Sport Bikes banner

1 - 7 of 7 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
10 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Heard this on NPR and looked it up....
http://news.yahoo.com/s/usatoday/motorcycledeathsrisesharply;_ylt=AiDKRlQz2BD6bee9kGH29xGs0NUE;_ylu=X3oDMTA3ODdxdHBhBHNlYwM5NjQ-


Motorcycle fatalities nationwide have surged to their highest levels since 1987, even as overall highway deaths continue to decline.

Last year, 4,008 motorcycle riders were killed in highway accidents, up 7.9% from 2003 and 89% higher than in 1997, according to a new National Highway Traffic Safety Administration report. Meanwhile, passenger car deaths dropped 3.2% to 19,091 last year.


The increase in motorcycle deaths has spurred Congress to add $3 million to a federal transportation bill for a study on motorcycle crashes. President Bush is set to sign the measure this week.


"What we need now are answers, not theories," said Tom Lindsay, spokesman for the American Motorcyclist Association.


Possible causes: a sharp rise in motorcycle ownership, rollback of mandatory helmet laws and an increase in inexperienced bikers riding powerful machines.


Americans bought an estimated 734,000 new on-highway motorcycles last year, up from 230,000 in 1995, said Tim Buche, president of the Motorcycle Safety Foundation.


But more motorcycles don't account for the entire increase. The fatality rate is also on the rise.


In 2003, the most recent year for which statistics are available for motorcycles, the fatality rate was 38.38 per 100 million miles traveled. In 2002, that figure was 34.23.


By contrast, the fatality rate for all highway drivers has improved for decades and in 2004 was 1.46 per 100 million miles traveled.


Rae Tyson, spokesman for the highway administration, said blame may lie partly with states that have scaled back helmet laws. A study released by the agency Monday showed an 81% rise in motorcycle deaths in Florida in a three-year period after the state repealed its law in 2000.


Motorcycle groups opposed to helmet laws point to the changing face of bikers. Jeff Rabe, lobbyist for the Modified Motorcycle Association of California, said more "middle-aged executives" are riding powerful machines without training. "There's a huge group of people ages 35 to 50 who have purchased motorcycles," Rabe said. "But they're still beginning riders."
 

·
That's Mrs. Hawker 2U!
Joined
·
5,293 Posts
I would like to see the stats broken down a bit more....cruiser/harley-type fatalities compared to sportbike fatalities. I am not saying anything, I am just curious to see the difference. Our culture is to wear gear where as the cruisers do not and I wonder if that is reflected in the statistics.
 

·
Combat Marshmellow
Joined
·
13,132 Posts
blndebmbr said:
I would like to see the stats broken down a bit more....cruiser/harley-type fatalities compared to sportbike fatalities. I am not saying anything, I am just curious to see the difference. Our culture is to wear gear where as the cruisers do not and I wonder if that is reflected in the statistics.
i was thinking the same thing.....you are so smart :beer
 

·
All new kind of FAST!!
Joined
·
286 Posts
I would also like to see it more broken down. But let me remind you, that we sportbike riders that prefer to wear gear, are still most likely in the minority. I would guesstimate that there are more riders on sportbikes that don't wear gear... but still would be nice to know the exact numbers per style bike.
 

·
Keeping WI HOT since 1998
Joined
·
2,917 Posts
I know my sister's boyfriend and their group of riders, all rural types, don't wear or even own gear. They're very happy riding in jeans, t-shirts and tennis shoes. They ride CBRs, 929s, etc. And they're a crazy bunch. To be honest, that was part of the reason sportbikes never intrigued me until the last couple years. Before Malik, I never had someone present sportbike riding to me intelligently. Prior to that, it had just seemed a "show off" sport, not something people did because they actually liked riding.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
651 Posts
blndebmbr said:
I would like to see the stats broken down a bit more....cruiser/harley-type fatalities compared to sportbike fatalities. I am not saying anything, I am just curious to see the difference. Our culture is to wear gear where as the cruisers do not and I wonder if that is reflected in the statistics.

Our culture is to wear gear but I see more people on sportbikes without helmets than with.
 

·
Bring It!
Joined
·
935 Posts
benjester said:
I would also like to see it more broken down. But let me remind you, that we sportbike riders that prefer to wear gear, are still most likely in the minority. I would guesstimate that there are more riders on sportbikes that don't wear gear... but still would be nice to know the exact numbers per style bike.
+1 I am surprised when I see a person on a sportbike wearing gear, or on any bike for that matter. I see way more poeple without gear than with regardless of what they ride. I would like to see the numbers on that also but I am not sure what we'd get out of them. Just because your average sportbike rider is 18-30 and your average cruiser bike rider is 25-?? So it really wouldn't be too accurate I don't think. I think if you took the average of purchased bikes that get wrecked in both classes the sportbikes would have a much higher average, and the same with killed riders. My theory on this issue is this; motorcycles have grown in popularity, the study shows that big time. At the same time the bikes are only getting b*****, stonger, and faster and that's only going to continue. A couple ways to get numbers down is to get helmet laws and limit engine size to noobies. That will weed out some of the squids also that way. Just my $.02.
 
1 - 7 of 7 Posts
Top