ADVrider

Go Back   ADVrider > Riding > The perfect line and other riding myths
User Name
Password
Register Inmates Photos Site Rules Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 01-08-2014, 10:29 PM   #106
bush pilot
Beastly Adventurer
 
bush pilot's Avatar
 
Joined: Jun 2006
Location: Thailand
Oddometer: 2,399
On my way to South America I happened to pass through Daytona Beach during Bike Week, seemed like a great big fashion show to me.
The HD riders I did talk to rode in from places like Maine and Michigan, so there were some riders and not just self absorbed fashion players. They were mostly dumbstruck at the idea of riding from Alaska to Ushuaia.
A lot of bikes there probably never killed a bug in their lives, the amount of chrome dazzling, amazing paint jobs and art work on many bikes which probably arrived in enclosed trailers.
I think my bug encrusted KLR and Alaska mud saturated Motoport kevlar(Dalton hwy mud doesn't washout) was a little off-putting for many, I was definitely kinda out of place. I felt much more at home in a seedy motel down in Homestead surrounded by all sorts of ethnic minorities, where Spanish and Haitian French was mostly spoken rather than English.
__________________
USA travels 09'
Anchorage to Ushuaia
Iron Butt #35784
bush pilot is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-08-2014, 11:02 PM   #107
windmill
Beastly Adventurer
 
windmill's Avatar
 
Joined: Feb 2008
Location: Kent, Washington State
Oddometer: 4,084
Quote:
Originally Posted by MotoTex View Post
Maybe not the only honest justification. Could also be that you honestly do not believe that the risk exists for you at all. (or believe that the prescribed gear will protect you from all possible risks.)

Is there anything dishonest about ignoring an uncomfortable truth that lies between those two extremes?

Is ignorance considered dishonesty?
My mistake,
Assuming its an educated choice by an intelligent person.

Only an ignorant or foolish person would think gear has no value, or will protect you from all possible risk, and I didn't even give them consideration.
__________________
"Take care, sir," cried Sancho. "Those over there are not giants but windmills".
windmill is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-09-2014, 05:55 AM   #108
MotoTex
Miles of Smiles
 
MotoTex's Avatar
 
Joined: Jul 2009
Location: Tool Shed
Oddometer: 1,516
Quote:
Originally Posted by windmill View Post
My mistake,
Assuming its an educated choice by an intelligent person.

Only an ignorant or foolish person would think gear has no value, or will protect you from all possible risk, and I didn't even give them consideration.
This is the crux of the matter.

Ignorance (no first-hand experience with the potential consequences) and bravado/machismo/ego (foolishness) are the primary reasons for not choosing more appropriately to increase skills and wear protective gear (i.e.: take PREcautions).

This in no way changes the fact that the odds are still (slightly) in favor of someone without gear riding for a lifetime and never actually needing the gear. The longer they ride and develop skills (even if by osmosis) the better their odds.

In the end it is a philosophical matter. It is still each person's choice and I support that. I also discount all the "burden on society" arguments for requiring others to conform. It is more of a burden on humanity to circumvent natural selection.

This in no way changes the fact that I am an ATGATT rider, though I see no reason to be evangelistic about it. If a no gear rider poo-poos my choices, that too is their right. Just as long as they don't try to regulate my right to this choice.
__________________

This is The Internet. Confirm for yourself anything you may see while visiting this strange and uncertain land.

MotoTex is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-09-2014, 05:56 AM   #109
JohnCW
Studly Adventurer
 
Joined: Dec 2013
Location: Sydney, Australia
Oddometer: 684
Quote:
Originally Posted by blk-betty View Post
Does wearing more gear lead to increased risk taking?

Most here would probably say "no, not for me". I think otherwise.
If wearing more protective gear makes a rider take increased risk (so not a good idea), to be consistent you'd also have to believe that car seat belts make drivers take increased risks, for exactly the same reason.

Both are devices that really have no purpose when everything is going to plan. Both only have the function of reducing or eliminating injury in the event of an accident. So if more protective gear makes riders takes greater risks because they believe they will suffer less injury, then surely motorist will also take greater risks driving a car when wearing a seat belt, fitted with air bags, ABS, improved crumple zone design, anti-swerve control, etc. etc.

We should therefore remove all the safety improvements to cars of the past 40+ years. This will then make everyone fell way more vulnerable driving these death traps, they'll drive slower, and we'll all be safer.
JohnCW is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-09-2014, 06:08 AM   #110
JohnCW
Studly Adventurer
 
Joined: Dec 2013
Location: Sydney, Australia
Oddometer: 684
Quote:
Originally Posted by MotoTex View Post
the odds are still (slightly) in favor of someone without gear riding for a lifetime and never actually needing the gear. The longer they ride and develop skills (even if by osmosis) the better their odds.
Am I understanding your right, the odds are in your favor that you'll never need gear in a lifetime of riding?

I must just know all the crap riders because all have come of at sometime or another.

JohnCW screwed with this post 01-09-2014 at 06:13 AM
JohnCW is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-09-2014, 06:18 AM   #111
blk-betty
bam-a-lam
 
blk-betty's Avatar
 
Joined: Aug 2009
Location: Charleston, SC
Oddometer: 2,247
Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnCW View Post
I think you may have a fundamental flaw in your question/comment.

Anyone with half a brain will ride slower only dressed in shorts.
My point is not to say one rides or is safer without gear.

The question I'm asking, because most bike accidents are a result of rider error, does wearing gear lead to false sense of security where one rides the twisties a little faster, pushes a little harder, is a little more aggressive with lane changes/positioning in traffic, etc., because he is fully geared.

If we all agree that we change riding style without gear do we not do the same with gear?
__________________
Any day on a dirt road is a great day
blk-betty is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 01-09-2014, 06:29 AM   #112
MotoTex
Miles of Smiles
 
MotoTex's Avatar
 
Joined: Jul 2009
Location: Tool Shed
Oddometer: 1,516
Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnCW View Post
Am I understanding your right, the odds are in your favor that you'll never need gear in a lifetime of riding?
Yeah, odds are funny like that. There is some percentage of riders that will fall and have gear or wish they did. That percentage is going to be less than its inverse percentage.

I'm not one of those riders who will go a lifetime, maybe neither are you, but plenty of examples do exist. Uber-careful, mitigate exposure to risks, ride often but fewer miles, etc.

I guess that I was trying to say that it is possible to do so and there is no valid argument against that. Perhaps the overall odds might be against making it a lifetime, but on any given ride I would think that the odds are probably in their favor.
__________________

This is The Internet. Confirm for yourself anything you may see while visiting this strange and uncertain land.

MotoTex is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-09-2014, 06:38 AM   #113
MotoTex
Miles of Smiles
 
MotoTex's Avatar
 
Joined: Jul 2009
Location: Tool Shed
Oddometer: 1,516
Quote:
Originally Posted by blk-betty View Post
My point is not to say one rides or is safer without gear.

The question I'm asking, because most bike accidents are a result of rider error, does wearing gear lead to false sense of security where one rides the twisties a little faster, pushes a little harder, is a little more aggressive with lane changes/positioning in traffic, etc., because he is fully geared.
Ipso facto, would a rider without gear who subscribes to this philosophy then also have a false sense of security that they are safer? Likewise, leading them to take chances like drinking heavily and riding, expecting other drivers to see them, not signaling their intentions when changing lanes or turning, installing lights that don't provide visibility to other traffic, dressing in dark clothes with no reflective properties, etc.?

I don't think that statements like yours can be applied like a blanket over riderdom. Each rider will have their own reasons and reactions to their choices. Some like you indicate, some not. Just because it is possible is no reason to believe it is absolute.
__________________

This is The Internet. Confirm for yourself anything you may see while visiting this strange and uncertain land.

MotoTex is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-09-2014, 06:53 AM   #114
Kamloopsrider
Gnarly Adventurer
 
Kamloopsrider's Avatar
 
Joined: Jun 2009
Location: Rainshadow of the Coast mountains
Oddometer: 416
Quote:
Originally Posted by blk-betty View Post
My point is not to say one rides or is safer without gear.

The question I'm asking, because most bike accidents are a result of rider error, does wearing gear lead to false sense of security where one rides the twisties a little faster, pushes a little harder, is a little more aggressive with lane changes/positioning in traffic, etc., because he is fully geared.

If we all agree that we change riding style without gear do we not do the same with gear?
" risk homeostasis " There was a study done on accident rates after ABS became standard on most cars. It found that initially accident rates dropped mainly due to better braking. After a few months, as drivers became accustomed to reduced braking distances, accident rates climbed back to previous levels.
No matter what safety measures we employ people will strive to overcome them.
I fall into the camp of improved riding skills save more hide than all the gear in the world.
Kamloopsrider is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-09-2014, 06:57 AM   #115
JimVonBaden
"Cool" Aid!
 
JimVonBaden's Avatar
 
Joined: Feb 2005
Location: Alexandria, VA
Oddometer: 48,098
Quote:
Originally Posted by blk-betty View Post
Many of the typical long time HD riders are philosophical non-conformist. Not wearing protective gear fits in with a non-conformist, non-safety, risk taking mindset.

I don't believe they don't think about the consequences at all, at least not long time HD riders, since most know someone that was killed or severely wounded while riding. They just accept the risk of freedom unrestrained by excess gear.

New HD riders, yea they mostly want the badass look.
I think this is likely the case, though the "non-conformist" part I am not so sure of. Many are actually conforming!

Jim
JimVonBaden is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-09-2014, 07:01 AM   #116
Purch23
Dirtbiker
 
Purch23's Avatar
 
Joined: Nov 2013
Location: Oxford, CT
Oddometer: 169
Quote:
Originally Posted by trevorf View Post
If you think you don't need a helmet...you are probably right!
That's hilarious!
__________________
Current Rides - 2002 KTM 200 EXC plated, 2008 Sherco 250, 2003 Shadow Sabre 1100
Purch23 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-09-2014, 07:13 AM   #117
MotoTex
Miles of Smiles
 
MotoTex's Avatar
 
Joined: Jul 2009
Location: Tool Shed
Oddometer: 1,516
Quote:
Originally Posted by JimVonBaden View Post
Many are actually conforming!

Jim
+1

They strive to be unique, just like everyone else they hang out with.

Which reminds me,

How do you catch a unique rabbit?






























Unique up on it.
__________________

This is The Internet. Confirm for yourself anything you may see while visiting this strange and uncertain land.

MotoTex is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-09-2014, 07:27 AM   #118
JohnCW
Studly Adventurer
 
Joined: Dec 2013
Location: Sydney, Australia
Oddometer: 684
Quote:
Originally Posted by blk-betty View Post
because most bike accidents are a result of rider error, does wearing gear lead to false sense of security where one rides the twisties a little faster, pushes a little harder, is a little more aggressive with lane changes/positioning in traffic, etc., because he is fully geared.

If we all agree that we change riding style without gear do we not do the same with gear?
"Most accidents are the result of rider error", sure about that? Even if its statistically the case it's being T boned or someone turning across in front of me that concerns me the most.

Your assumption is that a slower largely unprotected rider is safer than a faster rider wearing full safety gear. I totally disagree with that assumption.

I ride with a few different clubs. IMO, the most dangerous group comprises a lot of older returning riders who've bought cruiser style bikes, actually ride quite slowly, and dress more for image than safety. The safest group comprises guys who've been riding large sports/adventure bikes for years, dress appropriately, and really ride hard.

JohnCW screwed with this post 01-09-2014 at 07:35 AM
JohnCW is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-09-2014, 07:34 AM   #119
Wraith Rider
Beastly Adventurer
 
Wraith Rider's Avatar
 
Joined: Feb 2012
Location: Germany
Oddometer: 1,009
Quote:
Originally Posted by Craneguy View Post
The most interesting statistic to me would be how many riders who have suffered a significant injury while wearing no gear return to biking and now go ATGATT.
How about the ones who where safed by a helmet from serious head injury and still like to ride without any gear from time to time for the fun of it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnCW View Post
If wearing more protective gear makes a rider take increased risk (so not a good idea), to be consistent you'd also have to believe that car seat belts make drivers take increased risks, for exactly the same reason.

Both are devices that really have no purpose when everything is going to plan. Both only have the function of reducing or eliminating injury in the event of an accident. So if more protective gear makes riders takes greater risks because they believe they will suffer less injury, then surely motorist will also take greater risks driving a car when wearing a seat belt, fitted with air bags, ABS, improved crumple zone design, anti-swerve control, etc. etc.

We should therefore remove all the safety improvements to cars of the past 40+ years. This will then make everyone fell way more vulnerable driving these death traps, they'll drive slower, and we'll all be safer.
Well, in fact many cagers give a shit about crashing because "the insurance pays it". Very different to my approach on riding.
__________________
"Why not stay in disguise all the time? You know, look like everyone else."
"Because we shouldn't have to."
Wraith Rider is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-09-2014, 07:50 AM   #120
JohnCW
Studly Adventurer
 
Joined: Dec 2013
Location: Sydney, Australia
Oddometer: 684
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wraith Rider View Post
Well, in fact many cagers give a shit about crashing because "the insurance pays it".
I'm taking it you meant to say "don't give a shit about crashing because the insurance pays for it". Can't say I know to many people who think like that. Everyone I know doesn't really want the hassle of the accident itself, their car being off the road being repaired for possibly months, and their repaired car never being as good as it was before the accident.
JohnCW is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Share

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

.
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump


Times are GMT -7.   It's 12:28 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.5
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ADVrider 2011-2014