bad this problem has become
| where I am (Sydney, Australia) is to consider the street
| where I live.
|
| It's a one-way street (as it's narrow) but recently the
| Council has made it _two-way_ for cyclists and painted
| bicycles on the street to indicate thus--for motorists it
| 's still one-way.
|
| The lunacy of this decision is obvious even to those with
| a room-temperature IQ. For starters, drivers (usually
| visitors) often mistakenly drive the wrong way down this
| street and it's been the situation for years (from street
| arrangements and local geography it seems the logical way
| to go, and the sineage is poor and hard to see).
|
| It gets worse, there's a sharp bend in the road so two
| vehicles approaching from either side cannot see each
| other and there's nowhere to pull off in an emergency!
|
| Oh, I also must point out that when the Council painted
| bicycles on the street to indicate their right to two-way
| usage it also upgraded the far-from-obvious street sign
| indicating one-way by adding "bicycles excepted" but did
| nothing to make the sign more obvious. (Words fail me!)
|
| Lunacy has no limits, now consider the same head-on
| situation between a cyclist and a vehicle, it's a miracle
| no one has been killed to date (but the change is recent
| --there's much time to go).
|
| Right, the trendy and electorally savvy, many-term
| Council has the ear of cyclists and no doubt this
| dangerous change was the result of cyclists' lobbying.
|
| Not if but when someone is killed then who's to blame?
| Even if a motorist is found not to be at fault (i.e.
| driving in the right direction) and is completely
| exonerated then he/she will have to live with the
| knowledge that he/she was the driver of a vehicle that
| killed a cyclist.
|
| What amazes me is that cyclists want this dangerous
| situation to continue to exist, it seems that sheer
| convenience takes precedence over their safety in both
| their minds and that of the Council. More to the point,
| cyclists seem to have overwhelming confidence in their
| ability to avoid an accident.
|
| Even more amazing is that this situation can exist in
| this overly safety conscious, horribly risk averse
| society.
|
| From my perspective it's high time this nonsense stopped.
| The first thing would be license cyclists--if nothing
| else, they'd at least know the road rules.
| Mawr wrote:
| > don't even have to know the rules of the road
|
| I'm not aware of any country where that is true, unless
| you're being pedantic and making a distinction between
| having to know the rules vs having to follow them. Every
| road user in every country I know of has to follow the
| rules of the road, no matter if they're a cyclist or a
| pedestrian or anyone else.
|
| > Trouble is, during an incident between a cyclist and a
| car driver the sympathy vote is in the cyclist's favor.
|
| What do you mean by "trouble"? This is perfectly logical.
| The cyclist presents precisely _zero_ danger to the car
| driver, but the car presents deadly danger to the
| cyclist.
|
| > It's a one-way street (as it's narrow) but recently the
| Council has made it two-way for cyclists
|
| Yeah, all one-way streets should be like that. Streets
| are designated to be one-way for a reason. Either they're
| too narrow for two vehicles to pass each other safely or
| making them two way would increase traffic too much. None
| of this applies to bicycles.
|
| > drivers (usually visitors) often mistakenly drive the
| wrong way down this street and it's been the situation
| for years (from street arrangements and local geography
| it seems the logical way to go, and the sineage is poor
| and hard to see)
|
| Go ahead and complain about the poor signage then? What's
| this have to do with cyclists?
|
| > From my perspective it's high time this nonsense
| stopped.
|
| You haven't really provided any arguments here besides
| the rather incoherent example.
|
| > The first thing would be license cyclists
|
| _Sigh_. How many times are we going to have to listen to
| such poorly thought-out suggestions? Do you know just how
| many bicycles there are out there? Do you understand the
| risk a driver poses to others? Do you understand the risk
| a cyclist poses?
| hilbert42 wrote:
| Thanks, you've just clearly illustrated the unresolved
| (and seemingly unresolvable) dichotomy between cyclists
| and four-wheel vehicle drivers.
|
| It's unresolvable because of political ideology, like the
| chasm between right-wing conservatives and liberals,
| views seem almost genetic and immutable (it's been so
| ever since bicycles took to the roads--even in the days
| of horse drawn vehicles).
|
| _" I'm not aware of any country where that is true,
| unless you're being pedantic"_
|
| Pedantic? Rubbish, unless cyclists are licensed by way of
| a thorough examination of the road rules, etc. then
| there's no way to know if a cyclist knows the rules or
| not. Going on the many violations I see cyclists commit
| every day it's clear many do not. Licensing cyclists
| would bring them into line with other road users, for
| starters, they'd also be vulnerable to losing their
| licenses for violations.
|
| Fact is, as a motor vehicle driver I do not feel safe on
| the roads with unpredictable unlicensed cyclists about.
| If you do not believe cyclists are an undisciplined and
| unpredictable lot that worry the shit out of many
| licenced drivers because of the way they ride and
| regularly violate traffic rules (like jumping red lights
| at intersections) then you live in fantasyland.
|
| For every violation I witness car drivers make I reckon I
| see about a dozen from cyclists. By your views you'd have
| to condone this alacrity or they'd be contradiction with
| each other. Alternatively, it's cognitive dissonance so
| you've not noticed the fact.
| xandrius wrote:
| I am pretty sure in most countries riding a bike on a
| normal street requires absolutely no license,
| verification or anything. Even a 5 year old could and
| would be able to ride there (if their parents permitted
| or for whatever reason).
|
| So this means that bike riders do not need to know
| exactly what all signs mean, what are the rules of giving
| way (or receiving it), etc.
|
| So, that point is absolutely valid.
|
| I have a friend who doesn't have a car licence and cannot
| distinguish many signs (for instance the circular one
| with red border and full white inside) or when to expect
| to have the priority.
|
| Not supporting the rest of the comment, just that
| specific statement which is a valid one.
| hilbert42 wrote:
| _" Not supporting the rest of the comment."_
|
| That unsupported statement is not helpful. Whether right
| or wrong I at least give reasons or background for my
| positions.
| xandrius wrote:
| To verify any of the words of your long comment, one
| would simply need to compare deaths caused to others by
| cars vs deaths caused to others by bicycles (could even
| add in motorised bikes) and see how many order of
| magnitude of difference we would find.
|
| Once we have established the danger level of each vehicle
| then we can go into detail on how to decrease the
| fatalities of the most deadly one. I'm pretty sure,
| requiring a license for bicycles is not going to change a
| thing.
| hilbert42 wrote:
| _" ...deaths caused to others by bicycles"_
|
| By simply doing that you'd just fuel the belief in the
| saying "there are damned lies and statistics". It does
| not make sense to compare the killing potential of a
| motor powered vehicle with one powered by a human.
|
| The issue is simple and straightforward. As I've
| mentioned elsewhere, many cyclists have unpredictable
| riding habits and a high propensity to violate traffic
| law at the drop of a hat--which, on a per capita basis,
| is much more frequent than that of licenced drivers.
| There's no disputing the accuracy of that statement
| although there's argument over the actual numbers.
|
| By their unpredictable riding habits and regular
| violations of the road rules, cyclists put motorists into
| invidious situations where they are more likely to have
| an accident with a cyclist (or pedestrian, or other
| vehicle or thing whilst desperately trying to avoid the
| cyclist).
|
| Licensing cyclists won't solve everything but it'd sure
| improve their safety. If cyclists knew they could lose
| their license thus not be allowed to drive on public
| roads then their riding behavior would be more
| predictable and we would see many fewer traffic
| violations (such as running red lights which I see happen
| regularly). Moreover, motorists' behavior would be more
| predictable with licenced cyclists on the road because
| their behavior has become more predictable through them
| being licensed. All up, licensing cyclists would mean
| fewer accidents.
| carlosjobim wrote:
| And how old are those motorcycle riders who suffer
| serious accidents? There's your answer.
| Mawr wrote:
| Let's get our assumptions straight. Are you talking about
| riding or "riding"? What's "the freedom of the open road"
| an euphemism for? Doing 100 mph? Lane splitting? Racing
| on public roads? Yeah, that is dangerous.
| potato3732842 wrote:
| There was literally 1/5th as many people on earth in 1900 as
| there were today. Of course the roads were empty. Even if you
| compare to 75yr ago there's been a doubling of population in
| many countries.
| giantg2 wrote:
| "There was literally 1/5th as many people on earth in 1900
| as there were today. Of course the roads were empty."
|
| We're there 1/5 the number of roads back then? Number of
| people might not be the best measure of density. Number of
| people in a specific walkable/short horse rideable
| location, such as a city would.
|
| I think the bigger thing is that trains were the main mode
| of distance travel on land and very few people traveled
| more than 50 miles from home in their life.
| potato3732842 wrote:
| >We're there 1/5 the number of roads back then?
|
| Probably more like 1/2 or 3/4 depending on how you want
| to count dead end office park and residential subdivision
| roads of which there are many.
|
| Pretty much every road in the US and Europe that isn't in
| the above category or a purpose built highway existed in
| 1900, and likely 1850 if you're looking at europe or the
| american northeast.
|
| Obviously size and quality was lesser, many times they
| weren't even paved. But they existed because they were
| the roads between towns and points of interest.
| giantg2 wrote:
| I doubt this. The interstate project in US added a
| massive number of roads. Not just the interstate, but new
| tributaries. Those office parks and subdivisions have to
| hook up to stuff too.
| lifis wrote:
| I think that motorcycle and e-bike safety can be greatly
| enhanced by never doing things a car couldn't do.
|
| Always stay in the middle of the lane (unless you need to avoid
| a pothole), never overtake unless a car would have space to
| overtake, never enter an intersection alongside a car in the
| same lane.
|
| On a bike, you also have the option of behaving like a
| pedestrian (cycle on the sidewalk slowly) occasionally.
|
| If you don't do this, it's only a matter of time before a car
| hits you because it didn't expect a vehicle or pedestrian doing
| what you are doing.
| travoc wrote:
| The middle of the lane is where cars drip years of oil and
| coolant.
| giantg2 wrote:
| "Always stay in the middle of the lane"
|
| Usually the middle is more slick from oil drips and contains
| more debris. That's why most people ride in one of the tire
| tracks from the cars.
| Zambyte wrote:
| It's also the best place to be to maximize damage if you
| happen to rear ended. It's also illegal where I live (edit:
| for specifically e-bikes).
| s0ss wrote:
| Also, riding where cars/trucks/whatever mirrors are able
| to see you is another dimension.
| reddit_clone wrote:
| Also you can see much farther between cars. I usually
| ride switching left of the lane to right of the lane
| occasionally, to create lateral movement so car drivers
| will notice more (one hopes).
| mynameisash wrote:
| I was coming home from work on my bike very late a few years
| ago, and I was on the side of the lane where your car tire
| would be -- not in the center. It was a good thing, too,
| because there was a full size ladder in the road, lined up
| exactly in the direction of traffic. Cars could safely drive
| 'over' it. I missed it by maybe a foot. If I were in middle
| of the lane, I would have taken a serious spill.
| bpc777 wrote:
| I have also barely avoided a large ladder in the middle of
| the lane. Don't follow closely so you have more time to see
| what is ahead and react.
| bpc777 wrote:
| > Always stay in the middle of the lane
|
| This is wrong. Use the whole lane to be in the best spot to
| see and be seen. Use lateral movement to increase your
| visibility in driver mirrors.
| TacticalCoder wrote:
| I've done MX (Yamaha YZ 250 two strokes: a monster), enduro
| (big mono-cylinder) and road driving on a variety of
| motorbikes. Road driving is by very far the most dangerous of
| them all.
|
| I just quit about 15 years ago.
|
| Now I'm a petrolhead at heart so I still enjoy scenic roads but
| with a car. It's much safer.
| theshackleford wrote:
| > Now I'm a petrolhead at heart so I still enjoy scenic roads
| but with a car. It's much safer.
|
| I've tried it in a car, but it's not the same. For me, it's
| not even 1/10th of the experience of being on a bike. It's
| like all the soul has been sucked out of it. I might as well
| be in a minivan on the freeway for all the joy it gives me.
|
| I'm not riding at the moment due to an unrelated (incomplete)
| spinal cord injury and some long term issues relating to
| that, and so i've been trying it in a car, and I even bought
| a "fun" car thinking it would help. But it just feels
| so...meh that i've largely just given it up full stop and am
| going to just sell the car.
|
| I'd been riding since I was five years old, I dont think
| anything will ever touch it for me honestly. It was my zen
| place, the place I was truely happiest and at peace. It's
| been the biggest loss for me since my injury.
|
| There is still a chance I could one day return to riding, so
| i've kept the bike (a 2012 BMW F800GS) out of sheer hope, but
| I must admit that it's likely by the time I can physically, I
| may no longer be mentally capable of the return.
| JKCalhoun wrote:
| I tell people worried about motorcycles (I've had motorcycles
| around more or less since I was 12) -- if safety is the most
| important thing for you, skip motorcycles (and bicycling,
| etc.).
|
| I'm surprised how often people project their own fears on me
| with comments like, "Aren't you afraid you'll get killed?" As
| though that never occurred to me, ha ha.
|
| Obviously I choose to do some things in life that are not the
| safest -- but I do them because they make life more worth
| living. (Sound like a bumper sticker? Hopefully you get the
| point though.)
|
| Likely there are things others do that add a degree of risk
| to their life but they feel are worth it.
| lylejantzi3rd wrote:
| If you're really worried about it you could buy an airbag.
|
| FortNine on motorcycle airbags:
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N2jZryt607U
| ubermonkey wrote:
| I'll chime in here and note that, until very recently, there
| wasn't an airbag system that really appealed enough to ME.
|
| The affordable ones, now long in the tooth, required a
| tether. The nicer ones were built into vests that weighted
| more, were hotter, and sometimes required a _subscription_ ,
| meaning a billing error could result in a nonfunctional
| safety device. Um, no.
|
| AlpineStars released one that was ALMOST right a year or two
| ago called the Techair 5. It was (is) accelerometer driven,
| so no tether, and while it has an app it doesn't require a
| subscription. However, it IS heavy, and it IS hot, and it
| DOES require that you mail it in to be serviced after a
| deployment, so that was still a no-go for me.
|
| However, last year AStars released the updated TechAir 5
| Plasma, which has all the goodness of the original TechAir 5
| while also being materially lighter and cooler -- plus, the
| canister can be replaced by the end user. It's spendy ($800
| or so), but I bought one immediately. I wear it more or less
| every time I get on the bike. I live in the American South,
| so when I say I'm not any hotter wearing it than I would be
| without it, you know it's vented well.
|
| (In fact, I wore it on a 4-day road trip between where I used
| to live (Houston) and where I live now (Durham) 2 weeks ago.
| Was it a hot trip? Absolutely; I was riding a motorcycle in
| TX, LA, MS, TN, and NC in the summer. Did the airbag make me
| less comfortable? No.)
| jpgvm wrote:
| Hopefully these go from being expensive pieces of gear that
| only few have to being completely normal/common-place. They
| are a great technological improvement but right now they are
| out of the budget of most of the motorcycling world (which
| outside of the West skews heavily towards lower incomes).
| xnyan wrote:
| > but if it is not combined with training and of course a sound
| attitude, you may sooner or later find yourself in an
| undesirable situation.
|
| I ride motorcycles, so this is not a argument against it, but
| even with all the best safety gear and perfect habits you're
| still significantly more likely to die in an accident compared
| to a motorcycle per mile driven.
| bityard wrote:
| Motorcycle fatality and injury statistics don't control for a
| rider's skills, experience, or attitude. Add to that the fact
| that motorcycles tend to attract a large number of young
| thrill seekers on crotch rockets and counter-culture types on
| choppers--neither of which put much, if any, level of effort
| into safety--and you get studies and statistics saying that
| motorcycles are basically two-wheeled insta-death machines.
|
| Yes, a motorcycle rider will never be as protected as a
| person in a car surrounded by a steel frame and airbags. That
| should go without saying. But it would be nice if we can
| acknowledge that people who actually make an effort to wear
| their gear and maintain situational awareness generally
| aren't well represented in the statistics.
| Workaccount2 wrote:
| It's been probably over a decade since I dug into this, but
| IIRC, if you have a motorcycle license, insurance, a
| registered bike, and wear a helmet, your fatal accident
| chances drop by 70%.
| philwelch wrote:
| That's equivalent to saying that if you don't have a
| motorcycle license, don't register your bike, don't have
| insurance, and don't wear your helmet, your fatal
| accident risk increases by over 3x. Put that way, it's
| not surprising, nor does it actually tell you anything
| about the base rate safety of lawful motorcycling. By way
| of analogy, you could just as easily say "not dousing
| yourself in gasoline reduces the risk of death by smoking
| by 98%", which is both true and useless.
| Workaccount2 wrote:
| I totally get what you are saying, but if you ride
| motorcycles and have been around motorcycle groups, the
| stat is clearly saying "as expected, it's the dumb kids
| doing the dieing".
|
| The comment is written for other riders, I left out a lot
| of detail for it to be a general comment.
| shkkmo wrote:
| > That's equivalent to saying that if you don't have a
| motorcycle license, don't register your bike, don't have
| insurance, and don't wear your helmet, your fatal
| accident risk increases by over 3x.
|
| That's not really how statistics work. Since the
| reduction was probably calculated against the population
| average you need to know the relative size of the groups
| to calculate the risk increase for the inverse group.
| Additionaly, the group you specified is not the inverse
| group since you exclude those who have some, but not all,
| of the safety signals.
|
| Your calculation would be accurate if almost nobody took
| all safety precautions (that would mean the average risk
| rate would be affected much by that group) and everbody
| else took no safety precautions.
|
| What you have calculated is a rough lower bound for the
| risk increase given unknown population behavior ratios.
|
| > nor does it actually tell you anything about the base
| rate safety
|
| It doesn't by itself. What it tells you is given a base
| of rate of 3x more deadly per mile, those who follow all
| the rules are as likely to die as an average driver
| (which still isn't an fair comparison.) To be fair, you'd
| beed to compare agaisnt driver who have a license,
| registration, insurance and are wear a seatbelt. (Or
| maybe helmet..)
| snozolli wrote:
| Simply not drinking and riding _wildly_ improves your
| odds. ~20 years ago, MCN published that 70% of single-
| vehicle motorcyclist fatalities involved alcohol.
| Workaccount2 wrote:
| Ah yes, that too!
| xnyan wrote:
| > But it would be nice if we can acknowledge that people
| who actually make an effort to wear their gear and maintain
| situational awareness generally aren't well represented in
| the statistics.
|
| The data says you are 25 times more likely to die per mile
| driven versus a car. If we were talking about personal
| experience, my motorcycle training instructor with 3
| decades of experience was killed a few years ago by someone
| in an SUV making a left turn. It was broad daylight, they
| had all the gear, they were doing everything right, the
| person in the car was not paying attention and made a last
| second left with no time to react.
|
| Even doing everything right you are still significantly
| more likely to die on a motorcycle in a car per mile
| driven. again, I ride motorcycles and I accept that risk.
| tshaddox wrote:
| It's also very possible that if you ride a motorcycle and
| believe you are "one of the safe ones" you are simply
| mistaken.
| jonex wrote:
| This isn't just about perception. If you:
|
| * Have a license * Wear appropriate gear * Follow speed
| limits * Don't drink and ride * Aged somewhere 30-50 *
| Have more than a few months experience on your bike *
| etc.
|
| You are statistically "one of the safer ones". Not safe,
| you are never truly safe when in traffic.
| YZF wrote:
| I rode motorcycles most of my life. I stopped during the
| pandemic and I'm sort of thinking of maybe getting another
| bike. Trying to balance the fun with the realities of
| riding.
|
| Anecdotally, I've been to the funeral of a fighter jet
| pilot years ago who died on a motorcycle after a bus cut
| him off, in the city. This would be someone at the top 1%
| of skill, attitude and experience. The reality of riding a
| motorcycle is that you are completely exposed/unprotected
| (leather vs. a metal box) and there are many situations you
| can't predict/control.
|
| I've had a few crashes myself, including a high speed one,
| possibly some I could have avoided but for whatever reason
| didn't. People make mistakes, have poor judgement, and
| can't always be 100%. My worst crash was when someone
| T-boned me in the city doing an illegal left turn across
| three lanes. If I had been paying more attention I could
| have predicted/avoided/seen it but I didn't. I even had my
| visor open and got the handlebar in my face. I walked/drove
| away from that one just like all my other crashes with some
| minor injuries.
| catherd wrote:
| There are safe (and unsafe) drivers contributing to both
| car and motorcycle statistics. Is this an argument that the
| skill curve for motorcycle driving is skewed towards highly
| unskilled drivers but cars are more evenly distributed?
|
| I don't remember much about my statistics classes but even
| if you're a 99th percentile driver can't you still say
| there will be a large increase in your own personal
| probability of a fatality if you jump from the car curve to
| the motorcycle one?
| Mawr wrote:
| People who seek to ride a motorcycle rarely do so out of a
| desire to religiously stick to the rules of the road,
| particularly speed limits.
|
| Take the low motorcycling population and the extreme self
| selection bias and you end up with an average that paints a
| very misleading picture.
| hilbert42 wrote:
| _" Go to refresher courses. I do it every year to update myself
| and get an idea of my current limits. It really helps."_
|
| I'll preface this by saying I love motorcycles but haven't been
| on one for decades.
|
| As a driver of four-wheeled vehicles, the biggest problem I
| have with motorcycles is seeing them. Fortunately, I've never
| had an accident with a motorcycle but have had some near
| misses. All of those were because (a) I did not see the rider
| and (b) they were in positions where I did not expect them to
| be--on my wrong side, quickly switching lanes seemingly
| appearing out of nowhere, etc.
|
| Whilst hardly in that league, I experienced an incident only
| three days ago that illustrates the point. At a shopping centre
| on a busy road I found a parking spot tight enough to require
| multiple maneuvers to park. When about to leave a motorcyclist
| pulled in behind me without me being aware of it (I was
| arranging shopping stuff so it wouldn't go everywhere when
| vehicle was in motion and there was no noise to indicate his
| presence).
|
| He wasn't there when I got in the vehicle and I couldn't see
| his motorcycle both from my rear vision and side mirrors. I
| reversed slowly and felt a resistance and stopped immediately
| (I touched so gently there was no noise--and not even a scratch
| to show). (He wasn't on the motorcycle or I definitely would
| have seen him.)
|
| What this motorcyclist did was to sneak into an illegal parking
| space so small that he effectively blocked my exit, I could not
| leave before he did. Sure, I wasn't really inconvenienced as he
| was delivering something to one of the businesses so he wasn't
| long.
|
| Motorcycles offer conviences other vehicles do not, here being
| able to park in a small space. Motorcyclists get used to such
| conviences without realizing that other motorists might not be
| aware of them. For example, motorcycles allow for easy
| maneuverability which tempts riders to make illegal maneuvers
| that car drivers wouldn't even consider doing in the same
| circumstance. If the last thing on a car driver's mind is an
| unexpected maneuver by a motorcycle then it doesn't bode well
| for its rider.
|
| From my experience, many motorcyclists drive from their
| perspective and not that of four-wheeled driver's. It's why I
| don't own a motorcycle, if I did then before long I'd be in
| motorcyclist thinking mode, and that'd be damned dangerous for
| my health.
| snozolli wrote:
| _on my wrong side_
|
| What's a wrong side?
|
| _I couldn 't see his motorcycle both from my rear vision and
| side mirrors._
|
| You seem inattentive. The motorcyclist didn't "sneak" into a
| spot, he simply minded his own business and parked. You
| didn't even notice a motorcycle park behind you while you
| were moving things around inside your car? I'm sorry, but
| you're simply inattentive.
|
| _many motorcyclists drive from their perspective and not
| that of four-wheeled driver 's_
|
| This statement strikes me as extremely ironic.
| hilbert42 wrote:
| _" What's a wrong side?"_
|
| You are obviously a motorcyclist.
|
| And so it's OK for motorcyclists to disobey road rules on a
| public street and be inconsiderate to others? Why would a
| car driver expect to find a motorcycle illegally parked
| between two legally parked cars with only several inches
| between the car and the motorcycle?
|
| If you drive a car, I'll bet London to a brick you don't
| get out and back into your vehicle just the moment before
| you drive off. Show me someone who does and I'll retort "by
| golly you've found the mystical unicorn".
|
| BTW, being in a safely parked car with the ignition
| switched off and doing something doesn't count or
| constitute as being inattentive as it would _after_ the
| ignition is switched on and the motor running. Despite what
| you say I 'm particularly attentive at what's at my rear
| (even after checking it's why I always back up at a snail's
| pace). The street in question is very noisy and pedestrians
| regularly flit between parked cars--it's all the more
| reason. Motorcycles can't be heard above the street noise,
| and when riders park tightly between two cars they'll wheel
| them in with motor off (but you'd already know that).
|
| It's your comment that's ironic. I'd also maintain that
| road statistics support the notion that such attitudes have
| to change before they'll improve for the better.
| Workaccount2 wrote:
| Probably the single most important thing is learning good
| defensive driving. Which is different than "good driving".
|
| Lots of "good drivers" T-bone the guy who ran a red light.
| Defensive drivers see him barreling towards the intersection,
| as they check both ways despite it being green.
|
| On a motorcycle, even if a crash is not your fault, you're
| still dead.
| jpgvm wrote:
| The road to heaven is full of bikers who had right of way.
| hilbert42 wrote:
| ...And car drivers too (although not as many).
| SoftTalker wrote:
| Every time I make this point to bicycling communities I'm
| told that I'm "victim blaming." OK, you were a victim. You're
| still dead.
| ubermonkey wrote:
| I learned to ride in my 50s, and I am 100% convinced it made me
| a better _driver_.
| mianos wrote:
| As a motorcyclist myself, I always felt drivers should be
| forced to do a certain number of hours on a motorcycle to
| make them more aware. But, those atrocious drivers would
| probably get injured so quickly that the idea would never
| fly. Now they are just driving.
| Havoc wrote:
| Wow that slide was much longer than expected. I had always
| assumed it's good for a second maybe two
| 14 wrote:
| FortNine is a hidden gem of a YouTuber. Many of his videos are
| just showing his passion for riding and interesting facts like
| "different ways to mount a motorcycle" and are entertaining to
| watch him climb up the back tire and hop onto the bike. But then
| some of the videos are actually highly educational and he
| incorporates tested science and studies and explains why things
| are they way they are like the science of different leaning
| styles while riding and their science.
|
| The video that has always stuck with me is when he explained the
| science behind how motorcycles are hard to gauge their speed and
| distance and related it to how pigeons see. It showed me that a
| lot of why drivers have a tendency to pull out and cut off riders
| is more to do with not being aware that it can be very difficult
| to calculate the distance and speed of a motorcycle the same as
| we do with a car. With that knowledge as a rider I have actually
| changed my driving and really make sure I fully check both
| directions before pulling out. I also, as a rider, pay attention
| to side roads and driveways and always assume the car is going to
| pull out. I have never almost pulled in front of a rider but I
| can say I have many times avoided cars by riding defensively.
| postsantum wrote:
| > 2M subscribers
|
| > hidden gem
| vinodkd wrote:
| not in number of subscribers - they know the channel already,
| but in quality of content and production values. I think
| that's what OP meant.
|
| F9 could get 2M subscribers by just doing product reviews
| because they're an ecommerce website in Canada like Revzilla
| is in the US, and that Youtube channel
| (https://www.youtube.com/c/RevZilla) has 1.5m subscribers.
|
| F9 has a few product reviews, but they have a ton of just top
| quality content that shines for not just the motorcycle
| content, but how its presented, the attention to filming and
| editing, etc.
|
| Oh and if you're interested, they even have a video about
| cheese (it was an april fool's prank, but still informative
| about cheese).https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a1T7NzCtWHo
| 14 wrote:
| Yes you are right his content is well done. By hidden gem
| yes he has millions of subscribers but for some reason many
| riders I have asked about him have never heard about him. I
| just got the sense that some how a lot of people have never
| heard of him and I think he deserves some recognition for
| his content.
| Xenoamorphous wrote:
| I think that we haven't reached the insulation to weight ratio of
| down feathers, so that'd be another example where artificial
| fabrics haven't reach some qualities of natural materials.
| meindnoch wrote:
| I'd doubt feathers would be better insulators than aerogel.
| Xenoamorphous wrote:
| I don't think you can use that for clothing, too brittle.
| bartvk wrote:
| Yeah but it goes the other way round, too. Gore-Tex laminated
| textile jackets are amazing. Suppose you ride through rain, and
| it clears up 15 minutes before your destination, you arrive
| with a dry jacket. Leather just soaks it up.
| notpushkin wrote:
| [video]?
| raffael_de wrote:
| The final segment starting at 6:00 makes me think that he can
| wear as much leather as he wants protecting his body while
| sliding over asphalt when he's anyway intent on braking with his
| face and chin. "There are many things you can
| point to as proof that the human is not smart. But my personal
| favorite would have to be that we needed to invent the helmet.
| What was happening, apparently, was that we were involved in a
| lot of activities that were cracking our heads. We chose not to
| avoid doing those activities but, instead, to come up with some
| sort of device to help us enjoy our head-cracking lifestyles. And
| even that didn't work because not enough people were wearing them
| so we had to come up with the helmet law. Which is even stupider,
| the idea behind the helmet law being to preserve a brain whose
| judgment is so poor, it does not even try to avoid the cracking
| of the head it's in."
|
| - Gerry Sinefield
| theelous3 wrote:
| Internet comment safety policing, when you have no idea what
| went in to making the content, is one of the more tiresome
| things a person could ever do.
| Dilettante_ wrote:
| They have a couple of quite good videos on helmets, I assume
| this time it was just to get a nice shot of him smiling empty-
| headedly for comedic effect.
| potato3732842 wrote:
| Humorously, I have less than nothing to do with motorcycles but
| find the sponsor's product relevant. I never knew such a product
| existed but it makes perfect sense that motorcycle people would
| create it for those reasons. Kinda expensive though.
| dazzawazza wrote:
| I've come off two motorbikes in the UK. On the first occasion I
| wore a leather jacket, on the second I had a synthetic jacket on
| (because it was more comfortable in hot weather).
|
| Both were completely safe. On both occasions I slid along the
| tarmac for about 10-15 meters, I was travelling at around 30-40
| mph. I still wear the same leather jacket 30 years later (not for
| riding) but the synthetic jacket was a right-off.
|
| On both occasions I really smacked my head: don't mess about with
| sub-standard crash helmets.
|
| So even though leather is better, we're not racing the TT, we're
| just going from A-B and if you want to wear synthetic you'll be
| fine at normal speeds. So if you can't wear leather, for whatever
| reason, don't let that stop you.
| loloquwowndueo wrote:
| * write-off, not right-off.
| dazzawazza wrote:
| Forgive me. I've banged my head a few times.
| the_sleaze_ wrote:
| Same thing here. Slid on black ice in the north-east USA
| winter. Big -big- hit to the side of the helmet, road-slide for
| 100 feet and got up with a bruised ego.
|
| I'd add 1 point for the pads, shoulder elbow and back for
| impact. Mine happen to be `D3o` and are comfortable
| Workaccount2 wrote:
| That's a big factor for me, my leather jacket is tough as
| nails, and has eaten one slide before with only minor scuffs.
|
| But my synthetic jacket has armor as well, and while
| thankfully I have never tested it, it should provide pretty
| good protection even if the nylon burns through.
| Zambyte wrote:
| This summer I got into electric scooter riding, and along with
| that I have been interested in finding appropriate gear for my
| riding. My go-to so far has been to wear a fairly cheap half
| helmet that I used to wear longboarding, and a pair of well-
| padded cycling gloves. Wearing more protection sounds nice, but:
| at the speeds I'm going < 20 mph / 30 kph, and impact protection
| (from cars) is more important than sliding to me, and I'd also
| like things that are easy to get on and off and carry around at
| my destination.
|
| I've been thinking about getting a nice, full face helmet
| (helmets marketed for mountain biking seem like a good fit), but
| they seem like a pain to deal with at my destination. A lot of
| times I'll just loop my current helmet on my scooter completely
| unlocked, because it's cheap enough that I'm not really worried
| about it being stolen. The full face helmets I have been looking
| at are an order of magnitude more expensive though, and I
| wouldn't really feel comfortable just leaving it unlocked by my
| scooter. Does anyone have any recommendations on this? Or
| recommendations on other appropriate safety gear for my kind of
| riding?
| the_sleaze_ wrote:
| Vespa scooters are awesome because they have a huge storage
| compartment under the seat where you would store things like
| helmets and gear.
|
| The full-face mountain bike helmets sound exactly the ticket,
| and would protect your face from abrasion if you have an
| unexpected rapid dismount.
|
| I used to use a small wire cord and padlock that you can store
| wrapped up tightly onboard. You're never going stop someone
| determined to get your old lid you just want to prevent
| opportunists and not be too cumbersome about it otherwise you
| won't actually do it.
|
| I will say I have heard enough stories about 5k+ electric bikes
| getting scooped that I'd only ever store one behind locked
| doors rather than buying a huge bike lock setup.
| Zambyte wrote:
| Locking the helmet to the scooter with a cable definitely
| sounds like an interesting option! I'll have to look more
| into that. Unfortunately I can't store gear under the seat on
| my scooter because it is a standing scooter :D
|
| I'm actually not too worried about the scooter itself being
| stolen - I have two kryptonite locks, one of which includes
| an insurance policy covering the vehicle from theft if it is
| taken by cutting the lock. Also for long term storage (like
| in the bike room at my apt) I remove the battery, which I
| believe is another layer of theft deterrence.
| snozolli wrote:
| _at the speeds I 'm going < 20 mph_
|
| At those speeds, I wouldn't worry about a full-face helmet.
| Those are completely ordinary cycling speeds for a road cycling
| enthusiast. Your primary risk is probably rear and side
| impacts. Your body is really good at instinctively protecting
| the head, so you should worry more about surprise impacts, like
| t-bones and rear-ending.
|
| I don't know what your helmet looks like, but modern cycling
| helmets have migrated toward a longer back side for better rear
| impact protection.
|
| For what it's worth, one of the reasons that my motorcycle has
| a big top box and aluminum panniers is simply to store my gear
| when I get to my destination. Thieves suck and if something
| _can_ be stolen, someone will steal it.
| Zambyte wrote:
| I may ultimately stay away from full face helmets, but
| surprise impacts like t-bones and rear-ends are precisely why
| I find full face helmets appealing. For one, I can't really
| control how I fall in a surprise crash. And two, I'm less
| worried about the initial impact, and more about being
| slammed into the pavement. Especially from a higher center of
| gravity like I have on my standing scooter. Being rear-ended
| and slamming my head back against the hood of a car will
| hurt, but my current helmet will probably suffice for that.
| Being slammed forward into the ground, it seems like my face
| will become very familiar with the pavement.
|
| Another instance that a full face helmet seems appealing is
| in in getting doored. I often don't have a choice but to ride
| near a bunch of cars parked on the street.
|
| Road cycling enthusiasts are a good reference point, but the
| differences I see are in that I am not as focused on being
| aerodynamic and lightweight, since I have an electric
| throttle doing 100% of the work for me. In the tradeoff
| between efficiency and safety, I have the luxury of leaning
| much more into safety before negatively impacting the ride
| itself very much. Most of the negative impacts of additional
| safety gear are on either end of the ride (gearing up and
| down)
| seadan83 wrote:
| The stats for collisions from rear are surprising, rarest way
| to get hit on a bike (and most of those are no lights at
| night).
|
| It turns out, moving closer to the center of the lane reduces
| the chances of the most likely directions of impact - namely
| turning traffic. Either turning left as an oncoming vehicle,
| turning out from a side road or driveway, of someone that is
| overtaking you and then turns right.
|
| I've found low speed crashes really want a helmet. Things
| like you roll sideways off the bike. You are not moving fast
| but are rotating quickly. (So back hits ground followed by
| back of head)
|
| FWIW, I just noticed the common irrational rational fear of
| being run over from behind. It is a common mistake. Riding to
| the extreme right can make it worse, it is an invitation to
| pass when instead the cyclist is just afraid. Taking a little
| more room on a road (situationally) can make a person a lot
| safer.
| AdrianB1 wrote:
| This is one of the few articles where F9 makes statements not
| supported by any science or experiments. Cow hides are strong,
| but they were not built for the purpose of protecting people from
| road rash. I had slides on asphalt at 60 km/h in textile suits
| (Klim) and I am still wearing that suit as a secondary one, it
| got stitched back and partly cleaned and it is just fine, it just
| has the scars to tell the stories. In 20 years on bikes the only
| leather items I bought are gloves and boots; this is because this
| is the only option (not talking about MX/enduro boots that are
| mostly plastic). Never had a problem with textile equipment and
| never felt the need for leather. Modern Cordura and kevlar layers
| are fine.
| throw7 wrote:
| Is there a difference between leather performance? Like genuine
| vs top grain vs full grain? Would a very thin genuine leather
| still perform better than synthetics?
|
| I am not familiar with textiles in this area, but they don't make
| bullet proof vests out of leather last I checked... I presume
| there are good synthetics (better than leather?) out there?
| gethly wrote:
| it does not matter that much. only thing of importance here is
| that the leather will be still usable whereas the synthetics are
| "one crash only" type of thing. leather does not breathe either.
| i am not arguing for one or the other, that is an endless debate,
| i am merely saying there is no "best". each has its positives and
| negatives. if i would be riding a sport bike on a track or doing
| high speed freeway riding, leather is a no-brainer. anything
| else, synthetics will be more user friendly. also, understand the
| difference between nylon and polyester. one is tough and
| rough(ie. cordura), the other is soft and weak. most cheap
| product use polyester that provides very little protection so
| they layer it whereas nylon(like cordura) will be much safer
| choice.
|
| PS: if you crash, for the love of anything holy, do not slide but
| roll(ie. be active during the event, not passive). it is better
| to get bruises rather than getting your skin peeled off.
| snozolli wrote:
| _the leather will be still usable whereas the synthetics are
| "one crash only" type of thing._
|
| Leather _may_ still be usable. Also, one of the primary failure
| points is the stitching, which is synthetic. It can especially
| be a problem if the gear is older and dust has abraded the
| stitching for years, particularly if leather conditioner was
| used that is oily and attracts dust.
|
| Synthetic can be repaired, which is why it's often worth it to
| go with a more expensive brand. I've had my Aerostich
| Roadcrafter for 25 years and it's served me well, though it
| aged out of their servicing policy a decade ago.
| skhameneh wrote:
| How far along are developments with natural leather alternatives
| based on fungi like mycelium or mushrooms?
|
| My understanding is they are not quite there yet, but coming
| along and looking promising.
| pas wrote:
| or lab grown leather?
|
| (but it seems leather is not a very interesting target for
| substitution as there's no market for it?
| https://www.latimes.com/business/story/2019-08-18/america-is...
| though this is from 2019)
| elcdodedocle wrote:
| F9 produces such a consistently and ridiculously good, cool, fun,
| and educational *social media content*; that it is installed
| permanently as a cognitive dissonance in the back of my mind.
| FirmwareBurner wrote:
| Agree. I'm not into motorcycles and never plan to own one, but
| I still follow their videos because of the mix between
| intriguing and entertainment. Kind of why I used to watch top
| gear back when I was in school even though I didn't own a car.
| skeptrune wrote:
| Not only is Ryan good, but he has brought on additional staff who
| are equally good. Incredibly impressive creator and team.
| Simon_O_Rourke wrote:
| There's a massive fat guy in the local area here who goes
| blasting around the place on some over-powered, over-noisy bike -
| but doesn't (or can't find the right sized) leathers, so instead
| goes out wearing bluejeans and a denim jacket. Just waiting for
| him to take a slip one of these days to see the folly.
| jonex wrote:
| Maybe he's actually wearing protective gear? Jeans with slide
| tolerant layers and padding are pretty common as warm weather
| gear and there are jeans style jackets as well. If you don't
| know what to look for it can be hard to tell the difference to
| regular clothing.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2025-08-02 23:01 UTC)