Tiered license system

[02Tac]

 Here is what I would like to see. Granted, anyone already possesing a license would be exempt.

Tier 1 - 250cc limit - might consider a slighly higher initial limit depending on what bikes are available.

Tier 2 - 750cc limit - After 2 or 3 years with 250 license and no more than 2 speeding violation. 1 violation if excessive (100mph+) would reset the clock

Tier 3 - No cc limit - After 2-3 years with 750 license and same speeding rules

[scott-sts]

I only use full synthetic ABS tires.

[DogBoy]

Great. Another "I've already got mine but here's what everyone else should do thread."

[R.Markus]

Great. Another "I've already got mine but here's what everyone else should do thread."

Exactly.

[zer0netgain]

 Here is what I would like to see. Granted, anyone already possesing a license would be exempt.

Tier 1 - 250cc limit - might consider a slighly higher initial limit depending on what bikes are available.

Tier 2 - 750cc limit - After 2 or 3 years with 250 license and no more than 2 speeding violation. 1 violation if excessive (100mph+) would reset the clock

Tier 3 - No cc limit - After 2-3 years with 750 license and same speeding rules

I disagree with the speeding BS.  It means an effective license revocation if you don't have a bike of the correct cc rating to fall back on, and since most speeding laws are BS to start with it's just an overdone punishment.  Might as well just say license revocation for conviction of a reckless driving charge.

I do believe there should be a cc limit on new license holders, but I think it would have to be under 500, under 1000, 1000 & over.  A possible alternative could be based on gross vehicle weight, but that could be problematic all around.

Frankly, once you master a sub-500cc bike, any size up from that is your discretion.  The key should be that you learned to handle being on two wheels responsibly and learned something about respecting what the bike can and can't do.

[bubba zanetti]

 Here is what I would like to see. Granted, anyone already possesing a license would be exempt.

Tier 1 - 250cc limit - might consider a slighly higher initial limit depending on what bikes are available.

Tier 2 - 750cc limit - After 2 or 3 years with 250 license and no more than 2 speeding violation. 1 violation if excessive (100mph+) would reset the clock

Tier 3 - No cc limit - After 2-3 years with 750 license and same speeding rules

Add to that ... upon reaching the elderly age of 50, the system will start to reverse so that by the advanced age of 65 you may only ride a 250cc or less.

[pmax]

Please.  We don't have enough bureaucracy already

[traveler]

Add to that ... upon reaching the elderly age of 50, the system will start to reverse so that by the advanced age of 65 you may only ride a 250cc or less.

Being the fossil that I am, I say BITE ME.

[megillet]

Add to that ... upon reaching the elderly age of 50, the system will start to reverse so that by the advanced age of 65 you may only ride a 250cc or less.

Honda would fight that tooth and nail, since they would loose a majority of their Gold Wing market.  

[02Tac]

Great. Another "I've already got mine but here's what everyone else should do thread."

 True, but I actually did my street biking in a tiered process.  I went from a 500 to 600 to the current 1200

[bubba zanetti]

Being the fossil that I am, I say BITE ME.

moi aussi  

[Snowbird]

Read my sig for my view of tiered licensing. How anyone would think there is either a need or justification for tiered licensing is beyond me.  

[02Tac]

I disagree with the speeding BS.  It means an effective license revocation if you don't have a bike of the correct cc rating to fall back on, and since most speeding laws are BS to start with it's just an overdone punishment.  Might as well just say license revocation for conviction of a reckless driving charge.

I do believe there should be a cc limit on new license holders, but I think it would have to be under 500, under 1000, 1000 & over.  A possible alternative could be based on gross vehicle weight, but that could be problematic all around.

Frankly, once you master a sub-500cc bike, any size up from that is your discretion.  The key should be that you learned to handle being on two wheels responsibly and learned something about respecting what the bike can and can't do.

ZERO - Read the first line.  Existing license holders would not be affected.  As far as the cc limits, I would be willing to discuss the tier sizes. I just tossed out some off the top of my head sizes

[LitzerSki]

I think this is the worst thing anyone could possibly do for the motorcycling industry, PEROID.  

Unless your point is to have fewer bikes and more cars on the road, then...hell...let's implement it tomorrow.  

[ctbandit]

Eh, you say you did yours tiered but you went from 500, not 250.

the cc's don't really matter as much as power/weight anyway. If anything like this ever(it won't) went trough, manufacturers would just start making race replica 500's and 250's like they do with the 600's now, and the cc limit wouldn't do anything.

I started off on an aged 400(all of 35hp and 375lbs i think), but that was my choice. Somehow without knowing all that much I knew I shouldn't give myself a lot of power off the bat. But there was almost nothing in the way of government/state educating me about it.

You want safer beginning riders? Courses like the msf should be mandatory and more comprehensive. In my state, I was on my bike and riding it for 20 bucks and a half hour at the dmv. Nothing else.   Luckily I did alright, but I don't think cc class tiers is the answer.

[02Tac]

I think this is the worst thing anyone could possibly do for the motorcycling industry, PEROID.  

Unless your point is to have fewer bikes and more cars on the road, then...hell...let's implement it tomorrow.  

Works just fine in a number of other countries.  I also believe it would actually benefit us by giving the manufacturers a reason to bring in a larger variet of smaller bikes which in turn may actually attract more riders.  

[county]

So, would this be a Federal License that'd be required in addition to state licenses?

[DogBoy]

Works just fine in a number of other countries.  I also believe it would actually benefit us by giving the manufacturers a reason to bring in a larger variet of smaller bikes which in turn may actually attract more riders.  

Any stats to back this up? IIRC, in past discussions of tiered licensing no one has produced statistics that prove tiered licensing reduces accidents, injuries or fatalities.

BTW, I believe the UK restricts new riders by hp rather than cc limit. Your cc limit is unworkable because there is no correlation between cc's and HP across all bikes. Or are you trying to run HD out of business?  

[LitzerSki]

I question whether it would deter more potential riders then it would attract.  Especially here in America where bigger is better.  

Someone mentioned a hp/weight ratio, which I believe is the only way to do it here.  3.5 years ago, I started on one of the new air-cooled Triumph twins (~800cc) and it was perfect for me.  Slow enough to keep me out of trouble, yet still had enough power to run all day on the highway without flogging it.  Had I been forced to learn on a Honda Rebel, I honestly doubt I'd be the same rider with the same passion as I am now.

Plus, as much as many of y'all don't like them, Harley riders make up a majority of the 2-wheeled community here in the US.  Do you really think they're going to ride 3-4 years before they can even legally ride a 883 sportster?  

[02Tac]

Any stats to back this up? IIRC, in past discussions of tiered licensing no one has produced statistics that prove tiered licensing reduces accidents, injuries or fatalities.

BTW, I believe the UK restricts new riders by hp rather than cc limit. Your cc limit is unworkable because there is no correlation between cc's and HP across all bikes. Or are you trying to run HD out of business?  

 Stats - I could make some up for you, but for real stats it would be very hard to do as the only way to do it would be to have 2 identical countries with the same number of riders and so on.........

 I could see a HP limit as opposed to a cc limit.  

 I guess HD would just have to get off it's dead a$$ and actually make something different

[02Tac]

I question whether it would deter more potential riders then it would attract.  Especially here in America where bigger is better.  

 I have actually spoken to a number of folks that are considering riding (I always suggest the BRC), but would like some smaller cc offerings.  Of course these are guys who have been around long enough to not be worried about not riding the biggest, baddest, fastest, loudest thing they can find.  It is amazing

[HipGnosis]

I think new riders should have to wear a helmet and a bright, reflective vest for a year or first 1,000 miles.

And anyone that gets an 'excessive' type ticket wears em again for 6 mos / 500 miles.

Anyone over 55 ought to re-take the written test and take a reflex test every 5 yrs.

[Ant]

Any stats to back this up? IIRC, in past discussions of tiered licensing no one has produced statistics that prove tiered licensing reduces accidents, injuries or fatalities.

BTW, I believe the UK restricts new riders by hp rather than cc limit. Your cc limit is unworkable because there is no correlation between cc's and HP across all bikes. Or are you trying to run HD out of business?  

Yep, up to a 125cc (after a days compulsory basic training) before a license. Get your basic license after a test but under 21 then you're limited to 33bhp for two years or take another test after you're 21.
Simple really, keeps a lot (a lot, not all) of the eejits off the bigger bikes and keeps them on wheeled hair driers.

Tired licensing makes sense. Manufacturers get to flog more bikes (one at each stage of your "career"), people get to keep all their limbs, motorcyclists have a chance to get used to their bikes.

Hell, even if you don't have tiered licensing, how about some actual compulsory training?  

[bubba zanetti]

Hell, even if you don't have tiered licensing, how about some actual compulsory training?  

Because that would make riding too much like scuba diving or flying and we know that those pastimes are waaay more dangerous.  

[R.Markus]

The 'zero alcohol' provision to my mind is quite sensible.

That should apply to all licenses and vehicle types up there and here in the US.

[photomd]

I don't have a problem with tiered licenses. I started with a Kwak 305 the first 3 years and it was fine. However, I'd like to see some objective data that it would make a difference. I also think that unlike Europe where motorcycles are a viable alternative to get around big cities, in the states, bikes are seen as toys, not transportation. From that stand point, the manufacturers are gonna lobby very hard against it. I don't think people are gonna ride a mini-cruiser for 3 years to get their big bore bike. This could end up decreasing our numbers which, in the end, will hurt our sport.

[DogBoy]

Hell, even if you don't have tiered licensing, how about some actual compulsory training?  

But where do you stop the compulsory training? Many people who own 1000cc + bikes are often outridden by people on smaller bikes. So do add training as cc or hp limits increase?

As an aside, how does the two-year time period (or any other time frame) work? Two years for one rider could be 30,000 miles or 900 mile for another. There is no guarantee that time will improve riding skills or judgement.

[02Tac]

But where do you stop the compulsory training? Many people who own 1000cc + bikes are often outridden by people on smaller bikes. So do add training as cc or hp limits increase?

As an aside, how does the two-year time period (or any other time frame) work? Two years for one rider could be 30,000 miles or 900 mile for another. There is no guarantee that time will improve riding skills or judgement.

 You can come up with all kinds of "YEA BUTS..", but compulsory train can't hurt.  You say many 1000cc owners are outridden by smaller bikes adn this may be true, but I have never seen a Ninja 250 do 140mph down the highway.  Part of the tiered system is that it takes the high HP bikes away from those with little or no riding experience.

[UFO]

Let's be a bit more reasonable:

Minimum 18 years old, MSF training required, and 1 year on a sub 500cc bike, with no moving infraction on said bike  (this isn't that hard to do).  You get an infraction or are pulled over riding a 500+cc bike and that year gets reset.

If a rider can demonstrate they've learned what they've been taught, and some self control I don't see a need to drag it out beyond a year.  Any person who is serious about motorcycling as a lifestyle can wait a year...and you can still have a lot of fun on a sub 500cc bike.

I was riding street bikes when I was 16-17 years old.  I'm not sure that's such a good idea anymore.  Hell, I don't even trust a 16 yo driving a car let alone a bike.

Of course I know none of this would ever happen because it takes away our " 'merican freedom" which is why I believe people have the right to off themselves in all silly ways imaginable as long as they don't maim anyone else in the process.  Want your 17 yo kid to have a GSXR1000 as his first bike and wheelie it into a brick wall?  Could care less.  But since no one wants anything like reasonable required training, experience, or even a helmet...what do I care?

No tiered system will ever address the fact that 1/4th of motorcycle fatalities involve riders with no endorsement...they just jump on a bike and start riding:
http://www-nrd.nhtsa.dot.gov/Pubs/810892.PDF

Live and die by your freedoms.

[Ant]

But where do you stop the compulsory training? Many people who own 1000cc + bikes are often outridden by people on smaller bikes. So do add training as cc or hp limits increase?

My comment on the training was meant to mean that there should be some kind of training on the smaller bikes. I don't mean training on how to ride the bike fast as such, more of how to be "aware" on the road. Skills that apply to all bikes. We spent hours and hours having it rammed home in to our brains to do shoulder checks when changing lane and to always be aware of everything going on around you. I don't even think about it any more and I've only been riding for 2 years. I didn't really "think" about it even when I first got the bike (other than to improve my skills), it had been drummed in to us throughout our training. You will fail your test and not get a license if you don't show awareness of the traffic around you and prove you can safely control your bike in the real world rather than a car park.

As an aside, how does the two-year time period (or any other time frame) work? Two years for one rider could be 30,000 miles or 900 mile for another. There is no guarantee that time will improve riding skills or judgement.

Personally I agree, I think that rule is completely pointless. I myself passed my test, sat around for 2 years and then bought my Bandit. Okay that was more financial reason than anything else but still, I shouldn't have been allowed to do that since I had never ridden a bike with that power before. If you take you're test after you're 21 then your training is done on a minimum of a 500cc bike so you get a bit of experience of what it is like.

I'm not sure how is best to solve that problem though, miles logged would be good but too hard to accurately measure. I don't know, just saying that giving someone the keys to a big bike without any real training scares the hell out of me.

[pdxfj]

I think the major problem we have here in the states is that it's all to easy to get a drivers license.  We need to adopt things that European countries do.  Make it mandatory to get extensive drivers training before you can go for a full blown drivers license.  Here people take it as their right to drive and forget that it's a privilege.

When I was a teenager and wanting to get my drivers license, my parents put me through Sears Driving school because the car we had was such a POS you couldn't take the drivers test in it.  I know that going through that training made me a better driver and my driving record proves it.  Although learning how to parallel park in between cop cars in downtown Portland was an interesting experience.  But when you have cops standing on the sidewalk watching what you're doing it makes you really focus on the task at hand.  

[DogBoy]

 You can come up with all kinds of "YEA BUTS..", but compulsory train can't hurt.  You say many 1000cc owners are outridden by smaller bikes adn this may be true, but I have never seen a Ninja 250 do 140mph down the highway.  Part of the tiered system is that it takes the high HP bikes away from those with little or no riding experience.

  Find some statistics or studies that show high HP (not large displacement which you propose restricting) is the cause of in accidents/injuries/fatalities

You don't know the experience level of all the riders in the 140 mph incident you are obsessed with. No one was hurt in that instance and more accidents/injuries/fatalities happen at lower speeds which the Ninja 250 is capable of reaching easily.

[ctbandit]

i wish the DOT could start tracking more info on motorcycle accidents. Besides just helmet use, how bout the rest of the gear and how riders using this fair in an off. Recording type of material, armor.
 This has nothing to do with this thread.. but I still wish it could happen.  

[pmax]

Maybe a mandatory training course but that's it.  Take test.  Get license.  Done.  Drive whatever bike you can.  Let individuals be responsible for their own actions.  Every law/regulation takes away a little more of our freedom.  Stop the madness.  Freekin' liberals want to create the perfect society.

[Global Rider]

Add to that ... upon reaching the elderly age of 50, the system will start to reverse so that by the advanced age of 65 you may only ride a 250cc or less.

Buddy, by that age one of my students was on his 4th round the world tour...instead of racing around on and off ramps and kicking tires at donut shops. 

Tiered licencing is a good idea as proven by numerous countries that have employed that system. Do you think putting an 18 year old squid on a GSXR 1000 or R1 is a better idea. 

[county]

Anyone over 55 ought to re-take the written test and take a reflex test every 5 yrs.

Fcuk that.

[DRam]

Anyone over 55 ought to re-take the written test and take a reflex test every 5 yrs.

What good does a written test do?  Anyone can talk a good talk.  A test that demonstrates actual skills would make more sense.  And start  at 65 (where I'll be in about three weeks).

[Snowbird]

This topic is stupid.

[Global Rider]

This topic is stupid.

Having been a flight instructor for many years, there is a reason why we start them off on a Cessna 150 and not a Lear Jet or F18.

This is no different, and the inexperienced riders writing themselves off proves that.

[photomd]

Having been a flight instructor for many years, there is a reason why we start them off on a Cessna 150 and not a Lear Jet or F18.

This is no different, and the inexperienced riders writing themselves off proves that.

Intuitively, I agree, but where's the objective data and at what cost (in man power, lives, dollars, decreased numbers in our sport, and whatever else I can't think of off the top of my head)?

[Snowbird]

Having been a flight instructor for many years, there is a reason why we start them off on a Cessna 150 and not a Lear Jet or F18.

This is no different, and the inexperienced riders writing themselves off proves that.

Sorry, but it is far different.

I only characterize the topic negatively because it's so divisive; it has as much to do with liberal vs conservative world views as with safety, and it's a bit like arguing about ATGATT, helmet laws, oil, tires, brands, cruiser riders vs sportbikes, etc., etc., etc. Finally, the topic one one hand blames riders for cager errors, poor highway design and maintenance, etc., while on the other erects hurdles to increasing the use of motorcyles at a time when lowering barriers would be better.

If you want my support, tell me how you personally plan to mentor and assist others to become involved in motorcycling.... in a new thread, of course.

[02Tac]

Sorry, but it is far different.

I only characterize the topic negatively because it's so divisive; it has as much to do with liberal vs conservative world views as with safety, and it's a bit like arguing about ATGATT, helmet laws, oil, tires, brands, cruiser riders vs sportbikes, etc., etc., etc. Finally, the topic one one hand blames riders for cager errors, poor highway design and maintenance, etc., while on the other erects hurdles to increasing the use of motorcyles at a time when lowering barriers would be better.

If you want my support, tell me how you personally plan to mentor and assist others to become involved in motorcycling.... in a new thread, of course.

 I have found that this topic, much like ATGATT and helmet use is very much like a liberal vs conservative discussion.  Those that are against it (liberals) resfuse to have a valid discussion and simply keep throwing out emotional BS.  They refuse to discuss it because they do not like it or it does not fit their agend and there for it cannot be acceptable.  Kind of like the global warming scam.  Other planets in our solar system have been noted to be warming and it is deemed the result of the Sun burning slightly hotter (something it apparantly does now and again), but for earth they blame us.  Helmet us , ATGATT and some type of stricter licensing system are treated teh same way.  Helmets help, PERIOD. ATGATT helps PERIOD. and a stricter licenseing sytem would help PERIOD.

[bubba zanetti]

Buddy, by that age one of my students was on his 4th round the world tour...instead of racing around on and off ramps and kicking tires at donut shops.  

Tiered licencing is a good idea as proven by numerous countries that have employed that system. Do you think putting an 18 year old squid on a GSXR 1000 or R1 is a better idea.  

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/facetious

I am over 50 and don't call me buddy.

[UFO]

This topic is stupid.

Oh the irony.

[Global Rider]

Sorry, but it is far different.

If you think so.

I started on a 125, then went onto a 400 with many 100 to 350s thereafter and it wasn't till my 16th year that I went bigger than a 500. Oddly enough, more than double those years later, I haven't had an accident or needed to make an insurance claim on 2 wheels, or on 4 wheels, or under 2 wings.

People oppose any rules/restrictions put on them...human nature I guess. Would you like drivers not to have licences or airline pilots not to have licences? How dare government ask me to prove my abilities!

Tiered licencing would be good for the industry; think of all the sales and trade-ins.

[02Tac]

Yea!, then I could probably find a small 250-400cc dual sport used for a good price.

[Twistedpinion]

 Helmets help, PERIOD. ATGATT helps PERIOD. and a stricter licenseing sytem would help PERIOD.

Helps what exactly?

[02Tac]

Helps what exactly?

If you need it spelled out for you than I would be wasting my time typing.  

[Twistedpinion]

If you need it spelled out for you than I would be wasting my time typing.  

 

So typing that wasn't a waste of your time?

[Twistedpinion]

 I have found that this topic, much like ATGATT and helmet use is very much like a liberal vs conservative discussion.  Those that are against it (liberals) resfuse to have a valid discussion and simply keep throwing out emotional BS.  

so um yeah.

[Baron Samedi]

Please.  We don't have enough bureaucracy already

And how much bureaucracy-and cost/ distress etc-goes into a death on the roads?

It's not liberal to call for rider training. It's common sense and cost effective. And you'll be able to buy the bikes we get in Yorp.

[02Tac]

 

So typing that wasn't a waste of your time?

   Nope, but anything beyond that would have been.

[ReynoldsFH439]

I think the major problem we have here in the states is that it's all to easy to get a drivers license.  We need to adopt things that European countries do.  Make it mandatory to get extensive drivers training before you can go for a full blown drivers license.  Here people take it as their right to drive and forget that it's a privilege.

In Illinois they've definitely been increasing the requirements. In addition to the driver's ed course, I had to get 25 hours of driving time with someone over 21 in the car and document what type of road (residential, 2 lane hwy, etc...) and conditions (night/day, weather).  Even after I got my license, there were restrictions about how many passengers I could have for the first year (limit did not apply to family members).  

By the time my youngest sister was going through 6 or 7 years later, the 25 hours had doubled to 50.  I believe additional restrictions applied to her first year with her license, too.  I never got a ticket while I was under 18, but she got one and it was a mandatory court appearance with a parent even though she was less than 15 over the limit.

I think some of the requirements don't apply to someone getting his license at 18+, but they are definitely making it harder for the 16-18 year-olds to get their licenses.

[Thunderbox]

If they are going to a tier system it needs to be done by HP not by CCs.  All 600 to 650 bikes are not the same.  Urals have lots of CCs but no power.  Think about it.  Doing a tier system is fine but make it sensible.

[GooseMan]

Here in Quebec we seem to have a semi-good system.

Firstly, anyone wishing to ride a motorcycle (above 50cc) is REQUIRED to take a written test, take MANDATORY courses (around 40 hrs total...similar to the MSF course) and then take a closed circuit test.

You MUST past this final test at the DMV to obtain your motorcycle permit. This permit allows you to ride any motorcycle of any CC, provided you did the test on a correspondingly sized bike. So if you do a test on a 250, you will ONLY be allowed to ride up to 250cc...(the different classes are 50cc and less, 125cc and less, 400cc and less, and unlimited cc).

Once you obtain your motorcycle learners permit, you can ONLY ride alongside another rider, whom of which must have had a FULL license for 2+ years. You can ride whatever you want, whenever you want, but NO passengers.

You MUST have this permit for 7 months before taking the final exam. This is a test on road, with an evaluator driving in a car behind you, giving you directions via radio. If you pass this exam, then you have your full, unrestricted license.

I believe this is a good, and bad, in a way. I like the idea of the mandatory courses (personally, I would never ride a motorcycle without courses!) and I like the idea of the testing. It's a pretty long process, but it works.

I do NOT like the idea of having to ride with someone else for that 7 month period. This means every time you want to go for a spin around the block, or practice in a parking lot, you must have someone "babysit" you. Also, if you end up riding with a complete moron, you'll pick up some bad habits. And finally, you dont even HAVE to ride for those 7 months. You can just sit on your ass for 7 months and wait it out, and then just do the final exam. So its pretty pointless.

Another "fun" thing we have now in Quebec is different registration costs for different types of bikes. I dunno how much registration is in other parts of North America, but it is my understanding its a LOT cheaper than it is here. Last year, it was around $300 to register your bike for the year (which is 6 months of actual riding time   ) which was already pretty steep.

But they decided to raise registration costs across the board, this year, and for the next 3 years. This means all bikes deemed as "sport" bikes have higher registration costs than "standard bikes". This year, it is $617 to register a sport bike...next year $1000 and 2010 it will be $1400!!  

Thats right! If you have a 1995 CBR thats worth about $2K, it will cost you $1400 just to register the damn thing! So this discourages the purchase of sport bikes, and discourages newbies from buying sport bikes in the first place.

Problem is, there still are experienced riders out there who want to enjoy their sport bikes, but dont wanna pay that much money to ride them. On the other side, there are people who figure, hey, if I'm gonna spend $1400 to register a sport bike, I might as well go all out and get a 'Busa or ZX14!!

Yes...Quebec is a pretty ass-backwards place.

[Corwin]

System here in BC is somewhat similar to Quebec.  
Pass written test, get learner's.  This allows you to practice with supervision of a licensed rider.  
Next pass a parking lot skills test.  This then allows you to ride a bike (any cc) on the road during daylight hours.  Zero alcohol tolerance, I believe, no passengers.
Finally, pass a riding test on the road, lasting about 45 minutes with a tester being driven behind you, giving instructions via two way radio and observing everything you do.  If you pass this, you get a full license.  Any cc permitted regardless of what bike you took the test on.  If you wait over a year to do your road test you have to first repeat the skills test.  
Many people choose to take a course that gives them the basic skills test at the end and therefore skip the initial supervised practice period.  
I do think there is a very short mandatory time period between getting your learner's and getting the full license.  It can't be very long though, because I had my full license within about a month of passing my written.
I think it's a good start, but would also like to see some rules regarding hp for beginners.  
Also I would like to see mandatory BRC courses that include road rides, not just parking lot maneuvres.  Scooters of any size should also have to be included in mandatory courses and licensing in my opinion.  

[Snowbird]

Oh the irony.

Got something to say, smart ass?  

[Baz]

 Here is what I would like to see. Granted, anyone already possesing a license would be exempt.

Tier 1 - 250cc limit - might consider a slighly higher initial limit depending on what bikes are available.

Tier 2 - 750cc limit - After 2 or 3 years with 250 license and no more than 2 speeding violation. 1 violation if excessive (100mph+) would reset the clock

Tier 3 - No cc limit - After 2-3 years with 750 license and same speeding rules

OK, so they start everyone at zero the 1st year. What do you think now Mr?

I really hate it when people think that added layers of Government intervention will help me from hurting myself. Riding a motorcycle is not rocket science. Just like everything in life, when you make the decision to do something, and you feel the need to have a million pieces of legislation to make you comfortable, I suggest that you should really find another hobby.

Your idea is about as annoying as those non smokers who used to tell me how bad smoking was, when I was standing outside smoking, bothering no one. (BTW I don't smoke anymore, but they had nothing to do with that).

If you feel the need to have rules for everything there is to do in life, I would suggest a move to China may help.

[ruffcut]

Add to that ... upon reaching the elderly age of 50, the system will start to reverse so that by the advanced age of 65 you may only ride a 250cc or less.

                   I`m going to step out on a limb here and take a wild guess that youre not 49 years old.

[zer0netgain]

Some of those Canadian rules are just stupid.

Ride with someone else?  What if you don't know anybody?  Gotta pay someone to ride with you?

If you can't ban it....just regulate it to death, I guess.  

[Ant]

Gotta pay someone to ride with you?

They're called instructors

[DosEquis00]

Here in Quebec we seem to have a semi-good system.

But they decided to raise registration costs across the board, this year, and for the next 3 years. This means all bikes deemed as "sport" bikes have higher registration costs than "standard bikes". This year, it is $617 to register a sport bike...next year $1000 and 2010 it will be $1400!!  

Thats right! If you have a 1995 CBR thats worth about $2K, it will cost you $1400 just to register the damn thing! So this discourages the purchase of sport bikes, and discourages newbies from buying sport bikes in the first place.

Yes...Quebec is a pretty ass-backwards place.

Glad to know the government goes after organized crime for extortion.  

[zer0netgain]

They're called instructors

Yeah, but why should you have to pay someone who is basically just following you around?  It's not like the other rider can take over your bike in an emergency.

[Baron Samedi]

Yeah, but why should you have to pay someone who is basically just following you around?  It's not like the other rider can take over your bike in an emergency.

Good grief.

[GooseMan]

Some of those Canadian rules are just stupid.

Ride with someone else?  What if you don't know anybody?  Gotta pay someone to ride with you?

If you can't ban it....just regulate it to death, I guess.  

Yup! That was one of the most frustrating things! I got my permit last April...so I had all summer to ride. Every time there was a nice day, or I was in the mood to ride, I had to scramble to find someone to ride with. I didnt know ANYONE that rides...so my bike sat in the garage most of the time

Finally found some riders on a local forum that would "babysit" me. Lucky for me, they were good people, and let me ride around at my own pace, so it was ok.

But yeah...pretty dumb rule. Like I said, you can get your permit in October...wait 7 months (winter, no riding) and just go for your license in the spring. Only the 7 month period is NECASSARY, but you dont actually have to practice in those 7 months!  

[leveredge]

Yup! That was one of the most frustrating things! I got my permit last April...so I had all summer to ride. Every time there was a nice day, or I was in the mood to ride, I had to scramble to find someone to ride with. I didnt know ANYONE that rides...so my bike sat in the garage most of the time

Finally found some riders on a local forum that would "babysit" me. Lucky for me, they were good people, and let me ride around at my own pace, so it was ok.

But yeah...pretty dumb rule. Like I said, you can get your permit in October...wait 7 months (winter, no riding) and just go for your license in the spring. Only the 7 month period is NECASSARY, but you dont actually have to practice in those 7 months!  

That's the way it's supposed to be in NY with a learners permit another licensed rider is supposed to be in site of you. I got in with a group that let me ride with them when I had my learners. They ended up going bar hopping! How's that for being a mentor. I left those guys a few times on my own because I didn't want to sit there and watch them drink when I would not. I had not rode in 25 years and could ride as good as some of them. Especially after they had a few. Crazy world.
I did end up with a guy from work that would ride around with me but again we usually met up someplace. I had to get there somehow. Three years ago it took all summer to get into the MSFBRC. I understand the wait is even longer now.

[CreepingMalaise]

 Here is what I would like to see. Granted, anyone already possesing a license would be exempt.

Tier 1 - 250cc limit - might consider a slighly higher initial limit depending on what bikes are available.

Tier 2 - 750cc limit - After 2 or 3 years with 250 license and no more than 2 speeding violation. 1 violation if excessive (100mph+) would reset the clock

Tier 3 - No cc limit - After 2-3 years with 750 license and same speeding rules

Utah just adopted a tiered system, based on what you take the riding test on:

O = 90 cc or lower motorcycle
2 = 249 cc or lower motorcycle
3 = 649 cc or lower motorcycle

It will be interesting to see how this plays out in the next few years.  An interesting point about these tier choices is that would be 600 SS riders will have get something larger to test on. I wonder if it will push them to buy 1000cc bikes instead?

[Baz]

For fooks sake....

Make everyone signs a waver that says motorcycling is dangerous and it will probably kill you one day. Read & Sign. There you know your going to hurt yourself, we told you so, and you still want to do it? Well fine.

Just like the time I was thrown in an oil wrestling ring in Minneapolis with two ladies of questionable reputation. They informed me of the risks, but unfortunately they did not tell me I would have to explain my supple soft skin to my wife for the following month.


I love the "Have a licensed rider follow you" idea. Just what exactly is that person going to do for you? I guess he will be able to get you an ambulance a little faster when you pile into a truck, but that's about it.

[Hardware]

Let's be a bit more reasonable:

Minimum 18 years old, MSF training required, and 1 year on a sub 500cc bike, with no moving infraction on said bike  (this isn't that hard to do).  You get an infraction or are pulled over riding a 500+cc bike and that year gets reset.

If a rider can demonstrate they've learned what they've been taught, and some self control I don't see a need to drag it out beyond a year.  Any person who is serious about motorcycling as a lifestyle can wait a year...and you can still have a lot of fun on a sub 500cc bike.

I was riding street bikes when I was 16-17 years old.  I'm not sure that's such a good idea anymore.  Hell, I don't even trust a 16 yo driving a car let alone a bike.

Of course I know none of this would ever happen because it takes away our " 'merican freedom" which is why I believe people have the right to off themselves in all silly ways imaginable as long as they don't maim anyone else in the process.  Want your 17 yo kid to have a GSXR1000 as his first bike and wheelie it into a brick wall?  Could care less.  But since no one wants anything like reasonable required training, experience, or even a helmet...what do I care?

No tiered system will ever address the fact that 1/4th of motorcycle fatalities involve riders with no endorsement...they just jump on a bike and start riding:
http://www-nrd.nhtsa.dot.gov/Pubs/810892.PDF

Live and die by your freedoms.

+1

As soon as you make something idiot-proof, nature goes out and engineers a better idiot.

[spinalator]

It is amazing how these "discussions" always seem to polarize everyone. I may be off base, but IMO, most of these personal rights vs public safety topics are, incredibly, not entirely black and white or right and wrong issues.

From what I have seen from living in three countries:

• Training and instruction is good, it should not have to be mandated, but some will never voluntarily go unless legislated
• Licensing levels does weed out some wackos and reckless hoodlums. Some idiots fall through the cracks, they always do.
• In modern society there is some loss of personal rights to be able to live in an integrated society.
• It sucks whenever you have more layers of senseless bureaucracy, but it makes absolutely no sense for a 16 year old to be allowed to buy and license a 1400cc GT bike, when even 85HP is too much for someone who is 40% testosterone and 60% Red Bull. That is the current reality in many situations and that is what I see ripping up the streets at 3:00AM on weekends. I would love to send the little pricks back to 85cc scooter camp.

I think if the motorcycle industry and riders take control of this issue, then non-riders, the government, and/or the insurance industry will not own the issue before we have a chance to respond.

[zer0netgain]

In modern society there is some loss of personal rights to be able to live in an integrated society.

True, but since special interests often craft the laws and government has no sense where to stop and accept that it exists to serve the sovereign man and not to enslave him, I'm very protective of my personal rights.

It sucks whenever you have more layers of senseless bureaucracy, but it makes absolutely no sense for a 16 year old to be allowed to buy and license a 1400cc GT bike, when even 85HP is too much for someone who is 40% testosterone and 60% Red Bull.

Agreed, but not all 16-year-olds are equal.  The more you make a system to account for everyone, the more you impose unreasonable standards because you are catering to the lowest common denominator.  Some of the practices in other countries affect people regardless of age or experience or economic means.  As I've said elsewhere....if you can't ban it, regulate it to death, and that's what often happens.  

[zer0netgain]

Good grief.

Once you obtain your motorcycle learners permit, you can ONLY ride alongside another rider, whom of which must have had a FULL license for 2+ years. You can ride whatever you want, whenever you want, but NO passengers.

For the average person....you get a permit (didn't indicate an age restriction) and for the next TWO YEARS you can only ride if you have someone else with you who also has at least 2 years of experience?  Okay, what if you don't have a riding buddy?  I suppose you wait 2 years without riding to get your regular license?

No thank you.  I got my first bike with ZERO motor bike experience.  Someone taught me in an hour the basics (on a rented motorcycle), and yes, I made some mistakes, but I was able to practice, get my MC endorsement, and enjoy the road.  I took the risks and the responsibilities.  If I had to do all that other BS, I'd never have gotten on 2 wheels.

I was without a bike for about 10 years (motor on my first bike blew), and I got a used sportbike.  I had years of driving experience.  I had tactical pursuit driving training as a cop.  I knew I had to respect the power of the bike.  I still had my MC endorsement.  I didn't have any major problems.  Some bad technique, but I learned once I met more skilled riders who taught me.  There's no why the DMV courses would have taught me how to ride a sportbike properly and the specialty schools were too far away and too expensive.

A lot of these regulations would deny anyone but the wealthy the pleasure of the open roads.  In Europe, the chief strategy to get cars off the road and people onto mass transit is to make car ownership too expensive to be practical.

If you can't ban it, regulate it to death.

[ScotchFan]

And of course, folks like me who have been endorsed since the 1970's are exempt.  However, I still recall an old codger who wanted to ride his big Harley and failed the driving test many times.  Each time, he retook it with something smaller.  When I took my riding test he was on something like a Honda Trail 70 or QA-50.  He was dressed to the 9's in leather chaps, vests, boots.  I do not think he passed that day either.
It sucks that you have to buy up different displacement bikes.  But, the thought of a noobie starting our with a 'Busa is a little scary.    Problem is common sense is more and more getting to be uncommon.

[OMJunk]

I have read in some European countries it is 35HP max for the first 2 years, then anything goes. I learned to ride on a BSA Lightning which I think was about 45 HP. It was more than enough, in fact one of the fastest bikes available in the 60's. Young people today are buying bikes with 3 times the power to learn on. One bike shop in S Cal kept track for a year and every sport bike sold that year was totalled by the end of the year. I also had a ZG1000, not a good beginners bike, but I know they made a 35HP version and when the time came, replacing the throttle slides returned the bike to 108 hp, so a new bike was not required. I do not believe that allowing our young riders to kill themselves off is good for the sport, but neither do I believe there is any easy answer.  Just my .02