How dangerous is motorcycling?

[beemerman2k]

Thank you EffBee! Thank you for actually addressing the question.

 

I am going to research this issue further as I'd really like to know the answer to this question.

 

I don't know what David Hough is up to these days, but were he still hanging around here, I'm sure he'd have all manner of data to provide for us. In fact, if I recall, he provides a chart in his book, "Proficient Motorcycling" that displays the typical likelihood of an accident occurring by number of years riding. The first 2 years were the most dangerous, with the curve falling after that, but then rising again after around 10 years, probably due to over confidence on the part of the motorcycle operator.

 

I would imagine the motorcycle rider is at greatest risk early in their riding life, and the cigarette smoker is at greatest risk later in their smoking life.

 

But I am curious to quantify the risks we are taking; to me it's an important question. What if it were revealed that there is a 1% chance that you will have a serious accident at some point in your motorcycling life. Well, that's a manageable risk! But what if the data shows that you are 80% likely to have a serious accident in your riding life? Whoa, that's a greater risk than I was aware of! Wouldn't you want to know about these odds this side of the serious crash? I would.

[Dan5620]

Really? I thought your point was no one would be swayed by a stat showing motorcycling being more dangerous than smoking or than what someone thought it was or wasn't? That motorcycling was dangerous however, you assumed the risk and didn't want to be "scolded", nor should anyone scold others regarding their "dangerous" activities. Even those who participated in activities as risky as yours - motorcycling. But now, you need to know just how dangerous your activity is, by a percentage (of some standard by which ways and chances to die are measured) and you're going to research more to determine if it is 1% or perhaps 80% (of something?) Tell me again, what is it you're trying to do? And what are you going to do with it, if you get, whatever it is?

 

On a serious note, if you really are interested, is to visit a web site regarding the Commisioners Standard Ordinary Mortality Definition. Then spend some time understanding mortality studies and how they have evolved. Then conference with a qualified actuary to understand how the data provided in any studies involve are evaluated and applied. At that point you'll have a 'beginning' understanding of the methods involved. Take that knowledge and apply it over a 35 year career of evaluating risks to achieve financial objectives, with a proven loss ratio and asset share profit. Then look into your question. Good luck.

[beemerman2k]

No, my point was that those who engage in dangerous activities are in no position to cast judgement on others who do the same. I thought I clearly stated that point repeatedly, over and over, again. Guess not :smirk:

 

Now, having said that, I would like to know just how dangerous motorcycling is in some sort of an objective sense. As of now, we're all going by hearsay and personal impressions.

[Skywagon]

from this link

 

http://trafficsafety.org/safety/sharing/motorcycle/motor-facts/motor-injuries-fatalities

 

 

Motorcyclist Fatalities Increase

•Motorcycles are the most dangerous type of motor vehicle to drive. These vehicles are involved in fatal crashes at a rate of 35.0 per 100 million miles of travel, compared with a rate of 1.7 per 100 million miles of travel for passenger cars.

•Motorcyclists were 35 times more likely than passenger car occupants to die in a crash in 2006, per vehicle mile traveled, and 8 times more likely to be injured.

•Although motorcycles account for only 2% of vehicles on the road, they make up more than 10% of all crashes.

•Motorcycles accounted for nearly 3% of all registered motor vehicles and 0.4% of vehicle miles traveled in 2006.

•Motorcycle fatalities have more than doubled in 10 years to 4,810 in 2006. Helmets saved the lives of 1,658 motorcyclists in 2006—and could have saved an additional 752 lives if all riders had worn helmets compliant with federal safety standards.

•Some 104,000 motorcycles were involved in crashes in 2006, including property damage-only crashes.

•Approximately 80% of motorcycle crashes injure or kill a motorcycle rider, while only 20% of passenger car crashes injure or kill a driver or passenger in their vehicle.

•In 2006, 37% of all motorcyclists involved in fatal crashes were speeding, compared to 23% for passenger car drivers, 19% for light-truck drivers, and 8% for large-truck drivers.

 

[Dan5620]

So now you aren't interested in determining the risk in order to evaluate, as you state, what the degree of risk is "before the crash." But, as you now state, to determine if 'scoldability' is justified by the ranking of - a danger element - according to individual actions.

 

I think not. You've been directed to the most scientific methodology available to answer your question. Attempting a lesser effort, for an objective and accurate answer, would be as meaningless as the question asked.

[beemerman2k]

I think not. You've been directed to the most scientific methodology available to answer your question. Attempting a lesser effort, for an objective answer, would be as meaningless as the question asked.

 

I guess I'm not convinced of that methodology. Insurance companies have a different criterion than I do. They want to know what is the risk to their bottom line. They could care less about what risk it's policy holders expose themselves to, only what risk those policy holders expose *them*, the insurer, to! It's a slightly different question, and I expect a slightly different answer.

[Dan5620]

You do not have a clue about the science and art of risk evaluation and life insurance underwriting, if this is really what you think. I think you just want to post with no real objective.

 

There is no better source than what I've suggested. You must know that risk management requires an expanding knowledge base, which would include data to apply for your quest. Knowing how to apply and evaluate the data is the essence of managing the risk. It isn't you thinking your question seeks a different answer than what might be the answer.

[beemerman2k]

Dan5620: you're correct, I don't have a clue. That is exactly right. May I have the elbow room and the time to do my own homework and learning?

 

Let's say that after a time, I slap my own forehead and declare, "Now I see what Dan5620 was trying to tell me, I got it now". May I have the leeway to learn and to discover these matters so that I am just as convinced as you are as to the validity of your sources and data?

 

BTW: I am not going to ignore your sources, I am simply going to question all sources to make sure their aims match my own. Reasonable, isn't it? Don't assume anything, question everything. And thank you for the sources, too! Seriously. Thank you!

[1springer]

Bless you!

 

We seem too now have arrived knowing what we knew from the beginning....motorcycling is risky.

 

Now maybe a worth while discussion would be to evaluate the "hazards" and what can be done or what more can be done, if anything, to mitigate a given hazard and thereby reduce the risk ( Like that hasn't been addressed before)!

[beemerman2k]

Yes indeed, Skywagon, your data is very informative.

 

But, what I am looking to piece together is a more detailed puzzle. For instance, for the average motorcycle crash that this data logs, what do we know about the rider? Inexperienced or seasoned? What do we know about the motorcycle, dirt bike? Sport bike? Cruiser? Large touring bike?

 

I'd be very happy with a chart that averaged out, for the typical, long term rider (not the 16 year old who gets a bike, trashes it, and moves on to the next thrill), what are the accident stats for this motorcycle lifer? For instance, I'll bet of those 2006 crashes, extremely few were represented on this forum of lifetime riders who take safety quite seriously.

 

In fact, there's a great question right there: for the average board member, how many miles have you logged over how many years since your last "accident" (as defined by some criterion we can decide upon).

 

BTW: while it would be interesting to compare these charts with that of other activities such as smoking, drinking, air craft pilot, etc, my interest purely rests in the fact that I plan to spend a good chunk of the rest of my life on 2 wheels, therefore I want to know this type of information.

[beemerman2k]

Hold the press, Skywagon's link answers some of my questions:

 

According to the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS) riders of high-performance racing motorcycles, called “supersports” have driver death rates per 10,000 registered vehicles nearly four times higher than for drivers of other types of motorcycles.

 

So this points to young, inexperienced, men riding powerful sport bikes in a very irresponsible manner. While this is good to know, this doesn't apply to us for the most part. Nobody's going to confuse my RT with a R1

[sardineone]

Nobody's going to confuse my RT with a R1

 

In my home range some Harley riders would!

[Quinn]

I guess we all want to know where we are on the bell curve of danger. If we're able to back out certain segments of the riding population that don't apply to us, such as bar to bar drinkers and street racers, then our odds of surviving go up. Then we add in helmet, ATGATT, rider training, and years of experience. Suddenly we're beating the odds by a wide margin and think we're on the lip with other immortal riders.

 

-----

 

 

[Patallaire]

We seem too now have arrived knowing what we knew from the beginning....motorcycling is risky.

 

Maybe not, perhaps we arrived at a conclusion in the question before we had any facts. The hypothisis was stated as though it were a fact, when in fact it was an opinion and the dialogue ensued from there.

 

What if the question was "What is risk?" and how do we define it? Or, is riding a bicycle more risky than a car or motorcyle? Or is skydiving/downhill skiing/unsafe sex riskier than....

 

I am of the opinion that the question was framed in such a way as to state an pre-conceived conclusion. Explore this from another angle and a more convincing round of opinions may surface.

[dhanson]

What is it that makes you think you have to post to a thread after you have finished reading the whole thread? Must be the recognition desired from others, to validate you read the thread.

 

What bike you were on, how you were riding, how much experience may have no bearing at all on the crash. If you investigated the accident and talked to people that actually knew the rider, you may just find out that he just mounted a NEW to him GoPro and was fiddling with it at speed when . . . Bam.

[Mike]

It's within the realm of reason to construct a data set that would precisely predict the likelihood of crashing, dying, losing a left big toe, or whatever, but the statistics that are available are not necessarily geared to any individual's personal objectives in determining these answers. Safetycrats gather data for one purpose, insurance companies for another. The one thing that's common to these and most similar endeavors is that the statistics are gathered and utilized to achieve broad institutional objectives. They're not necessarily helpful in understanding whether Mike, riding a BMW R1200ST to Kalamazoo, Michigan, departing at 5:00 a.m., with 40 years of riding experience but having a bit of stomach upset from last night's chicken quesadilla, and focused on his run-in with a co-worker last week will or will not crash.

 

If an intelligent person relied without further analysis on statistics, he or she could easily talk himself into staying at home, ordering from Peapod and working out three hours a day on the treadmill. Low risk, except when you consider the statistics that tell us that individuals who are socially isolated suffer more physical ailments and live shorter lives.

 

Personally, I find the broader statistics helpful in developing my approach to life. What these broad statistics tell me is that I'm more likely to crash on my motorcycle than in my car. They tell me that if I crash, the odds are much greater that I'll be meeting my Maker. They also tell me that some of my own behaviors can reduce the likelihood of the two preceding statistics catching up with me, though they cannot eliminate the possibility of being crushed like a bug in a collision or get-off.

 

So, I listen, at least with one ear, to what the statistics say. I try not to let them dictate whether I will engage in statistically risky behavior, but I do listen to what they say about how to enhance my chances of living another day to continue enjoying those endeavors.

 

All things considered, I'd like to live a long life in full possession of my faculties. However, danger is sometimes the accompaniment to pleasure. I'd rather take the occasional risk, whether it's steamed lobster dipped in butter or a ride through the rolling hills astride a motorcycle, than to succumb to a life of blandness in hopes of eking out a few more days of meaningless living.

[beemerman2k]

What is it that makes you think you have to post to a thread after you have finished reading the whole thread? Must be the recognition desired from others, to validate you read the thread.

 

Huh?! :confused:

 

I have no idea what this refers to.

 

Let's all just post, and let post!

[RTJohn]

I like that! On Sunday the 8th I celebrate two years since I got my motorcycle permit. No accidents! Woo Hoo!

[RTJohn]

Good information Dave. Thanks for the link.

[beemerman2k]

I like that! On Sunday the 8th I celebrate two years since I got my motorcycle permit. No accidents! Woo Hoo!

 

[ESokoloff]

I like that! On Sunday the 8th I celebrate two years since I got my motorcycle permit. No accidents! Woo Hoo!

 

Don't get too cocky!

 

It is said that there are riders that have gone down & there are riders that will go down.

[Paul Mihalka]

"It is said that there are riders that have gone down & there are riders that will go down."

 

I guess I'm a member of both groups - and plan to get up again...

[sardineone]

Hoping tomorrow isn't my day, here's a statistic that can't be twisted much. I've been riding motorcycles for 43 1/2 years and haven't killed myself YET! So if I haven't succeeded in that span of time, how much danger have I been in? Seriously though, safety on a motorcycle takes some skill & judgement IMO. Those that don't get the skill in time are more likely to become a negative statistic no matter what type of bike you ride.

[Paul Mihalka]

Hoping tomorrow isn't my day, here's a statistic that can't be twisted much. I've been riding motorcycles for 43 1/2 years and haven't killed myself YET! So if I haven't succeeded in that span of time, how much danger have I been in? Seriously though, safety on a motorcycle takes some skill & judgement IMO. Those that don't get the skill in time are more likely to become a negative statistic no matter what type of bike you ride.

I read you and up it... Over 60 years and waaay over a million miles... still doing it... knock on wood

[EddyQ]

Yes indeed, Skywagon, your data is very informative.

 

I've seen this publication before and while I do feel there are some very informative information within, I also am rather confused my some of the statements. "Although motorcycles account for only 2% of vehicles on the road, they make up more than 10% of all crashes" kinda makes you think 1 out of 10 crashes will be with a motorcycle. But, I think it is all based on deaths, so 1 out of 10 crashes with deaths involve a motorcycle. "Motorcycles are the most dangerous type of motor vehicle to drive" is misleading. Why not consider a bicycle? No motor, but I think it is more dangerous than a motorcycle in many neighborhoods. The article seems to support a biased opinion that you are crazy to ride a motorcycle.

 

Maybe it is just me, but I would rather see some of the data than someones statistical interpretation of the data which often is biased to support something. Plus, in order to feel good or bad about these numbers, I would need data for comparison. Like, dangers of walking down a busy street or playing baseball.

 

I wonder if anyone who does these statistics has considered the fact that more people can get hurt in a car than a motorcycle. My wife's SUV holds eight people and we have filled it with kids and parents many times. Under this case, a single crash is eight times more critical than a solo motorcyclist. Plus, my fully loaded SUV will likely plow right over a sub-compact killing everyone inside, but the motorcyclist won't. Maybe it is all in the statistics, but I can't tell.

 

So, what to believe? Where to get reliable data? I'd say we could read all these articles AND pay close attention to local crashes and folks you know who have crashed. If one of 100 folks I know who ride similar to me crashed and was hurt, I'd like to know the details. It is the best possible data. Stuff on this forum and other similar forums is decent data, but we all don't know each other that well and we are geographically different. But, still the info is good. Look at it all once in a while and go for a ride and chill.

[ka5ysy]

Yes, risk can be quantified. Insurance company actuaries do it all the time because it is the basis of the insurance industry.

 

Statistics Y2K from National Safety Council :

http://danger.mongabay.com/injury_death.htm

 

Quick summary, Top causes of death:

 

1. Pedestrian 1 in 610 lifetime odds of death

2. Pedal cyclist 1 in 4,838

3. Motorcycle rider 1 in 1295

4. Occupant of three-wheeled motor vehicle 1 in 155,654

5. Car occupant 1 in 242

6. Occupant of pick-up truck or van 1 in 1,095

7. Occupant of heavy transport vehicle 1 in 9,702

8. Bus occupant 1 in 179,003

9. Animal rider or occupant of animal-drawn vehicle 1 in 36,908

10. Occupant of railway train or railway vehicle 1 in 119,335

11. Occupant of streetcar 1 in 3,580,052

12. Other and unspecified land transport accidents 1 in 212

 

 

So I guess we should all stop walking, riding bicycles and ride in streetcars or maybe Trikes for safety !

 

Having just buried my mother who died from Alzheimers dementia, I absolutely can say that there are things much, much worse than death.

 

If I happen to die instantly doing something I love, that is way, way better than how my mom died.

 

Life is a terminal illness, give or take the luck of the draw, and we all have a certain amount of time here to do whatever, so using the time wisely is probably a good idea. Stupid choices like drugs, smoking etc. shorten that without any good result.

 

I fly planes, ride motorcycles and teach MSF courses, teach scuba diving, teach firearms to police, and do a whole bunch of other really neat stuff that is dangerous. I do not jump out of perfectly good airplanes with the wings still attached, much to the great relief of my insurance agent.

 

When I go, I will have been on and "E" ticket ride here, and will be very interested to see what, if anything, is in the afterlife. I have a great life and motorcycles are an acceptable fun part of it.

 

Live Long and Prosper !

[tallman]

Eddy,

You are correcter.

About 1 in 10 vehicle deaths are mc.

And, about 1/2 of them involve no other vehicle/alcohol.

[VTBeemer]

Risky yes. But a life without risk is dull and boring. Been riding a bike since I was 16 and a licensed white water river guide for 28 years. Both are risky, but both have provided some of the best experiences in my life.

There are degrees of risk and just like in business, the higher risks provide the best rewards. If I was risk adverse, I would sell my bike and whitewater gear and then my bicycle, chainsaw, backpacking gear, fly fishing gear, canoe, boat, my car, power tools, and this could continue to be an endless spiral of risk adversity. Result would be a very dull life.

Hedge the risks with good equipment, good training and a good attitude. And enjoy the life experiences they provide.

[awagnon]

Here are some more statistics: ( I couldn't get the table to print correctly, but you get the idea )

 

The numbers after each activity are: Number of participants - Number of Fatalities per year - and rate per 100,000 participants

 

Traffic Fatalities: 162,850,000 - 46,000 - 28

Power Boat Racing: 7,000 - 5 - 71

Scuba diving: 300,000 - 140 - 47

Mountaineering: 60,000 - 30 - 50

Boxing: 6,000 - 3 - 50

Homebuilt Airplanes: 8,000 - 25 - 312

General Aviation: 550,000 - 800 - 145

MOTORCYCLES (USA): 6,580,000 - 4,810 - 73

MOTORCYCLES (Utah data): 64,376 - 33 - 51

Sailplane / soaring: 20,000 - 9 - 45

Balloon (Hot air): 4,500 - 3 - 67

Hang Gliding: 25,000 - 10 - 40

SKYDIVING: 110,000 - 28 - 25

 

So, during the summer, two or three times a week I ride my motorcycle 60 miles one way to the drop zone where I jump out of a perfectly good airplane from 2 1/2 miles up in the air, and make 4 or 5 jumps each trip. Sometimes I jump from a hot air balloon. So what are my odds of getting killed? Do I worry? At my age (64) I figure lots of other things are competing to kill me first. My father dropped dead at work of a heart attack when he was 15 years younger than I am. As an oncologist, I've seen lots of young people die of cancer who didn't smoke, drink alcohol, work with carcinogens, or have any other risk factors other than bad genes and bad luck. As the previous poster mentioned, statistics apply to groups. As an individual, I manage my odds the best I can with proper training, the best equipment, and use caution and good judgement. And then I quit worrying about it and have fun.

[gottabmw]

...

 

Maybe the difference with motorcycling is that it's all good until it isn't...But biking doesn't take a toll until the final bell rings. Other behaviors tip the scales slowly, but biking can go bad quickly.

 

 

You make it seem like it's an either/or proposition. Either everything is perfectly fine, or you're dead. In many cases that aren't so black and white, the victims probably at one point wished they were dead. Not every crash victim dies. At least when you're dead, you have no regrets.

[John Bentall]

In my MSF group we have a male nurse who works in the brain neurosurgery unit of a busy London hospital. I asked him how he could encourage bikers with advanced riding techniques when the prospect of a brain injury was so awful.

 

He replied that many times more head injuries were caused by youths hitting each other over the head with beer bottles when drunk on a Saturday night.

 

Motorcycling is dangerous - no mistake - but so are a lot of other things....including stupidity apparently.

[Quinn]

 

You make it seem like it's an either/or proposition. Either everything is perfectly fine, or you're dead. In many cases that aren't so black and white, the victims probably at one point wished they were dead. Not every crash victim dies. At least when you're dead, you have no regrets.

 

I was trying to show the contrast between event dangers and deteriorating dangers. There was no one cigarette that tipped you over the edge to cancer; you didn't eat your two hundredth Big Mac and boom! suddenly you had PAD and high cholesterol. So yeah, motorcycle dangers are an either/or thing. Either it's all good or there's an incident and it's not.

 

 

-----

[RTJohn]

Not being cocky. I get lots of good advice from rider friends and this forum. I know that one of the most dangerous parts of riding are the drivers around me. I try to imagine what they're seeing, if they're not on their cell phones or texting, and anticipate what they may do. I haven't had any close calls or near misses. Maybe because being 61 convinces me I'm not bullet proof. I really would rather not get bashed up while I enjoy the one thing that really gives me joy.

[1springer]

Good advice...especially useful up here in the PNW with all the logging trucks!

[New2Wheeler]

This is a little off topic, but does relate to riding and risk. When I started riding on the street a few years ago I read Dave Haugh's book Proficient Motorcycling and NHSTA crash data and found these statistics: 1) 41% of riders killed had some alcohol or drug involvement, 2) 46% of riders in fatal crashes were improperly licensed 3)27% of riders were speeding. From this, I made the following commitments: 1 - no alcohol the same day as riding, 2- be trained and licensed,3- no excessive speeding. By keeping these commitments, I should significantly reduce my risks. Of course, if I could become female, my chances of dying in a motorcycle accident would go down even more!

[awagnon]

Of course, if I could become female, my chances of dying in a motorcycle accident would go down even more!

 

It's probably not worth having the sex change operation.

 

On a serious note, the above post is a good example of statistics applying only to a group. The statistics don't apply to the rider who doesn't drink and ride, always wears ATGATT, takes motorcycle safety training, gets a motorcycle license, and uses caution in riding at dusk in deer country, at night, in the rain, etc. For that rider, we don't have good statistics.

[jrhSeattle]

Anecdotal statistics.

 

35 years ago I had a sudden flat on an R60 which led to a highside at over 50. Happened in an instant, don't think I could have avoided it. Both of us were wearing helmets, long before any helmet law required. Results, ambulance ride, shoulder seperation, bruises and scrapes...........30 plus year hiatus from riding a motorcycle.

 

A month ago a deer ran into me at about 40 (me not the deer), the rt didn't even wobble. I had glanced at the GPS for a second to see how far I had gone and that was the instant the deer made her move. Results, damage to the rt, more damage to the deer, and reaffirming the knowledge that you can minimize your risks on a motorcycle, but not avoid them. I will be more wary riding in the fall now (especially in the wooded areas), the buggers are thick as flies here on Whidbey Island and intent on committing murder suicide.

 

For over 30 years I avoided the risk of motorcycling by not getting on one. I choose to accept the risk again, and I know that I was just dumb lucky last month.

[beemerman2k]

Wow, glad you survived both encounters with fate.

 

To be honest, I feel a great sense of loyalty to BMW because of how well their motorcycles are engineered. Even if they tend to drop the ball in the manufacturing phase with all their final drive issues, the bikes are very well engineered in my opinion. They seem designed to do everything possible to keep you out of trouble, including designing the frame itself to act as a crumple zone in the event of a collision, if you buy that particular point of view.

 

My RT is rock solid, especially in severe winds. Terrible cross winds that have trucks floating all over the roads were unable to seriously upset my RT, it just kept on, even if I did have to lean into the wind to counteract the forces.

[jviss]

35 years ago ...long before any helmet law required.

 

Glad you survived the incidents.

 

Just an FYI, helmet laws go back to 1961 (world's first, in Australia), and in the U.S. to 1966, I think, coincident with the Federal government requiring mandatory helmet laws for states to receive federal highway funds. By 1975, 47 states had them, but when the requirement was dropped in 1977, many states repealed the laws.

 

So, 47 states had mandatory helmet laws 37 years ago! Wow, that makes me feel old.

 

Helmet law paper

 

[jrhSeattle]

I stand corrected John. I will almost always trust someone who can cite some data over my memory! The accident was in 75, so Washington probably was one of the 47.

 

Regardless, I never got on a motorcycle without a helmet, beginning in 1971 in VA. I certainly did not have much in the way or protective clothing then, but am fully armored up now.

 

When I see some youngster on a bike in shorts, t-shirt and tennis shoes, I just shake my head. I'm sure I felt that invulnerable at some point in my life, but not lately!

[Urban Surfer]

If riding a motorcycle was not considerably more dangerous than most other means of transportation, if not all, I would probably be involved in some other activity that stimulated me enough.

If there is little risk, where is the adventure?

I bought a slow bike to prolong the adventure.

[jviss]

I stand corrected John. I will almost always trust someone who can cite some data over my memory! The accident was in 75, so Washington probably was one of the 47.

 

Regardless, I never got on a motorcycle without a helmet, beginning in 1971 in VA. I certainly did not have much in the way or protective clothing then, but am fully armored up now.

 

When I see some youngster on a bike in shorts, t-shirt and tennis shoes, I just shake my head. I'm sure I felt that invulnerable at some point in my life, but not lately!

I'm an allt the gear, all the time guy, too; at least 95% of the time. And, it's Vanson racing-weight pants and jacket, upgraded to GP armor, armored boots, gauntlet-style Held gloves, etc., etc. Imagine how I feel after lecturing my own kids when they roll off in jeans, t-shirt and sneakers! It makes my skin crawl.

 

Oh well, what can you do?

[beemerman2k]

Vanson leathers are no joke. I sometimes wear my Vanson leather jacket and I often wear my Vanson perforated leather jacket in the summertime. I don't like getting caught in the rain with my Vanson's on, so more often than not I opt for my BMW riding jacket.

 

But Vanson leathers are tough as nails. You go down in those and although you'll get up and be just fine, there will likely be damage to the road :smirk:

[Bill246]

First off i disagre with motorcyleing is dangerous, yes there is some possibile dangers as there are possible danger in life in general. We must be more aware of our surrounding because of careleess people not aware of the surroundings. i could easyly be hit by them while walking in a cross walk. As for atgatt i have one helment that will always remind me to wear it anytime i ride. As for air pollution ...locked up in a car with a smoker or its garbage left in side to rot makeing the nice smell, i will take my air outside on a bike. with that all beening said It still comes down to the rider and heor she useing there head and butting them self in safe ride postions enjoy the ride

[jviss]

But Vanson leathers are tough as nails. You go down in those and although you'll get up and be just fine, there will likely be damage to the road :smirk:

Yes, indeed. They used to have testimonials on their website; one was of a guy who got off at about 150mph at Laudon during a test lap, and slid to a stop on the road. Vanson fixed up his gear for free; meaning, it still had life in it.

 

FWIW, if you live in New England and need very good, U.S. made leathers, Vanson has a huge clearance section at their factory in Fall River. While I couldn't find pants my size and selected style, and paid full price, my jacket was about 1/3 of full price.

[beemerman2k]

But Vanson leathers are tough as nails. You go down in those and although you'll get up and be just fine, there will likely be damage to the road :smirk:

Yes, indeed. They used to have testimonials on their website; one was of a guy who got off at about 150mph at Laudon during a test lap, and slid to a stop on the road. Vanson fixed up his gear for free; meaning, it still had life in it.

 

FWIW, if you live in New England and need very good, U.S. made leathers, Vanson has a huge clearance section at their factory in Fall River. While I couldn't find pants my size and selected style, and paid full price, my jacket was about 1/3 of full price.

 

Yes, that's where I buy my Vanson's. In fact, they used to be located in Stoughton some years ago (pre-2001?), and that's where I used to buy their gear. But it's a great day ride from where ever you are in New England to visit their factory in Fall River.

 

Oh, and get on their mailing list! Deals aplenty. If you like leather, or canvas (I have a great Vanson canvas riding jacket that I often wear in the Spring/Fall that is as tough as nails and very well padded), you'll love Vanson gear

[leikam]

Is it possible for us to quantify the risks we take as motorcycle riders?

 

Sure it is. The statistics are out there in terms of fatalities or injuries per mile traveled, weighted by the impact of alcohol, location, training and so on. In some places, you can even get local data and you can take actions that put you in lower-risk categories. All of these things quantify our risk at a population level.

 

And yet, population-level risk calculations are inadequate when what matters is our own, personal experience. The bottom line is that risk doesn't exist on an individual level and nobody experiences life on a population level. What that means is that the objective answer is largely post-hoc and irrelevant to our experience of riding.

 

Whatever risk mitigation measures you take, they aren't predictive of your own survival.

[Dan5620]

I even went to school, but I don't know what he said. But you can bet he'll say it again however, in a different way and I still won't understand what he said. I'd rather just sleep, because sleep apnea is more dangerous than motorcycling, but without the thrill. Remember, it is the repeated thrill that eventually kills you.

[Dan5620]

Is attending an air show, as a spectator, more dangerous than motorcycling?

[Kitsap]

Is attending an air show, as a spectator, more dangerous than motorcycling?

 

If you’re referring to this year’s event in Reno, I would say no. Been there, done that, including last year (my first) and will do it this year if it’s held again.