who owns a Honda CBR 600? I'm pretty much set on getting one as a first bike.

[madeuce]

You need to stop trying to give people advice that will put them in a hospital.


Someone else said it, and they're right... You're the motorcycle equivalent of fleabag, giving stupid dangerous advice based on your incredibly narrow personal experience.

Amazing how quickly people resort to personal attacks when they have nothing else to back them up and can make no intelligent argument. Trolling really that fun for you?

 

[SpatiallyAware]

Amazing how quickly people resort to personal attacks when they have nothing else to back them up and can make no intelligent argument. Trolling really that fun for you?

No one is personally attacking you, merely pointing out your stupid and dangerous advice.

Why don't you go take a look at the video in the OPs other thread to get an idea of why we keep trying to tell you the same crap.


I vote for banning you to keep you from continually spouting this crap before some new rider actually believes it.

 

[madeuce]

No one is personally attacking you, merely pointing out your stupid and dangerous advice.

Why don't you go take a look at the video in the OPs other thread to get an idea of why we keep trying to tell you the same crap.


I vote for banning you to keep you from continually spouting this crap before some new rider actually believes it.

LOL, vote to ban. What "crap" have I been spouting?

Showed that people are statistically wrong when they say supersports are more dangerous. I used statistics that had actually had some thought put into as well, not the notoriously biased IIHS crap.

Showed that supersports have more safety features than a 250/500.

In fact, I had just gotten done saying:

"Take the MSF.
Wear your gear.
Ride responsibly.
Watch out for other drivers."

when you started in again with your BS. Supersport bikes can go faster, that's it. My bike will do over 150mph, doesn't mean I have to ride it that fast...

It's great that you think you are trying to keep people safe. Wrong is wrong though, and you have nothing to back yourself up.

 

[SpatiallyAware]

LOL, vote to ban. What "crap" have I been spouting?

Showed that people are statistically wrong when they say supersports are more dangerous. I used statistics that had actually had some thought put into as well, not the notoriously biased IIHS crap.

Showed that supersports have more safety features than a 250/500.

In fact, I had just gotten done saying:

"Take the MSF.
Wear your gear.
Ride responsibly.
Watch out for other drivers."

when you started in again with your BS. Supersport bikes can go faster, that's it. My bike will do over 150mph, doesn't mean I have to ride it that fast...

It's great that you think you are trying to keep people safe. Wrong is wrong though, and you have nothing to back yourself up.

Like I said the last we got into this - I fully realize that there's no way you're going to wake up until you're on the way to the ER and I'm not trying to talk you out of selling your 600. It's incredibly irresponsible of you to go around trying to convince new riders that it's just fine to start out on a SS just because you haven't wrecked *yet*. You have the exact same arguments as the other new riders who make the same mistake, and there's no way to convince you otherwise... I get it... but keep your rhetoric to yourself and other squidly friends.

 

[JulesMaximus]

Here are some statistics for the few here that like to claim they are on there side. Statistics are only as good as those who take them, but it looks like this site did a little research.

http://www.motorcycle-accidents.com/pages/stats.html

Here's a couple I thought were interesting.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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

What's really funny is that report is probably twice as old as you are. There weren't even bikes really anywhere near as capable as todays bikes when that report was conducted let alone published. I owned a 750cc Honda motorcycle from that era and my 2008 SV650 blows it away in EVERY category.

And, FTR, that website did NONE of the research.

 

[madeuce]

Like I said the last we got into this - I fully realize that there's no way you're going to wake up until you're on the way to the ER and I'm not trying to talk you out of selling your 600. It's incredibly irresponsible of you to go around trying to convince new riders that it's just fine to start out on a SS just because you haven't wrecked *yet*. You have the exact same arguments as the other new riders who make the same mistake, and there's no way to convince you otherwise... I get it... but keep your rhetoric to yourself and other squidly friends.

Once again, you dance around any hard evidence and instead go with subtle insults and a paragraph that amounts to no real information other than your narrow minded opinion.

One thing I have found looking for more information on the matter. The IIHS, the same people that more than likely put biased information into your head also want to outlaw Ninja 250s... It was on their list of factory race bikes that should be illegal.

 

[JulesMaximus]

Once again, you dance around any hard evidence and instead go with subtle insults and a paragraph that amounts to no real information other than your narrow minded opinion.

One thing I have found looking for more information on the matter. The IIHS, the same people that more than likely put biased information into your head also want to outlaw Ninja 250s... It was on their list of factory race bikes that should be illegal.

What hard evidence? So far all you've posted is selected quotes from a report that was conducted on motorcycle accidents back in 1976.

 

[madeuce]

What's really funny is that report is probably twice as old as you are. There weren't even bikes really anywhere near as capable as todays bikes when that report was conducted let alone published. I owned a 750cc Honda motorcycle from that era and my 2008 SV650 blows it away in EVERY category.

And, FTR, that website did NONE of the research.

FTR it doesn't matter if the website didn't do the research. The Hurt report is the Hurt report.

It would be great if we had some more real research on the matter, I just haven't come across anything else yet other than the IIHS BS.

And, FTR, I was alive when the report was done so I find it somehow unlikely that it's twice as old as me...

 

[madeuce]

What hard evidence? So far all you've posted is selected quotes from a report that was conducted on motorcycle accidents back in 1976.

What have you provided other than your own biased opinion?

"The more time goes by, the less things look different. Riders today have the same sort of accidents as riders in the 1970s, except that today they crash much more expensive bikes."

A quote from the professor that actually did the survey.

EDIT: The slipper clutch and the steering dampener on my bike are pretty hard evidence for the safety features my bike has over a 250/500 ninja. Do you need pictures?

 

[JulesMaximus]

What have you provided other than your own biased opinion?

"The more time goes by, the less things look different. Riders today have the same sort of accidents as riders in the 1970s, except that today they crash much more expensive bikes."

A quote from the professor that actually did the survey.

EDIT: The slipper clutch and the steering dampener on my bike are pretty hard evidence for the safety features my bike has over a 250/500 ninja. Do you need pictures?

I was around when the Hurt report was published too. In fact, I was just entering high school.

ZV has posted links to articles written by experienced riders and authors who do not advocate supersport bikes for beginning riders. They are well written, well thought out and detail several excellent reasons why this is so. And they actually make sense...unlike your anecdotal evidence and links to a 30+ year old study on motorcycle accidents.

Honestly, this makes a whole lot more sense than you do.

Why do you suppose insurance is so much higher (especially if you're in your 20s) on a 2010 GSXR1000 than on a 2010 Ducati Monster 1100 S?

Is it because the GSXR costs more? Nope (because it doesn't)
Is it because the GSXR has higher displacement? Nope (because it doesn't)
Is it because the GSXR poses a higher risk statistically? BINGO!

 

[madeuce]

Why do you suppose insurance is so much higher (especially if you're in your 20s) on a 2010 GSXR1000 than on a 2010 Ducati Monster 1100 S?

Is it because the GSXR costs more? Nope (because it doesn't)
Is it because the GSXR has higher displacement? Nope (because it doesn't)
Is it because the GSXR poses a higher risk statistically? BINGO!

Why is the insurance risk higher?

It's not because the GSXR cannot be ridden as safely as the Ducati. There are other factors in an accident other than what bike it is.

That's why the Hurt report is still the best resource out there. It took into consideration many, many other factors.

 

[SpatiallyAware]

What have you provided other than your own biased opinion?

"The more time goes by, the less things look different. Riders today have the same sort of accidents as riders in the 1970s, except that today they crash much more expensive bikes."

A quote from the professor that actually did the survey.

EDIT: The slipper clutch and the steering dampener on my bike are pretty hard evidence for the safety features my bike has over a 250/500 ninja. Do you need pictures?

Ugh... your ignorance is so glaringly obvious in all of your posts... Seriously, it's fleabag all over again.


Your slipper clutch and steering *damper has NOTHING to do with the safety of a new rider. Not one thing. If a new rider is pushing a bike to the point where either is actually being used then they're driving like an idiot and are going to end up in a ditch.


Seriously. You have no idea what you're talking about and it is blatantly obvious to the experienced riders. Just like fleabag, once proven and shown that you're wrong you just keep digging... and digging... and digging... incapable of admitting you're wrong or even just quietly backing out of the thread.

 

[JulesMaximus]

Why is the insurance risk higher?

It's not because the GSXR cannot be ridden as safely as the Ducati. There are other factors in an accident other than what bike it is.

That's why the Hurt report is still the best resource out there. It took into consideration many, many other factors.

Because they are crashed more?

Your beloved Hurt Report even states that young and inexperienced riders are significantly overrepresented in the crash data so why on earth would you advocate putting these riders on the fastest and most dangerous bikes? It defies all logic to even argue this point!

 

[SpatiallyAware]

Why is the insurance risk higher?

It's not because the GSXR cannot be ridden as safely as the Ducati. There are other factors in an accident other than what bike it is.

That's why the Hurt report is still the best resource out there. It took into consideration many, many other factors.

:facepalm;


The hurt report was published in 1981. A "superbike" back then was a measley 85hp. Your posts are so full of fail it's mind numbing. Have you actual read it?? It has to do with traffic causes, helmets, statistics behind training/licensing. There is hardly anything at all about supersports BECAUSE THEY DIDN'T EXIST BACK THEN.

 

[madeuce]

Ugh... your ignorance is so glaringly obvious in all of your posts... Seriously, it's fleabag all over again.


Your slipper clutch and steering *damper has NOTHING to do with the safety of a new rider. Not one thing. If a new rider is pushing a bike to the point where either is actually being used then they're driving like an idiot and are going to end up in a ditch.


Seriously. You have no idea what you're talking about and it is blatantly obvious to the experienced riders. Just like fleabag, once proven and shown that you're wrong you just keep digging... and digging... and digging... incapable of admitting you're wrong or even just quietly backing out of the thread.

There you go again with the insults. At least this time you made at least some attempt at safety.

Do you know what a slipper clutch and steering dampener are?

A slipper clutch might save the new riders ass when they accidentally downshift too far and would have otherwise resulted in the rear tire sliding.

And head shake isn't just caused by coming out of a corner with massive acceleration. There are varying causes of head shake, and a steering dampener could be the only thing between a new rider riding it out or crashing.

Yet, you call me ignorant. You need a clue man.

 

[madeuce]

Because they are crashed more?

Your beloved Hurt Report even states that young and inexperienced riders are significantly overrepresented in the crash data so why on earth would you advocate putting these riders on the fastest and most dangerous bikes? It defies all logic to even argue this point!

Great article you linked...

"Though the study doesn't look at the reasons" quote from your article...

Inexperience riders are dangerous. Bad riding practices are dangerous. The bikes themselves, not so much. That's the biggest thing you just can't seem to grasp.

EDIT: Going by the article you listed, the ninja 250/500 are included in the most crashed/stolen.

 

[JulesMaximus]

Great article you linked...

"Though the study doesn't look at the reasons" quote from your article...

Inexperience riders are dangerous. Bad riding practices are dangerous. The bikes themselves, not so much. That's the biggest thing you just can't seem to grasp.

It is merely stating facts. Facts you seem to be glossing over.

What difference does it make what the reasons are? The fact remains that putting inexperienced riders on the fastest production motorcycles on the planet is not a good idea. Can it be done? Sure, but statistically speaking the odds are not in your favor. This is what you don't seem to get...

If nothing else I would think you'd recommend beginner bikes to n00bs just to help keep the rest of our insurance rates down on the sportbikes we love so much.

 

[SpatiallyAware]

There you go again with the insults. At least this time you made at least some attempt at safety.

Do you know what a slipper clutch and steering dampener are?

A slipper clutch might save the new riders ass when they accidentally downshift too far and would have otherwise resulted in the rear tire sliding.

And head shake isn't just caused by coming out of a corner with massive acceleration. There are varying causes of head shake, and a steering dampener could be the only thing between a new rider riding it out or crashing.

Yet, you call me ignorant. You need a clue man.

Seriously... where are you getting this ridiculous crap?? I'm guessing your squidly friends on literbikes taught you how to ride?

Yet again, everything in your post is wrong. You are ignorant, and that's putting it extremely lightly.

A slipper clutch is designed to relieve the effects of engine braking before hitting a corner, not save a squid thinking he's ricky racer on his 600 banging down gears mid-corner. A slipper clutch is NOT going to 'save' you when you're right at the limit and downshift too far.

A new rider should not be anywhere near the point of needing a steering DAMPER unless they're being a total idiot. Only exception would some hidden screwed up road surface, and even then - not any sort of safety device.

You really have no clue what you're talking about, and you just keep digging yourself deeper and deeper..

 

[madeuce]

Seriously... where are you getting this ridiculous crap?? I'm guessing your squidly friends on literbikes taught you how to ride?

Yet again, everything in your post is wrong. You are ignorant, and that's putting it extremely lightly.

A slipper clutch is designed to relieve the effects of engine braking before hitting a corner, not save a squid thinking he's ricky racer on his 600 banging down gears mid-corner. A slipper clutch is NOT going to 'save' you when you're right at the limit and downshift too far.

A new rider should not be anywhere near the point of needing a steering DAMPER unless they're being a total idiot. Only exception would some hidden screwed up road surface, and even then - not any sort of safety device.

You really have no clue what you're talking about, and you just keep digging yourself deeper and deeper..

You don't even own a bike do you? At least do a little research before opening your mouth next time.

Slipper clutches can prevent your rear wheel from locking up if you downshift too far. It's not a maybe, it's a fact. It can also help prevent engine damage.

Your almost as wrong about head shake as well. You don't have to be racing your bike or even riding like a maniac to get head shake. A steering dampener will make a difference.

 

[madeuce]

It is merely stating facts. Facts you seem to be glossing over.

What difference does it make what the reasons are? The fact remains that putting inexperienced riders on the fastest production motorcycles on the planet is not a good idea. Can it be done? Sure, but statistically speaking the odds are not in your favor. This is what you don't seem to get...

If nothing else I would think you'd recommend beginner bikes to n00bs just to help keep the rest of our insurance rates down on the sportbikes we love so much.

One of the "facts" that the article you are quoting was that ninjas were clumped together. Ignoring that part because it is against suggesting a 250?

Again with the statistics. The last credible statistics in the US don't agree with you. The study in Europe in 2005 also does not agree with you.

What difference does it make what the reasons are?

It makes all the difference. If that "new" rider is a safe rider than they are going to be wasting money and more than likely be unhappy with a 250. If someone is looking for advise, giving them false information because you think it's safer is just dishonest at best whatever your intention.

 

[SpatiallyAware]

You don't even own a bike do you? At least do a little research before opening your mouth next time.

Slipper clutches can prevent your rear wheel from locking up if you downshift too far. It's not a maybe, it's a fact. It can also help prevent engine damage.

Your almost as wrong about head shake as well. You don't have to be racing your bike or even riding like a maniac to get head shake. A steering dampener will make a difference.

I've put literally 100's of thousand of miles on supersports. My 'main' bikes of the last 6 years are a 636, 675, 1098, TL1000, along with 10-15 other misc bikes etc etc). I've done numerous trackdays and spent countless weekends up in the mountains. I've done touring, camping, I mean seriously... you really have no clue.

I know you think you're right, but you are absolutely wrong about just about every thing you've voiced an opinion on.

 

[SpatiallyAware]

One of the "facts" that the article you are quoting was that ninjas were clumped together. Ignoring that part because it is against suggesting a 250?

Again with the statistics. The last credible statistics in the US don't agree with you. The study in Europe in 2005 also does not agree with you.



It makes all the difference. If that "new" rider is a safe rider than they are going to be wasting money and more than likely be unhappy with a 250. If someone is looking for advise, giving them false information because you think it's safer is just dishonest at best whatever your intention.

 

[madeuce]

I've put literally 100's of thousand of miles on supersports. My 'main' bikes of the last 6 years are a 636, 675, 1098, TL1000, along with 10-15 other misc bikes etc etc). I've done numerous trackdays and spent countless weekends up in the mountains. I've done touring, camping, I mean seriously... you really have no clue.

I know you think you're right, but you are absolutely wrong about just about every thing you've voiced an opinion on.

How is it you have all that experience but don't know how a slipper clutch or steering dampener works?

 

[JulesMaximus]

You don't even own a bike do you? At least do a little research before opening your mouth next time.

Slipper clutches can prevent your rear wheel from locking up if you downshift too far. It's not a maybe, it's a fact. It can also help prevent engine damage.

Your almost as wrong about head shake as well. You don't have to be racing your bike or even riding like a maniac to get head shake. A steering dampener will make a difference.

Yet supersports are still crashed more often than cruisers (which don't have any of the devices you are talking about).

 

[JulesMaximus]

One of the "facts" that the article you are quoting was that ninjas were clumped together. Ignoring that part because it is against suggesting a 250?

Again with the statistics. The last credible statistics in the US don't agree with you. The study in Europe in 2005 also does not agree with you.



It makes all the difference. If that "new" rider is a safe rider than they are going to be wasting money and more than likely be unhappy with a 250. If someone is looking for advise, giving them false information because you think it's safer is just dishonest at best whatever your intention.

Explain to me how a new rider is safer on a bike that he's more likely to crash?

BTW-Most countries in Europe won't let new riders ride a bike bigger than 250cc in displacement. They have a graduated licensing system there that takes riders up in levels over the course of a few years before they can get a bike over 600cc...I wonder why that is?