Quote:
Originally Posted by cillovely
I got my licence thru a three full day course and I think something like that should be manditory. It had both class room and practical lessons on small bikes. Those instructors are still in my head while I drive. My favorite quote from one of them "drive like they are all out to f'n kill you". And a most of it is not the motorcycles and the people on them. It's the idiots in thier big old suv's and fancy cars talking on thier cell phones, not paying one bit of attention to anything around them let alone someone on a bike. It's up to you to pay attention to the idiots and predict what may happen.
|
The tiered system won't help too much with other drivers, that's why I stated in my first post in the thread that the requirements for an operator's license should be tougher too. I agree, the MSF class you took should be mandatory unless the rider can pass the MSF ERC.
Quote:
Originally Posted by cillovely
Although I do agree somewhat with your tiered system, I think 300 or less cc's for the first 5000 miles is a bit much. It's not like we live in a climate where we can ride all year round. I'm lucky if I can squeeze in 3000 miles a year. Also don't forget off road miles for those who ride dirt bikes and atv's too.
|
Perhaps it could be 5000 miles or two years, whichever comes first; the point is I want people to have plenty of riding experience before they move up to more challenging bikes. ATV experience would make no difference to me, there's few skills that transfer. Dirt bike experience would be a huge advantage for the rider, but I still think they should have on-road experience with little bikes before graduating to bigger bikes.
Quote:
Originally Posted by cillovely
After one spring/summer I went from my first learner bike which was a 400 cc Honda straight to my 1200 cc Harley Sportster Custom. And have been on that since 1999. We also had a Honda CBR 900RR which I loved to ride here and there. Those super sport bikes are so easy to drive and balanced. The issue with them is you don't feel how fast you can go and the next thing you know you are doing 100+ on the highway. Way easier than a cruiser to drive, not as heavy.
|
I think supersports are more challenging to ride than a low-slung cruiser like a softtail, that's why I think there should be some sort of loophole if someone only wants to ride a big but low and under-powered bike like a softail. That way the softail could be classified as a <750cc bike and require only two tiers of licensing. I still think everyone should put the time in on <300cc bikes first though. If someone wants to ride a CBR900RR or a faster bike, I think they should have more experience and be tested for higher skills.
Quote:
Originally Posted by cillovely
Lately I've been hopping on hubbys bike when I can, a 2000 Heritage Softail. That's like riding a Cadillac compared to my bike. BTW, my Sporty is way more like riding a real Harley than his, I don't have rubber mounted engine, fuel injection and all the other fancy bells and whistles.
|
I imagine that softail is a wonderful bike for comfy cruising. I'm partial to sportbikes myself and own a Kawasaki ZX9R that I've put just over 100,000 miles on. It can get sideways very quickly with just a small change in throttle position while leaned over in a corner and is a terrible bike for a beginner IMO.
One other idea I had, there should be credit given for having a road racing (CCS) license. If someone is willing to attend racing school, pass the test, and race on a track, I'm cool with letting them go right into the second tier of street bike licensing.