33bhp, do you agree with it?

Originally Posted by yorkie_chris

So you'd say sitting at a slow jogging pace isn't necessary reason to pass on hatchings? God you must be patient (or have nowhere to go!)

I'd treat it as a proper overtake - wait til the other side is clear then go! I certainly wouldnt' squeeze through on the hatchings into oncoming traffic unless they were practically stopped.

[jamesterror]

I'm on 33BHP, I took mine to a private track and derestricted it, getting use to where the power is, is much more difficult as rev'ing higher, lower gears as you don't have to short shift as much.

Restricted giving it the beans I kick up about 6/7k revs as feels like not much point going further.

I can see both sides of the argument really but i think it should be gone,

passed my test 3 years ago when i was 17. Got a honda bros which is naturally 33bhp and ragged it round to my heart was content. Still enough power to do neccessary damage imo.

Started racing 250's when i was 18. The thought that i could even be allowed to race R6's/R1's on the track if i wanted etc at full power yet i'm only trusted a small fraction of that power on the road sounds ridiculous if you think about it.

2 years is an age to hold a restriction if you go to work on your bike every day, but you imagine its in place for people like the headcases who ride mopeds around town with no mirrors and oblivious to how bad their riding actually is, wheelying up the high street to their mates just generally being c*nty then buy a 600 when they hit 17. Might be stereotyping but they are the more likely to not even restrict the bike in the first place and if they are going to kill themselves, it doesn't matter how much power there is.

I think your made to be scared of 'oooh more power' when you are younger learning, and that limiting is the best way to get experience, i've just bought an SV which is basically a little over double my little honda bros' power and im thinking, is this it? It's quick and all, but not what some make out to be when you start and your told you will be killing yourself if you made your first outing onto the road on a bike that wasn't restricted.

im 18 (just)

and dont agree with it at all ..

reason been my old bike 33bhp would only do 85mph and then take my mates hornet at 33bhp could do 109mph and a r1 might be faster still so whats the point when the 33bhp does not directly dictate the max speed (isnt that what they are trying to do)

i dont know just doesn't quite add up to me, but there again that could just be me

[Nicky S]

im 19 and i have my 33bhp for 2 years as i did my test when i was 17 i think it is good as i feel i have learnt more and become a lot better rider at 33bhp then i would have if i did not have it at 33bhp. ok people say ohhh its slow but at 17 110 is still fast if i had not had the 33bhp then i think id be dead or very hurt i think its a good thing

[Nicky S]

Originally Posted by Neil89

I can see both sides of the argument really but i think it should be gone,

passed my test 3 years ago when i was 17. Got a honda bros which is naturally 33bhp and ragged it round to my heart was content. Still enough power to do neccessary damage imo.

Started racing 250's when i was 18. The thought that i could even be allowed to race R6's/R1's on the track if i wanted etc at full power yet i'm only trusted a small fraction of that power on the road sounds ridiculous if you think about it.

2 years is an age to hold a restriction if you go to work on your bike every day, but you imagine its in place for people like the headcases who ride mopeds around town with no mirrors and oblivious to how bad their riding actually is, wheelying up the high street to their mates just generally being c*nty then buy a 600 when they hit 17. Might be stereotyping but they are the more likely to not even restrict the bike in the first place and if they are going to kill themselves, it doesn't matter how much power there is.

I think your made to be scared of 'oooh more power' when you are younger learning, and that limiting is the best way to get experience, i've just bought an SV which is basically a little over double my little honda bros' power and im thinking, is this it? It's quick and all, but not what some make out to be when you start and your told you will be killing yourself if you made your first outing onto the road on a bike that wasn't restricted.

+ 1 very nice points

[Geodude]

If a 17 year old can drive a scoobywotsit twin turbo car 10 seconds after passing a car test without restriction then why is a motorcyclist restricted when they can both park them up a tree? A donkey with a throttle is a donkey with a throttle.

[Nicky S]

Originally Posted by Geodude

If a 17 year old can drive a scoobywotsit twin turbo car 10 seconds after passing a car test without restriction then why is a motorcyclist restricted when they can both park them up a tree? A donkey with a throttle is a donkey with a throttle.

+1 that makes no sence at all ... if it is for safety you must be able to kill/hurt more people with a scooby then a bike ??

but then again you will never see a 17 year old drivving a scooby unless they are very rich

No. I would give the choice to the rider. Not my place to tell no one what they do.

Most young guns have a restriction called money and this means they are limited anyway.

If your first bike is a turbo charged Hayabusa then good luck to you I say.

[Geodude]

Originally Posted by Nicky S

+1 that makes no sence at all ... if it is for safety you must be able to kill/hurt more people with a scooby then a bike ??

but then again you will never see a 17 year old drivving a scooby unless they are very rich

So no enforced restriction for the rich donkeys then.