33bhp, do you agree with it?

Originally Posted by timwilky

Maybe thats where the 125 requirement came from. As a learner I had a C15, then a Hustler. get on a mates LC and WOW, a different world.

The 125cc learner law was a knee-jerk reaction to MCNs sensationalist headline that read "First genuine 100mph learner bike" when the RD250LC hit the showrooms in 1980. It came to the attention of the Minister for Transport and they hurridly introduced a 125cc limit at 12bhp for learners and a two part test. It's been downhill ever since.

Blame MCN, that's one of the main reasons I can't stand the rag or it's semi-illiterate and lazy hacks.

Thing is, there are still loads of 1970s and 80s RD250s and 250LCs around that survived those days, so they couldn't have been that dangerous.

I do agree with the limit but also believe car drivers should have restriction too. The main thing with accidents on the road aren't always caused by SPEED. Human Error is the biggest cause of accidents. Go to any bike scrap yard and i bet there are 10 Mo-peds to every motorcycle!!!

[Wideboy]

no.....there are some 30-40 year olds that pass with the same mentality as a 17 but can and do go and buy an r1 ect so the system is floored

Having said that i sat my 33bhp right thro and its no different, 125cc to 33bhp still felt like the millenium falcon and when i derestricted it i was used to it by the end of that day

i passed back, in may 2007 and the both tests where the same just i was on a 125 not a 500

I think a limit for younger riders is wise. I did a few months commuting everywhere (2000 miles) on a 125, then DAS in Sep 09. I'm 28 now and I know the younger me would have dropped bikes a few times. That's why I waited!

I think the current rules on enforcement and proof are stupid - bikes should be restricted by a authorised centre, with a cert and some form of making on the bike. Ideally they would be ECU restricted only, with a sealed, marked ECU but this means that only modern bikes would be suitable.

If you want to see some alternative restriction ideas, take a look at what the Kiwis do -

Min Age 15:
Learner Licence (CBT eqiv, plus theory)
- The riders motorbike engine may not be lager than 250cc
- The open road speed limit is 70km/h, even when the stated speed limit is 100km/h
- The rider may not rider between 10pm and 5am
- A yellow L plate must be displayed on the rear of the motorbike at all times
- The licence must be with the rider at all times
- No passengers are allowed

Restricted Licence (Pass test, must have learner licence for 6 months):
- The riders motorbike engine may not be lager than 250cc
- The rider may not rider between 10pm and 5am
- No passengers are allowed

And the full licence comes when the restricted licence has been held for:
For riders under 25: 18 months (12 months with the completion of an approved course) For riders 25 and over: 6 months (3 months with the completion of an approved course)

Bear in mind that the above does allow for a full licence by age 17, In a country with no need to take out insurance, so not perfect by any means.

This whole debate is interesting in the different replies,especially where age is a concern.
My answer to the problem would be progressive testing.
Getting insurance,and the insurance companies would still be a big factor for a 17-18
year old on a high performance bike.
Yes you can have the full monty but only on Fully Comp and that will be £10,000 please.
Also instead of having the full points system[Driving penalty] it could be reduced for bikes over the current limit and two years riding experience for all ages so that apart from silly misdemeanours it is more or less one strike and your out

no its a waste of time.

you can take out a restrictor easily,
no register of bikes or any way to really prove its been done, no legal paperwork to say its been done either.
you can die at 50 MPH as well as 150 MPH

no need to have it at all, esp when a learner can pass a car test and if funds allow go buy a bugatti veyron.

Originally Posted by Milky Bar Kid

I kind of do as it needs to be regulated some how but its a catch 22 situation and I can definately see both sides of the coin

Although personally, I think if they are going to have a restriction then it should, as I think you said in another thread, make it so that everyone who passes their test has a 2 year restriction, with the possible further test.

Why do a further test? You have alreday passed once, its just another barrier and more sodding paper work. Espically the young people why tax them more FFS?

I don't see why just cause someone is older makes them any better, they are the ones who can afford an R1 ect, ride only when its sunny ect, they do seem to crash alot. I wonder why?

This country is geared up to taking the **** out of young people, lets not not make it any harder.

[chris8886]

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.

you have the experience from extra riding in racing and have learnt to control a bike well i would presume in terms of throttle control, cornering and braking. i think only having 33bhp helps riders learn these other things better because they don't have the distraction of big power.

Originally Posted by barwel1992

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

once you're above 70 it's not going to make a huge difference if you come off at much higher speed, you're still in trouble! it's about restricting the acceleration which is the important bit, but without making them stupidly underpowered like 50's and to some extent 125's are.

Originally Posted by Lozzo

Anyone noticing a pattern in the voting? Generally those who are younger and passed a restricted test think it's a good idea and those who didn't or are older think it's a waste of time. Maks me wonder if those younger people who did the restriction would want their bikes restricted if they didn't have to have it done.

I can't see that having a 33bhp restriction has made motorcycling and taking the test any more attractive to anyone, so presumably they'd have done their test and bought the appropriate bike to suit their riding, be that a full on sports monster or a sedate commuter they can gain some skills on. Either way, whatever bike they buy would be governed by the insurance costs, so that's a restriction in itself.

it didn't make biking more attractive to me. infact i was positively ****ed off that i had to restrict my bike and even though i had a couple of 'moments' before i did restrict it. i wouldn't have done it i didn't have to, but i definately think it was a good idea in the end for me.

Originally Posted by neio79

no its a waste of time.

you can take out a restrictor easily,
no register of bikes or any way to really prove its been done, no legal paperwork to say its been done either.
you can die at 50 MPH as well as 150 MPH

no need to have it at all, esp when a learner can pass a car test and if funds allow go buy a bugatti veyron.

as above it's not really about top speed, it's about acceleration

[_Stretchie_]

Originally Posted by zachl

i said im 21, i have had 8 cars, never had and accident or have any points on my license, and i've had a clio 172, audi TT, audi a3, golf gt tdi etc etc.

BLOODY HELL, I'm 31 and I've had 5 cars (not including one fixer upper that's not getting fixxer upped) of a somewhat less than sporty persuasion

Ford Fiesta 1.25
Rover 414
Honda Accord 2.0
Honda Civic 1.5
Landr Rover Discovery 2.5 Diesel boat

I couldn't afford the insurance on a TT right now even with 8 years no claims (fair play son)

Originally Posted by zachl

its about the individual not the vehicle
just my 2p worth

I do agree with mostly, but it is eaier to come unstuck on a bike than in a car and you're more likley to walk away when you've "misjudged that corner" in a car than on a bike.

I do agree with a restriction of some sort but how to make it fair is another thing

31, did the DAS years ago and can deffo see how coming up through the classes would help with your riding oppsed to just jumping on a bike that can shift

All these objections,I have an multiple vehicle types license and only got it by passing tests.
As has been suggested,if you are that good what is the problem with taking a more advanced test,your good you pass,your crap you fail.It only becomes an issue when you are crap.
Ageism is another subject and somewhere lines have got to be set, but further testing should apply to all who want to progress.