New Test On Telly

[yorkie_chris]

Originally Posted by leedsmatt7

Am I rite in thinking that the CBT hasnt changed?
surely they should have started there? By making that a damn site harder there wouldnt be some many accidents on those.
THink about it, have you ever seen a twist and go thats over a year old that doesnt have road rash on it? Ok so a 20mph slide is very rarely fatal and bigger bikes go faster but if it was harder to just get on the road then people would treat it with more respect.

Binning it at 20mph teaches you a lot more respect for things when you've had to dig some bloody bits of denim out of your ars cheek!

Better to crash at 20mph early on than to leave it a bit longer and do it at 60...

That's the contradiction of the licensing structure though in my opinion. Most 125s do 60mph, and other road hazards are just as lethal. Yet they let you out solo after just half a day without a proper test........then make you jump through hoops in the name of "road safety" when basically all you want to change is the size, power and handling ability of the machine you're allowed to ride. Nothing else is different, all of those road hazards and other road users are just as dangerous.

So they're saying it's safe to ride amongst all these hazards with almost no tuition, but it's not safe to do so if your bike is a bit more capable of keeping up with traffic.

[fizzwheel]

Originally Posted by Magnum

No, but for the test it's the type of thing you would be looking out for constantly on the road part and slowing down when necessary.

True but what about the unexpected or un-anticipated. i.e as said above little kid running out into the road between a parked car. You cant black and white say "you should have anticipated it" because sometimes as you'll find out when you've done a few more miles sh*te happens...

Originally Posted by Magnum

The ability to fling the bike round an 'obstacle' will come after experience rather than throwing new riders into it, resulting in some of them falling off.

Some people never learn it though. I've seen riders with alot of time in the saddle that cant flick their bike through a sequence of bends, let alone an obstacle in the middle of the road.

I think its better to learn control in a controlled environment at 30mph rather than on the road at 60mph. Are the people that are falling on their tests falling because they havent been taught properly ?

Most 125s do 60mph, and other road hazards are just as lethal. Yet they let you out solo after just half a day without a proper test........

But Compulsary Basic Training is just what is says in the name! Its an assesment to determine wether that person is safe enough to operate a samll bike on the public highway without instruction, biking generally being a solo thing!.

That's the contradiction of the licensing structure though in my opinion.

He!He! Chav boy passes his test in a Micra but can then drive a Ferrari! Thats a contradiction!

nb650

Originally Posted by yorkie_chris

Binning it at 20mph teaches you a lot more respect for things when you've had to dig some bloody bits of denim out of your ars cheek!

Better to crash at 20mph early on than to leave it a bit longer and do it at 60...

oh i'd totally rather be introduced to tarmac at 20 as opposed to 60mph any day, but if you fall 3 times at 20 and get back up no fuss just some minor cuts and bruses. You wont learn as much about riding as if you'd bined it once at 60.

If your getting away with coming off then you wont respect the dangers of coming off is what I guess im tryin to say.

A monkey can point and shoot a gun, but would you want it next to you on the front line..

Think about it.

Originally Posted by nakedblue650

But Compulsary Basic Training is just what is says in the name! Its an assesment to determine wether that person is safe enough to operate a samll bike on the public highway without instruction, biking generally being a solo thing!.



He!He! Chav boy passes his test in a Micra but can then drive a Ferrari! Thats a contradiction!

nb650

You miss the point completely I think. 125s aren't magically safer somehow, arguably for a sensible new rider a 125 is more dangerous than a 500 would be (ask anyone who's had car after car after lorry bombing past them down an A road). If a half day on a 125 = "safe" for 2 years, then why can't half a day on a 500 = safe for 2 years.

The contradiction is that the testing structure suggests one thing is safe, while then saying that exactly the same thing (but with arguable safer equipment) is not so you have to jump through hoops.

The car license structure isn't a contradiction. They are saying "pass your test in a car and you can drive a car". They don't distinguish between different types or require different tests, there is no opportunity for contradiction.

[fizzwheel]

I found this on another forum.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ctIfIXlPmYk

Interesting to watch how tiny the swerve is... perhaps somebody who isnt capable of making that move without falling off, hasnt

1. Had enough training of the right sort.

2. Shouldnt pass the test anyway.

This is a run through of the entire thing

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m5f8Y...eature=related

I know he's on a rip snorting, tarmac shredding ER5 but all looks achieveable on a 125 TBH.

Properganda to get Motorbikes off of the road imo.

[yorkie_chris]

The "swerve" test looks like the same sort of swerve you do to avoid running over road kill or something. Do you even have to begin the manoeuvre in the middle of the lane?