Forum menu
Ooh, you drive an Ariel Atom? (-:
There would be no chasing, I would sandwich you against the adjacent car without a moments thought 😈
I drive a van and would have thought that most motorcyclists would know that when behind me if they can't see my mirrors then I can't see them.Apparently this isn't common knowledge or they don't see it as dangerous.
As I'm a non-motorcyclists can you tell me which it is?
It's not seen as dangerous, you're a minor inconvenience...
There would be no chasing, I would sandwich you against the adjacent car without a moments thought
and of course, we'd see you in court for reckless endangerment
I didnt mind motorbikes until I drove (my car) on the A65 between the M6 and Skipton. Some right nutters on there that would lead me to pose the question - "Motorbike drivers - what is your problem?"
and of course, we'd see you in court for reckless endangerment
Who are you, T1000?
I would be gone, and you would be on the floor wondering what the fech happened, wishing you never bothered.
I didnt mind motorbikes until I drove (my car) on the A65 between the M6 and Skipton. Some right nutters on there that would lead me to pose the question - "Motorbike drivers - what is your problem?"
Think of the motorcyclists as you being a Downhiller. It's a speed, adrenaline, power, control, performance thing all rolled into one.
riding a fast bike fast is like having your own personal rollercoaster
It's not seen as dangerous
That's fine then I won't have to worry about braking too sharply any more.
Who are you, T1000?I would be gone, and you would be on the floor wondering what the fech happened, wishing you never bothered.
Without getting too ridiculous, you've then opened yourself up to fleeing the scene of an accident, possibly even attempted manslaughter and in the world of technology, video survillance and even head based cameras the same as cyclists use on trails... do you REALLY think your idea is terribly wise ?
Especially if you DO manage to kill me and i/someone has go-pro'd your actions...
That's fine then I won't have to worry about braking too sharply any more.
You shouldn't have to anyway... in that case, they're either too close or too stupid 🙂
So its fine for you to kick someones car, but if they retaliate you would grass them up....
So its fine for you to kick someones car, but if they retaliate you would grass them up....
The difference between a boot at a car and someone attacking me with a 2 tonne vehicle is quite dramatic ?
If i were to kick someones car (as i've done in the past) i would expect them to go to the Police and report me.
Did IQs suddenly drop in the last half an hour when I wasn't looking?
The difference between a boot at a car and someone attacking me with a 2 tonne vehicle is quite dramatic ?
Ahhh I see, so I'm only allowed to retaliate if you deem it appropriate retaliation. I don't think it really works that way.
If i were to kick someones car (as i've done in the past) i would expect them to go to the Police and report me.
Thats strange, I would expect someone to run me over or give me a beating.
Did IQs suddenly drop in the last half an hour when I wasn't looking?
sorry mum
You shouldn't have to anyway... in that case, they're either too close or too stupid
It's surprising how often it happens. I genuinely wondered if it's not seen as that dangerous by motorcyclists.
If we weren't talking about driving / riding motor vehicles I would've sworn weeksy & flow were both 9
If we weren't talking about driving / riding motor vehicles I would've sworn weeksy & flow were both 9
If this wasnt STW, I would have expected a more original, intelligent comment than that.
If I weren't 9 I'd suspect you were both middle aged 😈
I didnt mind motorbikes until I drove (my car) on the A65 between the M6 and Skipton. Some right nutters on there that would lead me to pose the question - "Motorbike drivers - what is your problem?"
Yeah my biggest problem with a motorcyclist came on the A59 side of Skipton - same idiots I assume. Wheelie-ing as they overtook me going up a hill with a blind summit, only to meet a car coming on the opposite direction and having to drop it and swerve in right in front of me. Muppet
Here is the exact spot.
Can you imagine how hard it is to do a controlled wheelie at speed on a motorbike. My guess would be 1-1000 motorcyclists could do the above... it's a true art form on a bike.
I know i can't that for sure.
Can you imagine how hard it is to do a controlled wheelie at speed on a motorbike. My guess would be 1-1000 motorcyclists could do the above... it's a true art form on a bike.I know i can't that for sure.
Easier than doing it slowly thats for sure.
You try doing a wheelie on your bike and keeping it a 5-10mph, them do one accelerating going quick, then report back and tell me I'm right.
I have no doubt it is hard. Does that make it right on a busy public road with solid white lines and a blind summit?
MF: someone did something stupidly dangerous.
Weeksy: wow that is well hard, so cool!
Flow: no it's not anyone can do that!
Donk: Shakes head...
...and leaves the thread.
Weeksy, Flow. Do you have any idea how rediculous you are both making yourselves look? 😐
Actually, you are both SurfMat and I claim my £5.
Weeksy, Flow. Do you have any idea how rediculous you are both making yourselves look?Actually, you are both SurfMat and I claim my £5.
I started sort of sensibly, but then it all got out of hand 🙂
I don't have a problem with organ donors TBH.
I think its very easy for people who have no understanding of the performance of a bike (or a properly fast car for that matter) to percieve things like overtakes as dangerous.
If I'm on A or B road and a fast bike catches me I normally indicate to the left to let them know to overtake me (this is normally appreciated)
As for filtering I honestly couldn't care less, I'll move over if there is room, i'd do the same for a push bike.
Wheelies while undoubtedly cool are pretty stupid on the public road though.
Weeksy, Flow. Do you have any idea how rediculous you are both making yourselves look?
Actually, you are both SurfMat and I claim my £5.
I know, but I don't care to be honest. Its just an internet forum, its not real life!
its not real life!
😯 Nooooooooo......!!!!!
It is real life. Its just real life with stabilisers on.
Car vs motocycles on STW = dogs owners vs non dog owners on STW. 🙄
Oddly the people who are pro bikes / dogs are the ones that are coming out of these threads looking like morons (not all but the more "vocal" ones).
This one still running?
Once again another depressing thread demonstrating just how many drivers who think they are 'awesome' are sadly far from it.
Interestingly enough there's been some new case law recently on exactly this subject. Previously riders injured in filtering collisions have been able to claim 100% compensation, even if speeds and differential speeds were high (up to 50mph in one case).
However, a couple of weeks back a new case was reported on appeal where because of the high speed, the rider was held 80% liable with the car driver held only 20% liable.
Each case will still need to be considered on it's merits but this sets a new precedent.
BURTON v EVITT (2011)CA (Civ Div) (Sir Anthony May (President QBD), Black LJ, Kitchin LJ) 18/10/2011
PERSONAL INJURY - ROAD TRAFFIC
APPORTIONMENT : DRIVERS : MOTORCYCLES : ROAD TRAFFIC ACCIDENTS : APPORTIONMENT OF LIABILITY : INABILITY OF DRIVER TO SEE BEHIND VEHICLE WHEN DRIVING
A driver was found to be 20 per cent liable for a road traffic accident caused when he turned whilst being unable to see an approaching motorcycle being driven quickly and overtaking other vehicles. Where a driver was unable to see what was behind him it was necessary for him to inch out to gain a better view.
The appellant (E) appealed against a decision that he had been negligent and was one-third responsible for a road traffic accident involving E and the respondent (B). E was driving his car at the front of a queue of traffic. He slowed down, looked in his mirror and saw nothing except a larger vehicle behind him. E, when almost at a standstill, then started to turn right into a car park. The driver of the vehicle behind E then saw a motorcycle, driven by B, at the corner of his vehicle, overtaking. B drove forwards, collided with E's car and sustained severe injuries. At trial the judge found that B was driving at an unsafe speed and in such a way that he could not deal with an emergency and so was negligent. However, it was also found that it was E's duty to move his car closer to, and perhaps over, the centre of the line in the road so that, using his wing mirror, he could have seen B approaching and that E's failure to do so meant that he was causatively responsible for the accident. It was found that B was two-thirds responsible and E one-third responsible for the accident. E submitted that although any driver should have been aware of any other driver overtaking on the outside, he had slowed down and checked just before he turned and, to require more, was a counsel of perfection.
HELD: (1) It was common ground that in driving along such a road, there was a need to be particularly aware of the presence of motorcycles and that they might overtake lines of cars. E initially acted with considerable care but, when crawling, he could not see what might be coming up on the offside. As the size of the vehicle behind E's car meant that E could not see clearly, he should have inched out. Where a driver could not see what was behind him, he had to take that step. E's appeal in respect of negligence was therefore unsuccessful. (2) B's negligence was of a very high order and contributed to what happened. The issue of blameworthiness of E and B required greater analysis than it received. Proper apportionment had to take into account the different negligence issues in respect of E and B. It was appropriate to set aside the trial judge's apportionment and replace it with apportionment that B was 80 per cent and E 20 per cent liable.
Appeal allowed in part
I ride a bike with gears and one with one, a motorbike, drive a car, and own a dog that poops in parks, which I remove to poop bins in little plastic bags.
My point?
[url= http://www.chamonet.com/whats_new_article.php?id_whats_new=7013 ]Not all of us are £o$$ers[/url]
Car vs motocycles on STW = dogs owners vs non dog owners on STW.Oddly the people who are pro bikes / dogs are the ones that are coming out of these threads looking like morons (not all but the more "vocal" ones).
Nope, you just take life, or in this case the internet (which probably is your life), too seriously.
Err, no. I was trying to point out that "these threads" always turn out the same way.
flow, when you're old enough to actually have a life let me know and i'll have a sensible debate with you. In the meantime, do carry on as you were.....
I struggle with long sentences. I will say though that car drivers were always a million percent more courteous and generally well mannered when I was on my huge, loud and slow Kawasaki Drifter than when I was on my tiny, loud and reasonably quick Kawasaki GPZ600R. Maybe it's just a Daily Mail-esque reaction to sports bikes?
Err, no. I was trying to point out that "these threads" always turn out the same way.
flow, when you're old enough to actually have a life let me know and i'll have a sensible debate with you. In the meantime, do carry on as you were.....
Debates have rules?
[i]I will say though that car drivers were always a million percent more courteous and generally well mannered when I was on my huge, loud and slow Kawasaki Drifter than when I was on my tiny, loud and reasonably quick Kawasaki [/i]
The clue is [i]loud[/i], they actually knew you were there.
flow - Member
Debates have rules?
Yes, don't feed the troll. 😳
I always move over for bikers. Out of the 5 or 6 lads at work that ride motorbikes all but one ride like complete tools. Where as out of all the lads that drive cars only one is a complete tool! The no`s speak for themselves your mostly all nutters. 40 something born again bikers are the worst.
The no`s speak for themselves
Can't argue with that with such a large sample size. That's nearly half a dozen in old money!
I love motorcyclists. I want to think it's OK to sit a foot away from the back of a car and still have a good chance of stopping, I also like the idea of no speed limits. 90% of riders I come across ride like this but the other 10% ride well, mostly not tossers on sports bikes.
I'm glad that I don't own one anymore 🙂
Yeah my biggest problem with a motorcyclist came on the A59 side of Skipton - same idiots I assume. Wheelie-ing as they overtook me going up a hill with a blind summit, only to meet a car coming on the opposite direction and having to drop it and swerve in right in front of me. Muppet
so actually perfectly in control and no risk to anyone else?
Come on Couger, people who buy sports bikes buy them for the speed thrill, fast acceleration. I have no problem with that as long as I don,t have to have radar to tell how fast they are bearing down on me. Have I got time to pull out or are they going to rear end me at 140mph. The speed differential is the biggest problem for car drivers to judge. Unfortunately a biker will usually come off worse than a driver and that is not something any road user wants. How many times when moving in slow traffic on a dual carriageway have you thought about changing lane, you know where all the cars around you are then out of nowhere a biker speeds through inbetween the cars and you think thank god I didnt pull across. Who would be at fault there?
the car driver for not checking it was clear.
Mirror indicate manoeuvre
Oh give it a rest tj. How can you defend someone doing a wheelie on a dual carriageway at speed. What are the consequences if he got it wrong, poor motorist going right over the top of him?