Government Survey
 

http://www.dft.gov.uk/stellent/group...ge/613506.hcsp

Tell 'em what you think.

Yeah but be careful, they will use the information to force through changes in construction and use regs, which we may not agree with. I for one would not want linked brakes forced on me, for instance.

Interesting phrasing of the questions, almost as if the options have been chosen by someone who does not ride.

The output of this survey could even be more for the nanny state to dictate to us which tyres / brakes we fit and where we have to get them and fit them. Not sure I agree with that. Unfortunately the data collectors could easily make it look like we've asked for it.

As for mirrors, very few bikes I've ridden have been really good, always had to move my elbow or arm to get a clear view, looks like we'll end up with huge bar end mirrors that will make the bike as wide as a small car, no more filtering. :roll: Would not need crach bungs anymore i guess :wink:

They can't make statistics twist too much.

Personally, I filled it in. Problem with your mirrors? Nope, never had one (honest officer!). Why choose tyres? On the sole recommendation of other bikers who have tried them on the same bike as I have. Who fits them & where do I buy them from? Purchased wherever available, after shopping around for the cheapest, and fitted by those who sell them. ABS/Linked brakes? Can't possibly compete with a human brain for judging the road surface.

I also made several comments in the boxes where appropriate.

All that seems a bit like my response the last time an officer asked me what speed I was going... "Honestly? I don't know, concentrating on the traffic more than my speedo" (I was let off with a strong talking to :oops:).

I completed the on line form but wondered where it was heading. I wondered if they were having issues about self fitting of tyres. but their questions on after market brakes was strange. I concluded by stating that bikers take their personal safety very seriously and would never compromise by fitting inferior parts.

I still believe that a competent rider can stop more efficiently than by ABS alone and that "linked" brakes can be dangerous when extreme braking is required and the rider needs to control the front/rear brake balance.

Burnouts are a little tricky with linked brakes as well.

There's a comments bit at the end.I put "we don't need any more regulation thank you"
That's the bit they ignore of course. :twisted:

Question 1, about mirror visibility, is a bit off. Of course I have problems with rear visibility, so do cars. So I answered No, then

"No mirror can provide 360 degree vision, to consider this a problem is in my opinion ridiculous so I chose "No". However, many sports bikes do have inadequate mirrors.

Cars suffer from far worse blind spots because of oversized a-pillars (and perhaps, poor observation)- it would be far more beneficial for motorcyclist safety for the oversized front A-pillars on many cars (used solely to give an impression of safety to the user while actually increasing the risk of an accident) to be legislated against."

I can see what they're getting at- the mirrors on a 749 frankly suck ass, for instance. But I've done enough stat and survey work to know that that's a bad question.

I stated that having ridden everything from mid 70's commuter bikes up to the latest sports bikes I'd say that modern tyres and brakes are incredible in all weather conditions. I added that the weakest link nowadays are the poor road surfaces caused by lack of maintenance, poorly positioned manhole covers, road repairs, white lines and diesel spillages.

I also added that my my mirrors appear to work better than those on most cars and that vibration is not a problem with smooth modern engines although again **** poor road surfaces can give me problems with forward and rearward vision especially if I am wearing spectacles as opposed to contacts.

Seems like they are looking for an easy way of solving a problem that shouldn't exist if they were doing their job properly.