SAFEST VEHICLE-MOTORCYCLE
The majority of motorcycle owners are "motorcycle riders", for whom the vehicles are sporting equipment. These riders are too often ignorant of the physics behind motorcycles, seeing them as fun vehicles for daredevil, risky behavior. Too often they ride taking chances because, since they believe they're risking their lives just riding one, might as well take it to the limit. Their stupid antics resulting in destruction, injury, and death make the news almost daily.
A small minority of motorcycle owners are "motorcyclists", hard-core riders for whom motorcycling is more than a sport. These individuals will often delve more deeply into motorcycle lore, especially physical principles of design and engineering, and soon understand how a motorcycle can actually be the safest vehicle on the road.
What!?, you say? If you get into a crash on a motorcycle, you're more likely to be hurt or killed than in a car or a truck! And I'd then ask, do you take the same position as Ralph Nader and the US Government and define "safety" as being in an accident and having no injuries? If so, fine, you're allowed to scoff.
But if you agree with me that "safety" is avoidance of an accident, then I hold by my statement. And I'll back it up now.
There are 5 ways that motorcycles are safer than cars and trucks, 1 feature that is basically a toss-up, and 1 way they are less safe. Let's take them in reverse order:
The one drawback that a motorcyclist has is that the cycle is small and not easily seen by other drivers. All cars and trucks have blind spots that the cycle can be in, and many drivers don't even think about motorcycles and therefore don't "see" them even if in view.
The toss-up has to do with tires. Motorcycle tires are round-bottomed giving a small contact patch with the pavement; car and truck tires are flat-bottomed resulting in a larger contact patch. So cars and trucks, especially with worn tires, can hydroplane in the rain as the water builds up into a sheet beneath the tire. Motorcycles can't, at least not at any conceivably reasonable highway speed.
But the drawback is that any slippery substance, like oil or gravel or even painted road stripes during a rainstorm, covers the entire contact width of the tire and so the cycle loses traction whereas a car or truck might only have a partial coverage of one or two tires. Hit a large enough oil patch or enough loose gravel while cornering and the cyclist is very likely to go down.
The first plus for motorcycles is maneuverability. Any doubters? They can avoid an accident more easily than any other vehicle.
Second is acceleration. Cycles generally have a better power-to-weight ratio than cars and trucks and so can accelerate more quickly to avoid an accident. There are exceptions in the automotive world, of course, but most people cannot afford those vehicles and so they are rare.
Third: braking. Again, the light weight combined with modern brakes means that a motorcycle generally stops in quite a bit less distance than an auto or truck.
Forth is visibility by the rider. With one, better two, mirrors, and turning his head (even with a helmet that cuts some peripheral vision), the motorcyclist has 360 degrees of visibility with no blind spots.
Now for number 5. A motorcycle is more stable, above a walking pace, than cars or trucks.
Consider a hoop or tire. Roll it and it goes straight; tap it to the right and it goes right, then straightens up and rolls straight again. It always wants to return to an upright position as long as it has momentum.
A motorcycle is 2 hoops, inline, a single track vehicle. To turn right, you actually pull back on the left handlebar, making the cycle "fall" through the corner to the right. The rear tire also "falls" and follows in the same line. All the while the motorcycle is wanting to return to an upright stance; if you release the handlebars, it will. So a motorcycle is inherently stable, always wanting to move in a straight, upright position.
Contrast that with a 4-wheeled car. Instead of "falling" through a corner, it relies on friction of the front steering tires. If those tires are correctly aligned, it will track inner and outer lines of compatible radius; if unaligned, they will track incompatible lines, trying to go in essentially two different corners. And the rear tires, fixed in non-turning positions, are all the time trying to go only forward, but are dragged through the corner. This is an inherently unstable situation: a 2-track vehicle attempts to go in 2 or 3 directions when cornering.
But, I hear you say, motorcycles fall over at rest. True, for a cycle engineered so that the center of gravity is exactly in line with the wheels, even if possible, would still only stay upright if perfectly upright. Any deviation from plumb and it falls to the side. That's why I say "above a walking pace" above. The gyroscopic action of moving hoops must be invoked for the stability to be evident.
Recap: a motorcycle is the safest vehicle on the road and, if ridden as though the rider/vehicle is invisible and with due care for slippery surfaces, can be accident free. Not an easy task, for humans are prone to error, but certainly possible.
While helmets are recommended, helmets are not "safety helmets", they are "crash helmets". They do nothing for safety and can even reduce your peripheral vision. Yet many states require them for "safety". In truth, the real safety item is eye protection such as goggles and face shields. If you can't see where you're going, you can't avoid an accident.
And I can't end this rant without bringing up "lane-splitting", one of the most asinine practices ever to be instituted. When you register your vehicle, whatever it be, and get a license to drive, the "deal" you have with the state is you may travel "in your lane". Not "in part of your lane", but in the whole lane. If there is a spiked board sitting in your lane, and you can move to the far right and miss it with your tires, you are not supposed to have a motorcycle on your right using "just that part of the lane you are not currently using".
Even when restricted to moving up when the vehicles are stopped, there is still a question as to why. If a sportscar can squeeze past, should it not get the same privilege?
Sensible motorcyclists will also recognize that "lane splitting" often comes as a shock to unsuspecting motorists (Where did that come from?!), and increases the anger many feel about motorcycles after encountering those motorcycle riders that ride recklessly.
Lastly, my opinionated guide to telling a "motorcyclist" from a "motorcycle rider". Ask him how he applies the front brake. A "motorcycle rider" will reach his right hand out and pull back the lever. A "motorcyclist" will reach out only 2 fingers and pull the lever. Reading this, try it with a pencil for the handgrip; when the whole hand reaches out and pulls the lever, you move to the position of the littlest finger. Using 2 fingers, your initial move is much less. "Motorcyclists" always use the 2-finger approach. In a panic stop, a "motorcycle rider" will over-apply the front brake, lock the wheel, and crash. The "motorcyclist's" move, in effect due to muscle memory in a panic situation, puts minimal pressure on the brake and allows an even, steady pull to stop, short of locking the wheel.
(For motorcycle physics and characteristics, you can't beat P. E. Irvine's Motorcycle Engineering, although, sadly, I believe it is out of print.)
The majority of motorcycle owners are "motorcycle riders", for whom the vehicles are sporting equipment. These riders are too often ignorant of the physics behind motorcycles, seeing them as fun vehicles for daredevil, risky behavior. Too often they ride taking chances because, since they believe they're risking their lives just riding one, might as well take it to the limit. Their stupid antics resulting in destruction, injury, and death make the news almost daily.
A small minority of motorcycle owners are "motorcyclists", hard-core riders for whom motorcycling is more than a sport. These individuals will often delve more deeply into motorcycle lore, especially physical principles of design and engineering, and soon understand how a motorcycle can actually be the safest vehicle on the road.
What!?, you say? If you get into a crash on a motorcycle, you're more likely to be hurt or killed than in a car or a truck! And I'd then ask, do you take the same position as Ralph Nader and the US Government and define "safety" as being in an accident and having no injuries? If so, fine, you're allowed to scoff.
But if you agree with me that "safety" is avoidance of an accident, then I hold by my statement. And I'll back it up now.
There are 5 ways that motorcycles are safer than cars and trucks, 1 feature that is basically a toss-up, and 1 way they are less safe. Let's take them in reverse order:
The one drawback that a motorcyclist has is that the cycle is small and not easily seen by other drivers. All cars and trucks have blind spots that the cycle can be in, and many drivers don't even think about motorcycles and therefore don't "see" them even if in view.
The toss-up has to do with tires. Motorcycle tires are round-bottomed giving a small contact patch with the pavement; car and truck tires are flat-bottomed resulting in a larger contact patch. So cars and trucks, especially with worn tires, can hydroplane in the rain as the water builds up into a sheet beneath the tire. Motorcycles can't, at least not at any conceivably reasonable highway speed.
But the drawback is that any slippery substance, like oil or gravel or even painted road stripes during a rainstorm, covers the entire contact width of the tire and so the cycle loses traction whereas a car or truck might only have a partial coverage of one or two tires. Hit a large enough oil patch or enough loose gravel while cornering and the cyclist is very likely to go down.
The first plus for motorcycles is maneuverability. Any doubters? They can avoid an accident more easily than any other vehicle.
Second is acceleration. Cycles generally have a better power-to-weight ratio than cars and trucks and so can accelerate more quickly to avoid an accident. There are exceptions in the automotive world, of course, but most people cannot afford those vehicles and so they are rare.
Third: braking. Again, the light weight combined with modern brakes means that a motorcycle generally stops in quite a bit less distance than an auto or truck.
Forth is visibility by the rider. With one, better two, mirrors, and turning his head (even with a helmet that cuts some peripheral vision), the motorcyclist has 360 degrees of visibility with no blind spots.
Now for number 5. A motorcycle is more stable, above a walking pace, than cars or trucks.
Consider a hoop or tire. Roll it and it goes straight; tap it to the right and it goes right, then straightens up and rolls straight again. It always wants to return to an upright position as long as it has momentum.
A motorcycle is 2 hoops, inline, a single track vehicle. To turn right, you actually pull back on the left handlebar, making the cycle "fall" through the corner to the right. The rear tire also "falls" and follows in the same line. All the while the motorcycle is wanting to return to an upright stance; if you release the handlebars, it will. So a motorcycle is inherently stable, always wanting to move in a straight, upright position.
Contrast that with a 4-wheeled car. Instead of "falling" through a corner, it relies on friction of the front steering tires. If those tires are correctly aligned, it will track inner and outer lines of compatible radius; if unaligned, they will track incompatible lines, trying to go in essentially two different corners. And the rear tires, fixed in non-turning positions, are all the time trying to go only forward, but are dragged through the corner. This is an inherently unstable situation: a 2-track vehicle attempts to go in 2 or 3 directions when cornering.
But, I hear you say, motorcycles fall over at rest. True, for a cycle engineered so that the center of gravity is exactly in line with the wheels, even if possible, would still only stay upright if perfectly upright. Any deviation from plumb and it falls to the side. That's why I say "above a walking pace" above. The gyroscopic action of moving hoops must be invoked for the stability to be evident.
Recap: a motorcycle is the safest vehicle on the road and, if ridden as though the rider/vehicle is invisible and with due care for slippery surfaces, can be accident free. Not an easy task, for humans are prone to error, but certainly possible.
While helmets are recommended, helmets are not "safety helmets", they are "crash helmets". They do nothing for safety and can even reduce your peripheral vision. Yet many states require them for "safety". In truth, the real safety item is eye protection such as goggles and face shields. If you can't see where you're going, you can't avoid an accident.
And I can't end this rant without bringing up "lane-splitting", one of the most asinine practices ever to be instituted. When you register your vehicle, whatever it be, and get a license to drive, the "deal" you have with the state is you may travel "in your lane". Not "in part of your lane", but in the whole lane. If there is a spiked board sitting in your lane, and you can move to the far right and miss it with your tires, you are not supposed to have a motorcycle on your right using "just that part of the lane you are not currently using".
Even when restricted to moving up when the vehicles are stopped, there is still a question as to why. If a sportscar can squeeze past, should it not get the same privilege?
Sensible motorcyclists will also recognize that "lane splitting" often comes as a shock to unsuspecting motorists (Where did that come from?!), and increases the anger many feel about motorcycles after encountering those motorcycle riders that ride recklessly.
Lastly, my opinionated guide to telling a "motorcyclist" from a "motorcycle rider". Ask him how he applies the front brake. A "motorcycle rider" will reach his right hand out and pull back the lever. A "motorcyclist" will reach out only 2 fingers and pull the lever. Reading this, try it with a pencil for the handgrip; when the whole hand reaches out and pulls the lever, you move to the position of the littlest finger. Using 2 fingers, your initial move is much less. "Motorcyclists" always use the 2-finger approach. In a panic stop, a "motorcycle rider" will over-apply the front brake, lock the wheel, and crash. The "motorcyclist's" move, in effect due to muscle memory in a panic situation, puts minimal pressure on the brake and allows an even, steady pull to stop, short of locking the wheel.
(For motorcycle physics and characteristics, you can't beat P. E. Irvine's Motorcycle Engineering, although, sadly, I believe it is out of print.)