rules! made by people with no experience?

Public apologies from me then, I shall spoof my IP to the corner...

Originally Posted by Person

"Technically" riding without a lisense? What does that really mean? My insurance stands up in an accident and stands up to the police. It's good enough for me.

Do you wipe your sons @rse as well? Bet you sit outside college for him as well on the dot ready to pick him up.

I rode for one year on a geared 50cc bike and i now ride a full power 400, well over 20000 miles under my belt, which may not seem a lot to you old folk, but it's a hell of a lot more than some 25 year old DASer whose just gone out and bought the bike with the most numbers in its name.

There is nothing to "handle" on a full power bike, it's not a weapon, it's a motorbike and if you don't have the skills needed to control it then you shouldn't be anywhere near it, limiting the power will do nothing other than make you accelerate a bit slower, you can still kill yourself at 100 remember. The throttle does go both ways.

You wrote a good reply and had some valid points, but you had to go and ruin it by adding a rediculous statement at the end didn't you.

Person - Maybe you should learn how to spell licence before preaching about how your's isn't void. Your opinions are also of someone who doesn't know their a*se from their elbow.

Apologises for the non PC image, but this guy has p***ed me off

If I understood this correctly (and once again I apologise to SaintMatt for thinking it was him), Person's already got his prize, and it looks to be this one:



But then again, I might be wrong yet again, and Dr. "Person" Watson will be along shortly to correct myself.

Originally Posted by Filipe M.

I apologise to SaintMatt for thinking it was him

S'alright mate, I can see the logic Thanks for apologising. I shall end by saying I don't think the decision to de-restrict my bike has been a bad one, I think I have the sense and respect for the bike to not have any adverse affects, obviously this is not the case for everyone so it would be hard to make a rule to generalise, unless more tests are put in place. And I also agree strongly with this comment

Apart from that, I'm not all that bothered by the whole derestricted bit. If people are going to cause me a problem at 70bhp then they're almost certainly going to cause one at 33bhp, so it makes very little difference.

I'd rather keep friends on this site, whether they agree or disagree with my actions. I don't have any hard feelings or bear grudges at all

Matt...Never mind all of that namby pamby talk! I am still waiting with my stale popcorn for Roundabout Madness-The Sequel! :P

Im gonna back Matt on this one. Having known him from other forums I consider him to be a sensible rider and someone who knows his limits. Yes he is technically in the wrong by derestricting early, but dont we all push the boundaries of the law everytime we go out and test the speed limits of this fair land when we think the conditions are right I would give matt the same grace and say that he has weighed up the pros and cons and decided to derestrict.

its not the bike its the nutter on top that matters. You can cause a world of hurt for you and other people on a 50cc. The power of the bike can be a factor but not a major one IMHO.

Originally Posted by Person

"Technically" riding without a lisense? What does that really mean? My insurance stands up in an accident and stands up to the police. It's good enough for me.

Do you wipe your sons @rse as well? Bet you sit outside college for him as well on the dot ready to pick him up.

I rode for one year on a geared 50cc bike and i now ride a full power 400, well over 20000 miles under my belt, which may not seem a lot to you old folk, but it's a hell of a lot more than some 25 year old DASer whose just gone out and bought the bike with the most numbers in its name.

There is nothing to "handle" on a full power bike, it's not a weapon, it's a motorbike and if you don't have the skills needed to control it then you shouldn't be anywhere near it, limiting the power will do nothing other than make you accelerate a bit slower, you can still kill yourself at 100 remember. The throttle does go both ways.

You wrote a good reply and had some valid points, but you had to go and ruin it by adding a rediculous statement at the end didn't you.

"Person"...

If you got that bloody great chip off your shoulder and thought logically for a few minutes you would realise that by riding an unrestricted bike with only a 33bhp licence (2 C's in licence by the way, were not the 51st state quite yet...) you are riding a vehicle for which you are not licenced; therefore "technically riding without a licence"..... Has that sank in ???

So, we take the situation that somebody is riding a motorcycle of say 65bhp, on a restricted licence, this also means that their insurance is also void, so in the case of a serious accident, they could find themselves with a pretty hefty fine and no licence. Possibly even eating porridge for breakfast and being careful in the shower for a few months as well....

I'm glad you thought I made some valid points, and the piece at the end was just there to try and get my point across. If everybody decided to do as they please because they didn't like a particular law then we would really be in some deep sh*t, wouldn't we.....

Whether YOU like it or not, the law is the law, and riding without a licence or insurance is bloody irresponsible and cannot be condoned.

I read with interest your comment "There is nothing to "handle" on a full power bike". So does that mean that after you've ridden a 125 for a year you should be let out on a litre sportsbike ?? I just want to understand what you mean by the statement... The reason that somebody with very little experience finds it difficult to get insurance a powerful bike is for exactly that reason, most can't handle it and are not responsible to be left to do so.

In fact, one has to ask if you are irresponsible enough to ride without the correct insurance and licence, are you exactly the type of person the law was put there to protect ??

And just so you know, my son's been wiping his own backside for about 16 years now, but says thanks for the thought.

.

I'm personally with mr Jelly on this one,

the only reason i went from a 50cc moped to a restricted 650 was because i'd been riding mopheads for 3 years and the restricted sv was in the shop.

while steve's kid might feel slow on a 125 for a year, he'll get better experience from riding it and hopefully won't have any of the guarenteed early accidents we all have when we launch a bike into the next field (read hedge )

but Person, please don't come on here talking like you own the place after only two posts, you're entitled to your opinion, but not necessarily to voice them

Originally Posted by Well Oiled

'Person' - One week you have an off at a hundred and whatever, reduce much of your bike to shrapnel and luckily avoid death or serious injury. The next you're arguing against guys of your age having their high powered bike's performance limited.

Surely you're missing a connection here? (possibly the one that joins your two brain cells together).

Do i?

Unfortunately your wrong, you see, Matt has more than one friend with a 400. (I'm not Dom)

Originally Posted by Filipe M.

If I understood this correctly (and once again I apologise to SaintMatt for thinking it was him), Person's already got his prize, and it looks to be this one:
.
.
.
.
But then again, I might be wrong yet again, and Dr. "Person" Watson will be along shortly to correct myself.

Wrong again, as above, that is not my bike.

Your all too quick to jump on the same bandwagon.

Originally Posted by lukemillar

Person - Maybe you should learn how to spell licence before preaching about how your's isn't void. Your opinions are also of someone who doesn't know their a*se from their elbow.

Apologises for the non PC image, but this guy has p***ed me off

Thanks for pointing that out, i'll get some sleep tonight. Great argument you've got there. Keep up the good work.

Oh, and i'm PMSL here at the fact you can wind yourself up so much to actually become ****ed off over someones opinions on a 33hp bike.

Originally Posted by Jelster

"Person"...

If you got that bloody great chip off your shoulder and thought logically for a few minutes you would realise that by riding an unrestricted bike with only a 33bhp licence (2 C's in licence by the way, were not the 51st state quite yet...) you are riding a vehicle for which you are not licenced; therefore "technically riding without a licence"..... Has that sank in ???

So, we take the situation that somebody is riding a motorcycle of say 65bhp, on a restricted licence, this also means that their insurance is also void, so in the case of a serious accident, they could find themselves with a pretty hefty fine and no licence. Possibly even eating porridge for breakfast and being careful in the shower for a few months as well....

I'm glad you thought I made some valid points, and the piece at the end was just there to try and get my point across. If everybody decided to do as they please because they didn't like a particular law then we would really be in some deep sh*t, wouldn't we.....

Whether YOU like it or not, the law is the law, and riding without a licence or insurance is bloody irresponsible and cannot be condoned.

I read with interest your comment "There is nothing to "handle" on a full power bike". So does that mean that after you've ridden a 125 for a year you should be let out on a litre sportsbike ?? I just want to understand what you mean by the statement... The reason that somebody with very little experience finds it difficult to get insurance a powerful bike is for exactly that reason, most can't handle it and are not responsible to be left to do so.

In fact, one has to ask if you are irresponsible enough to ride without the correct insurance and licence, are you exactly the type of person the law was put there to protect ??

And just so you know, my son's been wiping his own backside for about 16 years now, but says thanks for the thought.

Yep, it didn't need explaining. But i'm earning a years no claims, the police have seen my documents several times. If it got stolen tomorrow, i'd make a claim. My bikes insured.

The bit your missing is, NO ONE CARES. The police don't check and it's rare that the insurers do unless it's a very big claim.

Sorry about my spelling of licence, i see it means a lot to all of you considering the amount of people that have pointed it out. Getting petty, scraping the barrell there.

What are you on about? Because i de-restricted my bike, all of a sudden i'm a major criminal. Whatever next eh, now, where did i put that kilo...

The litre sportsbike comment, there is a huge difference between being able to handle it, and being irresponsable enough to abuse it. I've ridden a few large bikes, it doesn't take a rocket scientist to realise that you don't jump on the thing and **** the throttle wide open. I had no problems riding it, but then again, i'm responsible enough to realise what the bike is capable of doing to me. It's not the bike, it's the rider, surely everyone knows that by now.

I'm glad your sons got a small bit of independence then.

Originally Posted by Carl PO51 MYV

but Person, please don't come on here talking like you own the place after only two posts, you're entitled to your opinion, but not necessarily to voice them

Excuse me? I don't even have an sv650, i won't be staying do not worry. Although, forgive me if i'm wrong, but arn't public forums about sharing experiences and opinions?