I had to lay 'er down

You guys? He crashed. I was miles away.

'N loud pipes save lives!

<iframe src="//www.youtube.com/embed/hmwPkisglhs" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="315" width="420"></iframe>

I love it - great post. I always suspected that there was a strong inverse correlation between the length of your mullet and said mullet wearer's IQ -- now we have the proof.

Kent

^sfb.

Most Harleys are bought by people who really don't belong on a motorcycle. Makes all of us look bad.

I live in "Mullet Central" and I can confirm the scientific, statistical validity of your thesis: there is a nearly perfect inverse correlation between the length of one's mullet and said mullet wearer's IQ.

i disagree.some harleys are bought by people who dont belong on a motorcycle.

Oh well...

My front dual disks get plenty of usage...

There are a lot of responses and comments here about:
"how can you say all crashes can be avoided"
"you guys must be perfect riders in a perfect world"
"what about the guy that rear ended me"
"what about truck tires coming across the centerline"

and many others. Truth is not all crashes can be avoided. Some crashes really are instances of being in the wrong place at the wrong time, doing the wrong thing. But, I still hold to the attitude that MOST crashes CAN be avoided. Because that ATTITUDE is what guides my riding choices and prepares me for the risks in riding. It's a prepatory attitude rather than a reactionary attitude, and it has worked VERY well for me for well over 20 years and 200,000+ miles.

Like riders who claim "I had to lay it down" reflects an attitude of "I could do nothing about it and this is the result." In my 42+ years of riding, mostly up in Wisconsin, ride from March to end of November, I have never had to lay it down. My attitude is "it's ALL up to ME first to rider the best I can, every ride, and ONLY I can do something about the results."

There's a further aspect to avoiding crashes and that's keeping aware and keeping an escape route planned. Frex, a rear ender when you are at a light is generally classed as unavoidable and it may be, but in some cases, you can position yourself to get out of the way if a non-stopping truck comes your way AND you keep a weather eye out in your mirror.

I'm one who's never been down or injured on the street (dirt is deadly) but recognize at least a component of that has been luck. Some it hasn't been, though.

After having my Blazer rear-ended (before the 2nd payment was made) while stopped in a line of traffic at a light, I keep a constant vigil on the mirrors and leave a little extra space to move if needed. I can 100% certainly say that this habit has prevented repeats at least twice. Once I had to punch it and head into someones yard. The reason, a courier car, skidded to a stop just inches behind the car I had been behind. Without the space to manuever, there would have been three cars involved in the accident rather than the near-miss it was.

I try to pound into my kids heads that just because you are stopped doesn't mean you don't have to pay attention. My wife didn't get it until her car was rear-ended. Now she tells me she now understands my obsession with checking mirrors.

About 3 years ago or so I was stopped in a line for a flag man on a built up commercial road. I got rear ended in my 2001 Escort by a 92 year old man i a Malibu going 35mph. I never saw it coming, but the National Guardsman in front of me did! My car was totalled, and also slammed into the Guardsman's car. Just a few days earlier I had absentmindedly adjusted the headrest on my seat. From what the Guardsman said, "classic whiplash," that probably saved my neck. I needed the help of a chiropractor a week later for the reemergence of a previous couple of dislocations from a roofing accident in my youth.

I was once nearly the meat in the bumper sandwich between two cars, on my cycle. Then years later, I was in traffic on my bike with a fellow MSF instructor next to me on his bike. I stopped behind a car in front of me, looked over to Bruce, and the quirky smile on his face told me he had a comment to make.

I asked. He said, "why you stopped so close to the car in front of you?"

I looked, and and yeah, no reason to be so close. Ever since then I always stay at least two bike lengths back, more if the vehicle in front is bigger/taller/wider, and NEVER centered on the vehicle in front of me. That way, while watching my mirrors I know I can move if I have too. In my car or pickup, I always stop back far enough to see the tires on the road of the vehicle in front of me. That way I always have room to exit if I need too.

So in this sense, it IS a way to avoid being rear ended. In the realm of cycle accidents, being rear ended is one of the least likely. But whenever I stress how MOST accidents can be avoided, someone always argues the point with: being rear ended, car crossing the median, etc, etc. But that is missing the point. If MOST crashes CAN be avoided, take that attitude in preparing yourself to ride. If you don't, then whatever can happen to YOU, likely will happen to YOU. But really, only YOU control the majority of the outcome.

this was in the fargo n.d. forum this morning.

Motorcyclist injured when car runs red light in Fargo

FARGO – A motorcyclist was injured Saturday afternoon when a car ran a red light, forcing him to lay down his bike to prevent a worse crash, according to the Fargo Police Department. By: Ryan Johnson, INFORUM

FARGO – A motorcyclist was injured Saturday afternoon when a car ran a red light, forcing him to lay down his bike to prevent a worse crash, according to the Fargo Police Department.
Sgt. Mark Lykken said the crash was reported at 4 p.m. at the intersection of NP Avenue and North University Drive.
The motorcycle driver, Matthew Peterson, 31, of Moorhead, was eastbound on NP Avenue in the left turn lane as he approached the intersection with a green light, but noticed a northbound car on University Drive was running a red light in front of him.
“He slammed on the brakes, but knew he wouldn’t stop so he intentionally put the motorcycle on its side,” Lykken said.
Peterson’s motorcycle slid into the rear wheel of the 2003 Honda, causing an estimated $4,000 of damage to the 2007 Harley-Davidson.
Lykken said Peterson was wearing a helmet, but he was brought by ambulance to Sanford Medical Center in Fargo for an apparent non-life-threatening injury. His condition was un-known Sunday.
The driver of the car, Michelle Schnarr, 28, of Fargo, was cited for disobeying a traffic control signal.
<hr>check the quote from the cop in the middle of the article. BTW i have a 07 harley and my brakes seem to work fine. they definitely have a higher coefficient of friction than chrome!

It's cheaper to lay'er down then take it to the dealer for new brake pads. : )

Hey farmerstu, et al...

Perhaps we ought to direct Sgt Lykken to this thread...?

(Pls remember to play nice!!)



Sergeant Mark Lykken

Beat 13

(701) 476-4098

mlykken@cityoffargo.com



Just a thought.
.
.
.

Dear Sgt Lykken,


It has come to my attention that you are perpetuating a long-standing motorcycle myth in your police statements regarding the accident involving motorcyclist Mathew Peterson and red-light runner Michelle Schnarr.

( http://www.wday.com/event/article/id/95799/ )

While it is quite apparent that M. Schnarr is culpable for running a red light, the article repeats three times that
M. Peterson DELIBERATELY dropped his motorcycle on the ground so as to avoid a worse accident.

This is utter nonsense.

No motorcycle safety course in the world advocates this practice.

Keeping the best surface available for deceleration, known as the "contact patch", firmly on the ground allows for a quicker stop than sliding metal in e v e r y instance.

( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contact_patch )

I understand that folks want to avoid being caught between motorcycle and motor vehicle;
however, "layin' 'er down" is simply not an acceptable approach.

It is, in fact, a widely derided practice, and is well understood to be a result of people's inability to acknowledge that they panicked and lost control of their motorcycle, often whilst inexpertly applying the rear brakes.

I urge you to ask a few motor officers' opinions on this matter, and in particular, ask them their own technique for dropping their moving police motor.

If indeed they have such a technique, I would be greatly interested in discovering just who exactly is teaching it!!

For further reference, and a rather entertaining read, I refer you to: http://www.advrider.com/forums/showthread.php?t=875537

I look forward to hearing your thoughts on this matter.


Thank You for Your Service.


DR
.
.
.

did you e-mail Sgt.Lykken? I would very much like to read his thoughts on this.
thanks for picking this up.
stu

The officer reported:
"“He slammed on the brakes, but knew he wouldn’t stop so he intentionally put the motorcycle on its side,” Lykken said.
Peterson’s motorcycle slid into the rear wheel of the 2003 Honda, causing an estimated $4,000 of damage to the 2007 Harley-Davidson.""

I would hope that the officer reported was what the rider said and not what the officer inferred on the report. I wonder how it is the rider KNEW he couldn't stop in time and WHY he thought sliding out of control into the path of the car was better than REALLY applying the brakes properly to reduce the impact force. Even if he felt he would not stop in the space allowed, crashing the bike (let's be real, he did not "intentionally lay it down") reduces the friction element, and he would just as likely slide into the car, or worse, slide under it.

My bet is he tromped on the rear brake, the bike slid out and low sided, which the rider interpretted as "laying it down intentionally". He was in the left turn lane to go northbound, the car was approaching the intersection from his right, also going northbound. Beauty of the internet means its easy to look up the scene of the crash. This was a downtown, multi-lane intersection with left turn lanes means the intersection was three lanes wide, each way. That means the center was 60' to 72' across. Also means the posted speed limits are likely 25 mph, even if N University Ave is Business HWY 81.

Assuming his left turn approach speed was less than 30 mph, means the bike could stop in about 45' if braked effectively. Also assuming he was still in the straight line approach to the left turn zone, means he should have been able to brake hard, and then perhaps swerve around the back of the car as it went through. Since the report said his bike slid into the rear wheel of the car, means HAD he been braking hard properly, the car would likely have passed through before he got to it. He screwed up. But to this day I bet he is convinced he "hadda lay er down!" Probably also claims, "there was nothing else I could do!"

Applying some analysis to the crash almost always gives proof that the rider screwed up. But that kind of report is never made public for people and riders to understand what likely did happen. No, everyone simply hears, he had to lay it down, the car didn't yield, car turned left into the rider, rider did NOT maintain control, rider did NOT brake effectively. Nope, we never get those reports that would be something everyone coud actually learn from.

So he's in a turn lane, which implies "turning"- and "slams on the brakes".

Well, that'll get him on his side, for sure.

Had he straightened the bike and then got on the brakes properly, he would have most likely missed the car altogether.

OTOH, since he hit the car, the driver gets a citation and a hit on her driving record that otherwise wouldn't have happened, hopefully with a little mental trauma to make her put down the cell phone and fscking drive; her insurance gets to pay a bunch of bills and fix dude's bike, with only a little wear and tear on dude, who might just decide motorcycles is dangerous and quit riding before he gets badly hurt.