In a perfect world, how would you define 'supersport'? | GTAMotorcycle.com

In a perfect world, how would you define 'supersport'?

TwistedKestrel

TwistedKestrel

King of GTAM
Site Supporter
Forum Sponsor
Let's you get to write some of the rules for how insurance companies surcharge bikes. How would you suggest they choose what bikes are affected by a supersport surcharge and which arent? (Picking "none" or impossibly restrictive criteria will get you sent to detention).

Example: Only bikes that were originally marketed as supersports. Gets bikes like the Ninja 1000 and ZZR600/1200 off the hook, but may retain the surcharge for older bikes that are not in the same strata as modern supersports (e.g. Honda CB750F)

Example 2: Clinton Assault Weapon Ban style rules where individual features don't necessarily make a bike a supersport, but combinations do. E.g. If a bike has clip-ons, AND is fully faired, AND makes more than, say, 80HP, it's an SS. Will exempt slower bikes but may accidentally re-encompass bikes that were already loopedholed out (some VFRs possibly)
 
I was having trouble getting coverage for my Goldwing because of engine size. That 1500 cc motor makes the 900 pound bike take off like a rocket (Sarcasm) IMO performance is a power to weight ratio.
 
Power to weight ratio should be the deciding factor, but ins. co.s are too lazy. Plus they get into actuarial tables etc. Then the V-Max would be a SS.
 
power to weight, same criteria used in many countries overseas for licensing purposes
 
There should be no need to define it. Total claims for that specific vehicle compared to some sort of average. The vehicles that have high versus low claims costs sort themselves out.
 
Blooton said:
power to weight, same criteria used in many countries overseas for licensing purposes
Click to expand...

This. Also if the intended use for the vehicle was track but it was adapted to work on the street (eg. added mirrors, headlight, and plateholder), then it should also classify as SS.
 
conundrum said:
This. Also if the intended use for the vehicle was track but it was adapted to work on the street (eg. added mirrors, headlight, and plateholder), then it should also classify as SS.
Click to expand...

If the vehicle could not originally be ridden on the street, it's not plateable or insurable anyway
 
Interesting topic, I'll see what I can find out and let you guys know if there is a definition.
 
conundrum said:
This. Also if the intended use for the vehicle was track but it was adapted to work on the street (eg. added mirrors, headlight, and plateholder), then it should also classify as SS.
Click to expand...

How do you establish this?

And why should this be a "bad" thing? A Gold Wing works as well as it does because racing taught lessons about frame geometry, suspension, tires, etc., even though that bike itself wasn't intended as a race bike. We are getting ABS and traction control that works better because of lessons learned in racing. Aluminum perimeter frame, full-enclosure-bodywork, and single-sided swingarm on those!

A Yamaha FJR1300 is pretty much a (previous-generation) R1 with touring bodywork. A Concours 14 is pretty much a ZX14 with saddlebags. Tip over a Ninja 1000 and it will do just as much damage as tipping over a ZX10R. A Ninja 1000 is mechanically the same as a Z1000. An RC390 is mechanically the same as a Duke 390. Most of the smaller-displacement "sport" bikes (Ninja 250/300, cbr125/250/300) are "standard" bikes underneath full-enclosure bodywork. The bonkers new Kawasaki H2 doesn't have full-enclosure bodywork (it's open underneath - no belly pan).

Trying to slot things in convenient little niches always results in special cases of absurdity, like Ninja 250s classified as supersport, or Z1000 classified as sport-touring and Ninja 1000 as supersport even though they're the same under the skin.
 
Base it on original equipment tires.
 
Base it on intelligence. We all know just as the insurance morons do, exactly what bikes are supersports and exactly what aren't. It's not exactly rocket science
 
It is pretty easy to tell if a bike is designed for racing or not. If you see the same bike being raced professionally in SBK or otherwise, then it is a supersport. If it is just using race technology, then it potentially isn't and should be rated off power to weight. It's been a while since I turned on the speed channel and seen Goldwings running around a track, but I'm pretty sure I'll see CBR600RRs, ZX6Rs, CBR1000RRs, S1000RRs, etc, etc.
 
In a perfect world you wouldn't put anything but the best performance class rubber on a supersport. You just wouldn't.
 
conundrum said:
It is pretty easy to tell if a bike is designed for racing or not. If you see the same bike being raced professionally in SBK or otherwise, then it is a supersport. If it is just using race technology, then it potentially isn't and should be rated off power to weight. It's been a while since I turned on the speed channel and seen Goldwings running around a track, but I'm pretty sure I'll see CBR600RRs, ZX6Rs, CBR1000RRs, S1000RRs, etc, etc.
Click to expand...

Your CBR250 was raced in CSBK. The new KTM RC390 will be raced in MotoAmerica and in Europe. The Ninja 300 is going to have a race class at CSBK next year. And Harley XR1200s had a class, until it went defunct. But there's no class for a GSXR750. "But you can enter Superbike with it" ... but you can enter Superbike with anything that has two wheels, if you wanted to. "But it's a close cousin of a GSXR600" ... but an FZ6 is a close cousin of an R6.

And why would this be relevant for insurance ratings for road use, anyhow?

"Actual real world experience with that specific bike". Do that, and it doesn't matter what niche you try to force something into.
 
Sure lets go with "real world experience" Not many guys riding the bike I ride, (Roadstar 1700), will ever be caught doing 200Km/h plus on them and we tend to be slightly older. Now take a 20 something guy put him on a 1000cc "sport bike" and look at the probability of them exceeding 200 Km/h as compared to the guy on the Roadstar.. I guess then a LOT more bikes would be considered SS...lol.

As for the "using race technology" goes then all cars should also rated differently as the manufacturers use "racing lessons" to improve safety features and better brakes etc in all cars...lol
 
When the big cruiser guys crash and their protective sunglasses and t shirts don't help them, whatever is left should get slapped with an outrageous rate for their insurance.

I also previously stated already that it's not hard to know what is and isn't a ss.
 
Last edited:
I sense there is about to be a fight in my beautiful thread
 
Yes, all true for some. Me, I wear full gear, ALL the time, riding pants or chaps, full face helmet, proper jacket, (leather for colder temps, textile for summer), full riding gloves and boots. But then your right I can't wear the special sunglasses as I need prescrip glasses to see...lmao.

Ironically your also right in that when I first insured the Roadie with Desjardins they told me the rate was so high as those who ride Roadies and similar bikes tend to get hurt a lot worst, (I guess older bones break easier)..lol although not much medical treatment needed when someone comes off a litre bike at 250 km/h..either..lol

But back to the topic at hand. I am sure insurers simply have never talked to the manufacturers about what bikes are what classification and how bike x is basically the same as bike y but only one is classed as a SS by insurance. Just as they have NO clue about ATV's. when my first ATV caught fire and burned I said it had 99 Km on it. The adjuster said.. "so it had 99,000 KM on it?" Yeah I said I rode it to Fla every week for the past year then I did also did some serious time on the trails...LMAO. Then she said she would assign an appraiser to seeif it could be fixed. I said "lady there is a scorched motor, four rims and a steel frame sitting in my dirveway, the rest of the bike has melted, the tires are also gone as it took the Volunteer Fire about 15minutes to respond and the plastic gas tank was full, when it caught fire... They sent a flatbed to take it to impact for scrap..lmao

Roomie said:
A much larger percent of guys on a bike like the road star won't push the limits you're right. The majority also won't wear proper gear and when involved in a crash likely cost insurance companies a lot more money. You know the crowd, the half fingered gloves wearing vest and minimal beanie helmet crowd? Don't worry I think they all have special sunglasses that do a better job than a proper lid. Leave the leathers to them "rice burners" they don't need it they're older and know all there is to know about motorcycling. There should be a special group rate for those guys that's 5 times higher than anyone else.
Click to expand...
 
I guess part of the question then becomes, is it possible to better differentiate the riders from the motorcycles?

Probably not yet. Car insurance, which is otherwise less simplistic, still doesn't try any harder. Based on the same principles of claim history/moving violations. You have those ODB-II boxes which report back on how hard you press the gas and brakes... but given that certain vehicles attract different mixes of drives, everyone still gets lumped in the same.
 
If you want to apply stereotypes then EVERY class of motorcycle has an "excuse" that an insurer can use to justify high rates.

Sport bike or hyper bike (Busa, ZX14, etc) because the 20-somethings do stupid crap with them. Nevermind that most of the 20-somethings can't afford the insurance - or can't afford the bike. I've got a new bike coming which has got to be an insurer's worst nightmare ... except an informal demographics survey suggests that the average purchaser is near 50 years old and has been riding for 10+ years, and I can't exclude myself from being near that, either. The squids can't afford them. These bikes will not get much annual mileage on them, and it won't be 20-somethings doing it.

Harleys because their riders don't wear gear and they use them to go bar hopping, and the chrome is expensive.

Gold Wings because their owners are putting a zillion miles a year on them. (High "exposure" factor)

Insurance does differentiate between riders. It might not be a perfect process, but it's there. Get a couple of speeding tickets and tell us what happens to your rates ...
Forum Sponsor
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom