Advantages and disadvantages of graduated licensing?

[Ninjabunny]

Forum Sponsor

I highly disagree with this! Thats like saying you can buy a civic with your G2 and a Vette with your G.

This is my first season, I started March 19th and now have 11,000km and no ****ing chicken strips. I also ride a 2010 GSX-R 600. Now why should I have been restricted? It is up to the rider to decide what he or she is capable of!

Oh ya it would not work because if that was the case I would have got my licence prior and just sat on it till I could get the 600cc.

Spoken like a true noob who compares a fast car to a fast bike and equates skill level with "chicken strips". You may not completely suck at riding, but your attitude will get you into trouble. You are NOT an experienced rider....skill comes with experience.

 

[dblEspresso]

I wouldn't mind power restrictions in a graduated system. It would probably filter some of the people who are just out to impress rather than ride. I'm in a self-imposed graduation program myself: I started with the GS500 last season and upgraded to the SV650 this year. I may get something more powerful next season -- or maybe not. I'm having a lot of fun with this bike.

One restriction they should eliminate is the ban on night-time riding. In the well lit city at least, it doesn't make much difference for visibility. In some ways it's safer at night because you can see the headlights of cars coming around the corner, and more importantly, there are far fewer cars on the road, which is less demanding for a beginner.

Also, it slowed down my progress terribly since, like most people, I have to work during the day. Thus leaving me only a couple of hours to practice during the most dangerous time: when traffic is at its peak, and the sun is in everyone's eyes.

The system as it stands now is little more than another money grab by the government.

 

[mikbusa]

Lol insurance strips. I like that.

But again the point was not the chicken strips. How else would you like me to illustrate my ability via the internet? It was to give a reference that a new rider can be a good rider.
Yes i know that sounds cocky.

You have no idea how many people have had reality smack them in the face when a split second of inexperience takes over.
And two seconds earlier, they were thinking exactly like you. It's a humbling experience if you live through it intact.

 

[dizzy929]

You have no idea how many people have had reality smack them in the face when a split second of inexperience takes over.
And two seconds earlier, they were thinking exactly like you. It's a humbling experience if you live through it intact.

Well said. The second you get the All-Star attitude and forget the fact that you're riding a rocket on wheels is usually when it bites the hardest.

 

[Baggsy]

The issue isn't skill. I could teach an ape to ride. The issue is letting the brain catch up to the skill. In some people that never happens. In others it just takes time.

 

[jaymurr]

Ok so if we don't impose restrictions onsize of motor then we need to seriously increase the difficulty of the tests. The m1 to m2 test should be twice as hard ( if it's possible to quantify it )

I agree 100% with more difficult standards, but I also think we should do the same for a G class licence.

 

[jc100]

Would you accept >50% failure rate for the tests? That should also have a pretty sizeable impact on insurance rates too shouldn't it? I still think some kind of power restriction should be used too though.

 

[Nwhiteside]

+1 to tougher G test, specifically -- not doing a shoulder check before changing lanes s/b an immediate fail; I've almost been smoked twice this season by a cabbie & distracted chick cutting me off with a lane change

 

[Flashmonkey]

Would you accept >50% failure rate for the tests? That should also have a pretty sizeable impact on insurance rates too shouldn't it?

I would accept this. I mean, the failure rate shouldn't be just because of a ridiculously hard or purposely tricky final test or anything like that...but more so because the training and the requirements to get a full M are rigorous and difficult. Not just technically, but skill wise as well. I dunno...maybe there should be a mandatory advanced riding course between the M2 and M. Or each rider has to log a certain amount of hours at a track or something. Sort of like a watered down version of what a pilot has to go through.

Riding a motorcycle isn't like driving a car...most on this forum can attest to that. The process should reflect that. Having to jump through a buncha hoops like that sure would weed out the posers and less committed, that's for sure.

 

[C109Knight]

In my opinion there should be a retest every 3-5 years...Alleast it will crease out the bad habits and "I AM THE BEST" attitude out. As I had stated in another post we must have GOOD RIDING experience and this should build over the years...Split second is what is there between WOW Rider & WAS Rider. Riding motorcycle is like being in a Combat Zone...One mistake, either it is yours or others will have very scary consiquences without a rewind button...the only thing which may save you is Good Habit build over time with Riding Safe...You may ride fast but please don't ride rash...In cars these days you have Buffer Zone, Impact Zone, 12 Air bags, Seat Belt, Air Bags etc etc and on motorcycle there is just you and your skills...When I took my M from a Riding School, there was a guy with 24 mistakes ....still passed...what you think he is going to do on the road...even he did not have any C...Strips on his tires..

 

[chiller]

I agree 100% with more difficult standards, but I also think we should do the same for a G class licence.

Hmm... that would probably get things into an uproar ... I think as an introductory thing to the G license revamp, they should first stop letting immigrant people (not being racist here) in Toronto take the drivers test up in Timmins...

Would you accept >50% failure rate for the tests? That should also have a pretty sizeable impact on insurance rates too shouldn't it? I still think some kind of power restriction should be used too though.

I can accept a 50% failure rate. This might actually deter some people from buy a bike, so it COULD hurt the moto industry as a whole because fewer people are buying bikes. Having said that, we MIGHT see a lower insurance rate because there would be fewer single bike accidents (rider error)... I say that only because you would have to demonstrate a higher proficiency to get a license in the first place. The easiest way to quantify it ? Is if we leave the test as is ? But we slash the allowable number of mistakes by half ... I believe currently 11 points is the max you are allowed accumulate on a test. If someone were to legislate it to only 5 points ? You would probably get your 50% failure rate.

 

[bennyskywalker]

Let's be honest here. Most people driving on the road today don't have the coordination to drive. Forget skill. I'm talking about those really nervous crouched behind the wheel doing 20km under. Those people should never pass. Not only should you pass the test, which should be harder, there should be a subjective rating of nervous vs. Confident...

Also the examiner should have some sort of liability for passing idiots that can't drive. Maybe they'll take there jobs more seriously.

As for bikes... I see a lot of nervous riders out there. I think the cc should be limited and riders should have to take training courses to get up the different levels of bikes.

I bet by the time you got on your 1000cc bike after a decade, 5 training courses, a wife, 2 kids ect, you'd have more to lose, and less chance of riding like a moron.

 

[matt123]

My cousins from Europe think the way we do it in Ontario is nothing more than a money grab.They are astounded that you can go write your m1,walk into a shop buy an SS and be set lose on society.Whats even more amazing is you have to pay to get your m2 and m after you've already been running the streets on what ever machine you can afford without restriction.They came for a visit and wanted to rent a couple of bikes and could not believe the hassle the MTO gave them over there licenses.After dealing with insurance and explaining the problems they had the broker flat out tell them the industry agrees with there assessment and thats why you don't get a discount for getting your an M.

 

[dpmachine]

Hmm... that would probably get things into an uproar ... I think as an introductory thing to the G license revamp, they should first stop letting immigrant people (not being racist here) in Toronto take the drivers test up in Timmins...



I can accept a 50% failure rate. This might actually deter some people from buy a bike, so it COULD hurt the moto industry as a whole because fewer people are buying bikes. Having said that, we MIGHT see a lower insurance rate because there would be fewer single bike accidents (rider error)... I say that only because you would have to demonstrate a higher proficiency to get a license in the first place. The easiest way to quantify it ? Is if we leave the test as is ? But we slash the allowable number of mistakes by half ... I believe currently 11 points is the max you are allowed accumulate on a test. If someone were to legislate it to only 5 points ? You would probably get your 50% failure rate.

But this is a lousy standard. Saying that you can only get x points on a test performed between white lines in an empty parking lot isn't going to make better riders in the road. I mean, congratulations, you can stop a CBR 125 or a Honda Titan within a specified distance while travelling through a curve at 25 km / h; this isn't going to make you notice the idiot who didn't notice that his lane was ending who suddenly decides to swerve into your lane without a shoulder check. It isn't going to help you notice the left turning SUV at the intersection up ahead. It isn't going to help you judge how to adjust your speed coming up to a corner, and to compensate for debris on the road. You don't even use turn signals on the course.

Maybe an approved riding course should be like approved driving courses - you have class instruction, parking lot practice, and then a specified number of hours going out on the road with someone keeping a close eye on your every move. Part of the problem is that the very basics of successfully navigating a bike down a road is the steep learning curve. In a car with an automatic transmission, you aren't going to stall out when crossing a street into the path of an oncoming car. On a bike, when you're still new, that is still a possibility. So you have to get over that learning curve before you can focus on polishing your skills, increasing your road awareness, cornering abilities, so forth.

A licensing graduation system sounds like a great idea, but there's a powerful economic reason against it. How many of you have bikes that you'd like to sell in the future? How would you like it if the market for those bikes were to suddenly vanish because you need to have ridden for three years and be over 23 just to go over 400 cc?

Besides all this; I'm willing to bet that a good number of you people calling for a 50% fail rate wouldn't have been able to get into motorcycling in the first place if a 50% fail rate had been in place when you tried to start out. By my calculations, half of you.

 

[matt123]

A 16yr old kid can walk into the mto write the m1,get on any bike he can afford and away he gooooooooooooooes.I've seen it done and it didn't end well.In fact that was two weeks ago and he's lucky hes not dead.Way to much bike for an inexperienced mind let alone rider.Now it's gone and he has the scares to prove it.An 89 ninja 500 or 600 I think.Ran into a car stopped at a light and face planted into the back window

 

[Myztyk]

The one fundamental challenge you do have with changing the skill level required for either a G or an M to be more similar to a European system is the fundamental fact that people need some mode of transportation to get around in this country.

Our public transit system sucks. Toronto is bad, pretty much everywhere else is apalling. So with that in mind, you still need to allow people access to some sort of vehicular transport. (Unless the government is going to pony up massive dollars to improve the system.)

I love the idea of the "in-world" practice with a follow along. If a car were to follow you along with a headset giving you directions a la M test, it might improve skills prior to a licensing. However, the down side to this is it would make testing prohibitively expensive, thus making a "cheap mode of transportation", much more expensive to license. (But maybe that's not a bad thing...)

 

[bombshelter13]

If I were to put something into effect, it would be to make it mandatory for a new rider to be carrying at least a G2 before being able to write the M1. That's just my take on it.

Wow, that sounds absurd to me. Why would you do that, is there something wrong with not driving cars? I've never driven a car and never plan to, and I'm sure I'm not the only rider on these forums who just rides bikes and doesn't drive cars. I can't begin to understand why you'd support such a restriction.

 

[Flashmonkey]

Wow, that sounds absurd to me. Why would you do that, is there something wrong with not driving cars? I've never driven a car and never plan to, and I'm sure I'm not the only rider on these forums who just rides bikes and doesn't drive cars. I can't begin to understand why you'd support such a restriction.

LOL because despite the lacking driver training in this country, it's still more standardized than the motorcycle rider training we have here. At least with a G2 you've been in a car with a more experienced driver (or even the class, which is much more comprehensive than the 3-day riding classes available) and have been given a chance to at least experience the road conditions and learn the ins and outs of the rules of the road here, etiquette, how to read the signs, etc.

I love how up in arms some of you get about the reality that driving in Toronto is much more of a necessity than riding a motorcycle is. While you and some others around here have managed to do without a car up until this point, good luck with trying to get anything accomplished outside of the city in the dead of winter on a motorcycle or relying purely on mass transit.

Trying to learn how to behave yourself on the road all the while trying to learn how to pilot a damn motorcycle is twice the learning curve. And there is currently no real world training for riding a motorcycle. So you tell me...why wouldn't you support such a restriction?

 

[Flashmonkey]

The only thing I haven't agree with you on this subject. I have my m2 and no plans on getting my G anytime soon.

I know it's controversial but if you look at the current way the M license system is setup, you could potentially have a 16 year old kid out there on a 120+ hp motorcycle who doesn't even know what the road signs mean.

If the M license can be issued separately from the G license then there should be a mandatory training program that will teach non G holding riders how to handle themselves out on the road.

 

[Myztyk]

I know it's controversial but if you look at the current way the M license system is setup, you could potentially have a 16 year old kid out there on a 120+ hp motorcycle who doesn't even know what the road signs mean.

If the M license can be issued separately from the G license then there should be a mandatory training program that will teach non G holding riders how to handle themselves out on the road.

Now there's an interesting idea! Have two levels of testing, one if you have your G, one if you don't. Could incorporate all the piece you are quite rightfully mention as missing from current M testing.

Forum Sponsor